[murillo]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

What does 2-3 mean?

In normal text, I always replace such instances to text form, i.e., "2–3" becomes "2 to 3". This is in line with what the reader will mentally read and will not inconvenience the reader.

In the below examples, en dash should never be used:
Wrong: from 2–3; correct: from 2 to 3
Wrong: between 2–3; correct: between 2 and 3

En dash can be inserted via Alt + 0150
Em dash can be inserted via Alt + 0151

[Thad E Ginathom]

I think... if words, all words; if numerals no words!

so two to three or 2–3.

between 2 and 3 I agree with that one, except, actually, such small numbers (under 10? should be spelt out. so between two and three.

For linux, a different key sequence is required. Which I forgot since yesterday!

Ok, this is better than my personal ideas!

In non-technical contexts, OUP style is to use words for numbers below
100. When a sentence contains one or more figures of 100 or above,
however, use arabic figures throughout for consistency within that
sentence: print for example 90 to 100 (not ninety to 100), 30, 76, and 105
(not thirty, seventy-six, and 105). This convention holds only for the sen-
tence where this combination of numbers occurs: it does not influence
usage elsewhere in the text unless a similar situation exists.

... From the Oxford Style Guide, which I mentioned earlier. And they have so much more to say about typesetting numbers.

[murillo]

Originally Posted by Thad E Ginathom

I think... if words, all words; if numerals no words!

Norms for usage of digits vs. text for numbers are rapidly evolving.

Somewhere, they asked us to spell out 1–9 and use digits for 10 and above. As you mentioned, OUP differentiates between 1–99 and >100.

For simplicity and ease of use, and to obviate exception handling, I always suggest using digits for all numbers in normal text. As to using digits in sentences, I do not see any ambiguity arising therefrom; besides, we do not have to worry about big numbers, years, centuries, page numbers, super-/subscript numbers, binary codes, IP addresses, etc.

I do not know anything about the typesetting industry. If one works in the typesetting industry and one's organization demands punctilious adherence, then one must learn and follow those standards. However, we may not bring industry standards to bear upon everyday language.

[tilt]

A slightly off-topic but interesting tidbit about numbers written in words occurred to me since we are talking numbers:

When written in words, the first occurrence of the letter "a" is after "hundred" (a hundred and one); however, if one were to stick to "a" occurring in pure numbers (rather than "and"), the first occurrence is at "thousand".

Useless trivia, but interesting!

Cheers

[JohnyBoy]

Originally Posted by tilt

.. however, if one were to stick to "a" occurring in pure numbers (rather than "and"), the first occurrence is at "thousand".

Useless trivia, but interesting!

Cheers

All odd numbers have 'e' in them.
Another useless trivia !!

[Thad E Ginathom]

Originally Posted by murillo

... I do not know anything about the typesetting industry. If one works in the typesetting industry and one's organization demands punctilious adherence, then one must learn and follow those standards. However, we may not bring industry standards to bear upon everyday language.

Indeed. I am mostly moaning about what I see in my newspapers every day, and how I observe the standard to be falling. The traditions/rules of publishing and media are mostly sensible: they are based on good readability and making stuff easy for the reader to follow. Typography is a thankless task: the better it is the less noticeable it is! That is the aim for its practitioners: to be invisible!

No, we do not need to apply these rules to writing which is not for publication --- or even to forum posts, which are largely conversational in nature. But publication these days certainly extends to web design and the vast internet.

We don't often need to apply such rules, but it does no harm to do so.

[condor]

Not about posting in English, but a nice video:

https://www.facebook.com/theenglishn...9454364728626/

[comfortablynumb]

I guess proofreading has become a full's errand these days.



Cheers,
Vikram

[shashanka]

Originally Posted by comfortablynumb

I guess proofreading has become a full's errand these days.
Cheers,
Vikram

Full-proof indeed! Har, har!

[Samurai]

In American TV News shows, I have noticed a trend in recent years. Instead of saying political calculations, they have started saying political calculus. Anyone who has studied calculus knows that calculation and calculus cannot be treated as synonyms. Calculus is a method of calculating change, or rate of change, or rate of change of rate of change (so forth) with respect to something.

Example:
Velocity = Change in distance with respect to time. [dL/dt]
Acceleration = Change in velocity with respect to time. [dv/dt]
Jerk = Change in acceleration with respect to time. [da/dt]

Ideally, if they say political calculus, they must mean calculating the change in political situation. One could discuss the international political calculus of Trump becoming president.

Since politics is extremely fluid everywhere, can we say political calculus is the right usage?

[binand]

Originally Posted by Samurai

Anyone who has studied calculus knows that calculation and calculus cannot be treated as synonyms.

Before calculus became "a method of calculating change" (or any of the other things that are studied in the branch of mathematics called calculus), it meant:

calculus (n): A particular method or system of calculation or reasoning (Lexico/OED)

calculus (n): Calculation (Merriam-Webster)

calculus (n): any mathematical system of calculation involving the use of symbols (Collins)

So yes, calculus in this sense and calculation appear to be interchangeable.

Calculus has a medical meaning too, btw.

[Samurai]

Originally Posted by binand

Before calculus became "a method of calculating change" (or any of the other things that are studied in the branch of mathematics called calculus), it meant:

Well, your reply inspired me to google the question. And I found that the exact same question was asked earlier in english.stackexchange site.

https://english.stackexchange.com/qu...vs-calculation

The last part of the answer explains the phenomena.

It is hardly surprising that people who spent significant time speaking English between 1963 and 1983 should have a sense that using calculus to mean "calculation" is either old-fashioned (if they remember "archaic" instances of that usage from those years) or newfangled (if they don't). But calculus-as-calculation has a long history of usage in English, as well as lots of current usage; and in business meetings across the land, the fact that "calculus" sounds more impressive than "calculation" almost guarantees that its popularity in coming years will grow rather than diminish.

[Thad E Ginathom]

I thought calculus was something nasty that dogs catch.

[V.Narayan]

Calculus meant my chances of passing in Maths were precarious. The rate of change of my panic was inversely proportional to the days left for the exam.

[fordday]

Originally Posted by girishv

Between, can not install digilocker on my mobile (LG V30+ oreo).

I could not decipher the usage of the highlighted word above. In what context is it used? Is it addressed to someone?

I have seen this usage before too.