[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 12 KB, 514x313, v336u9.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3056429 No.3056429[DELETED]  [Reply] [Original]

Just thought I would educate you guys, I see this word "parentheses" used a lot to describe these but I'm afraid it's incorrect.

Parenthesis is an explanatory or qualifying word, clause, or sentence inserted into a passage with which it does not necessarily have any grammatical connection, and from which it is usually marked off by round or square brackets, dashes, or commas.

It's an easy mistake to make I suppose, but parentheses are the things contained by the brackets and NOT the brackets themselves.
Perhaps it's just a yank thing, I suppose this may have confused one of your forefathers and got passed down through the generations.

Just trying to bring a bit of English enlightenment to you chaps.

>> No.3056449

OP is a "fag".

>> No.3056460

I have gone for years without knowledge that this was a misnomer and I fear that I may have broken social etiquette by using it.
Thank you for educating me OP, you sir are a gentleman and a scholar.

>> No.3056462

>>3056429
(what?)

>> No.3056477

pa·ren·the·sis
 
 [puh-ren-thuh-sis] Show IPA
–noun, plural -ses
 [-seez] Show IPA.
1.
either or both of a pair of signs ( ) used in writing to mark off an interjected explanatory or qualifying remark, to indicate separate groupings of symbols in mathematics and symbolic logic, etc.

EAT SHIT AND DIE OP

>> No.3056480

interesting.... i have been taught this since grade school

>> No.3056488

() - Roundy toundy tufts
[] - Right-angle flat knocks
{} - Squiggly bits
<> - Queen's knickers

>> No.3056492

<span class="math">\Bigg(parenthesis\Bigg)[/spoiler]

>> No.3056494

>>3056449
>OP is a ``fag"
FTFY

>> No.3056503

>>3056494
fixed for latex

>> No.3056507

>>3056477
Unfortunately it's quite common for a misnomer to make it into the mainstream, such as "PIN number" and "ATM machine" and often less respectable dictionaries lack the academic expertise to catch on and simply include these terms as if they were correct.

I would suggest purchasing the latest edition of the Oxford English Dictionary. I am sure that you will find everything in there to be correct, and it shall eliminate the possibility of you harbouring similar misunderstandings in the future.

>> No.3056521

>>3056507
>Unfortunately it's quite common for a misnomer to make it into the mainstream, such as "PIN number" and "ATM machine"

not a misnomer, it's just redundant; the person is just an idiot

>> No.3056525

>Implying that one regional quirk of language is objectively Right

Why do British people always think that stupid minutia they've added to the language since their dialects diverged from ours are more valid than ours?

>> No.3056531
File: 110 KB, 900x891, 1304310998966.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3056531

>>3056507
don't forget
>NIC card

>> No.3056532

( ) parentheses
[ ] brackets
{ } matrix (if not brackets)
< > html bull shit

>> No.3056537

>>3056507
http://oxforddictionaries.com/view/entry/m_en_us1275638#m_en_us1275638
>(usually parentheses) a pair of round brackets () used to mark off a parenthetical word or phrase.
>Parentheses are the most formal (and most obvious) way of showing parenthesis. Commas are less forceful:

Parenthesis (singular) is generally used to represent the statement inside parenthesis (plural). Oxford Dictionary itself confirms.

dealwithit.jpg

>> No.3056543

>>3056532
It is not "more valid" it's just objectively correct I'm afraid.

>>3056525
Thank you for outlining the misnomers that I described, I assume you forgot to label them "true" and false. I shall aid you with that.

1) False
2) False
3) False
4) False

>> No.3056545

>>3056507
>the dictionaries are wrong and my retarded britishisms are right.

>> No.3056547

>>3056532
{} are clearly braces

>> No.3056548

>>3056521
>the person is just an idiot

You don't know about descriptive linguistics.

How language IS used is more relevant than how it SHOULD be used

>> No.3056549

>>3056537
parentheses (plural)*

>> No.3056555

>>3056531
Thank you for providing me with another misnomer, I shall put it to good use in the future.

>>3056537
As I said before, online dictionaries are often less reputable and will let anybody contribute.
Not to mention that you have it on the wrong setting "en_us", it should be "en_gb" for the correct version.

>> No.3056564

ITT: Bitches don't know about my RAS syndrome.

Nothing wrong with it faggots. Language evolves. You can't control it. Rage harder

And if I want to pronounce meme as maim then I will.

>> No.3056577

>>3056548
> implying I don't know what that means does not mean the person isn't an idiot for being redundant.

give me a fucking break. If you're not aware of the abbreviation as you're saying it, you're lazy and stupid: it has nothing to do with one's knowledge of linguistics, and those people being redundant wouldn't know what descriptive linguistics are in the first place.

0/10 troll

>> No.3056589

>>3056555
I shall provide a link for the full set which can be purchased from a reputable online business.
For the more learned gentlemen among you of course, at an affordable price as well:
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Oxford-English-Dictionary-second-Volumes/dp/0198611862/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&am
p;qid=1305417819&sr=1-1

(I believe that this would be around 1100 "dollars" as I think the sterling is worth quite a bit more)

>> No.3056587

>>3056555
The "World English" (en_gb) version has the exact same definition. Online or not, it's still the Oxford Dictionary, which you incorrectly claimed would support your case.

At this point, you're just "the dictionaries are wrong and my retarded britishisms are right." like >>3056545 said

>> No.3056604

[ ] brackets (uk: square brackets)
{ } braces or curly brackets
( ) parentheses (uk: round brackets)
< > less-than and greater-than signs.

>> No.3056606

>>3056587
I'm sorry but is this some vague attempt at "trolling", if so it has been unsuccessful.
I definitely know my definitions, and in fact I have the latest 2012 copy (brand new) by my side and can assure you that you are objectively wrong.

>> No.3056607

>>3056577
I know what PIN stands for but I'll still say PIN number because it's common practice and everyone recognises what you're talking about. Language is habitual. Get over it. Fucking grammer nazi. (Uh Godwin's law!)

>> No.3056628

>>3056607
You are an oaf if you still use misnomers despite being aware that they are incorrect, I feel sorry that you probably don't have very many friends. Your violation of social etiquette must be most embarassing for those that are left.

>> No.3056629

>>3056606
>oh no he disagrees with me, and he pointed out my lack of sources to support my argument! he must be trolling!

>> No.3056630

>>3056606
>he goes to the dictionary to find the meaning of words
>laughingelf.jpg

>> No.3056646

>>3056629
I appreciate the effort, but I am afraid that you will have to try harder to "troll" me.

>>3056630
I have the latest 2012 edition of the Oxford English dictionary, there is not a more accurate dictionary in existence.

>> No.3056649

[] open/close staple
{} open/close stache (mustache)
() open/close parens
<> open/close carrot

>> No.3056668

>>3056646
Post a scan or picture from the page with definition of "parentheses". Clearly visible, with both the previous and following definitions visible as well to ensure you aren't conveniently leaving anything off.

Since apparently that is the only Dictionary in the world that agrees with the point you're trying to make.

>> No.3056667

>>3056628
violating social etiquette? you make me laugh. the social etiquette if it's anything in this circumstance would be how language is used and not how it should be used - therefore redundant acronyms wouldn't be wrong.

And as far as using them despite knowing otherwise, haven't you ever done something out of habit? or are you not a creature of habit? because that would imply you're some kind of Übermensch (unlikely!).

>> No.3056680

>>3056649
I find your response rather humorous, could I have your permission to put this little chestnut in my "blog"?

I'm sure that my friends would be just as amused as I am, the definitions are blatantly wrong yet the appearance of the characters bears a vague resemblance to them!
Very good indeed.

>> No.3056690 [DELETED] 
File: 34 KB, 464x600, COMEATMEBRO.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3056690

<span class="math">\Bigg\{\Bigg[\Bigg(\Bigg|5\Bigg|\Bigg]\Bigg)\Bigg\}\Bigg\{\Bigg[\Bigg(\Bigg|5\Bigg|\Bigg]\Bigg)\Bigg
\}[/spoiler]

>> No.3056684

>>3056607
lol. and being likened to nazis is easy to do for the defeated. You're trying to correct people's behaviour with the understanding of (paranthesis); I'm trying to control your use of being less redundant - sounds like two people with control issues to me: or is that an all too common theme to the internet?

Sure, you may habitually say "PIN number."; you are still redundant. If you find that others are too confused by your use of abbreviations, stop using abbreviations altogether ;)

>> No.3056688

>>3056684
see >>3056667

>> No.3056705

>>3056688
talk all you want, you will still sound like an idiot

>> No.3056707
File: 34 KB, 464x600, COMEATMEBRO.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3056707

<span class="math">\Bigg\{\Bigg[\Bigg(\Bigg|5\Bigg|\Bigg)\Bigg]\Bigg\}\Bigg\{\Bigg[\Bigg(\Bigg|5\Bigg|\Bigg)\Bigg]\Bigg
\}[/spoiler]

>> No.3056709

>>3056690
lol

>> No.3056717

>>3056667
I do consider myself somewhat superior to the unwashed masses, but that is not what I made this thread to discuss. The thought of using ANY misnomer after knowledge that it is wrong horrifies me, I have had friends who have confused the most simple words such as "than" and "then. I corrected them on their elementary mistakes, expecting them to thank me so that they do not do it again in the future but all I got in response was scorn!

It confuses me, if I correct an error in a friends mathematical working I get thanks - yet if I correct their language I get the complete opposite. It's an interesting observation, and I do wonder why it is so.

It's paradoxical really, people often pride themselves on being terrible at mathematics yet if you point out where they are wrong in a problem they appreciate. Most people can read, and nobody takes pride in lack of English comprehension but if you attempt to correct them they get angry!

It seems that people are appreciative about advice on what they aren't good at and don't care about, yet are unappreciative over advice on what they use every day and will be of great use throughout their lives.

It's utterly ridiculous.

>> No.3056729

>>3056684
"PIN number" is no more redundant than "blue color". PIN is acting as an adjective to qualify what kind of number you're talking about.

>> No.3056730
File: 314 KB, 824x872, good-sir.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3056730

>>3056688
mad, good sir?

captcha:
d<> eriatio