ological Sciences
University of San Diego
5998 Alcala Park
San Diego, CA 92110
tay...@sandiego.edu<mailto:tay...@sandiego.edu>
From: Carol DeVolder [devoldercar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2011 8:58 AM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
lcala Park
San Diego, CA 92110
tay...@sandiego.edu<mailto:tay...@sandiego.edu>
From: Carol DeVolder [devoldercar...@gmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, March 20, 2011 8:58 AM
To: Teaching in the Psychological Sciences (TIPS)
Subject: Re: [tips] Writing in APA style
Hi Annette,
Hi
And now for my third and final posting of the day. I turned to the google
ngram viewer and put in (without quotes and separated by comma) the phrases
"the data show" and "the results show". Both occur relatively frequently. See:
http://ngrams.googlelabs.com/graph?content=the+data+show%2C+
Point(s) taken. I am neither a linguist nor an English scholar. Heck, not
even a scientific writer. And I believe this is my last post of the day--I
hope I don't have some burning issue later. Like, which is better Presta or
Schrader?
Carol
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 12:48 PM, Jim Clark wrote:
> H
Hi
I think one point of Master's piece is that English DOES allow this
construction, whereas other languages do not. He is a linguist. In one
discussion of animate versus inanimate subjects by another linguist, for
example, the text contained the following "the examples demonstrate... " not a
Just to play devil's advocate, the rioters are demonstrating their
dissatisfaction; the riots are evidence of that dissatisfaction. Examples
are used [by someone] to demonstrate a point. It is the person who is
demonstrating by using an example, it isn't the example that is doing the
demonstrating.
Hi
I don't buy the criticism of "the data showed" or various similar
constructions. Do not the riots in the middle east demonstrate /show / reveal
something about the level of dissatisfaction there? Do not examples
demonstrate / show something? Are riots and examples any different than data?
Paul's solution solves the active voice/data as inanimate problem.
But these constructions shift the emphasis away from the main focus of the
sentence (patterns in the data) to experimenters doing analyses.
I wonder if this really helps readers? There might be exceptions, but the
passive voice is
Often, use of first person makes all of this flow better. "Our analysis of the
data revealed significant effects for both main effects..." see pages 69 and 77
for explicit examples of first person usage.
"significant effects for both main effects" what is that?
Why not state "Analyses of th
Often, use of first person makes all of this flow better. "Our analysis of the
data revealed significant effects for both main effects..." see pages 69 and 77
for explicit examples of first person usage.
Sent from my iPhone
On Mar 20, 2011, at 11:59 AM, "Carol DeVolder" wrote:
>
>
> Hi An
Hi Annette,
How about something like, "analysis of the data revealed..." or "examination
of the data (results, etc.)...?"
Carol
On Sun, Mar 20, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Annette Taylor wrote:
> I'm grappling with how to phrase some things in results sections
> especially. Because data are an inanimate t
I'm grappling with how to phrase some things in results sections especially.
Because data are an inanimate thing they can't really "show" or "demonstrate"
anything. Nor can a study do anything such as "observe" or "define" so what
kind of language do you all use. Is there some boilerplate that w
12 matches
Mail list logo
