Go Back   English Forum Switzerland > Off-Topic > Off-Topic > General off-topic
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1421  
Old 28.03.2013, 12:12
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: At home
Posts: 4,165
Groaned at 210 Times in 135 Posts
Thanked 6,404 Times in 2,719 Posts
Faltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Quote:
View Post
On the other issue, could MC and Faltrad get a room? Science and the arts never mix well.
Sorry to be impolite, but science is a much bigger field than you seem to think. The thread is not limited to your sole understanding of science, obviously reduced to experimental natural sciences. Especially when you write "empirial proof".... it's empirical evidence. Yea, it's right, I've just corrected your English. Sorry again for being impolite but with such a contempt for human sciences, you didn't deserve diplomacy.
Reply With Quote
  #1422  
Old 28.03.2013, 12:22
TidakApa's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Top of a Triangle
Posts: 3,009
Groaned at 42 Times in 33 Posts
Thanked 5,673 Times in 2,039 Posts
TidakApa has a reputation beyond reputeTidakApa has a reputation beyond reputeTidakApa has a reputation beyond reputeTidakApa has a reputation beyond reputeTidakApa has a reputation beyond reputeTidakApa has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Quote:
View Post
Yea, it's right, I've just corrected your English. Sorry again for being impolite. It was an emergency.
"There, Their, They're" Faltrad, don't take it to heart.

By the way, it's spelled "Yeah"
Reply With Quote
  #1423  
Old 28.03.2013, 12:24
adrianlondon's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Basel
Posts: 9,200
Groaned at 193 Times in 176 Posts
Thanked 25,643 Times in 6,892 Posts
adrianlondon has a reputation beyond reputeadrianlondon has a reputation beyond reputeadrianlondon has a reputation beyond reputeadrianlondon has a reputation beyond reputeadrianlondon has a reputation beyond reputeadrianlondon has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Quote:
View Post
Sorry to be impolite
Don't start off your post a lie. Plus, his point was more that this is really meant for Q and A topics, not an in depth discussion into the art/science of the study of linguistics. Why not start a new thread? In reality, your conversation is pretty interesting and could stand being in its own thread.
Reply With Quote
  #1424  
Old 28.03.2013, 12:27
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: At home
Posts: 4,165
Groaned at 210 Times in 135 Posts
Thanked 6,404 Times in 2,719 Posts
Faltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Quote:
View Post
"There, Their, They're" Faltrad, don't take it to heart.

By the way, it's spelled "Yeah"
There is a story to the pun: I suck at English big time. No shame here as the only reason why I am on this forum is to practice my English. Hence the very very ironical situation stated above. When one is obsessed with empirical natural sciences to the point of disregarding any other sciences, one diserve a gentle lesson in philosophical/scientific vocabulary. As for my English, of course it's all wrong, but I'm working on it... right now
Reply With Quote
  #1425  
Old 28.03.2013, 12:31
bubbles4352's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Zurich
Posts: 572
Groaned at 0 Times in 0 Posts
Thanked 174 Times in 108 Posts
bubbles4352 is considered knowledgeablebubbles4352 is considered knowledgeablebubbles4352 is considered knowledgeable
Re: Ask a Scientist

Quote:
View Post

I was reading today about smugness some teachers use to present themselves as the only ones with the "license" to knowledge. There are linguists like these, too. Who speak impressively. Anything well verbalized can pass for deep thoughts. Academia can be tiresome.

Why do some scientists insist on using big words, when little words will do? I’ve seen Psychology papers where the researchers say things like: “Cognate with the dichotomy is … “ instead of simply “The split is related to …”

It seems to be a two-edged sword. On one hand, using specific technical jargon makes the meaning quite clear. However, using less common words makes the paper less understandable and slower to digest and potentially less likely to be referenced by other papers, simply because search engine queries are more likely to be for “split” rather than “dichotomy”.
Reply With Quote
  #1426  
Old 29.03.2013, 18:53
MusicChick's Avatar
modified and reprogrammed
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: La Cote
Posts: 11,448
Groaned at 125 Times in 101 Posts
Thanked 13,698 Times in 6,814 Posts
MusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Quote:
View Post
Why do some scientists insist on using big words, when little words will do? I’ve seen Psychology papers where the researchers say things like: “Cognate with the dichotomy is … “ instead of simply “The split is related to …”

It seems to be a two-edged sword. On one hand, using specific technical jargon makes the meaning quite clear. However, using less common words makes the paper less understandable and slower to digest and potentially less likely to be referenced by other papers, simply because search engine queries are more likely to be for “split” rather than “dichotomy”.
I have created a new thread designated for debate on linguistics., see my answer there.

Reply With Quote
  #1427  
Old 29.03.2013, 20:05
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: At home
Posts: 4,165
Groaned at 210 Times in 135 Posts
Thanked 6,404 Times in 2,719 Posts
Faltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Sorry, but I refuse to be banned from a thread about science because we are talking linguistics.
Reply With Quote
  #1428  
Old 29.03.2013, 20:30
FrankZappa's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: France, near Geneva
Posts: 792
Groaned at 7 Times in 6 Posts
Thanked 2,491 Times in 617 Posts
FrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Quote:
View Post
Why do some scientists insist on using big words, when little words will do? I’ve seen Psychology papers where the researchers say things like: “Cognate with the dichotomy is … “ instead of simply “The split is related to …”

It seems to be a two-edged sword. On one hand, using specific technical jargon makes the meaning quite clear. However, using less common words makes the paper less understandable and slower to digest and potentially less likely to be referenced by other papers, simply because search engine queries are more likely to be for “split” rather than “dichotomy”.
This is a problem in all of science. Jargon is one thing and usually justified. Using complicated words when simple ones serve the same purpose is not. Scientists who speak perfectly clearly feel that they must write pompous fluff to be taken seriously. "Utilize" instead of "use", to name one. And using the passive tense instead of saying "we" or, God forbid, "I". I have several good articles denouncing this particular practice. One is an editorial in Nature.
Reply With Quote
  #1429  
Old 29.03.2013, 21:23
MusicChick's Avatar
modified and reprogrammed
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: La Cote
Posts: 11,448
Groaned at 125 Times in 101 Posts
Thanked 13,698 Times in 6,814 Posts
MusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Quote:
View Post
Sorry, but I refuse to be banned from a thread about science because we are talking linguistics.
You are not banned at all..It's a good thing, I made a whole nice new thread (smells like a new book...ooooh) for us to muse over stuff that interests us, without being interrupted by questions about physics and math and other nonsense

Zappa, those are interesting thoughts..I wish I could leave out the passive, though. I can't really use I, nor we. I think we is incorrect, if it is just one person conducting a research even with the help of a supervisor, I find that misleading. I am strongly discouraged to use I, apparently for modesty reasons, but I consider it illogical. I see it completely reversed, as all I want to state it was only I, who..., which is more modest than boast that I have a whole team of researchers behind me thus claiming more credibility.
__________________
"L'homme ne peut pas remplacer son coeur avec sa tete, ni sa tete avec ses mains." J.H.Pestalozzi

ἀρχὴ ἥμισυ παντός

Last edited by MusicChick; 29.03.2013 at 21:39.
Reply With Quote
  #1430  
Old 29.03.2013, 21:33
22 yards's Avatar
Only in moderation
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Basel-Land
Posts: 7,392
Groaned at 215 Times in 173 Posts
Thanked 13,216 Times in 5,426 Posts
22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Quote:
View Post
Sorry to be impolite, but science is a much bigger field than you seem to think. The thread is not limited to your sole understanding of science, obviously reduced to experimental natural sciences. Especially when you write "empirial proof".... it's empirical evidence. Yea, it's right, I've just corrected your English. Sorry again for being impolite but with such a contempt for human sciences, you didn't deserve diplomacy.
Dearest Faulty, chill out. And do try to keep up.

Evidence for a hypothesis may be gathered empirically. When that evidence is used to prove the hypothesis, it is known as empirical proof (with a 'c' in the second half of the first word'). This peer-reviewed paper, published in Astrophys.J., demonstrates appropriate usage of the term. But perhaps you don't accept that astrophysics is a science? I'd be glad to provide countless other examples, on request.

You may not be aware that in probably every university of any note in the world, the linguistics faculty is attached to the school of Arts. Scientific subjects, including "experimental natural sciences" are, naturally, taught in the school of Sciences. The fact that linguistics undergraduates generally graduate with BA degrees and science students with BS/BSc degrees ought to provide you with a little clue.

For one who writes such poorly formulated and imprecisely expressed rubbish, you certainly appear to think a lot of yourself. You appear to have a very large arrogant streak coupled with a massive persecution complex -- an interesting combination that gives rise to your current posting signature. Perhaps you should think (and research) before posting -- that way you would avoid most of the "trouble" you seem to experience on EF.

Sorry to point out your character flaws.

Oh, and happy Easter!
Reply With Quote
  #1431  
Old 29.03.2013, 21:43
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: CH
Posts: 6,496
Groaned at 224 Times in 175 Posts
Thanked 8,212 Times in 4,428 Posts
greenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond reputegreenmount has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

You showed him!
Reply With Quote
  #1432  
Old 29.03.2013, 21:53
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: At home
Posts: 4,165
Groaned at 210 Times in 135 Posts
Thanked 6,404 Times in 2,719 Posts
Faltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond reputeFaltrad has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Love you too.
Reply With Quote
  #1433  
Old 29.03.2013, 23:43
FrankZappa's Avatar
Forum Veteran
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: France, near Geneva
Posts: 792
Groaned at 7 Times in 6 Posts
Thanked 2,491 Times in 617 Posts
FrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond reputeFrankZappa has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Dear 22 yards, I'd pop over to Wikipedia and the entry on linguisitics. I feel it is very good. Here's one bit:
  • Applied linguistics, the study of language-related issues applied in everyday life, notably language policies, planning, and education. (Constructed language fits under Applied linguistics.)
  • Biolinguistics, the study of natural as well as human-taught communication systems in animals, compared to human language.
  • Clinical linguistics, the application of linguistic theory to the field of Speech-Language Pathology.
  • Computational linguistics, the study of linguistic issues in a way that is 'computationally responsible', i.e., taking careful note of computational consideration of algorithmic specification and computational complexity, so that the linguistic theories devised can be shown to exhibit certain desirable computational properties implementations.
  • Developmental linguistics, the study of the development of linguistic ability in individuals, particularly the acquisition of language in childhood.
  • Evolutionary linguistics, the study of the origin and subsequent development of language by the human species.
  • Historical linguistics or diachronic linguistics, the study of language change over time.
  • Language geography, the study of the geographical distribution of languages and linguistic features.
  • Linguistic typology, the study of the common properties of diverse unrelated languages, properties that may, given sufficient attestation, be assumed to be innate to human language capacity.
  • Neurolinguistics, the study of the structures in the human brain that underlie grammar and communication.
  • Psycholinguistics, the study of the cognitive processes and representations underlying language use.
  • Sociolinguistics, the study of variation in language and its relationship with social factors.
Almost without exception these disciplines are scientific in the sense of being quantitative and evidence-driven. Often they make heavy use of computers and statistics. Some of the students who study them may even be rewarded with BSc's, lucky things.
Reply With Quote
  #1434  
Old 30.03.2013, 11:15
22 yards's Avatar
Only in moderation
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Basel-Land
Posts: 7,392
Groaned at 215 Times in 173 Posts
Thanked 13,216 Times in 5,426 Posts
22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Not that I'm happy to accept Wikipedia as a credible source, I am perfectly prepared to accept that elements of linguistics may be considered to fall into the realm of the sciences. Frankly, it doesn't affect my world a whole lot.

My point was not to drive a wedge between arts and sciences (that already exists!). My light-hearted comment seems to have touched a nerve in some. Just as it was when I was at university all those years ago, those studying in the arts faculty are still very sensitive about the perceived value and credibility of their chosen fields.
Reply With Quote
  #1435  
Old 05.04.2013, 00:26
MusicChick's Avatar
modified and reprogrammed
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: La Cote
Posts: 11,448
Groaned at 125 Times in 101 Posts
Thanked 13,698 Times in 6,814 Posts
MusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

I don't actually think there is a wedge between arts and sci at all anymore, since art is often a topic of scientific studies, etc.

The best scientists I know actually are artists, in their own creative way. The need to think creatively and independently outside of the box is the place where artists and scientists meet. I was raised by a researcher/doctor/ who was a painter/designer. And a chef in her free time, hahahaha, mom having a hickup now, I am thinking about you! Languages and art talk, edu, together with medical facts were on the menu every night, beurk..not always light.
__________________
"L'homme ne peut pas remplacer son coeur avec sa tete, ni sa tete avec ses mains." J.H.Pestalozzi

ἀρχὴ ἥμισυ παντός

Last edited by MusicChick; 05.04.2013 at 01:16.
Reply With Quote
  #1436  
Old 05.04.2013, 05:05
22 yards's Avatar
Only in moderation
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Basel-Land
Posts: 7,392
Groaned at 215 Times in 173 Posts
Thanked 13,216 Times in 5,426 Posts
22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

"Art" and "the arts" are two different things -- the former a subset of the latter ... oh, never mind.

The whole point of my original post has been lost.
Reply With Quote
  #1437  
Old 05.04.2013, 05:56
MusicChick's Avatar
modified and reprogrammed
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: La Cote
Posts: 11,448
Groaned at 125 Times in 101 Posts
Thanked 13,698 Times in 6,814 Posts
MusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

It's ok.

I have a question.

Is the number of religious people increasing or decreasing?
Reply With Quote
  #1438  
Old 05.04.2013, 08:34
22 yards's Avatar
Only in moderation
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Basel-Land
Posts: 7,392
Groaned at 215 Times in 173 Posts
Thanked 13,216 Times in 5,426 Posts
22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute22 yards has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Yes.
Reply With Quote
  #1439  
Old 05.04.2013, 08:59
PaddyG's Avatar
Forum Legend
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: Pensier, Fribourg
Posts: 8,994
Groaned at 118 Times in 102 Posts
Thanked 16,051 Times in 5,666 Posts
PaddyG has a reputation beyond reputePaddyG has a reputation beyond reputePaddyG has a reputation beyond reputePaddyG has a reputation beyond reputePaddyG has a reputation beyond reputePaddyG has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Quote:
View Post
This is a problem in all of science. Jargon is one thing and usually justified. Using complicated words when simple ones serve the same purpose is not. Scientists who speak perfectly clearly feel that they must write pompous fluff to be taken seriously. "Utilize" instead of "use", to name one. And using the passive tense instead of saying "we" or, God forbid, "I". I have several good articles denouncing this particular practice. One is an editorial in Nature.
I would agree with you on the use of jargon, but there is nothing wrong with the use of the passive tense, especially in scientific peer-review articles. Using the first person takes the emphasis away from the research and onto the researcher. What's more important, what's being done, or who's doing it?
Reply With Quote
  #1440  
Old 06.04.2013, 18:01
MusicChick's Avatar
modified and reprogrammed
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: La Cote
Posts: 11,448
Groaned at 125 Times in 101 Posts
Thanked 13,698 Times in 6,814 Posts
MusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond reputeMusicChick has a reputation beyond repute
Re: Ask a Scientist

Quote:
View Post
Yes.
Booo

Who would know..
I was wondering what the trait is, probably a question for an anthropologist oir a sociologist, or a theologist? Can we even know?
Reply With Quote
Reply




Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Average salary for post-doctoral scientist barish Employment 87 01.10.2008 14:27
Wanted: Drug Metabolism Scientist to work in major Pharma, Basel Caroline Jobs wanted 0 20.09.2007 19:00
Surfing Scientist!!! Sarge Jobs wanted 2 24.05.2007 03:38


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 19:27.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
LinkBacks Enabled by vBSEO 3.1.0