Deciding whether to use single or double quotes is a style issue. Both are common in the English language; however, the single style is considered standard in British English and double style in American English. Being in Canada, this allows you to choose (poach) whichever style you prefer from either English (see post "Queens versus American English").
-wikipedia
p.s., I will now be including labels for posts for easy searching
Thursday, March 31, 2011
Wednesday, March 30, 2011
Empty Words and Phrases
In grading a batch of REM 100 term papers (the class I TA), I have noticed that when students are presented with a lengthy assignment they begin inserting many empty words and phrases. One such example:
"Deforestation is harmful to the environment."
The use of the word "harmful" provides an immediate subjective and emotional response in the reader. In "scientific" writing this is highly frowned upon. What defines "scientific" writing might be the topic for another blog post, but peppering in extremely value-contentious words and phrases is not "scientific".
I recently read a paper that deals with these empty words and phrases. The author had this to say:
"We don’t listen any more. Perhaps this is because words are very cheap and so many are thrown away each day. Our loss of critical listening skills leaves us vulnerable to manipulation by words which have no meaning but seem to describe a desirable situation. These empty words can evoke a strong, reflexive reaction just like the leg movement when the knee is stuck. In both cases the reaction is produced without the stimulus passing through the brain."
"Empty phrases are meaningless and loaded with emotion. Their use takes away the opportunity for calm, objective discussions of risk, time scales, degree of disturbance and the important ecosystem characteristics of recovery and adaptability."
While I don't agree with the author entirely, I think he hit on what empty words and phrases are with that last quote. This may sound a lot like my "ambiguity" post from a while back. That being, REM 100ers using to many ambiguous words, but I think it worth posting again in this incarnation.
"Deforestation is harmful to the environment."
The use of the word "harmful" provides an immediate subjective and emotional response in the reader. In "scientific" writing this is highly frowned upon. What defines "scientific" writing might be the topic for another blog post, but peppering in extremely value-contentious words and phrases is not "scientific".
I recently read a paper that deals with these empty words and phrases. The author had this to say:
"We don’t listen any more. Perhaps this is because words are very cheap and so many are thrown away each day. Our loss of critical listening skills leaves us vulnerable to manipulation by words which have no meaning but seem to describe a desirable situation. These empty words can evoke a strong, reflexive reaction just like the leg movement when the knee is stuck. In both cases the reaction is produced without the stimulus passing through the brain."
"Empty phrases are meaningless and loaded with emotion. Their use takes away the opportunity for calm, objective discussions of risk, time scales, degree of disturbance and the important ecosystem characteristics of recovery and adaptability."
While I don't agree with the author entirely, I think he hit on what empty words and phrases are with that last quote. This may sound a lot like my "ambiguity" post from a while back. That being, REM 100ers using to many ambiguous words, but I think it worth posting again in this incarnation.
Monday, March 21, 2011
Is "different than" incorrect grammar?
Yes, "different than" is bad grammar. The correct phrase is "different from". An amusing blog has this to say:
"A sensible discussion of different from versus different than may be found in Theodore M. Bernstein's The Careful Writer, published in 1965. Bernstein favors the former usage in most instances. So does the usage panel in my 1976 American Heritage Dictionary. The argument has nothing to do with Latin. People say different than out of the mistaken belief that different is a comparative adjective and thus takes than, as with better than, faster than, etc. But it's not a comparative (diff, differ, diffest?), it just looks like one. Different is used to draw a distinction and thus properly takes from, as do separate from, distinct from, apart from, etc. (One recognizes that we say in contrast to; one also concedes that another false comparative, other than, is firmly entrenched in the language. Never mind, this is English. One does the best one can.)"
-The Straight Dope
To summarize:
different= distinction, not comparative.
than = comparison
then = time
"A sensible discussion of different from versus different than may be found in Theodore M. Bernstein's The Careful Writer, published in 1965. Bernstein favors the former usage in most instances. So does the usage panel in my 1976 American Heritage Dictionary. The argument has nothing to do with Latin. People say different than out of the mistaken belief that different is a comparative adjective and thus takes than, as with better than, faster than, etc. But it's not a comparative (diff, differ, diffest?), it just looks like one. Different is used to draw a distinction and thus properly takes from, as do separate from, distinct from, apart from, etc. (One recognizes that we say in contrast to; one also concedes that another false comparative, other than, is firmly entrenched in the language. Never mind, this is English. One does the best one can.)"
-The Straight Dope
To summarize:
different= distinction, not comparative.
than = comparison
then = time
Sunday, March 20, 2011
Method of Multiple Working Hypothesis
I have chosen to use the method of multiple working hypothesis for my current PhD research.
This method was championed by T.C. Chamberlin in the 1890s and was directed to me by Dr. David Gross of the University of Illinois. An encapsulation can be found under the title: T.C. Chamberlin's "Method of Multiple Working Hypotheses": An encapsulation for modern students. A more recent article that uses multiple working hypothesis can found under the title: Patters of Gap-Phase Replacement in a Subalpine, Old-Growth Forest, by Dr. Kenneth Lertzman.
The main idea behind using multiple working hypothesis is to get away from the ruling theory, i.e., the trap assumes your research will lead to meaningful results. Using multiple working hypothesis makes it more likely that the researcher will see the interaction of several causes, promote more thoroughness than research directed toward one hypothesis, and avoid the pitfall of accepting weak or flawed evidence for one hypothesis when another provides a more elegant solution.
The major drawback of framing your research in this manner is that of indecision. As you balance the evidence for various hypothesis, it is possible to rush to a (false) conclusion. Keeping an open mind, and above all, WRITING YOUR HYPOTHESES DOWN, will help avoid this pitfall.
My current hypotheses are:
In my research, I will examine how carbon management should be conducted in Canada's National Park with respect to the following (mostly not mutually exclusive) hypothesis:
1. Previous Flux of Carbon
-carbon management should be determined by analysis of previous fluxes of carbon from deglaciation to the present (Holocene)
2. Future Flux of Carbon
-carbon management should be determined by modeled future fluxes in carbon
3. Park Management Practices
-carbon management should be determined by best practices identified by park managers
My previous hypotheses were:
The data presented in my research will be examined with respect to the following (mostly not mutually exclusive) hypotheses:
a. Liming [4] –Chemical Option
-reacting CO2 rich power plant gases with limestone to form Ca2+ and bicarbonate in solution, which can then be released and diluted in the ocean
b. Direct Injection via Platform [2] – Physical Option
-injecting liquid CO2 from a platform (e.g., retrofitted oil rig) at depth (>3,000m) in the ocean
c. Surface Nutrient Pipe Translocation [5] –Biological Option
- deploying a large number of floating “pipes” in the ocean that act to translocate nutrient-rich seawater from below the mixed layer to the ocean's surface (upwelling), the nutrient supplied should enhance the growth of phytoplankton and consequently the export of organic carbon to the deep ocean via the biological pump
Next post will be on "strong inference".
This method was championed by T.C. Chamberlin in the 1890s and was directed to me by Dr. David Gross of the University of Illinois. An encapsulation can be found under the title: T.C. Chamberlin's "Method of Multiple Working Hypotheses": An encapsulation for modern students. A more recent article that uses multiple working hypothesis can found under the title: Patters of Gap-Phase Replacement in a Subalpine, Old-Growth Forest, by Dr. Kenneth Lertzman.
The main idea behind using multiple working hypothesis is to get away from the ruling theory, i.e., the trap assumes your research will lead to meaningful results. Using multiple working hypothesis makes it more likely that the researcher will see the interaction of several causes, promote more thoroughness than research directed toward one hypothesis, and avoid the pitfall of accepting weak or flawed evidence for one hypothesis when another provides a more elegant solution.
The major drawback of framing your research in this manner is that of indecision. As you balance the evidence for various hypothesis, it is possible to rush to a (false) conclusion. Keeping an open mind, and above all, WRITING YOUR HYPOTHESES DOWN, will help avoid this pitfall.
My current hypotheses are:
In my research, I will examine how carbon management should be conducted in Canada's National Park with respect to the following (mostly not mutually exclusive) hypothesis:
1. Previous Flux of Carbon
-carbon management should be determined by analysis of previous fluxes of carbon from deglaciation to the present (Holocene)
2. Future Flux of Carbon
-carbon management should be determined by modeled future fluxes in carbon
3. Park Management Practices
-carbon management should be determined by best practices identified by park managers
My previous hypotheses were:
The data presented in my research will be examined with respect to the following (mostly not mutually exclusive) hypotheses:
a. Liming [4] –Chemical Option
-reacting CO2 rich power plant gases with limestone to form Ca2+ and bicarbonate in solution, which can then be released and diluted in the ocean
b. Direct Injection via Platform [2] – Physical Option
-injecting liquid CO2 from a platform (e.g., retrofitted oil rig) at depth (>3,000m) in the ocean
c. Surface Nutrient Pipe Translocation [5] –Biological Option
- deploying a large number of floating “pipes” in the ocean that act to translocate nutrient-rich seawater from below the mixed layer to the ocean's surface (upwelling), the nutrient supplied should enhance the growth of phytoplankton and consequently the export of organic carbon to the deep ocean via the biological pump
Next post will be on "strong inference".
Monday, March 14, 2011
Double Affirmative?
Does it exist? You can have a double negative, which can either mean "No" or "Yes" depending on the context (e.g., "not hardly"). But what about a double affirmative? Say, "yes mostly"? I ask you, the blog reader. I have not found any info on this matter.
Sunday, March 13, 2011
When to indent your quotations
While I will likely only ever paraphrase someone in my academic writing, it is good to know the rule of when to indent a "long quotation". The rule is 5 or more lines in MLA style (Purdue Writing Lab). But wait, I learned more. If you quote even a few words in text you should cite your source immediately thereafter and not at the end of the sentence. For example:
According to some, dreams express "profound aspects of personality" (Foulkes 184), though others disagree.
And, of course, you can omit parts of quotations using the "(...)".
-Purdue Writing Lab
According to some, dreams express "profound aspects of personality" (Foulkes 184), though others disagree.
And, of course, you can omit parts of quotations using the "(...)".
-Purdue Writing Lab
Thursday, March 10, 2011
Where to identify sources in your writing?
There is very little information on this subject on the web, but in general:
If your sources are very important to your ideas, you should mention the author and work in a sentence that introduces your citation. If, however, you are only citing the source to make a minor point, you may consider using parenthetical references, footnotes, or endnotes.
-Plagerism.org
In my experience reviewing literature, I have found that if you are paying tribute to a particularly novel idea or theory you probably should cite them at the beginning of the sentence, usually before writing on their novel idea or theory.
E.g., Marchetti (1977) proposed that directly injecting CO2 into seawater below 3,000m, given average temperature and pressure, will sink to the ocean floor.
In my experience, putting the source at the beginning of your sentence, negates the necessity to reference the source parenthetically at the end of the sentence (e.g., Marchetti, 1977). Note: this does not negate the need to reference them in your references, bibliography, or literature cited.
If your sources are very important to your ideas, you should mention the author and work in a sentence that introduces your citation. If, however, you are only citing the source to make a minor point, you may consider using parenthetical references, footnotes, or endnotes.
-Plagerism.org
In my experience reviewing literature, I have found that if you are paying tribute to a particularly novel idea or theory you probably should cite them at the beginning of the sentence, usually before writing on their novel idea or theory.
E.g., Marchetti (1977) proposed that directly injecting CO2 into seawater below 3,000m, given average temperature and pressure, will sink to the ocean floor.
In my experience, putting the source at the beginning of your sentence, negates the necessity to reference the source parenthetically at the end of the sentence (e.g., Marchetti, 1977). Note: this does not negate the need to reference them in your references, bibliography, or literature cited.
When should I use an ampersands(&)?
Only under the following circumstances:
-in certain company names, e.g. Smith & Jones Consulting.
-if space is very limited, e.g. in a table with a lot of text.
-when artistic considerations dictate, e.g. a logo.
-In MLA or APA citations the ampersand is used when citing sources in text such as (Jones & Jones, 2005). In the list of references, an ampersand precedes the last author's name when there is more than one author.
Do not use an ampersand in general writing simply to abbreviate the word "and". For example, we write:
We need to reorder toner cartridges and paper.
not:
We need to reorder toner cartridges & paper.
betterwritingskills.com
-in certain company names, e.g. Smith & Jones Consulting.
-if space is very limited, e.g. in a table with a lot of text.
-when artistic considerations dictate, e.g. a logo.
-In MLA or APA citations the ampersand is used when citing sources in text such as (Jones & Jones, 2005). In the list of references, an ampersand precedes the last author's name when there is more than one author.
Do not use an ampersand in general writing simply to abbreviate the word "and". For example, we write:
We need to reorder toner cartridges and paper.
not:
We need to reorder toner cartridges & paper.
betterwritingskills.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)