★ Find a new page on our Untranscribed Manuscripts list.
No edit summary |
No edit summary |
||
Line 15: | Line 15: | ||
Arithmetical is part<lb/> | Arithmetical is part<lb/> | ||
of the universal international<lb/> | of the universal international<lb/> | ||
language: | language: as<lb/> | ||
<del>Here</del> <add>more effectually than</add> jurisprudence language<lb/> | <del>Here</del> <add>more effectually than</add> jurisprudence language<lb/> | ||
is.: <del><gap/></del></note> | is.: <del><gap/></del></note> | ||
<p>4. The language of arithmetic including algebra and<lb/> | <p>4. The language of arithmetic including algebra and<lb/> | ||
its <foreign>et cæteras</foreign>, is | its <foreign>et cæteras</foreign>, is part and parcel of the universal international<lb/> | ||
<del>§ Elucidation continued — Nomenclature amended</del><lb/> | <del>§ Elucidation continued — Nomenclature amended</del><lb/> | ||
language: it is analogous in that respect to universal jurisprudence:<lb/> | language: it is analogous in that respect to universal jurisprudence:<lb/> | ||
Line 37: | Line 37: | ||
<p>5. In the language of <add>English</add> Legislation and Judication, <add>of</add> the<lb/> | <p>5. In the language of <add>English</add> Legislation and Judication, <add>of</add> the<lb/> | ||
operative denominated amendment, there are three modifications,<lb/> | operative denominated amendment, there are three modifications,<lb/> | ||
namely 1. Substraction or say Defalcation or say <unclear>Substractive</unclear>.<lb/> | namely 1. <sic>Substraction</sic> or say Defalcation or say <unclear><sic>Substractive</sic></unclear>.<lb/> | ||
2. Addition. 3. Substitution, which is performed by the union of<lb/> | 2. Addition. 3. Substitution, which is performed by the union of<lb/> | ||
both: commencing naturally with substraction as being the most universally<lb/> | both: commencing naturally with <sic>substraction</sic> as being the most universally<lb/> | ||
practicable</p> | practicable</p> | ||
Line 58: | Line 58: | ||
found little to do. Why.. <add>How so?</add> Because wheresoever we find a th<gap/><lb/> | found little to do. Why.. <add>How so?</add> Because wheresoever we find a th<gap/><lb/> | ||
we find one inapt denomination, that which <add><unclear>over high</unclear></add> ought to be done will<lb/> | we find one inapt denomination, that which <add><unclear>over high</unclear></add> ought to be done will<lb/> | ||
be thought to be incomplete if | be thought to be incomplete if we stop there, and <sic>omitt</sic> to give mention to substitute<lb/> | ||
to it that which <hi rend="underline">ought</hi> to be done</p> | to it that which <hi rend="underline">ought</hi> to be done</p> | ||
<note><del>13</del> 8<lb/> | <note><del>13</del> 8<lb/> | ||
II. Addition were to<lb/> | II. Addition were to<lb/> | ||
the denominations in | the denominations in use</note> | ||
<p>8. <del>21</del> Next to this will come <hi rend="underline">addition</hi>: addition to the stock of<lb/> | <p>8. <del>21</del> Next to this will come <hi rend="underline">addition</hi>: addition to the stock of<lb/> |
1831 May 17 M
Posology
1 Alegomorphics
§ Elucidation continued
Nomenclature amended
2
9 4
Arithmetical is part
of the universal international
language: as
Here more effectually than jurisprudence language
is.:
4. The language of arithmetic including algebra and
its et cæteras, is part and parcel of the universal international
§ Elucidation continued — Nomenclature amended
language: it is analogous in that respect to universal jurisprudence:
but is more effectually so than that is
10 5
In legislation and
judicial language, modification
of amend are
three.
1. Defalcation or say Subtraction
2. Addition
3. Substitution — union of
the two
5. In the language of English Legislation and Judication, of the
operative denominated amendment, there are three modifications,
namely 1. Substraction or say Defalcation or say Substractive.
2. Addition. 3. Substitution, which is performed by the union of
both: commencing naturally with substraction as being the most universally
practicable
11 6
Apply this to alegomorphic
posology.
Applying Let us apply this analysis to alegomorphic posology: that is
to say equivalence in its five several modes, of which above
12 7
In the way of substitution
I. Substraction: in this
way little will be to be
done
7. In the way of simple substraction — mere substraction is
found little to do. Why.. How so? Because wheresoever we find a th
we find one inapt denomination, that which over high ought to be done will
be thought to be incomplete if we stop there, and omitt to give mention to substitute
to it that which ought to be done
13 8
II. Addition were to
the denominations in use
8. 21 Next to this will come addition: addition to the stock of
nomenclature of apt denominations — the stock which is found already
in existence in the body of the language
14 9
III. Substitution: viz. of
apt to the unapt denominations
in use
9. 14 Lastly will come substitution of what we deem apt to what
we deem unapt: and here the existence of inaptitude being alledged, the existence of
inaptitude will require to be demonstrated.
15 10
Given accordingly
will be all those
denominations.
10 In each of these several cases lists if denominations will here
need to be given: given accordingly shall these lists be.
Identifier: | JB/135/192/001"JB/" can not be assigned to a declared number type with value 135. |
|||
---|---|---|---|
1831-05-17 |
9-15 |
||
135 |
posology |
||
192 |
posology |
||
001 |
|||
text sheet |
1 |
||
recto |
e1 |
||
jeremy bentham |
|||
46310 |
|||