Exclusive disjunction: Difference between revisions

From The Jolly Contrarian
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Created page with "An “or” that means ''either'' this or that ''but not both''. This is an unusual type of or. Most ors are inclusive disjunctions, meaning “it could b..."
 
No edit summary
 
(One intermediate revision by the same user not shown)
Line 1: Line 1:
An “[[or]]” that means ''either'' this [[or]] that ''but not both''.
{{a|plainenglish|}}An “[[or]]” that means ''either'' this [[or]] that ''but not both''.


This is an unusual type of [[or]]. Most [[or]]s are [[inclusive disjunction]]s, meaning “it could be this, that or both I’m honestly relaxed and don’t care as long as one of you shows up.” If you have an inclusive or, as mostly you should, you don’t need an [[and/or]]
This is an unusual type of [[or]]. Most [[or]]s are [[inclusive disjunction]]s, meaning “it could be this, that, ''or both'': I’m honestly relaxed and don’t care as long as ''one of you'' shows up.”  


 
If you have an inclusive [[or]], as mostly you should, you don’t need an [[and/or]]. If (you think) you have an exclusive [[or]], and you need an [[and]], just use an ''in''clusive [[or]].
 
{{plainenglish}}

Latest revision as of 08:07, 22 June 2022

Towards more picturesque speech
SEC guidance on plain EnglishIndex: Click to expand:
Tell me more
Sign up for our newsletter — or just get in touch: for ½ a weekly 🍺 you get to consult JC. Ask about it here.

An “or” that means either this or that but not both.

This is an unusual type of or. Most ors are inclusive disjunctions, meaning “it could be this, that, or both: I’m honestly relaxed and don’t care as long as one of you shows up.”

If you have an inclusive or, as mostly you should, you don’t need an and/or. If (you think) you have an exclusive or, and you need an and, just use an inclusive or.