= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
gwern comments on The rational rationalist's guide to rationally using "rational" in rational post titles - Less Wrong Discussion
You are viewing a comment permalink. View the original post to see all comments and the full post content.
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
Powered by Reddit
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d)
Comments (51)
I thought to myself for a little while whether you were quoting an actual quote or just made it up, since optimal optimization really does sound like something Schmidhuber might write about, and concluded it felt like a real quote at 40%.
Then Googling, I think you made it up.
Don't single quotes normally indicate paraphrasing?
Gwern is apparently familiar with more quoting styles than I, because no style I'm familiar with allows quote marks of any kind for something that isn't a direct quote.
No. Quotes, single or double, normally indicate quotation, or a few other things such as the use-mention distinction, but never paraphrasing.
Under some quoting styles, yes, they do. But no quoting style is so prevalent that this alone decides the question.
I was taught that single quotes are nested inside double quotes and vice versa, the default being double, but that they're otherwise equivalent.
Maybe you're thinking of scare quotes or glosses, but they're normally restricted to single words or short phrases.