On 8/12/2017 9:12 AM, MRAB wrote:
On 2017-08-12 09:54, Marko Rauhamaa wrote:
Jussi Piitulainen <jussi.piitulai...@helsinki.fi>:
Rustom Mody writes:
[ My conjecture: The word ‘comprehension’ used this way in English is
meaningless and is probably an infelicious translation of something
which makes sense in German]
From a Latin word for "taking together", through Middle French,
Metaphors' galore:
English: understand < stand under something
Its etymology is here:
http://www.etymonline.com/index.php?term=understand
French: comprendre < take something in
German: verstehen < stand in front of something
Finnish: ymmärtää < surround something
all mean the same thing.
I really don't think that "comprehension" in English, in the manner used
for Python set manipulation, is equivalent at all to the English word
"understand". For the Python comprehension, the word is more related to
"complete", or "exhaustive", as in "comprehensive" (covering all
possibilities). While a comprehensive explanation of something might
lead to an understanding of that something, teaching is not really a
requirement of being comprehensive. Being comprehensive is sometimes a
good attribute of teaching, or understanding, however. One might think
they understand something, but they only understand in part, they might
not have a comprehensive understanding. An example of this is Newtonian
physics gives an understanding of various physical phenomena, but
Einstein's theory of relativity shows that Newtonian physics is only a
partial understanding, not a comprehensive one. And maybe someday
there'll be a theory that demonstrates that relativity is only a partial
understanding as well (someone chime in if that is already true!).
Glenn
--
https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
