[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Geometria e inglês
Sauda,c~oes,
Agora mando informações para aqueles que
acham que escrever "proven" não está correto.
Confesso que mando esta mensagem a contragosto
(não é o objetivo da lista) mas como o assunto
é polêmico (para aqueles que escrevem em inglês)
achei que deveria completar a discussão (por isso
mando todas as mensagens a respeito do assunto).
E não falo mais nisso.
Por outro lado, é interessante conhecer o site
http://www.yourdictionary.com
de um dicionário online de diversas línguas.
[ ]'s
Lu'is
>From: Wilson Stothers <wws@maths.gla.ac.uk>
>Reply-To: Hyacinthos@yahoogroups.com
>To: Hyacinthos@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [EMHL] Forum Geometricorum
>Date: Fri, 11 May 2001 08:46:44 +0100
>
>You might like to look at Websters Dictionary,
>both as regards to usage and pronunciation.
>
>try
>
>http://www.yourdictionary.com
>
>and search for "prove".
>
>Perhaps we should take the view that a good language,
>like a good geometry program is dynamic.
>
>
>Wilson Stothers
>
>e-mail wws@maths.gla.ac.uk
>home page http://www.maths.gla.ac.uk/~wws/
>telephone +44 (0) 141 330 6531
_________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com.
-----Mensagem Original-----
De: Luis Lopes <llopes@ensrbr.com.br>
Para: <obm-l@mat.puc-rio.br>
Enviada em: Quinta-feira, 10 de Maio de 2001 20:14
Assunto: Geometria e inglês
Sauda,c~oes,
Informações para um site e um grupo que discute geometria pesada
e para aqueles que acham que escrever "proven" está correto.
[ ]'s
Lu'is
>From: Paul Yiu <yiu@fau.edu>
>Reply-To: Hyacinthos@yahoogroups.com
>To: (Recipient list suppressed)
>Subject: [EMHL] Forum Geometricorum
>Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 13:57:50 -0400
>
>The following paper has been published in Forum Geometricorum. It can be
>viewed at
>
>http://forumgeom.fau.edu/FG2001volume1/FG200111index.html
>
>The Editors
>Forum Geometricorum
>
>------------------
>Nikolaos Dergiades, The Gergonne Problem,
>
>Forum Geometricorum, 1 (2001) 75--79.
>
>Abstract: An effective method for the proof of geometric inequalities is
>the use of the dot product of vectors. In this paper we use this method to
>solve some famous problems, namely Heron's problem, Fermat's problem and
>the extension of the previous problem in space, the so called Gergonne's
>problem. The solution of this last is erroneously stated, but not proven,
>in F.G.-M.
>
>
>From: Richard Guy <rkg@cpsc.ucalgary.ca>
>Reply-To: Hyacinthos@yahoogroups.com
>To: Hyacinthos@yahoogroups.com
>Subject: Re: [EMHL] Forum Geometricorum
>Date: Thu, 10 May 2001 12:46:05 -0600 (MDT)
>
>May I air one of my bêtes noires ?
>
>`proven' is the past participle of an archaic
>verb `preve', meaning `to test', certainly not
>`to prove' in the modern mathematical sense.
>Its etymology (and pronunciation) are clear
>when you compare `woven' and `cloven'.
>
>It survives in Scottish law as a third possible
>verdict, `Not Proven' and in a few phrases, e.g.
>`a proven remedy' and is connected with the
>`proof' (number of 200ths) of spiritous liquors.
>
>The p.p. of `to prove' is `proved'. You might
>think that this is just another of my pieces
>of windmill-tilting, but this morning I refereed
>a paper (three, actually) and suggested, amongst
>other things, that `unproven' be changed to
>`unproved'. I'm delighted to say that the
>editor has already emailed me to say that that
>is an editorial change that he/she routinely
>makes. R.