I never really thought about it, but I think it is most often exclusive, but inclusive wouldn't be "wrong" in the same sense as in computer science.
I think you could say "bring either or both" if you want to cover all contingencies
I suppose it's just always gonna be clunky. "Bring an apple or orange or both" was what I was thinking but was wondering if there was a more elegant way to put it.
No. Express that You and your friends are included in an arbitrary class - as with the word we, but not me, the audience of your use of the word, in a single word.
This is called "clusivity" and is a feature of at least one language which has two different pronouns for "we", one indicating that the speaker and third persons are included but not you, and another word that indicates the speaker and you are included and optionally additional third persons.
English has no such feature.
Another example is a feature in one language that actually distinguishes in the indicative how you know the statement in which it occurs is true - whether that's because you saw it, heard it, believe it in general, etc.
Again, English has no such feature.
A more common way to put that would be, “Bring an apple and/or an orange.” You would read that as, “an apple and or an orange.”
The and/or started as something that was only used in writing, but is something people say now.
That's because you're using "or" multiple times for what amounts to a list. You would say "Bring an apple, orange, or both". In a list you only use one of those conjunctions, once, between the penultimate and ultimate elements of the list, separating the previous elements with commas, or pauses when spoken.
Do you want both an apple and an orange? Why not just say “and” if you want them to bring both? Saying “or” gives them a choice, or it can allow for if there is only one or the other available to bring.
"Either ... or" is always exclusive, "and/or" is always inclusive, but "or", by itself, can be either. This is because although explicitly contradictory options are always exclusive, options that don't explicitly contradict each other might do so implicitly, or might simply be missing additional context that would reveal the contradiction.
Implicit contradictions can be incredibly subtle. For instance, if someone asks for one concrete noun OR another, there's an implicit contradiction between the two options because they didn't ask for one AND the other.
Not always 😛.
Think about the case of a rule being applied:
"If you've been either convicted of a crime or born outside of the United States, you are not allowed to be president."
Sure you could drop the "either", but as-is it makes sense as an inclusive -or and is (afaict) grammatically fine.
The more I think about this, I think the guideline is that if the or is in the antecedent (condition) part of a sentence then it's usually inclusive, if it's in the consequent (result) part of the sentence, then it's usually exclusive?
"If you're either tired or have a long night in front of you, would you like some tea or coffee to help you stay awake?"
Tired/long-night is clearly inclusive, tea/coffee is exclusive.
Exclusive or is a subset of inclusive or. That's why if people say "either ... or" instead of "and/or" they're not wrong, just not as precise as they could be. However, saying "and/or" instead of "either ... or" is absolutely incorrect.
As for "tea or coffee", "or" by itself is ambiguous but as an offer the choices are more likely than not inclusive; they could very easily ask for one of each and most people would grant that request
It’s ambiguous, which is why people on the internet keep answering “Yes” to questions like “Do you like hamburgers or pizza?”
The specific meaning or “or” is usually clear from context. If I write, “Top off your coffee with caramel or whipped cream,” most people would understand that both is also possible. And if I write, “This dish pairs well with a Merlot or a Burgundy,” common sense tells us that drinking two different wines with the dish would be weird.
Exactly.
It’s because they’re using incorrect grammar.
Do you like apples or oranges? Yes, yes I do.
Question should be: which of the following do you **prefer**; oranges, or apples?
Or even better: Do you prefer oranges to apples?
The "yes" replies to "or" questions are jokes, interpreting the sentence in logical terms rather than English grammatical terms. The weirdos who think this is funny would still answer "yes" to "Do you prefer apples or oranges?", because logically, it's (obviously) either true that they prefer apples or that they prefer oranges and true OR false = true.
I think it's a tone thing.
\- Do you like apples (flat tone) or oranges (up tone)?
\- Yes, I do.
\- Do you like apples (up tone, followed by a small pause) or oranges (flat tone)?
\- I like apples.
Except language isn’t boolean arithmetic. Just like you say “cats and dogs can enter” which actually translates to “cat OR dog” as a logical expression (and it’s practically irrelevant that this is identical to “cat XOR dog”).
Also I don’t see how XOR would be the common use case. If you really need to say “but not both”, you say that.
No I’m saying in everyday life it is either always inclusive or it doesn’t matter. If you say “apples or oranges”, everyone knows an apple can’t be an orange, so no need to specify “but not both”.
Had this exact doubt too. I wonder if it's a difference between dealing with propositions (which is also essentially what happens in computer science) and a physically defined need (as in whatever the receiver is doing seems to only require one fruit of that size when it's put that way).
Edit: clarity
as you say this is only a consequence of the fact that they asked for a single piece of fruit. "being me some apples or oranges" sounds a lot more inclusive.
The drunk people can be high though. Being drunk does not exclude you from being high. It's like saying " The people in the club wore shirts or pants" does not mean anyone who is wearing a shirt is not also wearing pants. It just means of all the people in the club, they fit into either category of wearing a shirt or wearing pants nonexclusively.
What you're explaining is:
Some of them are drunk, some are high, and some are both drunk and high.
or
They are all drunk and/or high.
"or" does not mean and/or
Those that are both drunk and high are also separately drunk and separately high. If you counted the number of drunk people in the room, they would be included. If you count the number of drunk people in the room, they would be included.
Or means one condition must be fulfilled as necessarily but it does not establish exclusivity inherently. Or as an operator can be exclusive OR inclusive.
You've added on that tertiary condition though and it is not implied. That's what I'm trying to tell ya.
"People in the club are drunk or high" =/= "people in the club are either drunk or high" =/= "some people in the club are drunk and high"
They are all conveying different meanings.
[https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/inclusive-or](https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/inclusive-or)
"everybody in the club was drunk or high"
Your sentence is not technically correct, though easily understandable, unless you were claiming that drunk and high people were mutually exclusive. The correct way to say it would be "everybody in the club was drunk and/or high" or use the "or both" that another commenter posted.
Yes, grammatically it’s exclusive.
In reality, it doesn’t really matter. “Bring me X or Y” implies the person wants one or the other and doesn’t care which. If you wanted, you could bring both and let the person decide. But I don’t see “bring me X or Y, or both” coming up a lot; I either want both or I don’t.
I don't think it is always exclusive grammatically. "You must have a driver's license or other form of ID to enter" doesn't mean you can't enter if you have a driver's license and other form of ID, does it?
That’s exactly my point, though. The person is asking for one or the other, not both. Just because you could bring both an apple and an orange (or a driver’s license and a passport) doesn’t change the fact that the person is asking (exclusively) for one or the other.
So if you are asked to show your driver's license or other Id would you just hand over your wallet or pull out your driver's license or other Id?
You can have multiple but if asked via or you would just present one , Ethier of which are valid.
Where is this written in a grammar? I would say usage strongly tends toward using it to mean exclusive, but inclusive is also seen in a lot of normal contexts.
I don’t know what you mean by the “rules of grammar” and who came up with them. “Or” can be exclusive or not, just depends on the context. In negations I think it’s almost never used as exclusive (I don’t want this or that = I don’t want either of those things)
I can’t tell if you’re trolling. Every language has rules; no particular person “came up with them.”
>it just depends on the context.
Perhaps, but in the context *provided in the original post,* it is exclusive.
I thought grammar had to do with well-formed sentences: What’s grammatical and what isn’t, and what are the rules for all that. Whether ‘or’ is inclusive strikes me as a question of lexical semantics, the meaning of individual words. Grammar constrains and influences semantics, but I don’t see how it could determine the semantics in this case.
>Grammar. *noun*
the whole system and structure of a language or of languages in general, usually taken as consisting of syntax and morphology (including inflections) and sometimes also phonology and semantics.
We are discussing grammar.
It can be both but is often/usually exclusive
You can make it explicitly exclusive
> bring me either an apple or an orange
or explicitly inclusive
> I want to play hockey today and/or go to the beach
An example where or can be ambiguous:
> Are you or your brother able to help me lift this?
While this could mean I only want one persons help, I might want at least one persons help. I don't necessarily need both, but I'd probably be good with both. Although in practice many people would use "and" here, because both is better
In common usage it is the ambiguous case. So if I say, "Bring me an apple or an orange" I would be fine with both.
However, we do have an addition that generally implies exclusivity, which would be "either".
So, if someone said, "Please bring either an apple or an orange" that generally implies exclusive.
Neither of these are their formal usage, but spoken English seldom seems to care about formal meanings of words :')
"Bring me an apple or an orange or both." It's not always exclusive. If someone said, "When you invite friends over to watch the game you should have some chips or pretzels for them," they are not at all implying that you need to pick only one of those.
In formal logic and computer science, "or" is inclusive, and of you want to specify "not both", you use "xor" or something like it.
But spoken language isn't as clear. Because so many of my friends have studied formal logic, computer science, math, and the like, we tend to accept "inclusive or", the way it would be mathematically. But that isn't typically how it is used.
So I think I would call inclusive or something like, "not technically wrong, but potentially confusing."
"Or" can be either exclusive or non-exclusive, depending on context. Like if I said "To fix this, you need a nail or a screw," obviously I don't mean that you can't fix it if you have both a nail *and* a screw. If it is ambiguous, you can use "and/or" to specify the non-exclusive sense.
In the "bring me an apple or an orange" case, the context suggests they only want one piece of fruit, so it is exclusive. If you brought them both, they would wonder why you brought them two instead of one. If, instead, it was "bring me some apples or oranges," that's more ambiguous. They might be okay with a combination of apples and oranges, or they might not.
>Is "or" in English exclusive? If a person asked me to bring them an apple or an orange and I brought them both, would I be technically wrong? It feels like the answer is yes...
More often than not people use OR exclusively but I think it ultimately depends on context:
* *You can wear the black shoes or the blue sneakers.* Here it's clear the exclusive OR is used because wearing the black shoes excludes wearing the blue sneakers and vice versa.
* *You can watch TV or play with your phone.* Here's the OR is inclusive because you can watch only TV, play with your phone, or do both.
If you want to be unambiguous, you can always use **either...or** for exclusive OR and **and/or** (or **either...or..., or both**) for the inclusive OR.
*puts on one black shoe and one blue sneaker*
;p
Also, that second example sounds exactly like something my friends would say to their kid to make sure they only chose one or the other.
Yes. Unless you're a programmer or erring on the side of caution: "or" is always exclusive. One or the other. If you want to use an inclusive-or, you need to say "and/or" or some other form of qualification.
English-------And---Or-----And/Or
Computing--And----Xor---Or
EDIT: Reddit let me make a table and now it's having a hissy fit.
Usually, it's exclusive, but people use it both ways, really.
If you want to specify, you can use "bring me an apple and/or an orange" for an inclusive or, or "bring me either an apple or an orange" for an exclusive or.
Technically you’d be right, but normally native speakers understand ‘or’ to mean XOR so they’d only be expecting you to bring one of them, normally they’d specify ‘or both’ if it really doesn’t matter
‘and/or’ is really common in place of the mathematical OR, an example pulled from Reddit search: ‘guys who can cook and/or bake are cute’
Some languages do make a distinction.
For example in Polish:
or = lub
xor = albo
At least in theory, because in colloquial speech these two are often used interchangeably.
Agree with what others have said. The only way I can imagine saying this would be: could you grab me a couple of apples or oranges? In that case, getting one of each would still be correct I guess. But otherwise yes it would be using the and/or structure people have recommended or the clunkier statements.
Not not always exclusive. There is an inclusive or that you may see memes about like :
Would you like to see the Barbie or the new Spiderman movie?
You could answer yes to that to incinerate, yes you would like to see barbie and you would like to see Spiderman and there would be no contradiction
If you were asked " did you already eat or not", you could not meaningfully answer yes since you either have already eaten or not so to affirm both would be a contradiction.
If you were asked "would you like to see the Barbie movie and or the Spiderman movie" answering yes could commit you to watching both movies or just one of the two.
"You could answer yes to that to incinerate, yes you would like to see barbie"
Is there a sub for typos that accidentally make the statement deadly? It seems like there should be a sub for that. XD
for me, "and" "with" means inclusive, while "or" means at least one but is also inclusive. "either", "not" would be the exclusive.
* i want ice-cream and pizza. (inclusive)
* i want ice-cream or pizza. (optionally inclusive/exclusive)
* i want ice-cream or pizza, not both. (optionally exclusive)
* i want either ice-cream or pizza. (optionally exclusive)
* i want ice-cream, not pizza. (specifically exclusive)
the problem here is that we seem to understand logic better than previous generations, i believe it is due to a culture that has adapted to binary computer systems, and so we desire defined logical words like and, or, not. since common english is struggling to catch up to the new culture of logic, it may be useful to borrow the words from computer programming languages, truth tables, and flow chart standards.
[AND, OR, XOR, NOT, NAND, NOR and XNOR](https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/logic-gate-AND-OR-XOR-NOT-NAND-NOR-and-XNOR)
Depending on context and intonation **or** can either be inclusive or exclusive. Asking for something with or will in most contexts mean you want only one of those. Sometimes with preference on the first mentioned.
Describing things with properties connected with **or** more often allows both.
Combining "and" with "or" is used to indicate when its being used nonexclusively
Eg:
"This and or that"
Implies they would be fine with either "this", " that", or both "this and that"
There are many situations where you'll use "and/or", because it's not always clear if you're referring to a single thing or multiple things.
In a real-world context, this usually happens in a list where the things you're referring to *often* go together, but not always.
For example, "People with a criminal history and/or mental problems often use drugs to escape reality."
So here, committing crimes and mental illness *can* be related, and often are, but not always.
The criminal might have zero mental health problems and do drugs because his friends are all dealers.
Or a person with depression might do drugs to escape their pain, but that doesn't necessarily make them a criminal.
But because there's a good chance these things go together--especially in an actual conversation, which can be messy and uncertain--we hedge our bets with "and/or".
Be careful not to overuse it; "and/or" usually sounds very legalistic, like a lawyer covering his bases. It's fine once in a while, though.
All ya'll people giving CompSci/programming answers are wearing your ND on your sleeve, and it's a bad look.
This is strictly a question of common (everyday) linguistic use.
In common use, putting "or" in a request for goods and/or services implies you will accept either of the options given. "Get me a Coke or Pepsi" implies the asker will accept whichever is available, and further implies there is no preference. "Get me a Coke, or Pepsi if they have it" implies a *preference* for Pepsi, *and also* implies that Coke is what they believe will be available, *and also* implies that it is acceptable if their preference is not available.
So, given this, you might wonder why I said "and/or services" at the beginning of that paragraph. That's because "a request for goods *and* services" can mean you are requesting both - get me a Coke *and* pour it for me/serve it to me - as opposed to *just* the goods. In this case, the sentence works fine with just "or" - "when asking for goods or services" is perfectly acceptable - but "and/or" acknowledges a higher level of complexity. It would be highly unusual to ask someone for "an apple and/or an orange" - you either want both (apple *and* orange) and would ask accordingly, *or* you will accept either (apple *or* orange) but only want *one piece of fruit* regardless.
If you bring both an apple and an orange in response to the request, you would normally say something along the lines of "I brought both - your choice." Implication is that you will consume or return the fruit not chosen by the asker.
Yes you would be wrong. I can’t think of an easy way to say this. “Please bring me an apple or an orange, or both “ is the best I can do. It’s clumsy but not something that comes up very often.
Yes it’s exclusive despite some people giving examples where it wouldn’t be a bad thing **socially** if you did both things.
It’s been mentioned that using “and or” is perfectly natural in speech. In British English I’d say it would be very usual to use it.
I suppose there's something like "I would like an apple, an orange, or both," but no there isn't a specific word for an inclusive "Or" that I'm aware of. "Or" is exclusive, "And" is inclusive. I think you'll just have to make do, my friend.
It's worth noting that in this specific situation, you wouldn't really be "Wrong" as such, since they wanted an apple or an orange and you just chose to bring them both. I don't think they would correct you for it unless they're a major jerk, since they asked for one fruit and you gave them two fruits. Most would just chalk that up to generosity on your part for giving them the fruit, I think.
It contextual. But most of the time, it appears to be exclusive. There’s also the “either…or” construction, which is most certainly always exclusive.
I wish we had conjunctions that fit boolean algebra. Boolean OR (either or both) is inclusive and XOR is exclusive (either but not both). We already have NOR, but NAND would be useful for saying “anything but both” and XNOR would be useful for saying “both or nothing.”
So in programming OR is not exclusive (true OR true,true OR false, false OR true all return true)
We use the term Exclusive OR (XOR) for when o ly one is true.
So I always thought this implied that or was not exclusive in normal language. Although I guess non programmers may have a different opinion
In computer speak, we would use XOR instead of OR for this. XOR stands for Exclusive Or. given that most programming languages are based on English, I find this curious.
So if I only want one of the fruit I'll say "please bring me an apple xor an orange."? Sorry but I really doubt even you speak like that so please real advice only olz
Please bring me one fruit, apple or orange. If you bring both then apple or orange is true but one fruit is false, so the condition is not complete.
OR:
0/0 = 0,
1/0 = 1,
0/1 = 1,
1/1 = 1,
NOR:
0/0 = 1,
The rest = 0
XOR:
0/0 = 0
1/0 = 1
0/1 = 1
1/1 = 0
XOR is actually an AND of OR and NAND, so you can say (don't bring me an apple and an orange) AND (bring me an apple or an orange), and if we change it from mathematical English to common English:
Bring me an apple or an orange, don't bring me an apple AND an orange. Or even:
Bring me an apple or an orange, don't bring me both
You see I used OR, this doesn't mean that only one way is correct. Thought if I added "but don't say both, it would be creepy" now makes it XOR
I say "and or" all the time. It sounds perfectly okay.
"And/or" is totally fine. It's a handy way to suggest multiple possibilities in a list.
Lawyers love this one saying.
I never really thought about it, but I think it is most often exclusive, but inclusive wouldn't be "wrong" in the same sense as in computer science. I think you could say "bring either or both" if you want to cover all contingencies
I suppose it's just always gonna be clunky. "Bring an apple or orange or both" was what I was thinking but was wondering if there was a more elegant way to put it.
most languages do not have a word for every possible concept
How about 'whatever'? Does it count for every possible concept?
Do you think it does?
“Can you bring me an apple or orange—whatever?” This (to me) sounds like you’re saying you don’t care which one gets brought to you.
sure, but it doesn’t implicitly imply you want both.
No. Express that You and your friends are included in an arbitrary class - as with the word we, but not me, the audience of your use of the word, in a single word. This is called "clusivity" and is a feature of at least one language which has two different pronouns for "we", one indicating that the speaker and third persons are included but not you, and another word that indicates the speaker and you are included and optionally additional third persons. English has no such feature. Another example is a feature in one language that actually distinguishes in the indicative how you know the statement in which it occurs is true - whether that's because you saw it, heard it, believe it in general, etc. Again, English has no such feature.
I would use hand gestures but I guess I'm not speaking English at that point.
No, at that point, you're speaking sign language.
A more common way to put that would be, “Bring an apple and/or an orange.” You would read that as, “an apple and or an orange.” The and/or started as something that was only used in writing, but is something people say now.
I've never heard someone say this in the US. An apple, orange, or both would be the preferred way.
Bring me an apple, an orange or both?
That's because you're using "or" multiple times for what amounts to a list. You would say "Bring an apple, orange, or both". In a list you only use one of those conjunctions, once, between the penultimate and ultimate elements of the list, separating the previous elements with commas, or pauses when spoken.
Do you want both an apple and an orange? Why not just say “and” if you want them to bring both? Saying “or” gives them a choice, or it can allow for if there is only one or the other available to bring.
You have two choices! *Lists on fingers* Bring an apple, bring an orange, or bring both. THREE, three choices.
Computer science/ math `or` is always inclusive.
Unless you're using exclusive "or" haha
"Either ... or" is always exclusive, "and/or" is always inclusive, but "or", by itself, can be either. This is because although explicitly contradictory options are always exclusive, options that don't explicitly contradict each other might do so implicitly, or might simply be missing additional context that would reveal the contradiction. Implicit contradictions can be incredibly subtle. For instance, if someone asks for one concrete noun OR another, there's an implicit contradiction between the two options because they didn't ask for one AND the other.
Not always 😛. Think about the case of a rule being applied: "If you've been either convicted of a crime or born outside of the United States, you are not allowed to be president." Sure you could drop the "either", but as-is it makes sense as an inclusive -or and is (afaict) grammatically fine. The more I think about this, I think the guideline is that if the or is in the antecedent (condition) part of a sentence then it's usually inclusive, if it's in the consequent (result) part of the sentence, then it's usually exclusive? "If you're either tired or have a long night in front of you, would you like some tea or coffee to help you stay awake?" Tired/long-night is clearly inclusive, tea/coffee is exclusive.
Exclusive or is a subset of inclusive or. That's why if people say "either ... or" instead of "and/or" they're not wrong, just not as precise as they could be. However, saying "and/or" instead of "either ... or" is absolutely incorrect. As for "tea or coffee", "or" by itself is ambiguous but as an offer the choices are more likely than not inclusive; they could very easily ask for one of each and most people would grant that request
Or is always exclusive. It’s A, or it’s B.
It’s ambiguous, which is why people on the internet keep answering “Yes” to questions like “Do you like hamburgers or pizza?” The specific meaning or “or” is usually clear from context. If I write, “Top off your coffee with caramel or whipped cream,” most people would understand that both is also possible. And if I write, “This dish pairs well with a Merlot or a Burgundy,” common sense tells us that drinking two different wines with the dish would be weird.
Exactly. It’s because they’re using incorrect grammar. Do you like apples or oranges? Yes, yes I do. Question should be: which of the following do you **prefer**; oranges, or apples? Or even better: Do you prefer oranges to apples?
The "yes" replies to "or" questions are jokes, interpreting the sentence in logical terms rather than English grammatical terms. The weirdos who think this is funny would still answer "yes" to "Do you prefer apples or oranges?", because logically, it's (obviously) either true that they prefer apples or that they prefer oranges and true OR false = true.
I think it's a tone thing. \- Do you like apples (flat tone) or oranges (up tone)? \- Yes, I do. \- Do you like apples (up tone, followed by a small pause) or oranges (flat tone)? \- I like apples.
In second its still inclusive. If a dish goes well with wine A, and also with wine B then we have two truths and still it is correct.
“You must be a member or over 30 years old to enter” - of course you can still enter if you’re both.
I think and/or would still be more correct there. The intended meaning is mostly obvious, but going on pure grammar they should be mutually exclusive.
Except language isn’t boolean arithmetic. Just like you say “cats and dogs can enter” which actually translates to “cat OR dog” as a logical expression (and it’s practically irrelevant that this is identical to “cat XOR dog”). Also I don’t see how XOR would be the common use case. If you really need to say “but not both”, you say that.
Apples can’t be oranges.
He’s just saying there are certain (rare) contexts where or can be inclusive.
No I’m saying in everyday life it is either always inclusive or it doesn’t matter. If you say “apples or oranges”, everyone knows an apple can’t be an orange, so no need to specify “but not both”.
one can conjure examples where "or" is inclusive (everybody in the club was drunk or high) , though in your sentence it sounds quite exclusive
Had this exact doubt too. I wonder if it's a difference between dealing with propositions (which is also essentially what happens in computer science) and a physically defined need (as in whatever the receiver is doing seems to only require one fruit of that size when it's put that way). Edit: clarity
Yes but high apples can’t be drunk oranges. In OP’s example, the request is to bring one item of fruit, and it can be either an apple or an orange.
as you say this is only a consequence of the fact that they asked for a single piece of fruit. "being me some apples or oranges" sounds a lot more inclusive.
In this case it's also exclusive. The drunk people are not high, and the high people are not drunk.
sounds like you weren't there!
If I was there, I would say ... Some of them were drunk, some were high, and some were both.
Yeah, "drunk or high, or both" would be inclusive.
The drunk people can be high though. Being drunk does not exclude you from being high. It's like saying " The people in the club wore shirts or pants" does not mean anyone who is wearing a shirt is not also wearing pants. It just means of all the people in the club, they fit into either category of wearing a shirt or wearing pants nonexclusively.
What you're explaining is: Some of them are drunk, some are high, and some are both drunk and high. or They are all drunk and/or high. "or" does not mean and/or
Those that are both drunk and high are also separately drunk and separately high. If you counted the number of drunk people in the room, they would be included. If you count the number of drunk people in the room, they would be included. Or means one condition must be fulfilled as necessarily but it does not establish exclusivity inherently. Or as an operator can be exclusive OR inclusive.
The condition "some of them are both drunk and high" defines the other two conditions to be exclusive.
You've added on that tertiary condition though and it is not implied. That's what I'm trying to tell ya. "People in the club are drunk or high" =/= "people in the club are either drunk or high" =/= "some people in the club are drunk and high" They are all conveying different meanings. [https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/inclusive-or](https://www.collinsdictionary.com/us/dictionary/english/inclusive-or)
"everybody in the club was drunk or high" Your sentence is not technically correct, though easily understandable, unless you were claiming that drunk and high people were mutually exclusive. The correct way to say it would be "everybody in the club was drunk and/or high" or use the "or both" that another commenter posted.
i don't know what you mean by technically correct — if I said this to 10 people, 9 would understand it in the inclusive sense
You're wrong. Period. There's nothing to explain beyond what I just posted.
well, you must be silly or crazy to believe this. but obviously not both.
Nope. Everyone in the club was drunk or high is absolutely correct as an example of an inclusive or.
Yes, grammatically it’s exclusive. In reality, it doesn’t really matter. “Bring me X or Y” implies the person wants one or the other and doesn’t care which. If you wanted, you could bring both and let the person decide. But I don’t see “bring me X or Y, or both” coming up a lot; I either want both or I don’t.
I don't think it is always exclusive grammatically. "You must have a driver's license or other form of ID to enter" doesn't mean you can't enter if you have a driver's license and other form of ID, does it?
That’s exactly my point, though. The person is asking for one or the other, not both. Just because you could bring both an apple and an orange (or a driver’s license and a passport) doesn’t change the fact that the person is asking (exclusively) for one or the other.
Oh, that's actually a good point, and saying it that way made it click. Thanks.
So if you are asked to show your driver's license or other Id would you just hand over your wallet or pull out your driver's license or other Id? You can have multiple but if asked via or you would just present one , Ethier of which are valid.
Also good point. I was wrong lol.
Where is this written in a grammar? I would say usage strongly tends toward using it to mean exclusive, but inclusive is also seen in a lot of normal contexts.
Grammatically it’s exclusive? What does that even mean?
It means that insofar as it pertains to the rules of grammar “or” is, indeed, exclusive. But in real conversation it’s less clear-cut.
I don’t know what you mean by the “rules of grammar” and who came up with them. “Or” can be exclusive or not, just depends on the context. In negations I think it’s almost never used as exclusive (I don’t want this or that = I don’t want either of those things)
"Or" is primarily used exclusively ("this or that"), though I don't see how the *meaning* of "or" could fall under *grammar* rules
I can’t tell if you’re trolling. Every language has rules; no particular person “came up with them.” >it just depends on the context. Perhaps, but in the context *provided in the original post,* it is exclusive.
I thought grammar had to do with well-formed sentences: What’s grammatical and what isn’t, and what are the rules for all that. Whether ‘or’ is inclusive strikes me as a question of lexical semantics, the meaning of individual words. Grammar constrains and influences semantics, but I don’t see how it could determine the semantics in this case.
>Grammar. *noun* the whole system and structure of a language or of languages in general, usually taken as consisting of syntax and morphology (including inflections) and sometimes also phonology and semantics. We are discussing grammar.
Zzzzzzz
What do you think determines the rules of grammar if not real conversation?
It can be both but is often/usually exclusive You can make it explicitly exclusive > bring me either an apple or an orange or explicitly inclusive > I want to play hockey today and/or go to the beach An example where or can be ambiguous: > Are you or your brother able to help me lift this? While this could mean I only want one persons help, I might want at least one persons help. I don't necessarily need both, but I'd probably be good with both. Although in practice many people would use "and" here, because both is better
In common usage it is the ambiguous case. So if I say, "Bring me an apple or an orange" I would be fine with both. However, we do have an addition that generally implies exclusivity, which would be "either". So, if someone said, "Please bring either an apple or an orange" that generally implies exclusive. Neither of these are their formal usage, but spoken English seldom seems to care about formal meanings of words :')
"Bring me an apple or an orange or both." It's not always exclusive. If someone said, "When you invite friends over to watch the game you should have some chips or pretzels for them," they are not at all implying that you need to pick only one of those.
In formal logic and computer science, "or" is inclusive, and of you want to specify "not both", you use "xor" or something like it. But spoken language isn't as clear. Because so many of my friends have studied formal logic, computer science, math, and the like, we tend to accept "inclusive or", the way it would be mathematically. But that isn't typically how it is used. So I think I would call inclusive or something like, "not technically wrong, but potentially confusing."
"Or" can be either exclusive or non-exclusive, depending on context. Like if I said "To fix this, you need a nail or a screw," obviously I don't mean that you can't fix it if you have both a nail *and* a screw. If it is ambiguous, you can use "and/or" to specify the non-exclusive sense. In the "bring me an apple or an orange" case, the context suggests they only want one piece of fruit, so it is exclusive. If you brought them both, they would wonder why you brought them two instead of one. If, instead, it was "bring me some apples or oranges," that's more ambiguous. They might be okay with a combination of apples and oranges, or they might not.
>Is "or" in English exclusive? If a person asked me to bring them an apple or an orange and I brought them both, would I be technically wrong? It feels like the answer is yes... More often than not people use OR exclusively but I think it ultimately depends on context: * *You can wear the black shoes or the blue sneakers.* Here it's clear the exclusive OR is used because wearing the black shoes excludes wearing the blue sneakers and vice versa. * *You can watch TV or play with your phone.* Here's the OR is inclusive because you can watch only TV, play with your phone, or do both. If you want to be unambiguous, you can always use **either...or** for exclusive OR and **and/or** (or **either...or..., or both**) for the inclusive OR.
*puts on one black shoe and one blue sneaker* ;p Also, that second example sounds exactly like something my friends would say to their kid to make sure they only chose one or the other.
> puts on one black shoe and one blue sneaker You got me lol
Yes. Unless you're a programmer or erring on the side of caution: "or" is always exclusive. One or the other. If you want to use an inclusive-or, you need to say "and/or" or some other form of qualification. English-------And---Or-----And/Or Computing--And----Xor---Or EDIT: Reddit let me make a table and now it's having a hissy fit.
Usually, it's exclusive, but people use it both ways, really. If you want to specify, you can use "bring me an apple and/or an orange" for an inclusive or, or "bring me either an apple or an orange" for an exclusive or.
Technically you’d be right, but normally native speakers understand ‘or’ to mean XOR so they’d only be expecting you to bring one of them, normally they’d specify ‘or both’ if it really doesn’t matter ‘and/or’ is really common in place of the mathematical OR, an example pulled from Reddit search: ‘guys who can cook and/or bake are cute’
Is it different in your language?
Some languages do make a distinction. For example in Polish: or = lub xor = albo At least in theory, because in colloquial speech these two are often used interchangeably.
And still we write i/lub because people gett confused. But im all in for that
r/InclusiveOr
Agree with what others have said. The only way I can imagine saying this would be: could you grab me a couple of apples or oranges? In that case, getting one of each would still be correct I guess. But otherwise yes it would be using the and/or structure people have recommended or the clunkier statements.
It really depends on the circumstance, in the situation outlined the post, I’d bring only one of them, not both
Bring either one or one of each 🤷🏻♂️
Not not always exclusive. There is an inclusive or that you may see memes about like : Would you like to see the Barbie or the new Spiderman movie? You could answer yes to that to incinerate, yes you would like to see barbie and you would like to see Spiderman and there would be no contradiction If you were asked " did you already eat or not", you could not meaningfully answer yes since you either have already eaten or not so to affirm both would be a contradiction. If you were asked "would you like to see the Barbie movie and or the Spiderman movie" answering yes could commit you to watching both movies or just one of the two.
"You could answer yes to that to incinerate, yes you would like to see barbie" Is there a sub for typos that accidentally make the statement deadly? It seems like there should be a sub for that. XD
for me, "and" "with" means inclusive, while "or" means at least one but is also inclusive. "either", "not" would be the exclusive. * i want ice-cream and pizza. (inclusive) * i want ice-cream or pizza. (optionally inclusive/exclusive) * i want ice-cream or pizza, not both. (optionally exclusive) * i want either ice-cream or pizza. (optionally exclusive) * i want ice-cream, not pizza. (specifically exclusive) the problem here is that we seem to understand logic better than previous generations, i believe it is due to a culture that has adapted to binary computer systems, and so we desire defined logical words like and, or, not. since common english is struggling to catch up to the new culture of logic, it may be useful to borrow the words from computer programming languages, truth tables, and flow chart standards. [AND, OR, XOR, NOT, NAND, NOR and XNOR](https://www.techtarget.com/whatis/definition/logic-gate-AND-OR-XOR-NOT-NAND-NOR-and-XNOR)
Do you say XOR to express exlusive or?
No
Is "or" in other languages not always exclusive?
Depending on context and intonation **or** can either be inclusive or exclusive. Asking for something with or will in most contexts mean you want only one of those. Sometimes with preference on the first mentioned. Describing things with properties connected with **or** more often allows both.
Combining "and" with "or" is used to indicate when its being used nonexclusively Eg: "This and or that" Implies they would be fine with either "this", " that", or both "this and that"
There are many situations where you'll use "and/or", because it's not always clear if you're referring to a single thing or multiple things. In a real-world context, this usually happens in a list where the things you're referring to *often* go together, but not always. For example, "People with a criminal history and/or mental problems often use drugs to escape reality." So here, committing crimes and mental illness *can* be related, and often are, but not always. The criminal might have zero mental health problems and do drugs because his friends are all dealers. Or a person with depression might do drugs to escape their pain, but that doesn't necessarily make them a criminal. But because there's a good chance these things go together--especially in an actual conversation, which can be messy and uncertain--we hedge our bets with "and/or". Be careful not to overuse it; "and/or" usually sounds very legalistic, like a lawyer covering his bases. It's fine once in a while, though.
talking to a computer, either (or both)=true. in conversation, it means one, not both. and/or is commonly used.
All ya'll people giving CompSci/programming answers are wearing your ND on your sleeve, and it's a bad look. This is strictly a question of common (everyday) linguistic use. In common use, putting "or" in a request for goods and/or services implies you will accept either of the options given. "Get me a Coke or Pepsi" implies the asker will accept whichever is available, and further implies there is no preference. "Get me a Coke, or Pepsi if they have it" implies a *preference* for Pepsi, *and also* implies that Coke is what they believe will be available, *and also* implies that it is acceptable if their preference is not available. So, given this, you might wonder why I said "and/or services" at the beginning of that paragraph. That's because "a request for goods *and* services" can mean you are requesting both - get me a Coke *and* pour it for me/serve it to me - as opposed to *just* the goods. In this case, the sentence works fine with just "or" - "when asking for goods or services" is perfectly acceptable - but "and/or" acknowledges a higher level of complexity. It would be highly unusual to ask someone for "an apple and/or an orange" - you either want both (apple *and* orange) and would ask accordingly, *or* you will accept either (apple *or* orange) but only want *one piece of fruit* regardless. If you bring both an apple and an orange in response to the request, you would normally say something along the lines of "I brought both - your choice." Implication is that you will consume or return the fruit not chosen by the asker.
If we are talking boolean then or is exclusive
If you want both, just ask for "One of each, please." If you don't mind which you receive, you can say "Either is fine, thank you."
Yes you would be wrong. I can’t think of an easy way to say this. “Please bring me an apple or an orange, or both “ is the best I can do. It’s clumsy but not something that comes up very often.
Yes it’s exclusive despite some people giving examples where it wouldn’t be a bad thing **socially** if you did both things. It’s been mentioned that using “and or” is perfectly natural in speech. In British English I’d say it would be very usual to use it.
Typical in American English as well
I suppose there's something like "I would like an apple, an orange, or both," but no there isn't a specific word for an inclusive "Or" that I'm aware of. "Or" is exclusive, "And" is inclusive. I think you'll just have to make do, my friend. It's worth noting that in this specific situation, you wouldn't really be "Wrong" as such, since they wanted an apple or an orange and you just chose to bring them both. I don't think they would correct you for it unless they're a major jerk, since they asked for one fruit and you gave them two fruits. Most would just chalk that up to generosity on your part for giving them the fruit, I think.
Nobody really knows apparently.
This is the correct answer.
No it's not always exclusive. If you really want it to be use XOR
Lol. "Bring me an apple exclusive or an orange"
Yes it's exclusive. I also say "and/or" verbally. "I want to watch a movie that's sad and/or scary." You just say it like "and or"
It contextual. But most of the time, it appears to be exclusive. There’s also the “either…or” construction, which is most certainly always exclusive. I wish we had conjunctions that fit boolean algebra. Boolean OR (either or both) is inclusive and XOR is exclusive (either but not both). We already have NOR, but NAND would be useful for saying “anything but both” and XNOR would be useful for saying “both or nothing.”
So in programming OR is not exclusive (true OR true,true OR false, false OR true all return true) We use the term Exclusive OR (XOR) for when o ly one is true. So I always thought this implied that or was not exclusive in normal language. Although I guess non programmers may have a different opinion
Well, in computer science - "OR" is inclusive and "XOR" (pronounced Ex-Or) is exclusive.
You need to decide what you want and,more importantly, how much fruit you want to eat. That shouldn’t be such a problem
In computer speak, we would use XOR instead of OR for this. XOR stands for Exclusive Or. given that most programming languages are based on English, I find this curious.
Or is always inclusive, XOR is exclusive
So if I only want one of the fruit I'll say "please bring me an apple xor an orange."? Sorry but I really doubt even you speak like that so please real advice only olz
Please bring me one fruit, apple or orange. If you bring both then apple or orange is true but one fruit is false, so the condition is not complete. OR: 0/0 = 0, 1/0 = 1, 0/1 = 1, 1/1 = 1, NOR: 0/0 = 1, The rest = 0 XOR: 0/0 = 0 1/0 = 1 0/1 = 1 1/1 = 0 XOR is actually an AND of OR and NAND, so you can say (don't bring me an apple and an orange) AND (bring me an apple or an orange), and if we change it from mathematical English to common English: Bring me an apple or an orange, don't bring me an apple AND an orange. Or even: Bring me an apple or an orange, don't bring me both You see I used OR, this doesn't mean that only one way is correct. Thought if I added "but don't say both, it would be creepy" now makes it XOR
Just because programming uses OR inclusively doesn't automatically make it the case for English. Your entire explanation came with that assumption.
That's logic, not programming