TeX - LaTeX Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for users of TeX, LaTeX, ConTeXt, and related typesetting systems. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Possible Duplicate:
Writing a limit so that the subscript goes directly underneath

I am not sure how to explain this, but my code doesn't behave

      $\lim_{(x,y)\to(0,0)} xy + y$

Basically the {(x,y)\to(0,0)} part isn't under the limit operator, it's beside it.

share|improve this question

marked as duplicate by Werner, Gonzalo Medina, Peter Grill, percusse, egreg May 19 '12 at 7:45

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

This is the default behaviour in in-line math (between $ ... $). If you want to force display math, then use $\displaystyle ...$. However, this influences the line height and doesn't look right. – Werner May 19 '12 at 1:42
up vote 5 down vote accepted

When you are in inline, that is how it is done. If you want limits under, you can use \limits:


$\lim_{(x,y)\to(0,0)} xy + y$
$\lim\limits_{(x,y)\to(0,0)} xy + y$

enter image description here

share|improve this answer
Didn't know about that trick. It'll come in handy I'm sure. – Scott H. May 19 '12 at 1:48
Why do I have to put \lim in front of \limits? – Hawk May 19 '12 at 1:52
How come it doesn't work here codecogs.com/latex/eqneditor.php – Hawk May 19 '12 at 1:56
Works fine for me there. Did you include the $...$'s? – Scott H. May 19 '12 at 2:13

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.