5 ms·

"Then maybe it's time you look up how unemployment statistics are calculated in Switzerland and you will be surprised that you counted into them." Not to criti

by dbspin 15d ago

"Then maybe it's time you look up how unemployment statistics are calculated in Switzerland and you will be surprised that you counted into them." Not to criticise, but just to point out that this sentence doesn't quite make sense in English, and it's not immediately apparent what you mean. The sentence has to precisely opposed interpretations.

IAmBroom 14d ago
> this sentence doesn't quite make sense in English > The sentence has to precisely opposed interpretations. Muphry's Law still holds true.
- bpavuk 14d ago
  TIL that "Muphry's law" is a deliberate misspelling: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law
- dbspin 13d ago
  Always, but perhaps not in this case. I wasn't correcting spelling, but coherence. The comment I replied to includes a sentence that is both ambiguous and non-nonsensical. It doesn't seem to be an issue of grammar, but rather clarity of thought.
teiferer 15d ago
Oh interesting. What are the interpretations and why?
- crefiz 15d ago
  I beg to differ, perhaps my English dialect is different but sounds pretty OK to me – even for Chatty https://chatgpt.com/share/6a98091f-9550-83eb-b17e-c636ac3441d1 https://chatgpt.com/share/6a98091f-9550-83eb-b17e-c636ac3441...
  - dbspin 13d ago
    Expert as a stochastic parrot may be in impersonating expertise, grammatical or otherwise, I don't see how citing it is relevant.
- teiferer 14d ago
  (Also, why was that question downvoted?)
- dbspin 13d ago
  > Then maybe it's time you look up how unemployment statistics are calculated in Switzerland and you will be surprised that you counted into them. First off the sentence simply doesn't make sense. Specifically 'you will be surprised that you counted into them.' I assume the commenter meant something like 'you will be surprised that you were included in those statistics. But it's highly ambiguous since 'you counted into them' isn't sensical. Trying to parse it from context, they could be suggesting a reader would be surprised at how the statistics are calculated, at who is included, at who is not included, or at how similarly they are calculated when compared to other countries.

by dbspin 15d ago

IAmBroom 14d ago

> this sentence doesn't quite make sense in English > The sentence has to precisely opposed interpretations. Muphry's Law still holds true.

bpavuk 14d ago
TIL that "Muphry's law" is a deliberate misspelling: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muphry%27s_law
dbspin 13d ago
Always, but perhaps not in this case. I wasn't correcting spelling, but coherence. The comment I replied to includes a sentence that is both ambiguous and non-nonsensical. It doesn't seem to be an issue of grammar, but rather clarity of thought.

teiferer 15d ago

Oh interesting. What are the interpretations and why?

crefiz 15d ago
I beg to differ, perhaps my English dialect is different but sounds pretty OK to me – even for Chatty https://chatgpt.com/share/6a98091f-9550-83eb-b17e-c636ac3441d1 https://chatgpt.com/share/6a98091f-9550-83eb-b17e-c636ac3441...
- dbspin 13d ago
  Expert as a stochastic parrot may be in impersonating expertise, grammatical or otherwise, I don't see how citing it is relevant.
teiferer 14d ago
(Also, why was that question downvoted?)
dbspin 13d ago
> Then maybe it's time you look up how unemployment statistics are calculated in Switzerland and you will be surprised that you counted into them. First off the sentence simply doesn't make sense. Specifically 'you will be surprised that you counted into them.' I assume the commenter meant something like 'you will be surprised that you were included in those statistics. But it's highly ambiguous since 'you counted into them' isn't sensical. Trying to parse it from context, they could be suggesting a reader would be surprised at how the statistics are calculated, at who is included, at who is not included, or at how similarly they are calculated when compared to other countries.