RE: [sv-ac] the number of semantics

Ok you convinced me as well,

When it is about English, it is very easy to convince me....

Doron 

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org [mailto:owner-sv-ac@server.eda.org] On
Behalf Of John Havlicek
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2007 3:00 PM
To: sv-ac@server.eda-stds.org
Subject: [sv-ac] the number of semantics

Hi Folks:

>
------------------------------------------------------------------------
--
> . Throughout, semantics are --> semantics is, except in case two or
more
>   semantics are being referred to.
> 
> [DB} Shalom convinced me that it should not be changed

O.k., I have tried.

It has been cited that the word "semantics" can be used with a
singular or plural verb.  I do not disagree with this, but I think
that the choice of number for the verb is not arbitrary.

I have been taught that when using "semantics" to mean "meaning", 
as in a discussion of the "formal semantics" of various language
constructs, one should use the same verb as one would with the word 
"meaning".

If several meanings are being discussed, then the plural should
be used, as in

  Several distinct formal semantics have been proposed for this
  language construct, and there is not yet agreement on which is 
  preferable.
 

If, on the other hand, one meaning is being discussed, then the
singular should be used, as in

  The formal semantics of the operator is well defined, but
  it is too complicated to be useful in practice.


It has been argued that when speaking about the formal semantics
of a language, the overall semantics is built up from the semantics
of its various components, and therefore the overall semantics can
be regarded as a collective and used with a plural verb.  I have
not found this argument convincing.

J.H.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.

-- 
This message has been scanned for viruses and
dangerous content by MailScanner, and is
believed to be clean.