You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
(Just some though, I don't plan to translate those course for the moment)
In France, we start our sequence at rank 0 (which simplify a lots of formula !).
When translating, should the translater rewrite the course so that sequence start at rank 0 to follow french way to do ? What about Canada (which also have french as main language), I checked really quick but it seems that they start their sequence at rank 1. I think french course should follow France guideline and start at rank 0.
In France, in reccurcive formula, we usually give u(n+1) in function of u(n) instead of giving u(n) in function of u(n-1). What should the translator do ? I Think u(n) in function of u(n-1) is easier to understand, but it would then means that student have different reccursive formula than formula at their school (which shouldn't be a problem if they really understand what the formula means but this might still bug lots of students).
More problematic, we (but France is pronanly not be the only country to do that) also have a totally different definition for limit. We say that « f tends to L as x tends to a if for every ɛ>0 there exists δ>0 such that for every x in the domain of f, |x - a| ≤ δ implies that |f(x) - L| ≤ ɛ » while your definition also require that 0 < | x - a |. So some function might have limit with english definition but not with french definition. Again, what the translator should do ?
I repeat, it's just some though, I don't plan to translate those course for the moment.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The English and translated versions don't have to be exactly the same, so it's absolutely fine to change small things like this based on the country. However…
I think, we should find the best way to teach something, irrespective of a specific country or curriculum. In this case, the French version seems much more sensible, so I would lean towards changing the English version to match (but there might be other topics where it's the other way round).
I'm working on a new syntax for annotating small differences within a language (e.g. American vs British English), and this can also be used for France vs Canada. However, it's not entirely trivial to build, and I don't think it's a huge priority.
(Just some though, I don't plan to translate those course for the moment)
In France, we start our sequence at rank 0 (which simplify a lots of formula !).
When translating, should the translater rewrite the course so that sequence start at rank 0 to follow french way to do ? What about Canada (which also have french as main language), I checked really quick but it seems that they start their sequence at rank 1. I think french course should follow France guideline and start at rank 0.
In France, in reccurcive formula, we usually give u(n+1) in function of u(n) instead of giving u(n) in function of u(n-1). What should the translator do ? I Think u(n) in function of u(n-1) is easier to understand, but it would then means that student have different reccursive formula than formula at their school (which shouldn't be a problem if they really understand what the formula means but this might still bug lots of students).
More problematic, we (but France is pronanly not be the only country to do that) also have a totally different definition for limit. We say that « f tends to L as x tends to a if for every ɛ>0 there exists δ>0 such that for every x in the domain of f, |x - a| ≤ δ implies that |f(x) - L| ≤ ɛ » while your definition also require that 0 < | x - a |. So some function might have limit with english definition but not with french definition. Again, what the translator should do ?
I repeat, it's just some though, I don't plan to translate those course for the moment.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: