Example sentences of "[letter] [be] [adj] than [noun] " in BNC.
Next page| No | Sentence |
|---|---|
| 1 | In other words , erm , whateve the R is greater than C. Do you remember our , our formula for penaltriate benefit of an altruistic act exceeds the cost discounted by the degree of that 's between a half normally . |
| 2 | So the point I 'm making is that offspring will be prepared to make sacrifices under those conditions , where erm , the R is greater than C. But parents will want offspring to make sacrifices , wherever B is greater than C , and the parent is not concerned with the discount parameter R , but agreed on relatedness , because parents are equally related through their offspring . |
| 3 | So the point I 'm making is that offspring will be prepared to make sacrifices under those conditions , where erm , the R is greater than C. But parents will want offspring to make sacrifices , wherever B is greater than C , and the parent is not concerned with the discount parameter R , but agreed on relatedness , because parents are equally related through their offspring . |
| 4 | Formally , ordinal scales are asymmetrical in that if A is greater than B , B can not be greater than A. Transitivity still holds in that if A is greater than B , and B is greater than C , then A is greater than C. It is these properties which enable us to order cases along a continuum . |
| 5 | A relation is said to be transitive if the fact that it holds between two elements A and B , and also between B and some third element C , guarantees that it holds between A and C. The relation ’ — is longer than — ’ is thus transitive , because if A is longer than B , and B is longer than C , we can be sure that A is longer than C. In the case of an intransitive relation , on the other hand , the fact that it held between A and B , and between B and C , would entail that it did not hold between A and C. For instance , if A were the father of B , and B the father of C , then A could not be the father of C ; the relation ’ — father of — ’ is thus intransitive . |
| 6 | If X is cheaper than Y then you 've got your case . |
| 7 | For example , perceptual predicates that can be procedurally defined include the following spatial descriptions : x is higher than y ; the distance from x toy is zero ; x is in front of the moving object y ; y is between x and z ; x has boundary y ; x is convex ; x is changing shape ; x has the exterior surface y ; x is included spatially in y ; x , y , and z lie in a straight line ; x travels along the path p . |
| 8 | Suppose that x and y are numbers , such that x is greater than y ; then it would appear that there is no conceivable way in which such a relation could be reduced to qualitative properties of one kind or another , and re-expressed , accordingly , in a form that does not require the existence of both its terms . |
| 9 | In short , any explanation of " x is greater than y " , it seems , still leaves us with a two-term relation whereas the reductivist , if his argument is going to work , needs a monadic predicate . |
| 10 | The point , is that the existence is presupposed of an objective order that enables us to distinguish meaningfully between " x is greater than y and " A judges ( thinks , believes , surmises , etc. ) that is greater than y " . |
| 11 | If X is less than COUNT , a new-line will be printed first . |
| 12 | [ 5. l 5 ( a ) ] we see that a real value for the maximum operating frequency can only be obtained if H is greater than unity , so that the square toot in the denominator can be evaluated . |
| 13 | It was pointed out above that DD unemployment will arise when Y e is less than Y o , where Y o is the zero DD-unemployment rate of national income . |
| 14 | The possible properties of examples form a partially ordered set : Property P is less than property P' if A x ( P(x) 6 P' ( x ) ) . |
| 15 | It should be made clear both that ( A + B ) does not need to add up to 100 — it is an unfortunate chance that the 80/20 or 90/10 ‘ rules ’ are so well known — and that access frequency loading will only be of benefit when A is less than B. If A were greater than B , meaning that the less active records were loaded first , file access times would be poorer than those of randomly loaded files ! |
| 16 | Formally , ordinal scales are asymmetrical in that if A is greater than B , B can not be greater than A. Transitivity still holds in that if A is greater than B , and B is greater than C , then A is greater than C. It is these properties which enable us to order cases along a continuum . |
| 17 | Formally , ordinal scales are asymmetrical in that if A is greater than B , B can not be greater than A. Transitivity still holds in that if A is greater than B , and B is greater than C , then A is greater than C. It is these properties which enable us to order cases along a continuum . |
| 18 | Formally , ordinal scales are asymmetrical in that if A is greater than B , B can not be greater than A. Transitivity still holds in that if A is greater than B , and B is greater than C , then A is greater than C. It is these properties which enable us to order cases along a continuum . |
| 19 | If this is accepted , then the semantic content of ( 21 ) ( and identically for ( 22 ) ) would only allow the interpretation that A is better than A ( where A is composed of p and 4 or q and p , neutral with respect to ordering ) . |
| 20 | More recently , Caramazza , Gordon , Zurif and De Luca ( 1976 ) found right brain damaged patients to be impaired relative to controls on tests requiring the answer to such questions as " who is shorter ? " , given that " A is taller than B " . |
| 21 | It should be made clear both that ( A + B ) does not need to add up to 100 — it is an unfortunate chance that the 80/20 or 90/10 ‘ rules ’ are so well known — and that access frequency loading will only be of benefit when A is less than B. If A were greater than B , meaning that the less active records were loaded first , file access times would be poorer than those of randomly loaded files ! |
| 22 | For instance , if A is longer than B , then it follows that B can not be longer than A ; hence , ’ — is longer than — ’ is an asymmetric relation . |
| 23 | A relation is said to be transitive if the fact that it holds between two elements A and B , and also between B and some third element C , guarantees that it holds between A and C. The relation ’ — is longer than — ’ is thus transitive , because if A is longer than B , and B is longer than C , we can be sure that A is longer than C. In the case of an intransitive relation , on the other hand , the fact that it held between A and B , and between B and C , would entail that it did not hold between A and C. For instance , if A were the father of B , and B the father of C , then A could not be the father of C ; the relation ’ — father of — ’ is thus intransitive . |
| 24 | A relation is said to be transitive if the fact that it holds between two elements A and B , and also between B and some third element C , guarantees that it holds between A and C. The relation ’ — is longer than — ’ is thus transitive , because if A is longer than B , and B is longer than C , we can be sure that A is longer than C. In the case of an intransitive relation , on the other hand , the fact that it held between A and B , and between B and C , would entail that it did not hold between A and C. For instance , if A were the father of B , and B the father of C , then A could not be the father of C ; the relation ’ — father of — ’ is thus intransitive . |
| 25 | Suppose we have a set of elements A , B and C , such that A is larger than B and C , the latter pair being of equal sizes . |