Answers.Body: <p>Since the standard algebraic notation dictates that we write Bf4 and Qe5 instead of the other way around, you normally just say "Bishop (to) f4", "Queen (to) e5", and so on. If we have a pawn capturing something, say "fxe5", it's normal to say "f takes e5" or "f e5" for short; if instead a piece takes something, say "Nxe5", it's normal to say "Knight takes (on) e5".</p>
  
  <p>In general, you should never change the order when speaking from how letters are written in notation. As noted in the comments, some people tend to use very compact notation describing moves, i.e. "fe" instead of "fxe5" when there is no ambiguity, and you may hear some people therefore say "f e" instead of "fxe5", for instance.</p>
  
  <p>Edit: I just realized that I misunderstood your question, and will therefore add an addendum to answer your specific question.</p>
  
  <p>In the case you have a bishop on f4, and it takes a queen on e5 (I strongly suspect this is what you're asking about), you just say "Bishop takes (on) e5"; as long as there is no ambiguity in what you're describing you don't have to mention from which square the bishop moved, and it's never necessary to declare which type of piece the bishop took.</p>
  
  <p>Edit 2: As noted in the comments, if there is no ambiguity (often there will not be) people may say "[Piece] takes [Other piece]" when a capture occurs; in the given example it would become "Bishop takes Queen". As noted, this can be practical when describing a sequence of captures on the same square.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-01-13T21:42:39.297Z
Answers.Text: The notation "fe" for an f pawn capturing an e pawn isn't uncommon, either, although fe5 or fxe5 are more common.
Answers.UserDisplayName: BobRodes
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-01-13T22:35:20.167Z
Answers.Text: I'd add that also "bishop takes queen" (or other combinations of piece names) is an option and fairly common. Often you  would use something like this if several pieces get exchanged on the same square one after another. Something like: "(white) pawn takes f5,  (black) pawn takes pawn, (white) bishop takes pawn, knight takes bishop, rook takes knight...."
Answers.UserDisplayName: user1583209
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-01-15T17:25:04.500Z
Answers.Text: The target can also be omitted if obvious. In a series of exchange, eg "pawn takes f5, pawn takes, bishop takes, knight takes, Rook takes"
Answers.UserDisplayName: jf328
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 3.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2018-01-13T19:22:52.163Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2018-01-14T06:38:52.757Z
Answers.LastEditDate: 2018-01-14T06:38:52.757Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Scounged
Answers.Body: <p>Brief remark on ambiguity in notation: bishop moves are quite rightfully non-ambiguous as each has its color.
  They differ from knights and rooks in this regard: with a duo on the board, you need to pay extra attention to the position of the other one to determine whether or not it could reach the same destination after a moving or capturing.</p>
  
Answers.ContentLicense: CC BY-SA 4.0
Answers.CreationDate: 2021-02-06T08:56:10.917Z
Answers.LastActivityDate: 2021-02-06T08:56:10.917Z
Answers.UserDisplayName: Torquemada
Body: <p>I don’t have a picture to upload. </p>
  
Tags: <notation>
Title: In verbally describing a move, can you simply say: “B4f to Q5e?”
ThreadText: # In verbally describing a move, can you simply say: “B4f to Q5e?”
  
  (Asked by: username_0 on 2018-01-13)
  
  I don’t have a picture to upload.
  
  **Tags:** notation
  
  
  ---
  
  ## 2 answers
  
  ### Answer by username_1 on 2018-01-13. Score: 3
  
  Since the standard algebraic notation dictates that we write Bf4 and Qe5 instead of the other way around, you normally just say "Bishop (to) f4", "Queen (to) e5", and so on. If we have a pawn capturing something, say "fxe5", it's normal to say "f takes e5" or "f e5" for short; if instead a piece takes something, say "Nxe5", it's normal to say "Knight takes (on) e5".
  
  In general, you should never change the order when speaking from how letters are written in notation. As noted in the comments, some people tend to use very compact notation describing moves, i.e. "fe" instead of "fxe5" when there is no ambiguity, and you may hear some people therefore say "f e" instead of "fxe5", for instance.
  
  Edit: I just realized that I misunderstood your question, and will therefore add an addendum to answer your specific question.
  
  In the case you have a bishop on f4, and it takes a queen on e5 (I strongly suspect this is what you're asking about), you just say "Bishop takes (on) e5"; as long as there is no ambiguity in what you're describing you don't have to mention from which square the bishop moved, and it's never necessary to declare which type of piece the bishop took.
  
  Edit 2: As noted in the comments, if there is no ambiguity (often there will not be) people may say "[Piece] takes [Other piece]" when a capture occurs; in the given example it would become "Bishop takes Queen". As noted, this can be practical when describing a sequence of captures on the same square.
  
  > **Comments:**
  > **username_2**: The notation "fe" for an f pawn capturing an e pawn isn't uncommon, either, although fe5 or fxe5 are more common.  
  > **username_3**: I'd add that also "bishop takes queen" (or other combinations of piece names) is an option and fairly common. Often you  would use something like this if several pieces get exchanged on the same square one after another. Something like: "(white) pawn takes f5,  (black) pawn takes pawn, (white) bishop takes pawn, knight takes bishop, rook takes knight...."  
  > **username_4**: The target can also be omitted if obvious. In a series of exchange, eg "pawn takes f5, pawn takes, bishop takes, knight takes, Rook takes"  
  
  ---
  
  ### Answer by username_5 on 2021-02-06. Score: -1
  
  Brief remark on ambiguity in notation: bishop moves are quite rightfully non-ambiguous as each has its color.
  They differ from knights and rooks in this regard: with a duo on the board, you need to pay extra attention to the position of the other one to determine whether or not it could reach the same destination after a moving or capturing.
  
  
  ---
  
  