3 ms·
How do you not read it "5 times 3"? Why would you re-arrange where the "times" is?
by pbreit 11y ago
How do you not read it "5 times 3"? Why would you re-arrange where the "times" is?
- TeMPOraL 11y agoYou're joking, right? GP read it as: "5 x3", like he would read "copy x3", or "copy, three times". It's a natural way of reading "5x3", though I personally read it as "5x 3".
- Retric 11y ago(5, times 3) or (5 times, 3) both work.
- netheril96 11y agoI just consider "times" the name of the multiplication operator.
- signal11 11y agoBecause where I come from, we use the English equivalent of "into" rather than "times". "5 into 3" roughly translates to "5, 3 times". The meta-point here is that English (or any other language) is crap for math, which is why we use mathematical notation. And this bullcrap syllabus is trying to redefine the "x" operator, which gets my goat.
- chris_wot 11y agoThe syllabus does nothing of the sort. The addition technique is a way of teaching very young children in a way they can grasp. However, it relies on using concrete objects and so far as I can see, should be used as a technique to aid understanding, and only then should the multiplication notation be introduced.