If I have term -5 and I want to change its sign to opposite can I say that I'm negating its sign?
Does saying "to negate a sign of a const term" has a meaning
2
$\begingroup$
terminology
-
4It isn't incorrect to say so. – 2010-12-10
-
0What's wrong with simply saying "changing the sign"? (And by the way, it's "its sign", not "it's sign".) – 2010-12-10
-
0Yes, you're changing its sign. – 2010-12-10
3 Answers
5
You could say that, you could also say "to negate the constant term" -- both seem grammatically correct. In your expression, 'negate' changes the object of negation, while in the "to negate the constant term" 'negate' changes the sign in front of the object of negation, but it makes sense both ways.
5
Negating its sign sounds alright. A more fanciful way of putting it is changing its polarity. Polarity is not to be confused with parity: whether a number is odd or even.
-
0Jasper, I can't believe that your'e serious. But then I can't believe that you're joking either. So...WTF?! – 2010-12-10
-
0@Jasper Loy, why are you bumping all your old posts? Are these edits really necessary? Try to limit your edits on these inactive posts to just one or two an hour if they're necessary... – 2013-03-27
2
I think it is much more standard to say 'Multiplying equation (..) by -1 gives' than 'negating equation (...)'. As for 'negating the constant term', I'm not even sure of what that would mean, and without some serious context seems a bad idea.