Is there a contraction for non-exclusive or? Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Does “or” mean both conditions?Symbol for 'Or'I need clarification on the use of the word “either”Contraction for 'are' with nounsContraction for “owe on”; would it be “owe'n” or “ow'n”?Is there a word/term for a “super-contraction”Is “that've” a valid contraction for “that have”?Contraction in “Your file'll be downloaded…”Contraction RampageContraction of “There are” to “There're”Is “all'l” a suitable contraction?Is there a standard poetic contraction for “holiest”?Isn't “there're” a contraction for “there are”?
How could we fake a moon landing now?
Why does electrolysis of aqueous concentrated sodium bromide produce bromine at the anode?
I can't produce songs
Asymptotics question
One-one communication
Select every other edge (they share a common vertex)
What is the difference between a "ranged attack" and a "ranged weapon attack"?
How do living politicians protect their readily obtainable signatures from misuse?
Is multiple magic items in one inherently imbalanced?
Positioning dot before text in math mode
Do reserved cards get returned when gold token is spent?
Does the Mueller report show a conspiracy between Russia and the Trump Campaign?
Tips to organize LaTeX presentations for a semester
A proverb that is used to imply that you have unexpectedly faced a big problem
How many morphisms from 1 to 1+1 can there be?
How does the math work when buying airline miles?
How to ternary Plot3D a function
Strange behavior of Object.defineProperty() in JavaScript
Nose gear failure in single prop aircraft: belly landing or nose-gear up landing?
How were pictures turned from film to a big picture in a picture frame before digital scanning?
What is the difference between CTSS and ITS?
BITCOIN: on a chart what does it mean for the USD price to be higher then marketcap?
Why not send Voyager 3 and 4 following up the paths taken by Voyager 1 and 2 to re-transmit signals of later as they fly away from Earth?
In musical terms, what properties are varied by the human voice to produce different words / syllables?
Is there a contraction for non-exclusive or?
Announcing the arrival of Valued Associate #679: Cesar Manara
Planned maintenance scheduled April 23, 2019 at 23:30 UTC (7:30pm US/Eastern)Does “or” mean both conditions?Symbol for 'Or'I need clarification on the use of the word “either”Contraction for 'are' with nounsContraction for “owe on”; would it be “owe'n” or “ow'n”?Is there a word/term for a “super-contraction”Is “that've” a valid contraction for “that have”?Contraction in “Your file'll be downloaded…”Contraction RampageContraction of “There are” to “There're”Is “all'l” a suitable contraction?Is there a standard poetic contraction for “holiest”?Isn't “there're” a contraction for “there are”?
.everyoneloves__top-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__mid-leaderboard:empty,.everyoneloves__bot-mid-leaderboard:empty margin-bottom:0;
I find that often, in technical writing, I want to specify that or is non-exclusive: or ≠ xor; or = and/or.
(Stylistically, "and or" is terrible and gets tiresome quickly;)
As an example of the type of ambiguity that can arise, see I need clarification on the use of the word “either”.
If one has established an "xor" in natural language, "or" can be assumed to be non-exclusive can be assumed, but that may not be explicit enough.
- Has attempted to introduce, even unsuccessfully, a contraction for "non-exclusive or" that relates symbolically to xor?
--------------------------------------------
Russel & Whitehead used "v" as a symbol. [See: Symbol for 'Or']
See also: Does “or” mean both conditions?
terminology contractions logic
asked Mar 24 at 1:24
DukeZhouDukeZhou
768414
add a comment |
I find that often, in technical writing, I want to specify that or is non-exclusive: or ≠ xor; or = and/or.
(Stylistically, "and or" is terrible and gets tiresome quickly;)
As an example of the type of ambiguity that can arise, see I need clarification on the use of the word “either”.
If one has established an "xor" in natural language, "or" can be assumed to be non-exclusive can be assumed, but that may not be explicit enough.
- Has attempted to introduce, even unsuccessfully, a contraction for "non-exclusive or" that relates symbolically to xor?
--------------------------------------------
Russel & Whitehead used "v" as a symbol. [See: Symbol for 'Or']
See also: Does “or” mean both conditions?
terminology contractions logic
asked Mar 24 at 1:24
DukeZhouDukeZhou
768414
I hope this question will be found tolerable, as it is a serious one. I linked three related, useful (but under-voted) previous stack questions.
– DukeZhou
Mar 24 at 1:25
1
There's only and/or really. It does get tiresome, but the workarounds are not much less tiresome, and in any long-ish piece of writing (in a field where this comes up a lot), you will eventually come across a situation where even the best workaround is so clumsy it's better to use and/or - and then you'll wish you'd bitten the bullet the first time and used it throughout.
– Minty
Mar 24 at 17:17
add a comment |
I find that often, in technical writing, I want to specify that or is non-exclusive: or ≠ xor; or = and/or.
(Stylistically, "and or" is terrible and gets tiresome quickly;)
As an example of the type of ambiguity that can arise, see I need clarification on the use of the word “either”.
If one has established an "xor" in natural language, "or" can be assumed to be non-exclusive can be assumed, but that may not be explicit enough.
- Has attempted to introduce, even unsuccessfully, a contraction for "non-exclusive or" that relates symbolically to xor?
--------------------------------------------
Russel & Whitehead used "v" as a symbol. [See: Symbol for 'Or']
See also: Does “or” mean both conditions?
terminology contractions logic
asked Mar 24 at 1:24
DukeZhouDukeZhou
768414
I find that often, in technical writing, I want to specify that or is non-exclusive: or ≠ xor; or = and/or.
(Stylistically, "and or" is terrible and gets tiresome quickly;)
As an example of the type of ambiguity that can arise, see I need clarification on the use of the word “either”.
If one has established an "xor" in natural language, "or" can be assumed to be non-exclusive can be assumed, but that may not be explicit enough.
- Has attempted to introduce, even unsuccessfully, a contraction for "non-exclusive or" that relates symbolically to xor?
--------------------------------------------
Russel & Whitehead used "v" as a symbol. [See: Symbol for 'Or']
See also: Does “or” mean both conditions?
terminology contractions logic
terminology contractions logic
asked Mar 24 at 1:24
DukeZhouDukeZhou
768414
asked Mar 24 at 1:24
DukeZhouDukeZhou
768414
asked Mar 24 at 1:24
DukeZhouDukeZhou
768414
asked Mar 24 at 1:24
DukeZhouDukeZhou
768414
asked Mar 24 at 1:24
DukeZhouDukeZhou
768414
768414
I hope this question will be found tolerable, as it is a serious one. I linked three related, useful (but under-voted) previous stack questions.
– DukeZhou
Mar 24 at 1:25
1
There's only and/or really. It does get tiresome, but the workarounds are not much less tiresome, and in any long-ish piece of writing (in a field where this comes up a lot), you will eventually come across a situation where even the best workaround is so clumsy it's better to use and/or - and then you'll wish you'd bitten the bullet the first time and used it throughout.
– Minty
Mar 24 at 17:17
add a comment |
I hope this question will be found tolerable, as it is a serious one. I linked three related, useful (but under-voted) previous stack questions.
– DukeZhou
Mar 24 at 1:25
1
There's only and/or really. It does get tiresome, but the workarounds are not much less tiresome, and in any long-ish piece of writing (in a field where this comes up a lot), you will eventually come across a situation where even the best workaround is so clumsy it's better to use and/or - and then you'll wish you'd bitten the bullet the first time and used it throughout.
– Minty
Mar 24 at 17:17
I hope this question will be found tolerable, as it is a serious one. I linked three related, useful (but under-voted) previous stack questions.
– DukeZhou
Mar 24 at 1:25
I hope this question will be found tolerable, as it is a serious one. I linked three related, useful (but under-voted) previous stack questions.
– DukeZhou
Mar 24 at 1:25
1
1
There's only and/or really. It does get tiresome, but the workarounds are not much less tiresome, and in any long-ish piece of writing (in a field where this comes up a lot), you will eventually come across a situation where even the best workaround is so clumsy it's better to use and/or - and then you'll wish you'd bitten the bullet the first time and used it throughout.
– Minty
Mar 24 at 17:17
There's only and/or really. It does get tiresome, but the workarounds are not much less tiresome, and in any long-ish piece of writing (in a field where this comes up a lot), you will eventually come across a situation where even the best workaround is so clumsy it's better to use and/or - and then you'll wish you'd bitten the bullet the first time and used it throughout.
– Minty
Mar 24 at 17:17
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
As far as I know, there is no natural language contraction for the inclusive or.
In fact, in order to make it explicit, you have to write something even longer:
You can choose A, B, or A and B.
But even that may not be explicit enough—because it doesn't absolutely rule out the possibility of not making a choice—or making a choice that isn't any of those things.
If an inclusive choice has be made, then you have to say something like this:
You must choose A, B, or A and B.
Note that this also applies to the natural language equivalent of the exclusive or:
You can choose either A or B, but not both.
Generally, adding just either is enough; however, many people add the extra three words if they want to make sure there is no room for any confusion at all.
And also, in the more explicit version:
You must choose either A or B, but not both.
answered Mar 24 at 4:00
Jason BassfordJason Bassford
21.3k32752
add a comment |
Your Answer
StackExchange.ready(function()
var channelOptions =
tags: "".split(" "),
id: "97"
;
initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);
StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function()
// Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled)
StackExchange.using("snippets", function()
createEditor();
);
else
createEditor();
);
function createEditor()
StackExchange.prepareEditor(
heartbeatType: 'answer',
autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
convertImagesToLinks: false,
noModals: true,
showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
reputationToPostImages: null,
bindNavPrevention: true,
postfix: "",
imageUploader:
brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
allowUrls: true
,
noCode: true, onDemand: true,
discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
);
);
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f491039%2fis-there-a-contraction-for-non-exclusive-or%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
As far as I know, there is no natural language contraction for the inclusive or.
In fact, in order to make it explicit, you have to write something even longer:
You can choose A, B, or A and B.
But even that may not be explicit enough—because it doesn't absolutely rule out the possibility of not making a choice—or making a choice that isn't any of those things.
If an inclusive choice has be made, then you have to say something like this:
You must choose A, B, or A and B.
Note that this also applies to the natural language equivalent of the exclusive or:
You can choose either A or B, but not both.
Generally, adding just either is enough; however, many people add the extra three words if they want to make sure there is no room for any confusion at all.
And also, in the more explicit version:
You must choose either A or B, but not both.
answered Mar 24 at 4:00
Jason BassfordJason Bassford
21.3k32752
add a comment |
As far as I know, there is no natural language contraction for the inclusive or.
In fact, in order to make it explicit, you have to write something even longer:
You can choose A, B, or A and B.
But even that may not be explicit enough—because it doesn't absolutely rule out the possibility of not making a choice—or making a choice that isn't any of those things.
If an inclusive choice has be made, then you have to say something like this:
You must choose A, B, or A and B.
Note that this also applies to the natural language equivalent of the exclusive or:
You can choose either A or B, but not both.
Generally, adding just either is enough; however, many people add the extra three words if they want to make sure there is no room for any confusion at all.
And also, in the more explicit version:
You must choose either A or B, but not both.
answered Mar 24 at 4:00
Jason BassfordJason Bassford
21.3k32752
add a comment |
As far as I know, there is no natural language contraction for the inclusive or.
In fact, in order to make it explicit, you have to write something even longer:
You can choose A, B, or A and B.
But even that may not be explicit enough—because it doesn't absolutely rule out the possibility of not making a choice—or making a choice that isn't any of those things.
If an inclusive choice has be made, then you have to say something like this:
You must choose A, B, or A and B.
Note that this also applies to the natural language equivalent of the exclusive or:
You can choose either A or B, but not both.
Generally, adding just either is enough; however, many people add the extra three words if they want to make sure there is no room for any confusion at all.
And also, in the more explicit version:
You must choose either A or B, but not both.
answered Mar 24 at 4:00
Jason BassfordJason Bassford
21.3k32752
As far as I know, there is no natural language contraction for the inclusive or.
In fact, in order to make it explicit, you have to write something even longer:
You can choose A, B, or A and B.
But even that may not be explicit enough—because it doesn't absolutely rule out the possibility of not making a choice—or making a choice that isn't any of those things.
If an inclusive choice has be made, then you have to say something like this:
You must choose A, B, or A and B.
Note that this also applies to the natural language equivalent of the exclusive or:
You can choose either A or B, but not both.
Generally, adding just either is enough; however, many people add the extra three words if they want to make sure there is no room for any confusion at all.
And also, in the more explicit version:
You must choose either A or B, but not both.
answered Mar 24 at 4:00
Jason BassfordJason Bassford
21.3k32752
edited Mar 24 at 4:05
answered Mar 24 at 4:00
Jason BassfordJason Bassford
21.3k32752
answered Mar 24 at 4:00
Jason BassfordJason Bassford
21.3k32752
answered Mar 24 at 4:00
Jason BassfordJason Bassford
21.3k32752
21.3k32752
add a comment |
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to English Language & Usage Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function ()
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fenglish.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f491039%2fis-there-a-contraction-for-non-exclusive-or%23new-answer', 'question_page');
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function ()
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
);
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
I hope this question will be found tolerable, as it is a serious one. I linked three related, useful (but under-voted) previous stack questions.
– DukeZhou
Mar 24 at 1:25
1
There's only and/or really. It does get tiresome, but the workarounds are not much less tiresome, and in any long-ish piece of writing (in a field where this comes up a lot), you will eventually come across a situation where even the best workaround is so clumsy it's better to use and/or - and then you'll wish you'd bitten the bullet the first time and used it throughout.
– Minty
Mar 24 at 17:17