 
\begynd
\pind This section is an artifice, an expedient.

\begynd
\pind It summarizes, 
\begynd
\pind from an unusual angle,
\pind an aspect of the presentation style of this paper.
\afslut
\pind \sl The road ahead of us introduces rather many new and novel
concepts.
\begynd
\pind It is easy to get lost.
\pind The presentation alternates, almost sentence-by-sentence,
\pind between 5 languages.
\afslut
\pind The below explication might help You to keep track of where the
paper eventually shall lead us\,! \rm
\afslut
\pind This section, in a sense, tells the story
backwards\,!\footnote{S{\o}ren Kierkegaard: \sl Life is lived forwards
  but is understood backwards \rm [1843].}
\afslut

\subsection{The 6 Languages}

\begynd
\pind There are 6 languages at play in this paper:
\begin{itemize}
\item (i) technical English, as in most papers;
\item (ii) \texttt{RSL}, the \texttt{RAISE S}pecification \texttt{L}anguage \cite{RSL};
\item (iii) an augmented \texttt{RSL} language; 
\item (iv) the domain modeling language -- which we can view as the
  composition of clauses from two [sub-ordinate] languages:
\begin{itemize}
\item (v) a domain analysis language; and
\item (vi) a domain specification
\end{itemize} language.
\end{itemize}
\afslut

\noindent
\begynd
\pind (i) Technical English is the main medium, as  in most papers, of
what is conveyed.
\pind (ii) Domain descriptions are (to be) expressed in  \texttt{RSL}.
\pind (iii) The [few places where we resort  to the]  augmented \texttt{RSL}
      language is needed for expressing names of \texttt{RSL} types as
      values.
\pind (iv) The domain modeling language consists of finite sequences
      domain analysis and domain description clauses.
\begynd
\pind (v) The domain analysis language just consists of prompts, i.e.,
      predicate functions used informally by the domain analyzer in
      inquiring the domain. They yield either truth values or possibly
      augmented \texttt{RSL} texts.
\pind (vi) The domain description language consists of a few
      \texttt{RSL} text yielding prompts.
\afslut
\afslut

\begynd
\pind We presume that the reader is familiar with such languages as \texttt{RSL}.
\begynd
\pind That is: \texttt{VDM} \citevdm,  \texttt{Z} \citez,  \texttt{Alloy} \citealloy, etc.
\pind They could all be use instead of, as here, \texttt{RSL}.
\afslut
\afslut

\begynd
\pind We summarize some of the language  issues.
\afslut

\begynd
\pind \sort{The Domain Analysis Language:} We list a few,
cf.\,Fig.\,\vref{onto.fig0}, of the predicate prompts, i.e., language prompts:
\begynd
\pind \isref{entity},
\pind \isrefii{endurant}{is\_en\-dur\-ant},
\pind \isref{perdurant},
\pind \isref{solid},
\pind \isref{fluid},
\pind \isref{part},
%\pind \isref{living species},
\pind \isrefii{atomic}{a\-atom\-ic},
\pind \isref{compound},
\pind \isrefii{Cartesian}{is\_Car\-tes\-i\-an}, or
\pind \isref{part-set};
%\pind \isref{animal},
%\pind \isref{plant},
%\pind \isref{human}, or
%\pind \isref{other}.
\afslut
and the extended \texttt{RSL} text yielding analysis prompts:
\begynd
\pind \isrefii{record-Cartesians}{record\_Cartesian\_\-type\_names},
\pind \isrefii{record-Cartesians}{record\_part\_\-set\_\-type\_names} and
\pind \isrefii{record-Attributes}{record\_attri\-bute\_\-type\_names}.
\afslut
\afslut

\begynd
\pind \sort{The Domain Description Language:} \texttt{RSL}. 
      We shall us a subset of \texttt{RSL}. That subset is a simple,
      discrete mathematics, primarily functional specification language in the style of
      \texttt{VDM} \citevdm. Emphasis is on sets, Cartesians, lists, and
      maps (i.e., finite definition set, enumerable functions).
     % We refer to Appendix\,\ref{rsl} for a brief overview of  \texttt{RSL}.
\afslut

\begynd
\pind \sort{Domain Description:}  
\begynd
\pind A domain description consists of one or more domain specification units.
\pind A specification unit is of either of 10 kinds, all expressed in
      \texttt{RSL}. %We refer to Appendix\,\ref{spec-units} for details.
%\dbeat{%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
\begynd
\pind (1) a universe-of-discourse \sort{type} clause [pg\,\pageref{su:uod}];
\pind (2) a part \sort{type} and \sort{obs\_}erver \sort{value} clause [pg\,\pageref{su:pt}];
\pind (3) a  \sort{value} clause;
\pind (4) a unique identifier \sort{type} and (\sort{uid\_}) observer value (function)
          clause [pg\,\pageref{su:ui}];
\pind (5) a mereology \sort{type} and (\sort{mereo\_}) observer value
          (function) clause [pg\,\pageref{su:me}]; 
\pind (6) an attribute \sort{type} and (\sort{attr\_}) observer value (function) definition
          clause [pg\,\pageref{su:at}];
\pind (7) an \sort{axiom} clause;
\pind (8) a \sort{channel} declaration clause [pg\,\pageref{su:ch}];
\pind (9) a behaviour \sort{value} (signature and definition) clause
          [pg\,\pageref{su:be1} \& pg\,\pageref{su:be2}]; and
\pind (10) a domain initialization clause [Sect.\,\vref{su:in}].
\afslut
\pind These clauses are often combined in 2-3 such clauses,
\pind and may, and usually do, include further
\texttt{RSL} clauses.%%%%%%}
\afslut
      
\pind The use of \texttt{RSL} ``outside'' the  domain specification
units should not be confused with the \texttt{RSL} of the specification
unit schemas and examples.
\afslut


\subsection{Semiotics}

In \textsl{Foundations of the theory of signs} \cite{morris-semiotics-1938} defines
semiotics as ``consisting'' of syntax, semantics and pragmatics.

\begin{itemize}
\item \textsf{\textbf{Syntax:}}
\begynd
\pind The syntax of domain analysis and domain description clauses are
      simple atomic clauses consisting of a prompt (predicate or function)
      identifier, see above, and an identifier denoting a domain entity.
\pind The syntax of the domain modeling language prescribes a sequence
      of one or more domain analysis and domain description clauses.
\afslut
  
\item \textsf{\textbf{Semantics:}}
\begynd
\pind The meaning of a  domain analysis clause is that of a function
      from a domain entity to either a truth value or some augmented
      \texttt{RSL} text.
\pind The meaning of a  domain description clause is that of a function
      from a domain entity to a domain specification unit.
\afslut
  
\item \textsf{\textbf{Pragmatics:}}
\begynd
\pind The pragmatics of a domain analysis predicate clause, as applied
      to a domain entity $e$, is that of prompting
      the domain analyzer to a next domain analysis step: 
\begynd
\pind either that of
      applying a [subsequent, cf.\,Fig.\,\ref{onto.fig0}] domain
      analysis predicate prompt to  $e$;
\pind or applying a [subsequent, cf.\,Fig.\,\ref{onto.fig0}] domain
      analysis function to  $e$, and noting -- as writing down on a ``to
      remember board'' -- the result of the [latter] query;
\pind or
      applying a [subsequent, cf.\,Fig.\,\ref{onto.fig0}] domain
      description function to $e$. 
\afslut
\pind The pragmatics of a domain description function is that of
      including the resulting \texttt{RSL} domain description text in
      the emerging domain description. There is no hint as to what to
      do next\,!
\afslut 
\end{itemize}

\subsection{Speech Acts}

\begynd
\pind The above explication of a pragmatics for the domain modeling
      language relates to the concepts of \textsl{speech acts}.
\pind We refer to
\begynd
\pind \cite[How to do things with words]{JLAustin1975},
\pind \cite[Speech Acts: An Essay in the Philosophy of
      Language]{Searle1969} and
\pind \cite[Brain mechanisms linking language and action]{Pulvermuller2005}.
\afslut
\pind A further study of the \textsl{illocutionary} and
      \textsl{locutionary} aspects of the domain analysis language seems in place.
\afslut

%%  LocalWords:  RSL pecification anguage VDM ren endurant dur tes su
%%  LocalWords:  perdurant Cartesians erver uid mereology mereo attr
%%  LocalWords:  behaviour schemas ic attri bute illocutionary
%%  LocalWords:  locutionary
