a reference to something mentioned earlier

< Previous | Next >

ernest_

Senior Member
Consider the following snippet

The solution is unique if and only if the linear system A has a unique solution. Furthermore, if B, then the above linear system becomes C, which has a unique solution if and only if D has full column rank.

Here above refers to "linear system A" from the previous sentence. Somehow above doesn't sound quite right, because the thing that is said to be "above" could actually be on the same line, and thus not really above. I think aforementioned is for things that are mentioned much earlier, and previous seems a little ambiguous. What do you think?

• PaulQ

Senior Member
Above is completely normal. It seems to be aimed at people with an above-average intelligence.
Somehow above doesn't sound quite right, because the thing that is said to be "above" could actually be on the same line
... but I assume that it wasn't.
I think aforementioned is for things that are mentioned much earlier,
This is not correct. However, aforementioned is very formal and somewhat old-fashioned.
previous seems a little ambiguous.
I agree.

What is the source of this example?

ernest_

Senior Member
Thanks for your opinion Paul. It's an essay that I'm writing, so there's no source.

PaulQ

Senior Member
You could say "Furthermore, if B, then A becomes C,"

ernest_

Senior Member
Yes, but I'd rather avoid the repetition.

Is it correct to use "the latter" in this context? I.e. "the latter system becomes..."

PaulQ

Senior Member
Yes, but I'd rather avoid the repetition.
You are being too fussy. The "repetition" is not direct repetition and is in a new sentence.

You may be overthinking the problem and everything begins to sound wrong.
Is it correct to use "the latter" in this context? I.e. "the latter system becomes..."
No. I have no idea as to what "the latter" refers - B or A?

ernest_

Senior Member
Okay, I accept your suggestion. Thanks again.

< Previous | Next >