Up with "UP"...Another reason why English is baffling 5

[PaulTEG]

Ulster gaelic to my ear at any rate

whuas an styra
thuas an staighaire(sp?)
up the stairs
whu-as-
it was the short vowel sounds, but it's narrower than say the owf [auf] aus Deutsch

As to collecting dialects, that'd be a lot of travel, and not necessarily cheaper than stamps or coins
--Paul

cigless ...

 

[SantaMufasa]

I "collect" the dialects and accents as people come to me, not the other way 'round . Much less expensive that way. I collected the most accents per square mile/kilometer while in the UK.

Mufasa
(aka Dave of Sandy, Utah, USA)
[

http://www.dasages.com:

Providing low-cost remote Database Admin services]
Click here to join Utah Oracle Users Group on Tek-Tips if you use Oracle in Utah USA.

 

[PaulTEG]

no worries, must be difficult on a forum though
[/idea for thread]
--Paul

cigless ...

 

[BobRodes]

regarding the original topic, the word "run" has more definitions than any other in English, and it only has 3 letters.

 

[ESquared]

I once heard that it was set which has the most definitions.

No two words can possibly mean the EXACT same thing,

color colour
centre center
ask aks
wash "warsh"

just as no two numbers can be EXACTLY equal.

I disagree with this logic.

0.9 with a line over the nine is EXACTLY EQUAL to 1. In fact there are many different expansions in different number bases for the same quantity.

I think it would be helpful for people to read the book Metaphors We Live By by Lakoff and Johnson. There's a whole lot more going on here than just discussion about the nature of words: everyone is unknowingly applying metaphors.

For example, people tend to think of meaning as a substance and words as containers of that substance. In that context, tgreer is saying that different containers cannot hold the same substance, one type of substance per container, such substance being all the various possible meanings for a word (its connotations). Others are saying that each container can hold many different substances, and the particular meaning intended in a sentence (its denotation) can expose the same substance as that found in some other container.

Even the original topic about why we tend to use up for positive things and down for negative things relates to this. It comes from being physical beings who are (most of the time) attached firmly to the ground by gravity. When we die or are weak or are hurt, we fall... down. It is only by life or strength or health that we move upward. Thus it is natural for us to use these words as metaphors.

I've only read half the book, but I plan on finishing it some day soon.

-------------------------------------
Only the unvirtuous can be dutiful, for the virtuous already perform duty's requirements by inclination and for pleasure. Where there is no pain, no disinclination, there is no duty.
- Erik E

 

[sbudzynski]

whats i meant is:

check this out

speed up and speed down mean TWO different things

but slow up and slow down mean the same

call that a mind boggler, some one WRITE a riddle.


(i just took a sudafed, haha forgive me)

Steve Budzynski

 

[tgreer]

color colour
centre center
ask aks
wash "warsh"

In each case, there is a geographic or cultural difference, which subtly informs the meaning and creates overtones in the mind of the listener. Those pairs then, illustrate my point rather than refute it. In fact, you chose them BECAUSE of the differences, not because of the similarities.

In regard to numbers, yes 2+2=4. The notation doesn't alter the number. Not so with words, which are inexact by nature.

I don't think of words as containers, no. I think of them as aggregates, compounds, or molecules, with each having a unique chemical signature. While words in this metaphor might have many close isotopes, that will readily form very similar compounds, they are not identical.




Thomas D. Greer

http://www.tgreer.com

http://www.brownfedora.com

Providing PostScript & PDF
Training, Development & Consulting

 

[tgreer]

0.9 with a line over the nine is EXACTLY EQUAL to 1

No it isn't! A .9999-> is a repeated fraction converging on "1". It never reaches it. This has nothing to do with words though; I was just using an analogy.

If you plotted each successive term of .9999, you would have a curve that approached the axis without every reaching it. The curve would look the same under all scales. The point is it would never TOUCH the axis, and so never be EQUAL TO "1".



Thomas D. Greer

http://www.tgreer.com

http://www.brownfedora.com

Providing PostScript & PDF
Training, Development & Consulting

 

[CajunCenturion]

Actually tgreer, you can show mathematically that 0.9999... is equal to 1.

if x = 0.99999... then 10x = 9.9999999...
[tt]
10x = 9.9999999...
- x = 0.9999999...
=======================
9x = 9
x = 1
[/tt]


Good Luck
--------------
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[BobRodes]

No it isn't! A .9999-> is a repeated fraction converging on "1". It never reaches it.

All the myriad things merge into one in infinity, grasshopper.

 

[sbudzynski]

I am in college right now, and if my answer is x=1 and the answer is x=.9 repeating, i am marked incorrect!

thats enough verification for me to show that 1 does not equal .9999999

-steve budzynski

 

[CajunCenturion]

==> I am in college right now, and if my answer is x=1 and the answer is x=.9 repeating, i am marked incorrect!

That's interesting. How would your math teacher explain my preivous post, or the following?
[tt]
0.111... = 1/9
0.222... = 2/9
0.333... = 3/9
0.444... = 4/9
0.555... = 5/9
0.666... = 6/9
0.777... = 7/9
0.888... = 8/9
0.999... = 9/9
[/tt]
Last time I checked, 9/9 = 1.

Good Luck
--------------
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[tgreer]

Quite simply, that your math is wrong! To illustrate the fallacy:

if x = .999, then 10x = 9.990

10x = 9.990
- x = 0.999
-------------
9x = 0.009

x != 1

You're hiding the fact that, even though there is a repeated series, that series still contains one more term than "10x" does in its repeated series. Not all infinites are equal, which is a common mistake.

For example, the infinity of numbers is 2x as large as the infinity of even numbers.



Thomas D. Greer

http://www.tgreer.com

http://www.brownfedora.com

Providing PostScript & PDF
Training, Development & Consulting

 

[tgreer]

my math is wrong, too, but due to a typo:

10x  =  9.990
- x  =  0.999
-------------
 9x  =  9.009

  x  != 1

Thomas D. Greer

http://www.tgreer.com

http://www.brownfedora.com

Providing PostScript & PDF
Training, Development & Consulting

 

[SilentAiche]

Actually,

10x  =  9.990
- x  =  0.999
-------------
 9x  =  [red]8.991[/red]

but x still don't = 1

Tim

[blue]_____________________________________________________
If you need immediate assistance, please raise your hand.
If you are outside of Raleigh, raise your hand and say[/blue] [red]Ooh! Ooh![/red]

 

[SilentAiche]

For "proof" that 2=1, see:

[blue]

http://www.jimloy.com/algebra/two.htm

[/blue]

Tim

[blue]_____________________________________________________
If you need immediate assistance, please raise your hand.
If you are outside of Raleigh, raise your hand and say[/blue] [red]Ooh! Ooh![/red]

 

[CajunCenturion]

if x = .999, then 10x = 9.990

x is NOT .999 x is .999... with the nines repeating. With that value of x, I think you'll find my math is correct.

Good Luck
--------------
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[CajunCenturion]

Let my explain it another way.

Do you agree that 1/3 = 0.3333... and that 1/3 + 1/3 + 1/3 = 1.
so
[tt] 1/3 = 0.333333...
+ 1/3 = 0.333333...
+ 1/3 = 0.333333...
====================
1 = 0.999999...[/tt]

sbudzynski - Did you actually have a question that resulted in a repeating 9s answer and you responded with the next higher integer and was marked wrong?

Good Luck
--------------
To get the most from your Tek-Tips experience, please read FAQ181-2886
As a circle of light increases so does the circumference of darkness around it. - Albert Einstein

 

[tgreer]

The fallacy is that 1/3 does not equal .3333...

You're going to tell me to pull out a calculator and divide 1 by 3, aren't you? But they aren't exact. 0.3333... approaches 1/3, but never equals it. That's what confounded the ancients, who understood ratios, fractions, and whole numbers, but found such repeated fractions and irrational numbers obscene.

What your calculator is politely showing you is an error. It's saying "I can't show you the value of 1/3, but here is as close as I can get. You'll have to IMAGINE the rest."

Think of it this way, the reason such repeated series even exist is because they DON'T reach the fraction. If they DID, they wouldn't need to keep reaching toward infinity, would they? They would reach their final value and that would be that. But they never do. They go on forever, trying.



Thomas D. Greer

http://www.tgreer.com

http://www.brownfedora.com

Providing PostScript & PDF
Training, Development & Consulting

 

[tgreer]

x is NOT .999 x is .999... with the nines repeating. With that value of x, I think you'll find my math is correct.

I was using the finite series to show the fallacy. For EVERY finite term, .9, .99, .999, etc. you end up falling short. My math was wrong as SilentAiche pointed out (how embarassing).

So you'll never get "9". You'll get a .1 difference, then .01, then .001, then .0001, etc. That's the pattern for EVERY FINITE VALUE. "Every finite" is another way of saying "infinite".

Multiplying .9999[infinite series] by 10 doesn't create 9.999[infinite series]. It creates 9.9999[infinite series]0.



Thomas D. Greer

http://www.tgreer.com

http://www.brownfedora.com

Providing PostScript & PDF
Training, Development & Consulting