Peter of Spain's realism and John Buridan's nominalism are generally taken as the two predominant complete medieval semantics .However,the real difference between them does not lie in ontology,but rather in their paradigms of constructing semantic theories . For realists,they insist on a one-to-one mapping of linguistic terms with ontological categories,i .e . a singular term signifies an individual item while a universal term signifies a general item,both of which are taken as a substantial existence .However,in the eyes of nominalists,there is no place for universal items,everything in the world is singular,and everything that exists is numerically one and undivided . Singular and universal terms would not differ in the type of entities they signify,but rather in the way they signify the same type of entities .In other words,both singular term and universal term are applied to signify individual items :a singular term signifies things in a singular manner,whereas a universal term signifies things in a universal manner .The latter is a key semantic strategy named″adverbialization″ when we deal with the significata of a universal term . Furthermore,the semantic strategy of ″adverbialization″is also extensively applied to the significata of connotative terms . Based on the different principles of term signification,the two semantics have totally different theories of propositional significata and truth-conditions .Realists are ontologically committed to the total significata of the proposition taken as a whole,particularly the significata of the complex terms or connotative terms in the proposition,and hence defines truth in terms of the actuality or non-actuality of these significata .For nominalist,by contrast,no such type of entities—propositions signifying complex significata—actually exists or should be asserted .What a proposition signifies is no more than what each term in it signifies .However,they are by no means useful in dealing with the semantic evaluation of propositions .Hence,by adverbializing universal terms as well as connotative terms,and introducing quantifiers,nominalists assign the truth conditions of a proposition in terms of whether or not the terms in it co-signify the same individual thing in the domain to which the quantifiers are restricted .In a semantic construction of this sort,neither the subject nor the predicate would be committed to universal entities or propositional significata for truth value .As a result of these logical tactics on the contrary,any unwanted or unnecessary ontological commitments are eliminated by realists .We can then neglect the difference between the two semantics and focus on the possibility and operability of realist semantics being at least partially integrated into nominalism . Generally speaking,nominalism is obtainable by the adverbialization of realist semantics .A rational modern re-construction is probably the best way to facilitate the comparison between the two medieval semantics,as well as their comparison with the competing modern quantification theory in so far as how nominalism semantics can be modified to represent the standard modern semantics merely by natural logic .The theory of NLS (natural language system) is such a complete semantics system based on the formalization of nominalism natural language semantics . NLS,which is devised to describe the nominalist notions and principles of term signification and co-supposition,provides an easily operable program to construct a natural semantics and to represent the multi-quantifier theory of the first order logic,in so far as it is infinitely close to the pure-natural-language based conventional human thinking . Furthermore,it is not necessary for NLS to carry out the semantic function of the predicates with an ontological commitment of sets,like what modern logic does .The construction of NLS follows the trend of advocating natural methods for the problems within natural logic .This is probably one of the main significances or innovations of this paper .