1

One of my papers proves a theorem. And in the abstract I want to introduce what I do in this paper, so I began with "We prove A theorem that ...". But then I was aware of this: Could it be "We prove THE theorem that ..."?

Which one is the correct one?

  • If it is an introduction, wouldn't you write "We will prove..."? – user3169 Sep 12 '14 at 3:01
3

I think it depends on whether the rest of your sentence fully or only partly describes the theorem. Compare:

We prove the theorem that all cats enjoy Grieg

with

We prove a theorem that shows the relationship between pet species and appreciation of Norwegian classical composers

In the first case it wouldn't make sense to say a theorem because there isn't more than one to choose from: you've exactly stated what the theorem is, so it's the theorem. In the second case there could be many theorems fitting that description, so it's a.

  • I agree with that. From wikipedia: "a theorem is a statement that has been proven on the basis of previously established statements, such as other theorems—and generally accepted statements, such as axioms." If you say "we prove a theorem about the relation between A and B" then "a" is correct, whereas if you say "we prove the theorem that B always follows from A" then "the" seems better. – painfulenglish Sep 12 '14 at 7:46
  • I see what you meant. And the clause describing "theorem" is indeed partly describes the theorem that I proved, so right, using "a" is more legitimate than using "the". Thanks so much! – Megadeth Sep 12 '14 at 7:53
2

Since you're introducing the theorem to the reader, I believe you should use the indefinite article.

We prove a theorem that...

Looking for examples at Google Books, I found dosens of instances using the indefinite article in similar contexts, such as:

We prove a theorem stating that any semantics can be encoded as a compositional semantics, which means that, essentially, the standard definition of compositionality is formally vacuous. (COLING-92: proceedings of the 15th International Conference on Computational Linguistics)

or:

In his 1857 paper, Kummer proved a theorem which assured that FLT holds for a certain class of irregular primes (see Lecture VII). (13 Lectures on Fermat's Last Theorem, page 200)

  • 1
    Ah, appreciated. :) I see, I see. – Megadeth Sep 12 '14 at 3:18

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.