3 ms·
"C happened before A and B" can also work in this if we assume it means the joint of A and B. Such that it is not the same statement that C happened before bot
by taeric 4y ago
"C happened before A and B" can also work in this if we assume it means the joint of A and B. Such that it is not the same statement that C happened before both A and B, individually.
Granted, language is ambiguous. But I don't think it gets points for assuming a mistake on input.
- phkahler 4y ago>> Granted, language is ambiguous. But I don't think it gets points for assuming a mistake on input. So one person complains that it gave a "wrong" answer to contradictory input, and now you don't want it to guess at disambiguation. If we were this hard on kids when they're learning they'd be brought to tears. BTW does anybody notice that this thing is handling abstract notions like "Event A, B and C" better than a lot of people do?
- taeric 4y agoI made no real defense of the question, all told. It is written in a very hard to answer way. Just, if there is a way it could work, I'd expect that to be acknowledged. I will again agree that logic is silly tough for language, though. Context changes the colloquial use of "and," and "or" all of the time.