Identifying ambiguities
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I used lead and deadly as the ambiguities because they both can have different meaning. But I'm not sure how to explain how they can have different meaning in this sentence and how to restructure this sentence to make it right.
"Consider the sentence, "Diabetes can lead to deadly heart problems." Identify and explain any two ambiguities associated with the sentence."
propositional-calculus
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I used lead and deadly as the ambiguities because they both can have different meaning. But I'm not sure how to explain how they can have different meaning in this sentence and how to restructure this sentence to make it right.
"Consider the sentence, "Diabetes can lead to deadly heart problems." Identify and explain any two ambiguities associated with the sentence."
propositional-calculus
Hiking on a trail along a river can lead to being hit by lightening. This sentence, like your sentence, isn't very informative because neither explains the likelihood of the deadly consequences. Your sentence also may be taken by some to imply a causal connection, but that is not very clearly stated.
– amWhy
Nov 17 at 18:53
"... can lead to" is what I'd say is what is the most ambiguous. But what counts as "deadly heart problems" is also quite vague.
– amWhy
Nov 17 at 18:56
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
I used lead and deadly as the ambiguities because they both can have different meaning. But I'm not sure how to explain how they can have different meaning in this sentence and how to restructure this sentence to make it right.
"Consider the sentence, "Diabetes can lead to deadly heart problems." Identify and explain any two ambiguities associated with the sentence."
propositional-calculus
I used lead and deadly as the ambiguities because they both can have different meaning. But I'm not sure how to explain how they can have different meaning in this sentence and how to restructure this sentence to make it right.
"Consider the sentence, "Diabetes can lead to deadly heart problems." Identify and explain any two ambiguities associated with the sentence."
propositional-calculus
propositional-calculus
edited Nov 17 at 19:03
David G. Stork
8,99421232
8,99421232
asked Nov 17 at 18:48
Kifayat
81
81
Hiking on a trail along a river can lead to being hit by lightening. This sentence, like your sentence, isn't very informative because neither explains the likelihood of the deadly consequences. Your sentence also may be taken by some to imply a causal connection, but that is not very clearly stated.
– amWhy
Nov 17 at 18:53
"... can lead to" is what I'd say is what is the most ambiguous. But what counts as "deadly heart problems" is also quite vague.
– amWhy
Nov 17 at 18:56
add a comment |
Hiking on a trail along a river can lead to being hit by lightening. This sentence, like your sentence, isn't very informative because neither explains the likelihood of the deadly consequences. Your sentence also may be taken by some to imply a causal connection, but that is not very clearly stated.
– amWhy
Nov 17 at 18:53
"... can lead to" is what I'd say is what is the most ambiguous. But what counts as "deadly heart problems" is also quite vague.
– amWhy
Nov 17 at 18:56
Hiking on a trail along a river can lead to being hit by lightening. This sentence, like your sentence, isn't very informative because neither explains the likelihood of the deadly consequences. Your sentence also may be taken by some to imply a causal connection, but that is not very clearly stated.
– amWhy
Nov 17 at 18:53
Hiking on a trail along a river can lead to being hit by lightening. This sentence, like your sentence, isn't very informative because neither explains the likelihood of the deadly consequences. Your sentence also may be taken by some to imply a causal connection, but that is not very clearly stated.
– amWhy
Nov 17 at 18:53
"... can lead to" is what I'd say is what is the most ambiguous. But what counts as "deadly heart problems" is also quite vague.
– amWhy
Nov 17 at 18:56
"... can lead to" is what I'd say is what is the most ambiguous. But what counts as "deadly heart problems" is also quite vague.
– amWhy
Nov 17 at 18:56
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
English is a very sloppy language. There are many ambiguities in the statement. Some of them are more obviously absurd than others.
- "Diabetes" could refer to my pet dog Diabetes.
- "can lead to" is extremely vague. Does it imply a factual causal link ("if you have diabetes, then your diabetes may cause your heart to become faulty") or a roundabout route ("if you have diabetes, then you will take insulin, which will cause heart problems"), or a correlation ("if you have diabetes, then this is an indication that you are genetically predisposed to get heart disease later"), or any one of a number of other things?
- "Deadly heart problems" could mean that my heart problems are deadly to others (if I'm a pilot and my arrhythmia makes me feel faint), or that they're deadly to myself.
- "Deadly heart problems" can mean "problems with my deadly heart" (perhaps my heart contains lots of vitamin A which is poisonous when consumed).
If you're interested in this kind of thing, I recommend studying the grammar of the constructed language Ithkuil, which is really precise about lots of things which English simply leaves to context.
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
English is a very sloppy language. There are many ambiguities in the statement. Some of them are more obviously absurd than others.
- "Diabetes" could refer to my pet dog Diabetes.
- "can lead to" is extremely vague. Does it imply a factual causal link ("if you have diabetes, then your diabetes may cause your heart to become faulty") or a roundabout route ("if you have diabetes, then you will take insulin, which will cause heart problems"), or a correlation ("if you have diabetes, then this is an indication that you are genetically predisposed to get heart disease later"), or any one of a number of other things?
- "Deadly heart problems" could mean that my heart problems are deadly to others (if I'm a pilot and my arrhythmia makes me feel faint), or that they're deadly to myself.
- "Deadly heart problems" can mean "problems with my deadly heart" (perhaps my heart contains lots of vitamin A which is poisonous when consumed).
If you're interested in this kind of thing, I recommend studying the grammar of the constructed language Ithkuil, which is really precise about lots of things which English simply leaves to context.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
English is a very sloppy language. There are many ambiguities in the statement. Some of them are more obviously absurd than others.
- "Diabetes" could refer to my pet dog Diabetes.
- "can lead to" is extremely vague. Does it imply a factual causal link ("if you have diabetes, then your diabetes may cause your heart to become faulty") or a roundabout route ("if you have diabetes, then you will take insulin, which will cause heart problems"), or a correlation ("if you have diabetes, then this is an indication that you are genetically predisposed to get heart disease later"), or any one of a number of other things?
- "Deadly heart problems" could mean that my heart problems are deadly to others (if I'm a pilot and my arrhythmia makes me feel faint), or that they're deadly to myself.
- "Deadly heart problems" can mean "problems with my deadly heart" (perhaps my heart contains lots of vitamin A which is poisonous when consumed).
If you're interested in this kind of thing, I recommend studying the grammar of the constructed language Ithkuil, which is really precise about lots of things which English simply leaves to context.
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
up vote
0
down vote
accepted
English is a very sloppy language. There are many ambiguities in the statement. Some of them are more obviously absurd than others.
- "Diabetes" could refer to my pet dog Diabetes.
- "can lead to" is extremely vague. Does it imply a factual causal link ("if you have diabetes, then your diabetes may cause your heart to become faulty") or a roundabout route ("if you have diabetes, then you will take insulin, which will cause heart problems"), or a correlation ("if you have diabetes, then this is an indication that you are genetically predisposed to get heart disease later"), or any one of a number of other things?
- "Deadly heart problems" could mean that my heart problems are deadly to others (if I'm a pilot and my arrhythmia makes me feel faint), or that they're deadly to myself.
- "Deadly heart problems" can mean "problems with my deadly heart" (perhaps my heart contains lots of vitamin A which is poisonous when consumed).
If you're interested in this kind of thing, I recommend studying the grammar of the constructed language Ithkuil, which is really precise about lots of things which English simply leaves to context.
English is a very sloppy language. There are many ambiguities in the statement. Some of them are more obviously absurd than others.
- "Diabetes" could refer to my pet dog Diabetes.
- "can lead to" is extremely vague. Does it imply a factual causal link ("if you have diabetes, then your diabetes may cause your heart to become faulty") or a roundabout route ("if you have diabetes, then you will take insulin, which will cause heart problems"), or a correlation ("if you have diabetes, then this is an indication that you are genetically predisposed to get heart disease later"), or any one of a number of other things?
- "Deadly heart problems" could mean that my heart problems are deadly to others (if I'm a pilot and my arrhythmia makes me feel faint), or that they're deadly to myself.
- "Deadly heart problems" can mean "problems with my deadly heart" (perhaps my heart contains lots of vitamin A which is poisonous when consumed).
If you're interested in this kind of thing, I recommend studying the grammar of the constructed language Ithkuil, which is really precise about lots of things which English simply leaves to context.
answered Nov 17 at 19:12
Patrick Stevens
27.9k52873
27.9k52873
add a comment |
add a comment |
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3002683%2fidentifying-ambiguities%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Hiking on a trail along a river can lead to being hit by lightening. This sentence, like your sentence, isn't very informative because neither explains the likelihood of the deadly consequences. Your sentence also may be taken by some to imply a causal connection, but that is not very clearly stated.
– amWhy
Nov 17 at 18:53
"... can lead to" is what I'd say is what is the most ambiguous. But what counts as "deadly heart problems" is also quite vague.
– amWhy
Nov 17 at 18:56