If you want to describe a number that is greater than zero, you would use positive. Is there a similar term for numbers (not necessarily integers) that are greater than one? I.e., this term would be to multiplication as positive is to addition.

For example, I have a box in a figure that says "Antecedent: Factor Greater Than One", but that's a bigger name than most of the antecedents (or consequents) in my figures, so I'd really like it to say something like "Antecedent: Superpositive Factor" where "Superpositive" is a word I made up right now that I hope will never have the meaning I'm attributing to it here.

Plural has been suggested, and that's a really good answer for discrete quantities (such as the number of dogs), but in my particular case the number in question is continuous (a multiplicative factor).

Per request, here are other Antecedent/Consequent names I've used (after the "Antecedent:" or "Consequent:" bit): "Nonnegative Divisor", "Acceptable Error", "In Between Result", "Min Less Than Max" (which is equally as wordy), and "Applies Brake When At Rest" (which is even more wordy). So far, I've eschewed using actual math symbols (such as "> 1"), but I don't really have a solid reason for doing so.

  • Plural numbers perhaps? – Araucaria - Not here any more. Sep 2 '15 at 12:23
  • Give an example of how you'd use this. – Hot Licks Sep 2 '15 at 12:27
  • @HotLicks, added an example to the question – Ben Hocking Sep 2 '15 at 12:29
  • this may sound stupid, but why don't you just write "Antecedent: Factor > 1"? sometimes simpler is better... – SamuelVimes Sep 2 '15 at 12:36
  • 1
    For context it would be useful to see how you labelled the other antecedents. Otherwise we can't judge what you are aiming for. – chasly from UK Sep 2 '15 at 12:51

Perhaps you can use "Antecedent:plural number", although I think that it would be fine if you just write "Antecedent:Factor > 1"

  • Plural is good in some situations, but I will clarify my answer to include that I'm looking for an answer that works with uncountable quantities. – Ben Hocking Sep 2 '15 at 12:43
  • Never heard about plural numbers. – anemone Sep 2 '15 at 12:48
  • Accepting in lieu of a better answer, in that while this doesn't exactly suit my needs, it's a good answer for situations involving countable quantities. – Ben Hocking Sep 19 '15 at 13:59

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.