A. clocks that are designed by XYZ and
runs run backward
B. clocks that are designed by XYZ and that
runs run backward.
C. clocks that are designed by XYZ and those that
runs run backward.
Which of the above three corresponds to the intersection of {clocks that are designed by XYZ} and {clocks and that
runs run backward}, i.e. clocks designed by XYZ that also runs backward?
Yes. And which corresponds to the union, i.e. clocks that are designed by XYZ
and/or
all clocks that
runs run backward
(i.e., whether or not these backward running clocks are designed by XYZ)? or both? Yes. (Please note: While the conjunction combination, and/or, should be avoided in everyday English usage, it is indispensable when discussing either set theory or Boolean algebra).
My guess is
A. intersection
Yes.
B. intersection
Yes.
C. union
Yes.
But I'm not 100% sure.
Hope you are now.
how do you refer to the intersection of {small clocks} and {round clocks} and how about the union?
1. small, round clocks
2. small round clocks
3. small
[clocks] and round clocks
- is implied here
4. small clocks and round clocks
5. small or round clocks.
My guess is
1. intersection
Yes.
2. intersection
Yes.
3.
ambiguous union
4. union
Yes.
5. union
Yes.
Not 100% sure on that either.
80% ain't too bad. 