JB/135/028/002: Difference between revisions

Transcribe Bentham: A Collaborative Initiative

From Transcribe Bentham: Transcription Desk

Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.

JB/135/028/002: Difference between revisions

Keithompson (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
BenthamBot (talk | contribs)
No edit summary
 
(6 intermediate revisions by 2 users not shown)
Line 4: Line 4:


<head>Observations</head>
<head>Observations</head>
 
<note>Prop XIV &amp; XV<lb/>
<p>There is <del>the same<add></del><del>the more</del><add>the same</add></add> reason for <add>joining</add> the &amp; 15 <unclear>Prop.</unclear> Book 3<hi rend="superscript">d</hi><lb/>
Book III</note>
<del>being divided than</del> together as thee is for joining <note>Prop XIV &amp;
<p>There is <del>the same</del> <add><del>no more</del><add> the same</add> reason for <add>joining</add> 14 &amp; 15 Prop. Book 3<hi rend="superscript">d</hi><lb/>
XV<lb/>
<del>being divided than</del> together as there is for joining <lb/>
Book III</note></p>
The several Cases of the 7 &amp; 8<hi rend="superscript">th</hi> Prop. into one.</p>
<p>The several Cases of the 7 &amp; 8 Prop. into one.</p>
<note>Term.<lb/>
<p>The Word Term is made use of by several of the Editors<lb/>
double meaning</note>
in 2 very different  senses, in one they mean a "Term of expression"<add>in the Logical sense</add> <note>Term.<lb/>
<p>The word Term is made use of by several of the Editors<lb/>
double meaning</note><lb/>
in 2 very different  senses, in one they mean a "Term of expression" <add>in the Logical sense</add> <lb/>
in the other a <add>in the Mathematical sense</add> Term or boundary of a line Vid. to Chalis preface to 5<hi rend="superscript">th</hi> Book.</p>
in the other <add>in the Mathematical sense</add> a Term or boundary of a line Vid. De Chalis preface to 5<hi rend="superscript">th</hi> Book.</p>
&#x2014;
<note>Cunn's 3<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> Prop<lb/>
<p>
5<hi rend="superscript">th</hi> Book.<lb/>
The Meaning of the Word each seems to be understood by<lb/>
Word Each</note>
neither <add>Euclid</add> or any of his Editors, " [<!-- Greek letters -->exaoros"] is the expression in<lb/>
<p>The meaning of the Word each seems to be understood by<lb/>
neither <add>Euclid</add> or any of his Editors, "έκαστος" is the expression in<lb/>
the Greek and the Translators share all of them translated<lb/>
the Greek and the Translators share all of them translated<lb/>
it litteraly into "each" without Considering the meaning of<lb/>
it <sic>litteraly</sic> into "each" without Considering the meaning of<lb/>
but , prejudiced as in <del>any</del> many other cases to<lb/>
it but, prejudiced as in <del>any</del> many other cases to<lb/>
<del>the Infallibility</del> to Euclid because what he says<lb/>
<del>the Infallibility</del> to Euclid because what he says<lb/>
in generalisation as if that was a reason he should <note>Cunn's 3<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> Prop<lb/>
in generalisation as if that was a reason he should  
5<hi rend="superscript"><gap/></hi> Book.<lb/>
Word Each</note>
be infallible, a remarkable example of the bad<lb/>
be infallible, a remarkable example of the bad<lb/>
effect of making use of this word each in as are<lb/>
effect of making use of this word each in as are<lb/>
appropriate its real one, is to be found in 3<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> Prop<lb/>
appropriate its real one, is to be found in 3<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> Prop<lb/>
5<hi rend="superscript"><gap/></hi> Book of Cunns Edition.  He says "If the 1<hi rend="superscript"><gap/></hi> to"<lb/>
5<hi rend="superscript">the</hi> Book of Cunn's Edition.  He says "If the 1<hi rend="superscript">st</hi> to"<lb/>
"the same Multiple of the 2<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> as the 3<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> of the 4<hi rend="superscript">th</hi>, and<lb/>
"the same Multiple of the 2<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> as the 3<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> of the 4<hi rend="superscript">th</hi>, and there be"<lb/>
taken Equimultiples of the 1<hi rend="superscript">st</hi> &amp; 3<hi rend="superscript">d</hi>. Then we
taken Equimultiples of the 1<hi rend="superscript">st</hi> &amp; 3<hi rend="superscript">d</hi>. Then will <hi rend="underline">each</hi><lb/>
of the <hi rend="underline">Magnitudes taken</hi><add><del>he had by the <gap/> and Equimultiple</del></add> be Equimultiple
of the <hi rend="underline">Magnitudes taken</hi> <add><del>he had by the <gap/> and Equimultiple</del></add> be Equimultiples of the <del>2 &amp; 5<hi rend="superscript">th</hi>.</del><lb/>
2<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> <hi rend="underline">and</hi> 4<hi rend="superscript">th</hi>.</p>
2<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> <hi rend="underline">and</hi> 4<hi rend="superscript">th</hi>.</p>


<hi rend="underline">Each</hi> in its litteral sense in this Case is the same<lb/>
<hi rend="underline">Each</hi> in its <sic>litteral</sic> sense in this case is the same<lb/>
as <hi rend="underline">either</hi>, <del>if so it</del> let <hi rend="underline">either</hi> be put into its room then will it<lb/>
as <hi rend="underline">either</hi>, <del>if so it</del> let <hi rend="underline">either</hi> be put into its room then will it<lb/>
be "Then will either of the Magnitudes taken be Equimultiple<lb/>
be "Then will either of the Magnitudes taken be Equimultiple<lb/>
of the 2<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> &amp; 4<hi rend="superscript">th</hi> but this is <del>not the time there are in this instance</del><lb/>
of the 2<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> &amp; 4<hi rend="superscript">th</hi> <del>but this is not the time there are in this instance</del><lb/>
<del>2 words which together</del> but this the opposite
<del>2 words which together</del> but this the opposite meaning to<lb/>
that he intends to convey for it is determined which of the<lb/>
that he intends to convey for it is determined which of the<lb/>
two magnitudes taken shall be equimultiple of the 2<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> &amp; which of the 4<hi rend="superscript">th</hi> <note>but supposing the word<lb/>
two magnitudes taken shall be equimultiple of the 2<hi rend="superscript">d</hi> &amp; which of the 4<hi rend="superscript">th</hi> but supposing the word<lb/>
<hi rend="underline">each</hi> did determine which<lb/>
<hi rend="underline">each</hi> did determine which<lb/>
of the 2 <unclear>magniiti</unclear> you should<lb/>
of the 2 magnit. you should<lb/>
take <del>the <gap/></del><add>sentence</add> would<lb/>
take the <del>expression</del> <add>sentence</add> would<lb/>
then lead you into its own<lb/>
then lead you into an error<lb/>
for he says each is an<lb/>
for he says each is an<lb/>
equimult. of the 2 <hi rend="underline">and</hi> 4<hi rend="superscript">th</hi><lb/>
equimult. of the 2 <hi rend="underline">and</hi> 4<hi rend="superscript">th</hi><lb/>
when he means that<lb/>
when he means that<lb/>
therefore if he did expect<lb/>
therefore <del>if</del>in he did expect<lb/>
that <hi rend="underline">each</hi> should determine<lb/>
that <hi rend="underline">each</hi> should determine<lb/>
some one he saves could expect<lb/><lb/>
some one he saves could expect<lb/>
any body to understand that<lb/>
any body to understand that<lb/>
is equal to one, when he tells you it is to <lb/>
is equal to one, when he tells you it is to <lb/>
both</note><lb/><pb/>
both<lb/><pb/>
 
<note>On the Use which<lb/>
In treating of Propositions of Quantities Euclid makes use of Lines as examples and to distinguish the line or lines part or parts of lines, which he means to speak of at one instant from those which he means not to speak of at the same instant he fines <gap/> to letters at the extremeities of each part line or part  of a line. For example suppose he meant if of the line of B which is divided into A 3 parts, he meant to speak of the middle divisions C- he would pin the letters C C and call it the part C D - D Now C C the letters CD of themselves did give B you no idea of the part he mentions, but<gap/> know he means by putting these letters to refer you to the line divided in question.  When you look at that and have found the letter CD you see in the that their position denotes the middle division how much sooner might a it have been known that he meant the middle division if he had said so! for those the trouble of referring to the figure (by which you probably lost your place) would have been saved besides that of finding out the letters position of those letters with respect to the figure.
Euclid makes<lb/>
 
of Lines and<lb/>
 
Letters</note>
 
 


<note>Words not defined<lb/>
Antecedent}<lb/>
Consequent}<lb/>
Magnitude<lb/>
Relation of Magnitude<lb/>
Rank<lb/>
Excess<lb/>
Simplitude</note>
<p>In treating of Propositions of Quantities Euclid makes use of <lb/>
<hi rend="underline">Lines</hi> as examples and to distinguish <del>the line or lines</del> part <lb/>
or parts of lines, which he means to speak of at one intent <lb/>
from those which he means not to speak of at the <lb/>
same instant he fixes <del><gap/> to</del> letters at the extremities <lb/>
of each <del>part</del> line or part  of a line.  For example suppose <lb/>
<del>he meant</del> if of the line A.B. which is divided into <lb/>
A&#x2014;3 parts, he meant to speak of the middle division <lb/>
C&#x2014;he would fix the letters CD and call it the part C <lb/>
D&#x2014;D.  Now <del>CD</del> the letters C.D. of themselves <del>did</del> give <lb/>
B&#x2014;you no idea of the part he mentions, but you<lb/>
know he means by putting these letters to refer you <lb/>
to the line <del>divided</del> in question.  When you look at <lb/>
that and have found the letter CD. you see <add><del>in the</del></add> that <lb/>
their position denotes the middle division. how much <lb/>
sooner might a it have been known that he meant <lb/>
the Middle division if he had said so! for then the <lb/>
trouble of referring to the figure (by which you probably <lb/>
lost your place) would have been saved besides that <lb/>
of finding out the <del>letters</del> position of those letters with <lb/>
respect to the figure.</p>


<note>Magnitudes<lb/>
instead of<lb/>
Lines</note>
<p><del>Better</del> It would be better to <del>express</del> make use of<lb/>
the more general term of magnitude than to be<lb/>
confined to the idea of a line and if it was necessary<lb/>
to give an example in Numbers or if possible in<lb/>
letters standing for number in their common order.</p>
<note>Equimultiples</note>
<p>Euclid uses the Word <hi rend="underline">Equimultiple</hi> but without<lb/>
defining it.</p>


<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
<!-- DO NOT EDIT BELOW THIS LINE -->
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}
{{Metadata:{{PAGENAME}}}}{{Completed}}

Latest revision as of 10:35, 4 February 2020

Click Here To Edit

Observations Prop XIV & XV
Book III

There is the same no more<add> the same reason for joining 14 & 15 Prop. Book 3d
being divided than together as there is for joining
The several Cases of the 7 & 8th Prop. into one.

Term.
double meaning

The word Term is made use of by several of the Editors
in 2 very different senses, in one they mean a "Term of expression" in the Logical sense
in the other in the Mathematical sense a Term or boundary of a line Vid. De Chalis preface to 5th Book.

Cunn's 3d Prop
5th Book.
Word Each

The meaning of the Word each seems to be understood by
neither Euclid or any of his Editors, "έκαστος" is the expression in
the Greek and the Translators share all of them translated
it litteraly into "each" without Considering the meaning of
it but, prejudiced as in any many other cases to
the Infallibility to Euclid because what he says
in generalisation as if that was a reason he should be infallible, a remarkable example of the bad
effect of making use of this word each in as are
appropriate its real one, is to be found in 3d Prop
5the Book of Cunn's Edition. He says "If the 1st to"
"the same Multiple of the 2d as the 3d of the 4th, and there be"
taken Equimultiples of the 1st & 3d. Then will each
of the Magnitudes taken he had by the and Equimultiple be Equimultiples of the 2 & 5th.
2d and 4th.

Each in its litteral sense in this case is the same
as either, if so it let either be put into its room then will it
be "Then will either of the Magnitudes taken be Equimultiple
of the 2d & 4th but this is not the time there are in this instance
2 words which together but this the opposite meaning to
that he intends to convey for it is determined which of the
two magnitudes taken shall be equimultiple of the 2d & which of the 4th but supposing the word
each did determine which
of the 2 magnit. you should
take the expression sentence would
then lead you into an error
for he says each is an
equimult. of the 2 and 4th
when he means that
therefore ifin he did expect
that each should determine
some one he saves could expect
any body to understand that
is equal to one, when he tells you it is to
both

---page break---
On the Use which
Euclid makes
of Lines and
Letters

Words not defined
Antecedent}
Consequent}
Magnitude
Relation of Magnitude
Rank
Excess
Simplitude

In treating of Propositions of Quantities Euclid makes use of
Lines as examples and to distinguish the line or lines part
or parts of lines, which he means to speak of at one intent
from those which he means not to speak of at the
same instant he fixes to letters at the extremities
of each part line or part of a line. For example suppose
he meant if of the line A.B. which is divided into
A—3 parts, he meant to speak of the middle division
C—he would fix the letters CD and call it the part C
D—D. Now CD the letters C.D. of themselves did give
B—you no idea of the part he mentions, but you
know he means by putting these letters to refer you
to the line divided in question. When you look at
that and have found the letter CD. you see in the that
their position denotes the middle division. how much
sooner might a it have been known that he meant
the Middle division if he had said so! for then the
trouble of referring to the figure (by which you probably
lost your place) would have been saved besides that
of finding out the letters position of those letters with
respect to the figure.

Magnitudes
instead of
Lines

Better It would be better to express make use of
the more general term of magnitude than to be
confined to the idea of a line and if it was necessary
to give an example in Numbers or if possible in
letters standing for number in their common order.

Equimultiples

Euclid uses the Word Equimultiple but without
defining it.



Identifier: | JB/135/028/002"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 135.

Date_1

Marginal Summary Numbering

not numbered

Box

135

Main Headings

Folio number

028

Info in main headings field

observations

Image

002

Titles

Category

copy/fair copy sheet

Number of Pages

2

Recto/Verso

recto

Page Numbering

Penner

sir samuel bentham

Watermarks

[[watermarks::[gr with crown] [pro patria motif]]]

Marginals

sir samuel bentham

Paper Producer

Corrections

Paper Produced in Year

Notes public

ID Number

46146

Box Contents

UCL Home » Transcribe Bentham » Transcription Desk
  • Create account
  • Log in