Timeline for How could I use "respectively" to state three actions by subsets of four people?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
8 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Jan 21, 2021 at 14:13 | comment | added | RobJarvis | I agree, @dache1771. I like Anton's solution better than mine. | |
| Jan 21, 2021 at 7:39 | comment | added | dache1771 | I see. However I think that Anton's answer is more general, it works with any number of teams and people for team | |
| Jan 20, 2021 at 18:40 | comment | added | RobJarvis | OK, @dache1771, if we were to modify the example to add more people to the teams, we might write: "When X is a rainbow set or a rainy set, the claim was proved by Arnold, and Arnold and Rainey, respectively; Carlson, Benson, and Hillard further proved the claim when X is a cloudy set." A comma may help to distinguish, for example, one researcher from the following team of more than one. I did not include a comma in my answer between "Arnold and Benson and Arnold and Davidson" primarily because Arnold appears as the first name in each team, thus removing any ambiguity. | |
| Jan 20, 2021 at 16:44 | comment | added | dache1771 | I don't understand your reasoning: How would you do if the three teams had, say, n_1, n_2, n_3 people each; with possible non-empty intersections between the teams? Also, isn't "Arnold and Benson and Arnold and Davidson" lacking at least one comma? I would say: "When X is a rainbow set, (comma) or a rainy set, the claim was proved by Arnold and Benson, (comma) and Arnold and Davidson, respectively;" | |
| Jan 20, 2021 at 16:29 | history | edited | RobJarvis | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
Poor, neglected Benson--I forgot to include him in my answer.
|
| Jan 20, 2021 at 16:27 | comment | added | RobJarvis | My mistake! I shall edit my answer. | |
| Jan 20, 2021 at 16:26 | comment | added | niamulbengali | What about Benson? | |
| Jan 20, 2021 at 16:23 | history | answered | RobJarvis | CC BY-SA 4.0 |