Talk:Q.E.D.
Add topicLatest comment: 4 years ago by Canonicalization
@justinrleung: Hi. I've tried to keep initialisms only in this translation table, and whole phrases only over at quod erat demonstrandum. I'm uncertain about the Chinese, though: does 證畢／证毕 (zhèngbì) qualify as an initialism? I see there's a longer version, 證明完畢／证明完毕, so I guess yes? Canonicalization (talk) 18:25, 26 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Canonicalization: Yes, I guess so. I'm not really sure, though. @Dine2016, 沈澄心, any idea? — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 02:05, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
- 證畢 may be just 文言構詞法. I remember that "according to historical principles" was translated as 依史則 by Chinese linguistics in the first half of the 20th century, and here 依史則 is not an initialism of 依照歷史原則 if it appeared first. On the other hand, I don't know any history of mathematics so I'm not sure either. --Dine2016 (talk) 03:37, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Dine2016: That's also a possibility. @Canonicalization, that said, I still 證畢 should probably be on this entry and quod erat demonstrandum. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 04:31, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Justinrleung, Dine2016: Ok, thank you. Canonicalization (talk) 21:36, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
- @Dine2016: That's also a possibility. @Canonicalization, that said, I still 證畢 should probably be on this entry and quod erat demonstrandum. — justin(r)leung { (t...) | c=› } 04:31, 27 January 2020 (UTC)
- 證畢 may be just 文言構詞法. I remember that "according to historical principles" was translated as 依史則 by Chinese linguistics in the first half of the 20th century, and here 依史則 is not an initialism of 依照歷史原則 if it appeared first. On the other hand, I don't know any history of mathematics so I'm not sure either. --Dine2016 (talk) 03:37, 27 January 2020 (UTC)