the greater of
Charles Darling
Dear AUE people:
Someone sent a question to my ASK GRAMMAR page that I can't answer:
Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"? I
advised him to use "and," but after talking to some mathematicians and
others who ought to know, I'm not so sure I was right. My reasoning was
that the "of" worked algebraically, that the two items, A and B, had to
be _added_ before you could find which one was greater. My friends in
mathematics tell me I shouldn't mix math and English so liberally, but
they weren't sure which was correct.
Thanks.
Charles Darling
http://webster.commnet.edu/HP/pages/darling/grammar.htm
Steve Barnard
Charles Darling wrote:
>
> Dear AUE people:
> Someone sent a question to my ASK GRAMMAR page that I can't answer:
> Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"? I
> advised him to use "and," but after talking to some mathematicians and
> others who ought to know, I'm not so sure I was right. My reasoning was
> that the "of" worked algebraically, that the two items, A and B, had to
> be _added_ before you could find which one was greater. My friends in
> mathematics tell me I shouldn't mix math and English so liberally, but
> they weren't sure which was correct.
>
In my opinion "the greater of A or B" is best. Consider "the greater of
A and B or C and D." That makes sense and isn't very ambiguous, but
"the greater of A or B and C or D" is confusing to say the least.
Steve Barnard
Robert Lieblich
Geoff Butler wrote:
<snip>
> I'd say you're right in using 'and'. The construction is 'the greater of
> <a couple of things>' or 'the greatest of <a bunch of things>', and the
> way you make couples and bunches out of a list of items is to link them
> together with 'and'.
>
> <petpeeve>Of course, it's perfectly correct to say 'the greatest of
> <exactly two things>' rather than 'the greater of...', but some people
> get upset when you do.</petpeeve>
I fully agree. I tried to write a response saying the same thing, but
like a good lawyer I let the text get so long-winded and convoluted that
I gave up (it's the long-windedness, not the giving up, that was
lawyer-like).
Then, as I was busy writing my never-posted explanation, I recalled the
following: "Which is greater -- A or B?" If that's idiomatic -- and I
believe it is -- how do we square it with "Which is the greater of A and
B?"
The answer is that we don't. To quote Geoff Butler again:
Rule 1: Don't try to apply logic to English.
Rule 2: nor mathematics.
The defense rests.
Bob Lieblich
Steve Barnard
Paul Cook wrote:
>
> Charles Darling <cdar...@commnet.edu> wrote:
> >Dear AUE people:
> >Someone sent a question to my ASK GRAMMAR page that I can't answer:
> >Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"? I
> >advised him to use "and," but after talking to some mathematicians and
> >others who ought to know, I'm not so sure I was right. My reasoning was
> >that the "of" worked algebraically, that the two items, A and B, had to
> >be _added_ before you could find which one was greater. My friends in
> >mathematics tell me I shouldn't mix math and English so liberally, but
> >they weren't sure which was correct.
> >
>
> "the greatest of all these", then "all these" is obviously a
> substitute for "A, B, and C". "All these" cannot possibly be
> taken to mean "A, B, or C". In other words, the only sensible
> phrase you can use is "the greatest of A, B, and C".
>
> By the same logic, you must refer to "the greater of A and B".
"Obviously"? Hardly.
From a mathematical point of view you are wrong. "Or" denotes a
disjunction. "A, B, or C" denotes the set {A,B,C}, and "greater than"
is a clear-cut relation defined over this set.
Steve Barnard
Mark Barton
On Mon, 29 Dec 1997 18:34, Steve Barnard <mailto:st...@megafauna.com> wrote:
>Paul Cook wrote:
>>
>> Charles Darling <cdar...@commnet.edu> wrote:
>> >Dear AUE people:
>> >Someone sent a question to my ASK GRAMMAR page that I can't answer:
>> >Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"? I
>> >advised him to use "and," but after talking to some mathematicians and
>> >others who ought to know, I'm not so sure I was right. My reasoning was
>> >that the "of" worked algebraically, that the two items, A and B, had to
>> >be _added_ before you could find which one was greater. My friends in
>> >mathematics tell me I shouldn't mix math and English so liberally, but
>> >they weren't sure which was correct.
There is a fight between two different interpretations. There is a choice
from the group A _and_ B, but the result is either A _or_ B. I tend to
agree with you in thinking that the "of" should drive the choice between
"and" and "or, and that "of" assumes a normal "and"-terminated list.
>> Suppose you have three things: A, B, and C. If you refer to
>> "the greatest of all these", then "all these" is obviously a
>> substitute for "A, B, and C". "All these" cannot possibly be
>> taken to mean "A, B, or C". In other words, the only sensible
>> phrase you can use is "the greatest of A, B, and C".
>>
>> By the same logic, you must refer to "the greater of A and B".
>
>"Obviously"? Hardly.
>
>From a mathematical point of view you are wrong. "Or" denotes a
>disjunction. "A, B, or C" denotes the set {A,B,C}, and "greater than"
>is a clear-cut relation defined over this set.
I don't think the original argument was decisive but I think the
counterargument is even worse. "A, B, or C" can't denote _just_ the set
{A,B,C} because that's what "A, B, and C" denotes. Rather "A, B, or C"
denotes the set _plus_ the operation of selecting one element. That's why
"A or B" takes a singular verb and why you can put "the greater" into
apposition with "A or B", e.g., "Which is the greater, A or B?" The
objection to "the greater of A or B" is that the selection is represented
twice, once by the "or" and once by the "of". It's not clear that this is
fatally illogical, but I for one don't like it.
Cheers,
Mark B.
----------------
Please remove the spam filter (both bits) from my address before replying.
This reply was posted and possibly (if you receive it by email, definitely)
also emailed. I generally CC if I'm answering a request for information or
if I severely criticise something. Please make your preferences known.
Steve Barnard
Truly Donovan wrote:
>
> I'm staying with the mathematicians and I hope that any writers that I
> may have to read in the future do, as well.
Good for you, Truly. "Or" is the only choice for right-thinking people.
:-)
I'm more-or-less serious.
Steve Barnard
Paul Cook
Charles Darling <cdar...@commnet.edu> wrote:
>Dear AUE people:
>Someone sent a question to my ASK GRAMMAR page that I can't answer:
>Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"? I
>advised him to use "and," but after talking to some mathematicians and
>others who ought to know, I'm not so sure I was right. My reasoning was
>that the "of" worked algebraically, that the two items, A and B, had to
>be _added_ before you could find which one was greater. My friends in
>mathematics tell me I shouldn't mix math and English so liberally, but
>they weren't sure which was correct.
>
Suppose you have three things: A, B, and C. If you refer to
Geoff Butler
Charles Darling <cdar...@commnet.edu> writes:
>
>Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"? I
>advised him to use "and," but after talking to some mathematicians and
>others who ought to know, I'm not so sure I was right. My reasoning was
>that the "of" worked algebraically, that the two items, A and B, had to
>be _added_ before you could find which one was greater. My friends in
>mathematics tell me I shouldn't mix math and English so liberally, but
>they weren't sure which was correct.
Rule 1: Don't try to apply logic to English.
Rule 2: nor mathematics.
When your mathematician friends insist on applying mathematical sense to
English idiom, ask them to explain why a database query such as "Show me
the Smiths AND the Joneses" has to be expressed, mathematically, in
terms of OR. While they're doing that, go and have a few beers, take a
holiday, fix the bugs in Windows, invent time travel (you'll need this
to do the previous one), and have a generally good time.
I'd say you're right in using 'and'. The construction is 'the greater of
<a couple of things>' or 'the greatest of <a bunch of things>', and the
way you make couples and bunches out of a list of items is to link them
together with 'and'.
<petpeeve>Of course, it's perfectly correct to say 'the greatest of
<exactly two things>' rather than 'the greater of...', but some people
get upset when you do.</petpeeve>
-ler
AnWinEsp
>Charles Darling wrote:
>>
>> Dear AUE people:
>> Someone sent a question to my ASK GRAMMAR page that I can't answer:
>> advised him to use "and," but after
>alking to some mathematicians and
>> others who ought to know, I'm not so sure I was right. My reasoning was
>> that the "of" worked algebraically, that the two items, A and B, had to
>> be _added_ before you could find which one was greater. My friends in
>> mathematics tell me I shouldn't mix math and English so liberally, but
>> they weren't sure which was correct.
>>
>In my opinion "the greater of A or B" is best. Consider "the greater of
>A and B or C and D." That makes sense and isn't very ambiguous, but
>"the greater of A or B and C or D" is confusing to say the least.
>
> Steve Barnard
>
>
I disagree. Using OR means you're saying something is the greater of one thing.
Using AND means you're saying the greater of two things (similar to "the lesser
of two evils"). The mathemeticians are incorrect.
Anne
Charles A. Lee
Dear Charles,
On Mon, 29 Dec 1997 09:10:55 -0500, you wrote:
>Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"?
. . . .
Although RHUD2 carries fifteen definitions of "and," the common thread
in all of them boils down to "as well as." If you substitute this in
your sentence the result is not the desired effect.
"....the greater of A as well as B"
RHUD2 defines "or" as: "used to connect words, phrases, or clauses
representing alternatives." The alternative choices, A or B, fit
this definition very well.
Charles A. Lee
http://www.concentric.net/~azcal
================================
= "Nobody goes there anymore; =
= it's too crowded. =
= - Yogi Berra =
================================
Truly Donovan
On 30 Dec 1997 04:06:38 GMT, anwi...@aol.com (AnWinEsp) wrote:
>Steve Barnard wrote:
>>Charles Darling wrote:
>>>
>>> Someone sent a question to my ASK GRAMMAR page that I can't answer:
>>> Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"? I
>>> advised him to use "and," but after talking to some mathematicians and
>>> others who ought to know, I'm not so sure I was right. My reasoning was
>>> that the "of" worked algebraically, that the two items, A and B, had to
>>> be _added_ before you could find which one was greater. My friends in
>>> mathematics tell me I shouldn't mix math and English so liberally, but
>>> they weren't sure which was correct.
>
>>In my opinion "the greater of A or B" is best. Consider "the greater of
>>A and B or C and D." That makes sense and isn't very ambiguous, but
>>"the greater of A or B and C or D" is confusing to say the least.
>
>I disagree. Using OR means you're saying something is the greater of one thing.
>Using AND means you're saying the greater of two things (similar to "the lesser
>of two evils"). The mathemeticians are incorrect.
Well, now we have Charles claiming that they should be added together
and you claiming that they are only one thing. Good grief. We're
talking here about making a choice, and choices involve an "or"
condition, not an "and" condition.
I'm staying with the mathematicians and I hope that any writers that I
may have to read in the future do, as well.
--
Truly Donovan
reply to truly at lunemere dot com
Truly Donovan
On Tue, 30 Dec 1997 01:22:37 +0000, Geoff Butler
<ge...@gbutler.demon.LoseThisBit.co.uk> wrote:
>Charles Darling <cdar...@commnet.edu> writes:
>>
>>Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"? I
>>advised him to use "and," but after talking to some mathematicians and
>>others who ought to know, I'm not so sure I was right. My reasoning was
>>that the "of" worked algebraically, that the two items, A and B, had to
>>be _added_ before you could find which one was greater. My friends in
>>mathematics tell me I shouldn't mix math and English so liberally, but
>>they weren't sure which was correct.
>
>I'd say you're right in using 'and'. The construction is 'the greater of
><a couple of things>' or 'the greatest of <a bunch of things>', and the
>way you make couples and bunches out of a list of items is to link them
>together with 'and'.
Okay, would you please explain to me the rationality of deciding that
A and B should be *added* (that's what he said, I swear) before you
could find which one was greater? Does this interpretation buttress
your argument that it should be "and"? It scares me to death. Once
you've added them together, you don't have a greater to deal with at
all -- which of course is one way of attacking the problem.
John Nurick
On Mon, 29 Dec 1997 09:10:55 -0500, Charles Darling
<cdar...@commnet.edu> wrote:
>Dear AUE people:
>Someone sent a question to my ASK GRAMMAR page that I can't answer:
>Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"? I
>advised him to use "and," but after talking to some mathematicians and
>others who ought to know, I'm not so sure I was right. My reasoning was
>that the "of" worked algebraically, that the two items, A and B, had to
>be _added_ before you could find which one was greater. My friends in
>mathematics tell me I shouldn't mix math and English so liberally, but
>they weren't sure which was correct.
I think your mathematical friends are quite right (not least
because I don't see where (A+B) comes into determining whether
(A>B)).
In English, it's "the taller of Danny De Vito and Arnold
Schwarzenegger", "the greater of A and B", and so on. If "the
greater of A or B" was correct, you wouldn't be able to say "the
hotter of these two mugs of coffee": it would have to be "the
hotter of this mug of coffee or that one".
John
To e-mail me, drop clanger from address.
Mike Barnes
In alt.usage.english, Steve Barnard <st...@megafauna.com> spake
thuswise:
>Paul Cook wrote:
>> Suppose you have three things: A, B, and C. If you refer to
>> "the greatest of all these", then "all these" is obviously a
>> substitute for "A, B, and C". "All these" cannot possibly be
>> taken to mean "A, B, or C". In other words, the only sensible
>> phrase you can use is "the greatest of A, B, and C".
>>
>
>"Obviously"? Hardly.
>
>From a mathematical point of view you are wrong. "Or" denotes a
>disjunction. "A, B, or C" denotes the set {A,B,C}, and "greater than"
>is a clear-cut relation defined over this set.
You are correct that "obviously" and "mathematically" are not the same
thing. For everyday speech, I'll vote for the obvious over the
mathematical any day.
So, which is the better of "and" and "or"? There, I've answered my own
question.
--
-- Mike Barnes, Stockport, England.
-- If you post a response to Usenet, please *don't* send me a copy by e-mail.
Steve Barnard
Mark Barton wrote:
>
> On Mon, 29 Dec 1997 18:34, Steve Barnard <mailto:st...@megafauna.com> wrote:
> >
> >disjunction. "A, B, or C" denotes the set {A,B,C}, and "greater than"
> >is a clear-cut relation defined over this set.
>
> counterargument is even worse. "A, B, or C" can't denote _just_ the set
> {A,B,C} because that's what "A, B, and C" denotes. Rather "A, B, or C"
> denotes the set _plus_ the operation of selecting one element. That's why
> "A or B" takes a singular verb and why you can put "the greater" into
> apposition with "A or B", e.g., "Which is the greater, A or B?" The
> objection to "the greater of A or B" is that the selection is represented
> twice, once by the "or" and once by the "of". It's not clear that this is
> fatally illogical, but I for one don't like it.
If we have three sets {A}, {B}, {C}, then {A} OR {B} OR {C} is {A,B,C}.
{A} AND {B} AND {C} is {}, the empty set.
The OR operation is the same as "union." The AND operation is the same
as "intersection."
Steve Barnard
Bill Fisher
In article <34A85D...@megafauna.com>, Steve Barnard <st...@megafauna.com> writes:
...
|> From a mathematical point of view you are wrong. "Or" denotes a
|> disjunction. "A, B, or C" denotes the set {A,B,C}, and "greater than"
|> is a clear-cut relation defined over this set.
I take the original phrase in question to make a covert reference
to set membership, i.e.
"the greater of [the set composed of] A and/or B"
Most mathematicians writing in English use "and", not "or", when
listing the members of a set, e.g.
"There are two different ways of specifying a set. The first way
is by *listing* all of the members. For example,
A = {1,2,3,4,5}
is a complete specification of the set A, saying that it consists
of the numbers 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5."
---
- Winkler and Hays, "Statistics: Probability, Inference, and
Decision", Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1975, p. 5.
"A set consists of elements, for example, the set of all U.S.
presidents in the 19th century consists of Jefferson, Madison,
Monroe, ..., and McKinley.
---
- James D. McCawley, "Everything that Linguists have Always
Wanted to Know about Logic*", U. of Chicago Press, 1981, p. 139.
So the usage of serious mathematicians is in complete harmony
with normal English usage. And besides, "and" is the phrases in
question just sounds better (to me, anyway) that "or".
- billf
"If it *sounds* good, it *is* good."
- Duke Ellington, as quoted by Peter Schickele
AnWinEsp
>>
>>I disagree. Using OR means you're saying something is the greater of one
>thing.
>>Using AND means you're saying the greater of two things (similar to "the
>lesser
>>of two evils"). The mathemeticians are incorrect.
>Well, now we have Charles claiming that they should be added together
>and you claiming that they are only one thing. Good grief. We're
>talking here about making a choice, and choices involve an "or"
>condition, not an "and" condition.
>I'm staying with the mathematicians and I hope that any writers that I
>may have to read in the future do, as well.
You misread what I wrote. I didn't say we have one thing. I said if you use
"or," you're saying that. (If I want chocolate or vanilla, I want one flavor.
If I want chocolate and vanilla, I want two flavors.)
It's not as simple as saying that choices involve an "or," not an "and"
condition. You have to consider the context.
If I'm wrong, how do you explain the correctness of "the lesser of two evils"
(the lesser of "evil one and evil two")?
Anne
Eric The Read
anwi...@aol.com (AnWinEsp) writes:
> You misread what I wrote. I didn't say we have one thing. I said if you use
> "or," you're saying that. (If I want chocolate or vanilla, I want one flavor.
> If I want chocolate and vanilla, I want two flavors.)
Even mathematicians (or at least computer scientists) don't always agree
on what 'or' means. Which is why we have `inclusive or' or `exclusive
or'. The former refers to an `or' which can contain any of the options
listed. And example is buying a car-- you can get A/C, or a stereo, or
power windows, but no-one will claim you can get only ONE of them.
Exclusive or sounds like what you're talking about above; it refers to
only being able to pick one out of a set of items.
Now I've got to go back and read the "White horse is not a horse"
argument in "Disputers of the Tao"; for some reason this discussion
strongly reminds me of it.
> It's not as simple as saying that choices involve an "or," not an "and"
> condition. You have to consider the context.
And specify what you mean by `or', as well.
> If I'm wrong, how do you explain the correctness of "the lesser of two evils"
> (the lesser of "evil one and evil two")?
It's an XOR.
-=Eric
John Davies
In article <34a88f93...@news3.ibm.net>, Truly Donovan
<tru...@ibm.net> writes
>On 30 Dec 1997 04:06:38 GMT, anwi...@aol.com (AnWinEsp) wrote:
>
>>Steve Barnard wrote:
>
>>>Charles Darling wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"? I
>>>> advised him to use "and," but after talking to some mathematicians and
>>>> others who ought to know, I'm not so sure I was right. My reasoning was
>>>> that the "of" worked algebraically, that the two items, A and B, had to
>>>> be _added_ before you could find which one was greater. My friends in
>>>> mathematics tell me I shouldn't mix math and English so liberally, but
>>>> they weren't sure which was correct.
>>
>>>A and B or C and D." That makes sense and isn't very ambiguous, but
>>>"the greater of A or B and C or D" is confusing to say the least.
>>
>thing.
>lesser
>>of two evils"). The mathemeticians are incorrect.
>
>Well, now we have Charles claiming that they should be added together
>and you claiming that they are only one thing. Good grief. We're
>talking here about making a choice, and choices involve an "or"
>condition, not an "and" condition.
>
>I'm staying with the mathematicians and I hope
> that any writers that I
>may have to read in the future do, as well.
That opinion is so divided, in a group which one knows is composed of
skilled users of the language, forces me to conclude that this is one of
the many instances in which either alternative is likely to strike
someone as wrong. Or as John Lawler once wittily put it, a known bug in
English 97. One therefore needs a work-around; I'd suggest recasting
the sentence to something like: "Take A or B, whichever is the
greater".
But if for some reason it's necessary to stick to the original
construction, to my mind "A *and* B" is the least objectionable.
Consider some similar constructions:
"From A and B, take the greater."
"Choose the more gifted of the two Classico twins, Horace and Virgil."
"Take whichever is the greater of the set made up of a, b, c and d."
In other words, the original construction forces an emphasis on the
cohesion of the group from which the choice is to be made, not the fact
that only one choice is allowed. That in itself is sufficient cause for
recasting the sentence to switch the emphasis to the idea of
alternatives.
--
John Davies (jo...@redwoods.demon.co.uk)
Paul Cook
>> >Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"? I
>> >advised him to use "and," but after talking to some mathematicians and
>> >others who ought to know, I'm not so sure I was right. My reasoning was
>> >that the "of" worked algebraically, that the two items, A and B, had to
>> >be _added_ before you could find which one was greater. My friends in
>> >mathematics tell me I shouldn't mix math and English so liberally, but
>> >they weren't sure which was correct.
>> >
>>
>> "the greatest of all these", then "all these" is obviously a
>> substitute for "A, B, and C". "All these" cannot possibly be
>> taken to mean "A, B, or C". In other words, the only sensible
>> phrase you can use is "the greatest of A, B, and C".
>>
>
>"Obviously"? Hardly.
>
>From a mathematical point of view you are wrong. "Or" denotes a
>disjunction. "A, B, or C" denotes the set {A,B,C}, and "greater than"
>is a clear-cut relation defined over this set.
>
if a set S is the union sets A, B, and C, then "x is an element
of S" means that "x is in A, or x is in B, or x is in C".
However, the common English usage of "or" is not equivalent to
the mathematical usage. Again, in English, "all these" does not
mean "A, B, or C". In fact, in English, the use of "or" usually
implies the exlusive or, not the inclusive or. The way one typically
indicates the inclusive or is to say "It is either A or B, or both."
Aaron J. Dinkin
> If we have three sets {A}, {B}, {C}, then {A} OR {B} OR {C} is {A,B,C}.
>
> {A} AND {B} AND {C} is {}, the empty set.
>
> The OR operation is the same as "union." The AND operation is the same
> as "intersection."
But we're not talking Booleans here. In the English language, the
conjunction "and" is the same as "union". Thus, if you say, for instance,
"All of the seniors and all of the juniors attended the dance," you
certainly don't mean the intersection of those two sets (i.e., nobody) -
you mean the union.
-Aaron J. Dinkin
Dr. Whom
Aaron J. Dinkin
In article <xkfyb12...@valdemar.col.hp.com>, "Eric The Read"
<emsc...@mail.uccs.edu> wrote:
> Even mathematicians (or at least computer scientists) don't always agree
> on what 'or' means. Which is why we have `inclusive or' or `exclusive
> or'. The former refers to an `or' which can contain any of the options
> listed. And example is buying a car-- you can get A/C, or a stereo, or
> power windows, but no-one will claim you can get only ONE of them.
But I'd use "and" here: "You can get A/C, a stereo, and power windows."
That is, you _can_ get all three, though you may choose fewer if you like.
Obviously, "can" is essential to this interpretation of "and". "She got
A/C, a stereo, and power windows" obviously means she got all three, while
"She got A/C, a stereo, or power windows" means she got exactly one -
English "or" is a XOR.
(I seem to remember reading that Latin had two different words for "OR" and
"XOR" - namely, "vel" and "aut". Can anyone back this up?)
Steve Barnard
OK, I give up.
Steve Barnard
Stefano Rovetta
Charles Darling (cdar...@commnet.edu) wrote:
: Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"?
I always used "the greater between A and B" or "the greatest among
A, B, and C".
Was I wrong?
(I should add that I always did this in technical papers.)
--Stefano Rovetta
s...@dibe.unige.it
Gwen Lenker
Eric The Read <emsc...@mail.uccs.edu> wrote in article
<xkfyb12...@valdemar.col.hp.com>...
> anwi...@aol.com (AnWinEsp) writes:
>
> > If I'm wrong, how do you explain the correctness of "the lesser
of two evils"
> > (the lesser of "evil one and evil two")?
>
> It's an XOR.
In that case, you ought to be able to express it as "the lesser of
either evil one or evil two."
You could then express *that* as "the lesser of evil one or the
lesser of evil two."
Sign me up with the ANDers.
Bob Cunningham
In a posting in this thread I very recently said 'latin-english [stet]'.
I meant to say '[sic]' of course.
--
Bob Cunningham, Southern California, USofA
To send e-mail, delete an 'r', an 'i', and an 'o' from
the lefthand part of my address.
E-mail is welcome, but copies of postings aren't necessary.
Bob Cunningham
On Tue, 30 Dec 1997 19:39:53 -0500, adi...@commschool.org (Aaron J.
Dinkin) said:
[ . . . ]
>(I seem to remember reading that Latin had two different words for "OR" and
>"XOR" - namely, "vel" and "aut". Can anyone back this up?)
The _Chambers Murray latin-english [sic] Dictionary_ says:
aut /or\, introduces a real or important alternative or one
that excludes the other; whereas /vel\ introduces an
alternative that is merely a matter of choice or that is
unimportant.
Under 'vel' it says:
/imperat[ive]\ of velo, and therefore lit[erally] /choose\,
/take your choice\.
(I'm using '/...\' to indicate italicization in the source.)
(The 'o' in 'velo' has a macron.)
Mark Barton
On Tue, 30 Dec 1997 2:57, Stefano Rovetta <mailto:ste@esg_735.dibe.unige.it>
wrote:
>Charles Darling (cdar...@commnet.edu) wrote:
>: Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"?
>
>I always used "the greater between A and B" or "the greatest among
>A, B, and C".
>
>Was I wrong?
The good news is that you have absorbed the traditional distinction between
"between" and "among". This always goes down well in the formal style of a
scientific paper. The bad news is you've applied it in the wrong context.
"Between" doesn't refer to either A or B, but to a point in the interval
between them. "The greater between A and B" is definitely strange. "Among"
is similar to "between" but allows for the fact that three or more items
don't define a single interval. It's less strange but I still wouldn't
recommend it.
Note that this only applies to "-er" and "-est" words. You _can_ say "the
choice between A and B" or "the choice among A, B and C". It may help to
imagine that you are standing between or among the items wondering which
one to go to. However once you have identified the greater or greatest it
is one _of_ the items, not between or among them.
>(I should add that I always did this in technical papers.)
I think you got your message across but the grammar was a bit strange. Use
"of" with both "greater" and "greatest". As to the matter of "and" vs "or",
I prefer "and", but a lot of others seem to like "or" so there is no easy
recommendation here.
Geoff Butler
Robert Lieblich <lieb...@erols.com> writes:
>Then, as I was busy writing my never-posted explanation, I recalled the
>following: "Which is greater -- A or B?" If that's idiomatic -- and I
>believe it is -- how do we square it with "Which is the greater of A and
>B?"
Actually, I think we can square it. Things like 'greater' are selecting
one thing from a bunch of things. The question "Which is greater, A or
B" is asking about the result, and "A or B" describes the result, so it
needs to be essentially one thing. The question "Which is the greater
of A and B" is asking about the result of the selection from the bunch
of things, and "A and B" is defining the bunch of things. No conflict, I
think.
Incidentally, there are many ways of specifying a bunch of things, other
than by a list like "A and B". Ranges ("Which is the oddest of the
numbers between 10 and 20") and rules ("Which is the biggest of the cars
in the road") do the same thing. To me, the fact that you can do this
argues very strongly that "and" is the right conjunction to use.
-ler
Geoff Butler
Truly Donovan <tru...@ibm.net> writes:
>On Tue, 30 Dec 1997 01:22:37 +0000, Geoff Butler
><ge...@gbutler.demon.LoseThisBit.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>Charles Darling <cdar...@commnet.edu> writes:
>>>
>>>advised him to use "and," but after talking to some mathematicians and
>>>others who ought to know, I'm not so sure I was right. My reasoning was
>>>that the "of" worked algebraically, that the two items, A and B, had to
>>>be _added_ before you could find which one was greater. My friends in
>>>mathematics tell me I shouldn't mix math and English so liberally, but
>>>they weren't sure which was correct.
>>
>><a couple of things>' or 'the greatest of <a bunch of things>', and the
>>way you make couples and bunches out of a list of items is to link them
>>together with 'and'.
>
>Okay, would you please explain to me the rationality of deciding that
>could find which one was greater?
Yes, he did, didn't he. Given that there's an assertion that 'of' is
algebraic, I think we can safely assume that the assertion that you add
things using 'and' has equal merit.
-ler
Anonys
Geoff Butler wrote:
>
> Charles Darling <cdar...@commnet.edu> writes:
> >
> >Should we say "the greater of A or B" or "the greater of A and B"? I
> >advised him to use "and," but after talking to some mathematicians and
> >others who ought to know, I'm not so sure I was right. My reasoning was
> >that the "of" worked algebraically, that the two items, A and B, had to
> >be _added_ before you could find which one was greater. My friends in
> >mathematics tell me I shouldn't mix math and English so liberally, but
> >they weren't sure which was correct.
>
***
Hi,
When we say "the greater of A and B"
Suppose A= 5 and B= 4.
We have to add 5+4 =9
When be say greater of A and B. It means that the figure is
greater then 9.
In fact, we may be meaning that the figure is greater than
4 or 5.
Anonys.
Allan Rostron
I come across a similar problem every day in scientific texts. It is
extremely common to see the construction "A was greater than B or C",
which seems unsatisfactory because it doesn't say which of B and C was
exceeded by A. We can assume that what is meant is "A was greater than B
and greater than C" and if we are charitable we can think that the
author used this construction because "A was greater than B and C" could
be taken to mean that A was greater than the sum of B plus C. But I
think not.
--
Allan Rostron
Robert Lipton
"A was greater than either B or C."
(A was the largest of the three)
"A was greater than B and C."
(A was larger than the sum of B+C)
"A was greater than B or C."
(A was larger than at least one of the two other letters)
All of which goes to prove one should avoid comparatives with more than
two items.
Bob
Keith C. Ivey
lip...@dorsai.org (Robert Lipton) wrote:
>"A was greater than either B or C."
> (A was the largest of the three)
>
>"A was greater than B and C."
>(A was larger than the sum of B+C)
>
>"A was greater than B or C."
>(A was larger than at least one of the two other letters)
You interpretations of the first and third versions seem inconsistent.
If the third means what you say it does, then surely the first means
"A was larger than exactly one of the two others" -- that is, 5 is
greater than either 6 or 4.
Keith C. Ivey <kci...@cpcug.org>
http://cpcug.org/user/kcivey/
Washington, DC
Robert Lipton
Quite true. How foolish of me.
"A was larger than _either_ B or C."
A was the largest of the three.
"A was larger that _either_ B _or_ C."
A was larger than one of the two others but not necessarily both.
Now, doesn't that make the comparative look even sillier for more than two
elements?
Bob
Geoff Butler
Anonys <ano...@mailcity.com> writes:
>
>When we say "the greater of A and B"
>Suppose A= 5 and B= 4.
>We have to add 5+4 =9
Absolute rubbish. It says 'and', so you have to 'and' them, not add
them. In binary, 5 is 101, 4 is 100, 5 AND 4 is 101 AND 100 which is
100, which is 4. So '5 and 4' is 4, not 9.
Alternatively, of course, you could use 'and' in its English sense,
which doesn't imply any mathematical operation.
-ler