Talk:Language of mathematics

Mathematical symbols

Do you know of any book, in which the meaning all mathematical symbols is explained as well as their grammatical use?

If you know, please, send me an email A.vanderVen@pwo.ru.nl — Preceding unsigned comment added by 84.83.33.64 (talk) 15:06, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

Early discussion

Some comments on detail.

- Topos is certainly used in literary theory (it means roughly the 'place' in 'common place' of discussion, 'commonplace book' and so on.

- Sheaf is of course agricultural, too.

Charles Matthews 11:44, 21 Nov 2003 (UTC)

Interesting - I had no idea that topos had a non-mathematical meaning (but I have no excuse for sheaf !). Anyway, I've replaced both examples with fractal, which I am sure was specifically coined by Mandelbrot -- Gandalf61 12:08, Nov 21, 2003 (UTC)

Category theory and Chomsky

This seems suspect without support. Original research, Sokal-style hoax? Also has weaselly "perhaps". This needs citation and explanation.A Geek Tragedy 16:21, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Yes, bogus analogy. I've taken it out. Leibniz 19:26, 7 September 2006 (UTC)

Patchy article

Actually quite a lot of the article looks like original research. There are some real issues that need adding raised in philosophy of mathematics, about e.g. whether mathematicians can understand each other when talking about transcendental numbers, infinite sets, etc. Ben Finn 17:23, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Use of an underlying language for vocabulary

The use of an underlying language to provide meaning is not discussed. You mention specific mathematical symbols as a part of the vocabulary of mathematics; you do not mention that those symbols are often embedded in an English (or French, German, Russian &c) sentence. A specific example sitting in front of me is:

Construct a meromorphic function on $\mathbb {C}$ that has a simple pole with residue 1 at each Gaussian integer and no other poles.

(This is a question from a complex analysis exam.) This sentence clearly borrows both vocabulary and grammar from English and vocabulary from Mathematics. Is it a sentence in English or a sentence in Mathematics? Joyof (talk) 04:56, 1 August 2008 (UTC)

One problem with the article is that its claims are largely not substantiated by citations of reliable sources. Another problem, which may be related, is that the article is awfully vague and fuzzy. For example, let's agree that there is such a things as "the language of mathematics". Does that imply then that there is such a thing as "mathematics as a language"? There is surely such a thing as "the language of law", but "law as a language"?? Our Mathematics article describes maths as both a body of knowledge and an academic discipline, and I think we can extend the meaning to the activity pursued by mathematicians (Mathematics is not a careful march down a well-cleared highway, but a journey into a strange wilderness, where the explorers often get lost. – W. S. Anglin). In none of these meanings is it meaningful to assert that mathematics is a language.

It would be much clearer to just discuss "the language of mathematics", meaning the system employed by mathematicians to communicate amongst themselves – a system that has several registers, from the more formal discourse in research articles in academic journals to the exchanges over a scribbled-upon napkin in the university cafeteria. The issue of the underlying language is valid. I've occasionally heard the claim that mathematicians working in the same field can communicate meaningfully on mathematical problems with colleagues with who basically any other topic would run into unsurmountable language barriers, but I'm somewhat sceptical about how far that goes.  --Lambiam 13:46, 10 August 2008 (UTC)

"I've occasionally heard the claim that mathematicians working in the same field can communicate meaningfully on mathematical problems with colleagues with who basically any other topic would run into unsurmountable language barriers, but I'm somewhat sceptical about how far that goes."

This sentence needs a rewrite. Anyone up to the task? MotherFunctor (talk) 18:21, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

It seems clear enough to convey Lambian's meaning. And it is usually considered poor Wikiquette to copyedit other editors' posts on talk pages. And, as Lambian's post was written months ago, very few people will be reading it now anyway. Gandalf61 (talk) 09:21, 25 November 2008 (UTC)

Informality

Informal expressions between humans are to be expected. However, this text has poor examples:

When mathematicians communicate with each other informally, they use phrases that help to convey ideas. Examples of some of the more idiomatic phrases are "kill this term", "vanish this interval" and "grow this variable".

It may be reassuring to some readers to see that mathematicians can handle informality, but the given expressions are not familiar.Rgdboer (talk) 20:10, 1 June 2014 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Language of mathematics. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Replaced archive link http://webcache.googleusercontent.com/search?q=cache:mtsIvOjGzZsJ:file.scirp.org/pdf/CE20100300008_45591409.pdf+&cd=2&hl=en&ct=clnk&gl=de&client=firefox-b with https://web.archive.org/web/20170517025608/http://file.scirp.org/pdf/CE20100300008_45591409.pdf on http://file.scirp.org/pdf/CE20100300008_45591409.pdf
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20031214023204/http://www.aucegypt.edu/academic/anth/anth352/what_is_language.htm to http://www.aucegypt.edu/academic/anth/anth352/what_is_language.htm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 22:12, 16 December 2017 (UTC)

Try reading Maxwell's equations out loud?

The article states: "try reading Maxwell's equations out loud". WTH? You can definitely read Maxwells equations out loud.

$\nabla \cdot \mathbf {B} =0$  It reads: Magnetic monopoles do not exist

Just granpa (talk) 12:11, 24 December 2020 (UTC)

Nouns, verbs, and conjunctions

Let me make this easy for you:

numbers are nouns

+ - * / ^ = are verbs (= means "is")

& v are conjunctions

Just granpa (talk) 01:48, 30 December 2020 (UTC)

Neutral point of view

The whole article is non neutral, and this biased presentation starts from the first sentence: "The language of mathematics is the system used by mathematicians to communicate mathematical ideas among themselves, and is distinct from natural languages in that it aims to communicate abstract, logical ideas with precision and unambiguity". This sentence reduces mathematics to the communication of ideas, while most mathematics texts consists of the presentation of results, which is completely different.

If "the langage of mathematics" exists (I am not sure of that), an acceptable first sentence would be The language of mathematics is an extension of the natural language that is used in mathematics and in science for expressing results (physical laws, theorems, proofs, logical deductions, etc) with concision, precision and unambiguity. I am sure that most people who know mathematics would prefer this formulation.

The article is alredy tagged with {{multiple issues}}. I will further tag it with {{npov}}.

As the whole article is build on this wrong first sentence, there is nothing to be salvaged in it. D.Lazard (talk) 15:14, 21 June 2022 (UTC)

I WP:PRODed this articled, and the prod tag was removed by another editor. This removal was a good thing, since there are almost 50 incoming links to this article. Another editor has removed most of the irrelevant content. I rewrote the remainder of the article. Nevertheless the sections § Point of view and § Further reading present non-neutral points of view, and should be discussed further. D.Lazard (talk) 09:34, 25 June 2022 (UTC)

Since the article has been rewritten, should the PROD be updated to say it has been kept? I definitely think this is one of the most important possible articles Wikipedia can have, especially for mathematics, and it is seriously underdeveloped (as is the study of the language of mathematics itself). In which case I would obviously argue for a strong keep. KingAntenor (talk) 10:33, 20 August 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Content Area Literacy

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 17 January 2023 and 6 May 2023. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Kuchar2 (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Camiadmire, Gmtz81902.

— Assignment last updated by Gmtz81902 (talk) 19:56, 30 April 2023 (UTC)

New Comments

Areas of improvement

Organization Wise

• Change the location of understanding mathematical text. This section appears to explain the background information needed to be able to understand the topic. As result, it should go first and be integrated within the definition paragraph.
• Change the location of features. This section appears to discuss distinguishable characteristics related to mathematical language. Therefore, it should proceed the understanding mathematical text section due to it being an extension of the topic.

Content Wise

• Introduce additional perspectives on the topic. Williams is the only individual that is currently mentioned. This formulates a very limited, restricted, and single-minded view.
• Find a clear focus. The article is currently confusing, hard to read, and contains lots of complex language It would be more helpful if the information was broken down and interpreted further.

Grammer Wise

• Add citations. There is a high volume of citations missing within the article. This makes it difficult to know where information is coming from. The article still sounded very rooted in the original research's language instead of being rooted in the meaning of the research.

Areas of Strength

• A definition is provided. Readers can gain an understanding of the topic before diving into the rest of the article.
• Examples are provided. Readers can learn about what these specific aspects that are associated with the topic look like.
• Additional reading. Readers have the opportunity to expand their knowledge and or learn more about the topic. Exploration and research are encouraged.

Camiadmire (talk) 21:56, 22 February 2023 (UTC)