The main goal in this article is investigating and explaining Aristotle’ s two-part or tripartite analysis of attributive proposition and reviewing some of the opinions and views in this regard. In this article, we have tried to adduce Aristotle’ s works to show that firstly, although in Aristotle’ s view, the linguistic analysis of attributive proposition can be tow-part or tripartite, in logical analysis, the attributive proposition is always composed of two min parts, i. e. noun (subject) and verb (predicate), and the relation thereof is not considered an independent part due to being included in the meaning of the verb (predicate); and accordingly, attributing the tripartite analysis of attributive proposition to Aristotle as a logical analysis is wrong. Secondly, unlike some views and opinions, we do not find two different analysis of attributive proposition in Aristotle’ s logical works, and the basis for his discussions on ‘ analogy’ in his later works on logic (early analyses) is the very two-part analysis put forward by him in his early logical work (regarding clause). The main method in this study is referring to the texts of Aristotle’ s words and – where necessary – to Aristotle’ s interpreters and his followers or critics, scrutinizing those words, and analyzing, inferring and concluding based on them.

“Subjective proposition” is one of the terms that are introduced in Islamic Logic and used in Islamic Philosophy. In this paper, I investigate the term’s history and show that the subjective proposition has had many meanings in different times and had been associated with many different kinds of propositions. This variety and changes in meaning have caused the subjective proposition to encounter many ambiguities both in Islamic Logic and Islamic Philosophy. In this paper, I have tried to formulate the meanings of the subjective proposition by Symbolic Logic, and thereby to provide the possibility of assessing the term. In this process, we can have a better device to test the accuracy of the claims on the subjective proposition and the correctness of its use in Logic and Philosophy.

Aristotle in his logical works, in addition to the statement, introduces the concept of proposition and defines it based on affirmation and negation in Prior Analytics. There are two issues about Aristotle's view of preposition, i.e., the interpretation of its definition, and its relation to the statement. In this article, first, three interpretations of preposition, including Alexander of Aphrodisias' and classical ones, are discussed and criticized. And because Aristotle points to the relation between contradiction and proposition, first, the definition of contradiction from Aristotle's point of view and, then, its relation to proposition are discussed. Finally, my interpretation of proposition is explained: proposition is a statement which its relation with contradiction is considered and the attention to this relation leads to the acceptation of the rule of contradiction which is the foundation of each deduction. The linguistics meaning of proposition is compatible with this interpretation: proposition is to propose one side of contradiction, and because of this, the dialectical proposition has two forms: question form the answerer and its replay as a premise in dialectical deduction.

Shams al-Dī n Muḥ ammad ibn Ashraf al-Ḥ usaynī al-Samarqandī , an unknown logician of the seventh century AH, has an effective role in the growth and development of Sinai (Avicennism) logic in the Islamic world. Examination of his logical views shows his influence on the thoughts of some logicians, especially Qutb al-Din al-Razi. In addition to expanding some of Ibn Sina’ s (Avicenna) innovations, he has certain logical views. Adherence to Ibn Sina’ s system of logistics, simplification of affirmation (assertion) or negation of the composition of affirmation (assertion), solving the whole problem of false theology, distinguishing between different instances (referents) of the necessity of description and dividing it into three types, adding mental condition in negative conversion (even conversion or converse) in inversion of subject which is nonexistent attribute or affirmative inversion of attribute (predicate) which is nonexistent subject is one of the logical thoughts of Shams al-Dī n al-Samarqandī . The present article, while mentioning and examining these opinions, in discussing the simplicity of affirmation, mentions and examines Allā ma Tabataba'i’ s innovative view on the number of parts of the proposition, which in his view is not the Hokmieha (order, verdict ratio of the main parts of the proposition.

Persian attributive constructions are sentences including liking verbs:astan, budan, šodan, gaštan, gardidan.Considering some typological, syntactic, semantic, logical evidences and an evidence relying on first language acquisition process, the linking verbs do not play any canonical role in assigning the vabency of the construction. But, the contentives- nouns, adjectives and prepositional phrases preceding the linking verbs are considered as the pedicates.The writer of this paper believes that the attributive construction consists of one argument, so the valency of its predicate should be one. Finally, they are derived under predicate phrase node.Consequently, these kinds of predicates assign agentive or patientive q- role rather than essive to their arguments.

The parts manufacturing companies should select a proper strategy according to their current and future environmental conditions and capabilities to survive and thrive in competitive market. To help the companies to select the best strategy the current paper proposes a model.The model is developed using a number of strategic tools, including TOPSIS, SWOT analysis and Six Paths Framework to Formulate Blue Ocean Strategy. Finally, based on the study results, the paper proposes the best strategy for Salim Company. Although this paper covers the case of one company, the model presented here can help other companies to select the best available strategy.

In his various works, Ibn Sina has referred to different meanings of "All J is B", which his followers have called "ḥaqīqī" and "khārijī" propositions. Ibn Sina's examples for "khārijī proposition" are sometimes only related to the present time, sometimes related to past and present times, and his followers have extended these meanings to all three tenses: past, present, and future. To distinguish these three meanings, which have arranged from specific to general, I call them "specific," "intermediate," and "general" khārijī propositions. In this article, I show that for each meaning of khārijī proposition, its relation to a more general meaning of khārijī is similar to its relation to ḥaqīqī propositions, in that mixed khārijī-khārijī syllogisms (mixed of two kinds of khārijīs) have exactly the same rules as mixed khārijī-ḥaqīqī syllogisms.

One of the rules of numbersis making attributive nouns out of the words signifying numbers.An attributive noun is proportional to the type of the number.However,thereis no specific rule mentioned for this. It is obvious that it is sometimesmadeby the rhythm "fual" whichisprobablyformed by the attributive ya for instancein "thulath", "ruba" "thulathi" and "rubai". The fomwtion of an attributivenounout of numbersis allowedasfar asthe attributive rules are concerned, for examplein "wahidi" derivedfrom "wahid" and "arbai" from "arbaat". In a compound form of numbers called "mazji" or mingled compound, an attributive noun is made out of the role related to the attributed noun, for instancein "tisi" derived from "tisat ashar" or "tisat ashari "as it is said "al-shiat al_ithna ashariyah". attributive rulesin making "uqud" numbers are derived with the help of a joining element, namely attributive ya" as in "khamsooni "attributed to "khamsoon" and in "joined numbers "ma toof the attributive ya" element is attachedto bothparts.