Dear Professors,

I am looking for any reference articles on the uses of the preposition "of" that are applied most often in mathematics. I once read in the teacher's edition of Pre-algebra: An Accelerated Course by Dolciani that students should be taught, as early as possible, the many uses of the preposition "of" in mathematics, but I have been unable to find anything on this particular question/topic. Could you please help me find something? (books, articles, etc.)

Please note: The primary tag for this thread is a REFERENCE-REQUEST. Reference-requests are for questions that the poster wants to seek for references (books, articles, etc.) in a subject.

So far the only references that I have found can be viewed at these links:

Professor Pat Byrd

http://www2.gsu.edu/~eslhpb/grammar/lecture_11/of.html

and

Richard Milton Martin, Pragmatics, truth, and language, chapter 10, Of 'Of' page 130

http://books.google.com/books?id=L0PNx4i8G3UC&lpg=PR12&ots=GIyxSXUvi-&dq=Martin%2C%20Richard%20Milton's%20chapter%20X%20OF%20'OF'%20in%20Pragmatics%2C%20truth%20and%20language&pg=PA130#v=onepage&q&f=false

Unfortunately, they are at opposite ends of the spectrum with reference to my question about the uses of "of" most often applied in mathematics.

I have narrowed the question down to FINDING specific reputable reference sources as provided through the "links" above. Please note that I have removed the asking of "why this specific choice was made?" from the question to avoid any possible duplicate arguments. The topic of this thread is strictly being ABLE to find any verifiable sources.

Yours respectfully.

Dear Alex Bartel, I have narrowed the question down to FINDING specific reputable reference sources as provided through the "links" above. Please note that I have removed the asking of "why this specific choice was made?" from the question to avoid any possible duplicate arguments or spamming as you call it. The topic of this thread is strictly being ABLE to find any verifiable sources. Yours respectfully.

skullpatrol, you've already asked for reference requests here, and nobody knew of any.

It was also suggested that you contact the publisher of that Dolciani textbook. Have you tried that?

Either you have some idee fixe that there has to be substance to that Dolciani remark (and the professionals here have already suggested this is much in doubt; why on earth do you believe it?), or you keep asking just to get a rise out of us.

Either way, you are succeeding only in being a nuisance. Go find the sources yourself, pal, and leave us alone.

@skullpatrol: so now you're shifting from this request

"I am looking for any reference articles on the uses of the preposition "of" that are applied most often in mathematics... Could you please help me find something? (books, articles, etc.)"

to this one:

"all I ask is if you have any interest in the communication of mathematics that you at least read the links provided."

As for the first, you are evidently barking up the wrong tree. This is not the site where you are likely to find answers, especially since you have asked repeatedly already and have worn out your welcome. Perhaps you would have better success consulting with professional linguists.

The second request is very different, and very strange. The article by Martin may well be interesting to those who are already interested in this sort of thing, but it is not specifically mathematical even if there may be mathematical elements lurking within (as very often happens in the course of rational inquiries). There is no evidence that it has to do with communication of mathematics any more than with communication of anything else. I did look quickly through the article to gain an initial impression; it seems to live at the interfaces of logic, linguistic analysis, and philosophy, from a pragmatist point of view (stylistically, it vaguely reminded me of the writings of C.S. Peirce). But it is not an appropriate topic of discussion here: this is a site for asking and answering specific mathematical questions, at a professional level. You are way off-base here.

BTW, to say "the very foundation of thought rests on it" is hyperbolic to say the least.

If you want to talk about these articles, please go somewhere else.

Seconded, Mariano. I'm done.

I vote to close. There is no sign here that "skullpatrol" has taken on board any of the comments made in the other thread; and the question is based on either a misreading, a fallacy, or an idee fixe.