3 ms·
I guess we need terse, distinct pronunciations for each of the symbols. I heard a Physics youtuber say "nabla" the other day -- I didn't know that symbol had a
by MathMonkeyMan 3y ago
I guess we need terse, distinct pronunciations for each of the symbols. I heard a Physics youtuber say "nabla" the other day -- I didn't know that symbol had a name.
On the other hand, conventions for reading formulae out loud are difficult and prone to ambiguity.
One more idea. Even in ASCII, there are programming language notations that are hard to say. What is Go's "<-" symbol called? "Arrow"? "Send or receive"? What about C++'s "::"? "Colon colon"?
It is a neat linguistic puzzle to assign sounds to “{ ⊃ ⍵ ⊇⍨ ↑⍒≢¨ ⍵ /⍨ 2≥ (⊂"aeiou") (+/∊⍨)¨ ⍵ }”.
- ihumanable 3y agoPHP provided an answer to the "::" https://stackoverflow.com/questions/592322/php-expects-t-paamayim-nekudotayim https://stackoverflow.com/questions/592322/php-expects-t-paa... T_PAAMAYIM_NEKUDOTAYIM which of course is Hebrew for "Double Colon"
- amluto 3y agoThat’s worse, IMO. At least in Physics you can say “the gradient of f,” and I’ve rarely heard people say “nabla” when talking about physics. And you can look up “gradient” just fine. We don’t need more jargon just for jargon’s sake.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]