a few corrections

faydin commented

2020-09-28 20:35:23 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

a few corrections, mostly punctuation. Do you think that this sentence is clear:'The way I want to diagram an equation such as this would be as follows.' I get the meaning but I feel that there's something weird. Maybe it's just me, I'm not a native speaker.

freemo commented

2020-09-28 20:45:08 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

@faydin It does sound a bit weird, though not technically incorrect... I'll reword.

freemo commented

2020-09-28 20:47:22 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

"need be invertible" would technically be correct, though perhaps not formal, "needs be invertible" would not be correct not even informally I dont think. With that said a more formal correction would be "needs to be"

freemo commented

2020-09-28 20:49:12 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

Your correction is valid here but misses a mistake in the original "in relationship other variables" should be "in relationship to other variables"

freemo commented

2020-09-28 20:50:21 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

The apostrophe you added at the end of this correction makes sense. However the leading comma you added at the beginning of this correction does not sound right to me.

freemo commented

2020-09-28 20:53:01 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

The first comma you propose in this edit looks correct.

The last comma you removed is incorrect, see oxford comma rule in english if your curious why (though strictly speaking your way isnt wrong).

Also I there is a mistake both of us missed, terminal instead, it will should be terminal instead; it will

The first comma you propose in this edit looks correct. The last comma you removed is incorrect, see oxford comma rule in english if your curious why (though strictly speaking your way isnt wrong). Also I there is a mistake both of us missed, `terminal instead, it will` should be `terminal instead; it will`

freemo commented

2020-09-28 20:53:59 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

@faydin I added several comments to this merge request. You arent expected to apply those comments, I made them to remind myself so I can review my own comments as I merge. Though feel free to reply to the comments if you wish.

freemo commented

2020-09-28 21:08:16 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

mentioned in commit 22e6777e24

mentioned in commit 22e6777e24f8dd59e531ea2600dbf0c23fa17321

freemo (Migrated from git.qoto.org) merged commit 22e6777e24 into master

2020-09-28 21:08:16 +00:00

faydin commented

2020-09-28 21:11:21 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

I checked it before, to make sure. See the rules to decide if the verb should be singular or plural. Ah, I accidentally omitted 'to', I'm sleepy. I'm glad you recognized it.

I checked it before, to make sure. See the [rules](https://www.myenglishpages.com/site_php_files/grammar-lesson-either-or-neither-nor.php) to decide if the verb should be singular or plural. Ah, I accidentally omitted 'to', I'm sleepy. I'm glad you recognized it.

faydin commented

2020-09-28 21:19:31 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

I could swear that it's a mistake, I didn't even feel that I should check it online. Now I know about oxford comma rule :)

freemo commented

2020-09-28 21:23:52 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

@faydin the rule you are stating is correct, but slightly miss applied here.. what I said was similar to saying.

Consider the following correct application of the rule you just said"

"Only my father need be strong, neither my sisters nor my brothers needs be strong"

In this case the second "needs" is plural because one or more of "sisters" or "brothers" is plural. However the first version of "need" is singular because father is singular.

In my case I say "It is important to note here on T(x) need be invertible..." it is the plurality of "T(x)" (which is singular) which causes "need" to also be singular.

However this is actually also a more specialized case of a specifically colloquialism regarding the difference of "If need be" and "If needs be". They both mean the same thing but in American English the first version is always used. In British english either versions are acceptable.

See: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/if-need-be-if-needs-be#:~:text=If%20you%20say%20that%20you,European%20Court%20of%20Human%20Rights.

@faydin the rule you are stating is correct, but slightly miss applied here.. what I said was similar to saying. Consider the following correct application of the rule you just said" "Only my father need be strong, neither my sisters nor my brothers needs be strong" In this case the second "needs" is plural because one or more of "sisters" or "brothers" is plural. However the first version of "need" is singular because father is singular. In my case I say "It is important to note here on T(x) need be invertible..." it is the plurality of "T(x)" (which is singular) which causes "need" to also be singular. However this is actually also a more specialized case of a specifically colloquialism regarding the difference of "If need be" and "If needs be". They both mean the same thing but in American English the first version is always used. In British english either versions are acceptable. See: https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/if-need-be-if-needs-be#:~:text=If%20you%20say%20that%20you,European%20Court%20of%20Human%20Rights.

freemo commented

2020-09-28 21:25:39 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

@faydin while both versions are correct I strongly prefer the Oxford comma as not using the oxford comma can lead to ambiguities.

See the following example as to why I prefer the oxford comma: https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-60ce0a2dd785164f1a276780cc268294.webp

@faydin while both versions are correct I strongly prefer the Oxford comma as not using the oxford comma can lead to ambiguities. See the following example as to why I prefer the oxford comma: https://qph.fs.quoracdn.net/main-qimg-60ce0a2dd785164f1a276780cc268294.webp

faydin commented

2020-09-28 21:25:42 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

I checked and you are right. It should be just a comma.

faydin commented

2020-09-28 21:28:53 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

It's like a math. I see that it's better getting used to oxford comma.

faydin commented

2020-09-28 21:37:53 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

The special symbols of markdown makes it harder to see sentences in full and I tried to correct while reading the markdown version of the article, for the second merge request.

In my case I say "It is important to note here on T(x) need be invertible..." it is the plurality of "T(x)" (which is singular) which causes "need" to also be singular.

When I see this, I realized the whole sentence and the right meaning. You probably know it, it's best to use the rendered version for a review.

The special symbols of markdown makes it harder to see sentences in full and I tried to correct while reading the markdown version of the article, for the second merge request. > In my case I say "It is important to note here on T(x) need be invertible..." it is the plurality of "T(x)" (which is singular) which causes "need" to also be singular. When I see this, I realized the whole sentence and the right meaning. You probably know it, it's best to use the rendered version for a review.

freemo commented

2020-09-28 21:41:01 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

@faydin Yea the markdown, particularly with all the coloring added, makes it tricky to read for sure.

freemo commented

2020-09-29 01:58:18 +00:00

(Migrated from git.qoto.org)

@faydin just an FYI I have added a thanks section where you are mentioned and I published the article. Please let me know if you'd like me to update the link in the thanks section or modify it in any way. You can see the final version here: http://jeffreyfreeman.me/an-indepth-look-at-duals-and-their-circuits/

Rows
Columns

a few corrections #2