3 ms·
>Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo with a two-stone handicap English is not my first language but for clarity perhaps the title should be: Go grandmaster
by teleforce 1mo ago
>Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo with a two-stone handicap
English is not my first language but for clarity perhaps the title should be:
Go grandmaster Shin with a two-stone handicap defeats AI KataGo
- sermah 1mo agoNo. It’s not my first language too, but your version sounds odd. Usually you put an action first and only then the details
- nottorp 1mo agoTrouble is, from the existing title it's not clear who had the handicap. So the poster is right to try and fix it.
- deleted 1mo ago[deleted]
- qnpnpmqppnp 1mo agoIt's not clear from the revised title either though. In fact I found it even more confusing. The issue is the ambiguity of the wording "with a two-stone handicap", not where it's located in the sentence.
- edh649 1mo agoI would probably phrase it as 'Go grandmaster Shin defeats two-stone-handicapped AI KataGo'
- criddell 1mo agoAre there ads on the page? If so, let’s A/B test that along with “Grandmaster Shin Savagely Beats Handicapped Opponent”.
- nottorp 1mo agoI only saw the "revised title" and yes, it's still confusing :)
- shagie 1mo agoWith a two-stone handicap, Go grandmaster Shin defeats AI KataGo. Or Go grandmaster Shin, playing with a two-stone handicap, defeats AI KataGo.
- simiones 1mo agoThe problem is that "with a handicap" is in itself ambiguous. People sometimes use it positively, sometimes negatively. That is, you say that Shin had a two-stone handicap, that can in itself be understood as either "Shin was given an advantage of two stones over the AI" (the reality) or "Shin was playing with a disadvantage, giving the AI two extra stones" (the more common reading of "to have a handicap").
- nswango 1mo agoIdiomatically a handicap is a disadvantage not an advantage. So if Shin had two extra stones, KataGo had a two stone handicap.
- brainwad 1mo agoHandicaps can be positive, e.g. in fixed distance racing one way to handicap is to "give" a starting distance to the racers who are slower than the scratch racer; in this system a higher handicap is more of an advantage. Since the AI was playing scratch (the normal, unmodified play style), it seems odd to say it had a handicap. Rather, the human had a positive handicap of two stones.
- tokai 1mo agoYoure just mixing up who has the handicap. The handicap gives starting distance to the slower racer, but its still the faster racer that has the handicap.
- Sharlin 1mo agoYes, but the title has an ambiguous parse (a shift-reduce conflict): X defeats (Y with Z) or (X defeats Y) with Z with the latter usually understood as meaning X has Z, as far as I know.
- bawolff 1mo agofwiw, as a native speaker, your revised version sounds wrong. I'm terrible at grammer, but i think it's because when you put the "with" early in the sentence, it acts as a preposition modifying the noun, where later in the sentence it acts as an adverbial phrase modifying the verb defeat. The handicap is describing the manner of the defeat and not a trait of the grandmaster, so the with has to go at the end of the sentence. Or that at least is my guess as to why it sounds wrong.
- i_no_can_eat 1mo ago> I'm terrible at grammer Also pretty bad at spelling.
- bawolff 1mo agolol, you are not wrong.