Re: zeroth. was Re: Please welcome . . .
|From:||Christian Thalmann <cinga@...>|
|Date:||Friday, December 19, 2003, 9:38|
--- In email@example.com, "Mark J. Reed" <markjreed@M...> wrote:
> Sadly, John's limerick doesn't rhyme for me, since I don't
> pronounce powers as ordinals unless I'm including the word "power".
> So x^n is "x to the n" or "x to the nth power", but not *"x to the nth".
> Similarly, x^(n+1) is "x to the quantity n plus one" or "x to
> the n-plus-one'th power", which includes the desired "oneth" but loses
> the scansion and rhyme.
Then how about replacing hundred-oneth by n-plus-oneth in
-- Christian Thalmann