Talk:不等式

不等式 > 不 + 等式 or 不等 + 式 ?

@Suzukaze-c "as budeng is bu(not) + deng(equal), and deng(equal) is a part of dengshi". What makes you think this is "sensible"? In English, it's easy to determined that inequality is broken down into in- + equality, not *inequal + -ity as inequal doesn't seem to be a "valid" word (it isn't included in a couple of well-known dictionaries; the "valid" one would be unequal). In French, however, inégalité can be broken down into either inégal + -ité or in- + égalité. 不等式 might work similarly as 不等 a valid word.

@Wyang What is your take on this? ばかFumiko￥^talk 04:39, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

I think it is the latter. 不等 = not equal; unequal, and 式 is added based on analogy with 等式. 式 has the meaning of "a set of symbols to represent something in a natural science subject", e.g. 方程式, 化學式, 分子式. You can say 不等的式子 to get 不等式, but not 不的等式. Moedict follows this as well. Wyang (talk) 04:44, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

Thanks. ばかFumiko￥^talk 13:03, 16 May 2016 (UTC)

@Wyang On a similar note, shouldn't 不等號 be 不等 + 號? — justin(r)leung _{{ (t...) | c=› }} 00:30, 17 May 2016 (UTC)

Yes, changed. Wyang (talk) 02:05, 17 May 2016 (UTC)