u perspek - Filozofski fakultet u Splitu

ence. U: N.Rescher (ured.). The Logic of Decision and Action.
str. 37–70. University of Pittsburgh Press, 1967.
[68] M. de Rijke. A system of dynamic modal logic. Journal of
Philosophical Logic 27: 109–142, 1998.
[69] A. Ross. Imperatives and logic. Theoria, 53–71, 1941.
[70] J.M. Sagüillo. Logical consequence revisited. The Bulletin
of Symbolic Logic. vol.3 no.2. 1997.
[71] D.H. Sanford. If P, then Q (Conditionals and the Foundations
of Reasoning).Routledge. 1992.
[72] K. Segerberg. Getting started: beginings in the logic of
action. Studia Logica 51: 347–378, 1992.
[73] K. Segerberg. Validity and satisfaction in imperative logic.
Notre Dame Journal of Formal Logic 31: 203–221. 1990.
[74] Y. Shoham. Efficient reasoning about rich temporal domains.
Journal of Philosophical Logic 17: 443–474, 1988.
[75] M. Smith. The Humean theory of motivation, Mind, str.36–
61, 1987.
[76] E. Sosa. The semantics of imperatives. American Philosophical
Quarterly 4: 57–63. 1967.
[77] E. Stenius. Mood and language game. Synthese 19: 27–52,
1967. Tako ¯der u: E. Stenius. Critical Essays. str. 182–202.
Acta Philosophica Fennica. North-Holland Pub.Co. 1972.
[78] L. van der Torre and Y.-H. Tan. An update sematics for
deontic reasoning. U: P. McNamara i H. Prakken (ured.)
Norms, Logics and Information Systems. str. 73–90. IOS
Press, 1999.
[79] F. Veltman. Defaults in update semantics. Journal of Philosophical
Logic 25: 221–261, 1996.
[80] D. Vukičević. Digraph Representation of a Model of Dynamic
Semantics. str. 1–20. (neobjavljeni rukopis). Fakultet
prirodoslovno-matematičkih znanosti i odgojnih područja
Sveučilišta u Splitu, 2001.
[81] J.D. Wallace. Practical inquiry. Philosophical Review, str.435–
450, 1969.
292