HomeGroupsTalkMoreZeitgeist
Search Site
This site uses cookies to deliver our services, improve performance, for analytics, and (if not signed in) for advertising. By using LibraryThing you acknowledge that you have read and understand our Terms of Service and Privacy Policy. Your use of the site and services is subject to these policies and terms.

Results from Google Books

Click on a thumbnail to go to Google Books.

A History of Mathematical Notations (Dover…
Loading...

A History of Mathematical Notations (Dover Books on Mathematics) (edition 2011)

by Florian Cajori

MembersReviewsPopularityAverage ratingConversations
1031262,371 (3.81)None
Now that I am nearing the end of my (very) long journey through this tome, I feel I can honestly review it.

It's difficult to know how best to couch this review. I can't exactly recommend anyone do what I did and read A History of Mathematical Notations straight through ... I have more than once referred to this as my "Sominex book," a quite useful sort of book to have handy if you are having trouble falling asleep!

That's snotty, though, and Cajori does not deserve snottiness. This book is a monumental work of scholarship, a feat that I expect no one -- despite the fact that it's drawing near the book's centenary -- will likely want to repeat. Imagine, if you will, someone choosing a particular mathematical symbol, say for the sake of argument the symbol for multiplication. Now imagine someone combing through every historical work of mathematical nature and exhaustively listing the different forms of the symbol for multiplication, who used each form and when. Now imagine someone doing this for the entire imaginable range of mathematical symbols (to be fair, I'm sure the list here is incomplete). You have now imagined this book.

After I reached a certain point in my reading, the prose did take on a certain grey fascination, and there is interesting material here. But ... whew!

One thing Cajori does that definitely irks me is present snippets from historical texts in their original languages (I'm pretty sure Latin, French and German were the only three), sometimes providing translations but most often not. Of course, this was written at a time when general knowledge of these languages by people likely to read this book was pretty widespread. It's really the inconsistency here that bothers me. If there is a pattern to when he provided a translation into English and when he did not, I could not see it.

I'm not at all sorry I read this. On the other hand, I doubt I will use the knowledge I gained. Your mileage may vary. ( )
  tungsten_peerts | Jul 13, 2014 |
Now that I am nearing the end of my (very) long journey through this tome, I feel I can honestly review it.

It's difficult to know how best to couch this review. I can't exactly recommend anyone do what I did and read A History of Mathematical Notations straight through ... I have more than once referred to this as my "Sominex book," a quite useful sort of book to have handy if you are having trouble falling asleep!

That's snotty, though, and Cajori does not deserve snottiness. This book is a monumental work of scholarship, a feat that I expect no one -- despite the fact that it's drawing near the book's centenary -- will likely want to repeat. Imagine, if you will, someone choosing a particular mathematical symbol, say for the sake of argument the symbol for multiplication. Now imagine someone combing through every historical work of mathematical nature and exhaustively listing the different forms of the symbol for multiplication, who used each form and when. Now imagine someone doing this for the entire imaginable range of mathematical symbols (to be fair, I'm sure the list here is incomplete). You have now imagined this book.

After I reached a certain point in my reading, the prose did take on a certain grey fascination, and there is interesting material here. But ... whew!

One thing Cajori does that definitely irks me is present snippets from historical texts in their original languages (I'm pretty sure Latin, French and German were the only three), sometimes providing translations but most often not. Of course, this was written at a time when general knowledge of these languages by people likely to read this book was pretty widespread. It's really the inconsistency here that bothers me. If there is a pattern to when he provided a translation into English and when he did not, I could not see it.

I'm not at all sorry I read this. On the other hand, I doubt I will use the knowledge I gained. Your mileage may vary. ( )
  tungsten_peerts | Jul 13, 2014 |

Current Discussions

None

Popular covers

Quick Links

Rating

Average: (3.81)
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3 3
3.5
4 3
4.5 1
5 1

Is this you?

Become a LibraryThing Author.

 

About | Contact | Privacy/Terms | Help/FAQs | Blog | Store | APIs | TinyCat | Legacy Libraries | Early Reviewers | Common Knowledge | 203,242,163 books! | Top bar: Always visible