Is there a term or phrase better than "non-strict"?
Asked
Active
Viewed 606 times
4
-
1I always called them "non-strict inequality" and hope it's correct.. – Peter Franek Sep 17 '16 at 22:23
-
I think "not-necessarily strict" is unfortunately the best we can do in English. – paul garrett Sep 17 '16 at 22:23
-
1I've seen the non-strict inequalities called "inclusive inequalities". A quick search finds examples of this usage in math books, but it doesn't appear to be widespread. – dxiv Sep 17 '16 at 22:33
-
3In Italy we use debole, that stands for weak, but maybe that is not very common in English. – Jack D'Aurizio Sep 17 '16 at 22:45
-
Interesting. Thanks, everyone. – Tim kinsella Sep 18 '16 at 00:45
-
In French we use inégalité large as opposed to inégalité stricte. Note that by default inégalité stands for inégalité large. – J.-E. Pin Sep 21 '16 at 16:38
-
Does this answer your question? General expression/phrase for "less / greater than or equal to"? – Oct 09 '23 at 01:01
-
2@Scexit I suggest instead of marking this question a duplicate, we mark the other question a duplicate because this one now has an answer (from you) that actually answers the question (while the other is "answered" with something that avoids the actual question), and besides, this question was asked first. – David K Oct 09 '23 at 01:35
1 Answers
2
Why hasn't anyone mooted "weak inequality"? Or are you shunning "weak inequality" too?
Richard Earl, James Nicholson, The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Mathematics (6 ed. 2021)
Inequalities involving < and > are called ‘strict’, and those involving ≤ and ≥ are termed ‘weak’.
Ron Aharoni, Algebra For Parents: A Book For Grown-ups About Middle School Mathematics (2021), p. 96.
Inequalities
Let us recall two notations. "x < 3" means that x is smaller than 3 ― strictly so, namely equality is not allowed. If we wish to allow also equality, we write "x ≤ 3". The latter is called "weak inequality".
Stan Gibilisco, Everyday Math Demystified (2004), p. 5.
