In a digital card game I’m playing I see this text:
If this follower's attack or defense has not been increased by a spell or effect, destroy this follower. (“attack” and “defense” is a numeric value of this follower.)
I’m confused about the segment of
If attack or defense has not been increased. Does this mean:
attack has not been increasedor
defense has not been increased“, or
attack has not been increasedand
defense has not been increased“, since due to De Morgan’s laws
NOT (A or B) = (NOT A) and (NOT B)?
Although I think the sentence is not entirely unambiguous, I reckon that in colloquial language, too, the second interpretation would be favoured.
Take this colloquial example: ‘if you haven’t eaten the chocolate or the cake, you can have the pie’. It implies that you can have the pie only if you have eaten neither cake nor chocolate.
That is opposed to ‘if you haven’t eaten the chocolate and the cake, you can have the pie’, which implies you can have the pie unless you have eaten both chocolate and cake.