 can be rewritten as ‘\(\exists x{:}B(x)[S(x)] \land |B| = 1\)’, interpreted as follows: for some individual \(x\) such that \(x\) is a boy, \(x\) sang; and the number of (relevant) boys is exactly one. On this view, ‘the boy’ still does not correspond to a constituent of the formalism; nor does ‘the’. But one can depart farther from Russell’s notation, while emphasizing his idea that ‘the’ is relevantly like ‘some’ and ‘every’. For one can analyze ‘the boy sang’ as ‘\(!x:\textrm{Boy}(x)[\textrm{Sang}(x)]\)’, specifying the propositional contribution of ‘\(!\)’—on a par with as ‘\(\exists\)’ and ‘\(\forall\)’—as follows: