Lack of brackets in spoken language: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
| (2 intermediate revisions by the same user not shown) | |||
| Line 6: | Line 6: | ||
Matthew Scroggs finds this a particular challenge when writing clues for the [https://chalkdustmagazine.com/regulars/crossnumber Chalkdust crossnumber]. | Matthew Scroggs finds this a particular challenge when writing clues for the [https://chalkdustmagazine.com/regulars/crossnumber Chalkdust crossnumber]. | ||
[https://aperiodical.com/2013/02/all-squared-number-1-maths-out-loud/ The first episode of the All Squared podcast] is about spoken mathematics. | |||
[[Category:Ambiguities]] | [[Category:Ambiguities]] | ||
[[Category:Spoken language]] | |||
Latest revision as of 15:55, 7 November 2021
There are problems similar to those related to order of operations misunderstandings causes by the lack of brackets in language.
For example, if trying to describe \(3^{2x}\), you might say "three to the power of two times x". This could, however, also be interpreted as \(3^{2}x\). One common way to reduce the ambiguity is to pause and speed up, ie say "three to the power of [pause] two-times-x".
Another example are sentences "17 is a factor of 6 more than 15" and "7 is a factor of 6 more than 15". Both can be interpreted as correct under different readings: 17 is (a factor of 6) more than 15, 7 is a factor of (6 more than 15). The first of these could be disambiguated by saying "17 is 15 plus a factor of 6", but there is no obvious unambiguous candidate for the second.
Matthew Scroggs finds this a particular challenge when writing clues for the Chalkdust crossnumber.
The first episode of the All Squared podcast is about spoken mathematics.
