Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
In linguistics, clusivity [1] is a grammatical distinction between inclusive and exclusive first-person pronouns and verbal morphology, also called inclusive "we" and exclusive "we". Inclusive "we" specifically includes the addressee, while exclusive "we" specifically excludes the addressee; in other words, two (or more) words that both ...
Exclusive or, exclusive disjunction, exclusive alternation, logical non-equivalence, or logical inequality is a logical operator whose negation is the logical biconditional. With two inputs, XOR is true if and only if the inputs differ (one is true, one is false). With multiple inputs, XOR is true if and only if the number of true inputs is odd ...
This is in contrast with an exclusive disjunction, which is true when one or the other of the arguments are true, but not both (referred to as exclusive or, or XOR). When it is necessary to clarify whether inclusive or exclusive or is intended, English speakers sometimes uses the phrase and/or.
Venn diagram for "A or B", with inclusive or (OR) Venn diagram for "A or B", with exclusive or (XOR) The fallacy lies in concluding that one disjunct must be false because the other disjunct is true; in fact they may both be true because "or" is defined inclusively rather than exclusively. It is a fallacy of equivocation between the operations ...
The bitwise XOR (exclusive or) performs an exclusive disjunction, which is equivalent to adding two bits and discarding the carry. The result is zero only when we have two zeroes or two ones. [3] XOR can be used to toggle the bits between 1 and 0.
References on English usage strongly criticize the phrase as "ugly" [2] and "Janus-faced". [4] William Strunk, Jr., and E.B. White, in their classic The Elements of Style–recognized by Time one of the 100 best and most influential non-fiction books written in English since 1923, [6] say and/or is "A device, or shortcut, that damages a sentence and often leads to confusion or ambiguity". [3]
It is correct, at least for bivalent logic—i.e. it can be seen with a Karnaugh map—that this law removes "the middle" of the inclusive-or used in his law (3). And this is the point of Reichenbach's demonstration that some believe the exclusive-or should take the place of the inclusive-or.
The "exclusive" and "inclusive" can be determined often in spoken language (the speaker will often lower their pitch at the end of an "exclusive" question, as opposed to raising it at the end of an "inclusive" question), but it is a frequent source of humour for computer scientists and others familiar with Boolean logic, who will give responses ...