Fork me on GitHub
Math for the people, by the people.

User login

Character Deficiencies

Primary tabs

Character Deficiencies

Forums: 

The Wilkins Doc http://www.maths.tcd.ie/~dwilkins/LaTeXPrimer/TextSymbols.html says that I can get a Polish l-slash character with a \verb|\l| control sequence, but it doesn't seem to work here.

Is there another way to get this?


> I think \text{\l} should work better.

Thanks, that worked ...

> I also have plenty of other character deficiencies if you need any.
>
> Cam

And no thanks -- I've apparently been graced with a lifetime supply!

Jon

There's yet another way: \L{} (see the entry on reverse Polish notation).

Thanks, that works too, and saves a few bytes to boot!

Stans\l{}aw sends his \L{}uv ...

Jon

Oh, that's sweet! I'm blushing! Thanks!

Well, this all came up because of Stanislaw Ulam. Someone somewhere corrected my spelling to "Stanis\l{}aw Ulam", so I was trying to do that here. But I just went back to my copy of ''Analogies Between Analogies", and the "l" is unstroked everywhere there, also at the MacTutor site --- http://www-gap.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Ulam.html --- and many other places, so I'm beginning to wonder which is really correct.

Jon

In his "Selected Works", where the papers appear in their original format, both forms appear. The slash seems to appear more often in articles published in Polish journals.

If you asked Donald Knuth, he'd say it's correct with the stroke, and incorrect without. When he designed Tex he must've certainly been concerned with spelling names correctly, regardless of whether they are in a Latin or Cyrillic alphabet, or in kanji, etc.

As a corollary: L without the stroke would be acceptable in an e-mail and certainly in an IM, but not in the second draft of a scholarly paper.

But what answer would you get if you asked Ulam himself?

----
> If you asked Donald Knuth, he'd say it's correct with the stroke, and incorrect without. When he designed Tex he must've certainly been concerned with spelling names correctly, regardless of whether they are in a Latin or Cyrillic alphabet, or in kanji, etc.

I agree, you should use whatever Ulam used. Despite "Wiki-geneity" trends in author names, if De Moivre and De Morgan wanted their names to be spelled with the capitol D to fit in with their contemporary English culture, then we should spell their names the same, despite the French/Latin rules to the contrary. You can also give both spellings.

I'm not sure what you mean by "Wiki-geneity", but that reminded me of Wikipedia: I knew I had grappled with this issue before, over there. According to Wikipedia user Septentrionalis, Ulam himself used the plain old L in his autobiography. See http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Talk:Stanislaw_Ulam

wiki-geneity == homogeneity of wikipedia articles. Not meant as much of a comment but more as a contrast that on PM one can choose his/her own favorite guidelines in such a crisis rather than be forced to comply with a standard which may be irrelevant or inappropriate for the context.

Ulam was inconsistent in his usage. Sometimes he avoided the issue altogether by using only initials: in his autobiography, _Adventures of a Mathematician_, he is S. M. Ulam. In his book with Kac, _Mathematics and Logic_, he is Stanislaw M. Ulam (sans slash). From the papers reproduced in _Stanislaw Ulam: Sets, Numbers, and Universes_, I surmise that he dropped the slash altogether after coming to the U.S. in the 1930's.

I think \text{\l} should work better.

I also have plenty of other character deficiencies if you need any.

Cam

Subscribe to Comments for "Character Deficiencies"