======= Date Modified 30 Oct 2012 03:22:44 =======
Hey guys, Here is a blog post about how to enjoy taking a PhD.

it has a list of tips to help you.

Enjoy!

http://www.completephd.com/blog/How-to-enjoy-taking-a-PhD

======= Date Modified 29 Oct 2012 19:38:33 =======
He really needs to get a native speaker to help proofread his blog.

(This is meant as constructive criticism, not a snarky remark.)

======= Date Modified 29 Oct 2012 22:11:14 =======
quote from dalmation:
He really needs to get a native speaker to help proofread his blog.
(This is meant as constructive criticism, not a snarky remark.)


unfortunately, being native does not guarantee competency in proofreading. :)

i find it ironic that syntactical recommendation is the only response u can deliver after reading his blog.

then again, availability heuristic is quite dominant for he who is conditioned to find flaw above merit.

======= Date Modified 01 Nov 2012 02:23:15 =======
I fixed the typo in the footer and replaced the s with a d.

If you find any other errors please email me to let me know.

Thanks.

I don't think you read the advertisement before responding. The purpose of the blog is to advertise a book. If it were just a blog with his opinions, I wouldn't say anything. It's not just a problem with typos, syntax, or grammar. Doesn't that make you wonder about the quality of the book you're purchasing? Doesn't it seem strange that the publisher wouldn't help with editing? I just find it odd that so many people are offering editing services and "tips" for sale on the forum in pidgin English. It just raises questions as to whether or not the service is a hoax or legitimate. I just don't like the idea of people using a support forum with many non-native English speakers (including me) to rip people off. How can people know the content is great if it's incomprehensible?

lol dalmation. i think u mistake syntax with semantics. if i were to type "there are many CAT in the car" would it be grammatically inferior? of course. i missed out the 's' to indicate plurality. still, would u understand the assertion? can u imagine the implication of the statement in your head? DEFINITELY.

now, when u read his blog, did u understand what was written there, or did the occasional missing 's' or 'es' render ur cognition completely fallow? u must understand that in a formal context ie book, both syntax and semantics are vital. in an informal context however, like a blog or forum, only the latter is truly necessary.

i find it quite distasteful when academics are obsessively fixated on language at the expense of the contribution made. the formal adjective for this kind of behaviour is known as *filiopietistic".

a non-native friend of mine presented a remarkable idea on how to solve a critical problem in engineering, and all the examiners could say was.. "oh.. could u improve on ur grammar?". wth?? just because she's not linguistically competent from the aspect of verbal syntax, doesn't mean that she's deficit in thinking. please refer to gardner's work on multiple intelligence if u require further proof on this.

in effect, to assume that the advice offered within the book (formal context) is questionable, based on the improper portrayal of grammar in the blog (INFORMAL context), is how should i say, euphemistically *specious* at best.

======= Date Modified 31 Oct 2012 13:11:35 =======
EDIT: Advert - avoid.

It is annoying that people are advertising things without being upfront about it.
As for the comments about style versus substance, given the effect that turgid prose has readers, it's an important part of the dissemination aspect of research that we write well and engage the intended audience. The world of academia is littered with the corpses of brilliant minds who couldn't communicate effectively.

u're missing the whole point doc. it's not about style vs substance. im not trivializing the importance of communication.

merely stating the fact that communication should NOT be the only factor of evaluation. einstein was kinda bad in communication, especially when it involved formalism like mathematics in explaining his theory of relativity.

would it be fair to penalize einstein just because he was bad in communication?
or because he was non-native and had problem pronouncing certain words properly?
or because his sentence construction didn't achieve the required standard of academic exchange?
or because he made some typo errors in his blog? (LOL ok, they didnt have blogs back then but oh.. u get my point)

:) i thank God that his peers had learned to look pass ALL that. i thank God that they didn't say ..

"The world of academia is littered with the corpses of brilliant minds who couldn't communicate effectively"

if prejudice had won back then, we wouldn't be watching world cup live now, would we? with this, i rest my case.. hopefully, without the need of further resurrection.

8-)

No, I'm not missing the point at all. Using textspeak will tend to make people think a particular way. Do you dress smartly for interviews? I rest my case ;)