On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 11:41 AM, Joe Niederberger <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: >>This is an example of Jonathan's point that speakers of English need to consider that actually saying what they actually mean is a good thing > > Jonathan said before A x B means adding A to ZERO B times. > I pointed out the ambiguity that that could be read as repeatedly forming the sum A+0 (do it B times -- does the answer ever change?) > > His new formulation suffers from the exact same ambiguity, though now we are to add A to itself (form the sum A+A) B-1 times. Well, I get the answer 2A no matter how many times I form that sum. > > Language is ambiguous, furthermore, since when did the phantom menace that Jonathan is attacking ever reach the status of *the* official definition? For teaching multiplication, you need to illustrate many ways. That's how to overcome the ambiguities of human language. > > Joe N >
I agree that there are better ways to say it than the traditional formulation or is alternative. So let's promote those better ways. We both have. I gave an example as did you.