[plt-scheme] Re: [PRL] Denotation: barbarous neologism required

On Nov 12, 2009, at 4:59 PM, will at ccs.neu.edu wrote:
>
>> Bizarrely, it appears that most people in the languages community use
>> the latter.
>
> Not bizarre at all.  The usage of noun-ized verbs is idiosyncratic.
> Try going through your examples with "possesses"/"possessor" in
> place of "represents"/"representation".  Then do the same with
> "possesses"/"possession".
>
>> That is: suppose that "(lambda (x) x)" denotes the
>> platonic identity function.  I believe we say that the program is the
>> denotation of the function, rather than that the function is the
>> denotation of the program.
>
> Absurd.  Perhaps someone does indeed say that, but I'd say they're
> moby confused.  For the most part, "denotes" means about the same
> thing as "names" or "indicates".  The word "denotation" means the
> thing named or indicated.

As indicated elsewhere, this *particular* sentence was a typo on my  
part, and was indeed absurd.


More generally: thanks for comments. FWIW, the most convincing  
parallel case (to me) was Carl Eastlund's example of the word  
"connotes / connotation", which (like denotes / denotation) applies  
the noun form to the element of the codomain rather than the element  
of the domain.



Returning you to your regularly scheduled program,

John Clements

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2484 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20091112/004d4f1f/attachment.p7s>