X-Git-Url: http://lambda.jimpryor.net/git/gitweb.cgi?p=lambda.git;a=blobdiff_plain;f=topics%2F_week10_gsv.mdwn;h=c557d08be3d63d066cfd12430ac1a6a153143911;hp=8c2f52772b285463f07da937ee6ba94fbcdbfb6e;hb=c75dc0d2008d79a4fcc31e5c7c76317d9d1228d8;hpb=5f8b7b628d2f4c540c321fea83dd8c75a2573b4f

diff --git a/topics/_week10_gsv.mdwn b/topics/_week10_gsv.mdwn
index 8c2f5277..c557d08b 100644
--- a/topics/_week10_gsv.mdwn
+++ b/topics/_week10_gsv.mdwn
@@ -92,7 +92,8 @@ Here's the recipe: given a starting infostate s, choose an object a
 from the domain of discourse.  Construct a modified infostate s' by
 adjusting the assignment function of each possibility so as to map the variable x to a.
 Then update s' with φ.  Finally, take the union over the results of
-doing this for every object a in the domain of discourse.
+doing this for every object a in the domain of discourse.  If you're
+unsure about this, examine the [[code|code/gsv.ml]].
 
 Negation is natural enough:
 
@@ -442,6 +443,12 @@ The result is different.  Fewer possibilities remain.
 We have elminated both possible worlds and possible discourses.
 So the second formula is more informative.
 
+One of main conclusions of GSV is that in the presence of modality,
+the hallmark of dynamic treatments--that existentials bind outside of 
+their syntactic scope--needs to refined into a more nuanced understanding.
+Binding still occurs, but the extent of the syntactic scope of an existential
+has a detectable effect on truth conditions.
+
 As we discovered in class, there is considerable work to be done to
 decide which expressions in natural language (if any) are capable of
 expressing which of the two translations into the GSV fragment.  We