Are a lot of you math and science types poor at english

[Pythagorean]

s'long as yer makin' at yer point thoroughly, it don't matter if you follow every lil rule. Langauge aint learned so much as tis created.

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

I full agreements do with the OP. For years many now I been altering my style writing to conform with the low astonishly PF standards. Now but I feel liberatedly to write standarded English as it is spoked by me and everyone around me since childhood growing up. Thanks you to sportsstar469.

 

[sportsstar469]

If you stood outside the English department at any US university, I wager that you would find less than 10% of the students (and faculty) who could compute a simple integral or perform a simple kinematics calculation. John Allen Paulos published several books about 15 years ago, one of which was Innumeracy. His point was that there were many people who were generally acknowledged as intellectuals, but whose knowledge of mathematics didn't extend to anything more current than the 14th century, and whose knowledge of science was about the same.

On the other hand, a lot of people who are very well-versed in mathematics and the sciences are at least competent at writing in their native language. In addition, you'll find a fair number of musicians among mathematicians and scientists, despite music being considered a "right brain" activity.

maybe, but in all fairness, for professional purposes, english majors do not need above pre algebra if tghat to accomplish their daily tasks. i heard they were raising the math requirements for elementary school teachers as well, which i find ridiculous. the argument is that elementary school teachers should be competent enough to teach advanced math so they can teach basic math better. what's funny is my trig teacher makes basic addition mistakes, and she's taken classes far beyond calc..

 

[sportsstar469]

There are more errors in your posts than just typos. One major error is the incorrect usage of capitalization. That shift key really isn't all that hard to find, is it? There are errors in placement of commas, placement of apostrophes, usage of prepositions, etc. As you should be realizing, many of us here consider proper usage of English to be quite important. In fact, if you cannot write proper English, you will struggle to be a successful scientist, since scientists spend a lot of their time writing.

By the way, what is your "type?" Your thread title seems to suggest that you consider "math and science types" to be something different from yourself. Hopefully, you're not an English major.

im a science major hoping to go to med school./

 

[Chi Meson]

There are more errors in your posts than just typos. One major error is the incorrect usage of capitalization. That shift key really isn't all that hard to find, is it? There are errors in placement of commas, placement of apostrophes, usage of prepositions, etc. As you should be realizing, many of us here consider proper usage of English to be quite important. In fact, if you cannot write proper English, you will struggle to be a successful scientist, since scientists spend a lot of their time writing.

By the way, what is your "type?" Your thread title seems to suggest that you consider "math and science types" to be something different from yourself. Hopefully, you're not an English major.

Dang it Moonb, that was going to be MY post!

Sportsstar, you are NOT good at writing. Stop kidding yourself. And forget about the "left brain right brain" stuff. People do have areas where they are more talented, but being good at science does NOT preclude being good at other things. Writing is a discipline just as science is a discipline. Being good at something takes education and practice.

So you relax, drop the subject, and learn where capitalization, commas, apostrophes,and logic are supposed to fit into your posts.

 

[xxChrisxx]

how am i troll? i asked a simple question. relax... just because the question can be viewed of as less than flattering you call troll, and insult me. there's a difference between not grasping the english language and not typing properly.

Case in point.

Most people on this forum know the 'basic' english rules on the differences between similar sounding words. If they are writing papers you can be damn sure it's all Ship shape and Bristol fashion.Fact is, this is the internet. I regulally type things wrong, not because I don't know any better but purely becuase I just don't care so long as the point is effectively communicated. I type on auto pilot so get lots of errors.The fact that you made the very mistakes you were commenting on is highly ironic. It should also be pointed of that if someone as 'uber' at english as you claim to be, can make mistakes from typos, its safe to assume that everyone else does the same.

 

[sportsstar469]

Dang it Moonb, that was going to be MY post!

Sportsstar, you are NOT good at writing. Stop kidding yourself. And forget about the "left brain right brain" stuff. People do have areas where they are more talented, but being good at science does NOT preclude being good at other things. Writing is a discipline just as science is a discipline. Being good at something takes education and practice.

So you relax, drop the subject, and learn where capitalization, commas, apostrophes,and logic are supposed to fit into your posts.

Ive won school awards for my writing...who am i trying to kid.it was a simple ****ing question... I am not an english major anyway, so having good writing skills isn't that important. it's math skills that count, and i have none haha.

and just for the record, I've never believed that one can only be talented at one discipline, i just asked a question on people's personal ability. but no matter how good you are at both disciplines, you will always be dominant at both, and saying that's theory is wrong.

 

[sportsstar469]

Case in point.

Most people on this forum know the 'basic' english rules on the differences between similar sounding words. If they are writing papers you can be damn sure it's all Ship shape and Bristol fashion.


Fact is, this is the internet. I regulally type things wrong, not because I don't know any better but purely becuase I just don't care so long as the point is effectively communicated. I type on auto pilot so get lots of errors.


The fact that you made the very mistakes you were commenting on is highly ironic. It should also be pointed of that if someone as 'uber' at english as you claim to be, can make mistakes from typos, its safe to assume that everyone else does the same.

i didnt say I am an english god, i just said I am exemplary at english...

 

[cristo]

i didnt say I am an english god, i just said I am exemplary at english...

That's clearly not true, is it? I wouldn't like to see many people following you as a role model!

 

[ideasrule]

sportsstar: to counter the attacks on your English, why not type one post with proper punctuation and capitalization? I'd be shocked to death if you couldn't capitalize properly.

 

[sportsstar469]

That's clearly not true, is it? I wouldn't like to see many people following you as a role model!

Well, as someone who thrives in sciences, you should know the difference between a theory and a fact. Using clearly, would denote that you have put my english skills through the whole entire scientific method, and it is a clear fact that my english skills suck! Since that is not true, and you are speculating, my english competency based on some improperly capitalized posts on this site, your ideas are nothing but speculation and theory. it is for that reason that the word CLEARLY should be omitted from your post.
Mr. physicist.

its amazing how a simple question, can stir up so much animosity. You would think that members of the scientific community would thrive to divulge a myth, that scientists, and mathematicians are just one sided. Also that they would do this in a positive way, that would bring positive connotation to the science and math community, as opposed to negative backwash like is being done now.

when using the word exemplary to describe my english skills, i simply mean i am above average. i am no english god, nor do i wish to be one. i have a much greater interest in becoming proficient in the mathematics i will be taking. math and labs for science are my current weak points, and i have already aced the college english courses i needed to take.

 

[arildno]

Having worked, among other things, as a teacher, I can tell you that you are dead wrong:

IF a pupil is good at maths&physics, then that person is usually good in the language department as well.

The converse is not true at all.

This I can tell you from participating literally hundreds of grade settings for pupils at the end of the term; those I deem good at maths are most usually in the upper echelons in the Norwegian teacher's class, the English teacher's class, the French teacher's class etc.

But there are numerous students who struggle mightily with maths who make good grades in languages.

I'm sure Chi Meson has had similar experiences with his students.

 

[sportsstar469]

Having worked, among other things, as a teacher, I can tell you that you are dead wrong:

IF a pupil is good at maths&physics, then that person is usually good in the language department as well.

The converse is not true at all.

This I can tell you from participating literally hundreds of grade settings for pupils at the end of the term; those I deem good at maths are most usually in the upper echelons in the Norwegian teacher's class, the English teacher's class, the French teacher's class etc.

But there are numerous students who struggle mightily with maths who make good grades in languages.

no offense, but if you are so good at language, and reading comprehension, you would have seen that i am wrong on nothing. i actually said, that i don't believe in the fact that students can not excel at both. my original OP was a QUESTION on your opinions on this. Never once did i say anyone on this site was not good at english. I had just asked if this was a trend due, to a few posts i found from some members on this site. (i pointed out frylocks you're s for instance.)

to tell you the truth, I've always had the mentality, that a math professor, could learn an english professor's job much better than the english professor could learn the math's job. if the english professor could learn the math's job in the slightest bit. this I am not to sure about to be quite honest./

 

[waht]

Can a mathematician write another Hamlet?

 

[Pinu7]

Can a mathematician write another Hamlet?

It would be in a definition-theorem-proof format.

 

[arildno]

It would be in a definition-theorem-proof format.

Theorem: There is something rotten in the state of Denmark

Proof: Pick up the newspapers.

QED.

 

[Moonbear]

im a science major hoping to go to med school./

As someone who teaches at a med school, my recommendations are: 1) you DO need to learn proper grammar and writing skills, 2) you need to rethink your attitude in talking with other people, and 3) you need to toss out all your stereotypes and start thinking more about the person or people you're speaking with than making assumptions about them based on no factual information. Right now, based on your attitude toward others here, I hope you find another career path if you can't fix at least 2 and 3 above.

 

[xxChrisxx]

Well, as someone who thrives in sciences, you should know the difference between a theory and a fact. Using clearly, would denote that you have put my english skills through the whole entire scientific method, and it is a clear fact that my english skills suck! Since that is not true, and you are speculating, my english competency based on some improperly capitalized posts on this site, your ideas are nothing but speculation and theory. it is for that reason that the word CLEARLY should be omitted from your post.
Mr. physicist.

its amazing how a simple question, can stir up so much animosity. You would think that members of the scientific community would thrive to divulge a myth, that scientists, and mathematicians are just one sided. Also that they would do this in a positive way, that would bring positive connotation to the science and math community, as opposed to negative backwash like is being done now.

when using the word exemplary to describe my english skills, i simply mean i am above average. i am no english god, nor do i wish to be one. i have a much greater interest in becoming proficient in the mathematics i will be taking. math and labs for science are my current weak points, and i have already aced the college english courses i needed to take.

Noone cares what you think.

You held yourself up as a model of English language skill, yet demonstrated precisely no skill what so ever. Bashed people on the forum for basically being ignorant of the English language and then get shocked at an unfavourable responce.

The internet is such a delightful place for irony such as this.

 

[sportsstar469]

As someone who teaches at a med school, my recommendations are: 1) you DO need to learn proper grammar and writing skills, 2) you need to rethink your attitude in talking with other people, and 3) you need to toss out all your stereotypes and start thinking more about the person or people you're speaking with than making assumptions about them based on no factual information. Right now, based on your attitude toward others here, I hope you find another career path if you can't fix at least 2 and 3 above.

Having worked, among other things, as a teacher, I can tell you that you are dead wrong:

IF a pupil is good at maths&physics, then that person is usually good in the language department as well.

The converse is not true at all.

This I can tell you from participating literally hundreds of grade settings for pupils at the end of the term; those I deem good at maths are most usually in the upper echelons in the Norwegian teacher's class, the English teacher's class, the French teacher's class etc.

But there are numerous students who struggle mightily with maths who make good grades in languages.

I'm sure Chi Meson has had similar experiences with his students.

no offense, but if you are so good at language, and reading comprehension, you would have seen that i am wrong on nothing. i actually said, that i don't believe in the fact that students can not excel at both. my original OP was a QUESTION on your opinions on this. Never once did i say anyone on this site was not good at english. I had just asked if this was a trend due, to a few posts i found from some members on this site. (i pointed out frylocks you're s for instance.)

to tell you the truth, I've always had the mentality, that a math professor, could learn an english professor's job much better than the english professor could learn the math's job. if the english professor could learn the math's job in the slightest bit. this I am not to sure about to be quite honest./

Well, as someone who thrives in sciences, you should know the difference between a theory and a fact. Using clearly, would denote that you have put my english skills through the whole entire scientific method, and it is a clear fact that my english skills suck! Since that is not true, and you are speculating, my english competency based on some improperly capitalized posts on this site, your ideas are nothing but speculation and theory. it is for that reason that the word CLEARLY should be omitted from your post.
Mr. physicist.

its amazing how a simple question, can stir up so much animosity. You would think that members of the scientific community would thrive to divulge a myth, that scientists, and mathematicians are just one sided. Also that they would do this in a positive way, that would bring positive connotation to the science and math community, as opposed to negative backwash like is being done now.

when using the word exemplary to describe my english skills, i simply mean i am above average. i am no english god, nor do i wish to be one. i have a much greater interest in becoming proficient in the mathematics i will be taking. math and labs for science are my current weak points, and i have already aced the college english courses i needed to take.

moonbear, you my friend need to learn to read. i never made any assumptions., well i did make positive assumptions towards those in math fields. and like i said stop telling me my english needs improvements ;).

 

[sportsstar469]

Noone cares what you think.

cause I am right?

 

[xxChrisxx]

cause I am right?

How do you reach that conclusion?

IBTL

 

[Jimmy Snyder]

You would think that members of the scientific community would thrive to divulge a myth ...

The scientific community does not thrive to divulge myths. It strives to dispel them.

 

[Cyrus]

Well, as someone who thrives in sciences, you should know the difference between a theory and a fact. Using clearly, would denote that you have put my english skills through the whole entire scientific method, and it is a clear fact that my english skills suck! Since that is not true, and you are speculating, my english competency based on some improperly capitalized posts on this site, your ideas are nothing but speculation and theory. it is for that reason that the word CLEARLY should be omitted from your post.
Mr. physicist.

its amazing how a simple question, can stir up so much animosity. You would think that members of the scientific community would thrive to divulge a myth, that scientists, and mathematicians are just one sided. Also that they would do this in a positive way, that would bring positive connotation to the science and math community, as opposed to negative backwash like is being done now.

when using the word exemplary to describe my english skills, i simply mean i am above average. i am no english god, nor do i wish to be one. i have a much greater interest in becoming proficient in the mathematics i will be taking. math and labs for science are my current weak points, and i have already aced the college english courses i needed to take.

lol. You have no idea about the difference between a theory and a hypothesis. You use the word theory here improperly. You fail at science, English and life.

 

[waht]

when using the word exemplary to describe my english skills, i simply mean i am above average. i am no english god, nor do i wish to be one. i have a much greater interest in becoming proficient in the mathematics i will be taking. math and labs for science are my current weak points, and i have already aced the college english courses i needed to take.

I'm probably the last person on this Earth to judge anyone on good or bad writing skills. However, as with any skills it takes time to develop. Some of the members here are twice as old as you, so I trust they have a better judgment in this regard than you.

If you have aced all the English courses, then you do have better writing skills than the average college student. I know plenty of people that struggled with the class like soldiers in a battlefield. I wonder though, how did the other members performed in the English class when they were in college?

 

[Evo]

Both of my daughters are paid by their college to tutor college level English composition. The younger one is most definitely a grammar Nazi. I receive constructive criticism all of the time. One is a computer science major, the other is switching from pre-med to pre-law. I don't think that a desire to be proficient in English depends on the field of study one selects. I've actually found that a great number of people in math and science tend to be rather strong in English comp because they realize the importance.

 

[cristo]

Using clearly, would denote that you have put my english skills through the whole entire scientific method, and it is a clear fact that my english skills suck!

Any one of your posts in this thread go towards showing that your English is not 'exemplary', including the end of this post, where you show that you don't understand the definition of the very word!

when using the word exemplary to describe my english skills, i simply mean i am above average.

 

[dx]

when using the word exemplary to describe my english skills, i simply mean i am above average.

If you meant 'above average', why did you say 'exemplary'? Even someone who is average at english would know that 'exemplary' means something like 'extremely good' or 'near perfect'.

 

[Moonbear]

moonbear, you my friend need to learn to read.

This is precisely the attitude of which I speak. You seem very unaware of your own shortcomings. Become aware of them and correct them or don't ever try to practice medicine.

I also do not know who has been telling you that you have even above average English grammar skills. Bluntly, you do not. You are perhaps average, but your posts here would suggest your written English skills are below average and require improvement. If you CAN write better, and aren't bothering to do so, then that's just laziness.

 

[arildno]

Even I, just a scruffy Norwegian, am WAY more proficient in English than you, sportsstar!

 

[sportsstar469]

If you meant 'above average', why did you say 'exemplary'? Even someone who is average at english would know that 'exemplary' means something like 'extremely good' or 'near perfect'.

above average has many levels. extremely good is one of those levels.

 

[sportsstar469]

Well, as someone who thrives in sciences, you should know the difference between a theory and a fact. Using clearly, would denote that you have put my english skills through the whole entire scientific method, and it is a clear fact that my english skills suck! Since that is not true, and you are speculating, my english competency based on some improperly capitalized posts on this site, your ideas are nothing but speculation and theory. it is for that reason that the word CLEARLY should be omitted from your post.
Mr. physicist.

its amazing how a simple question, can stir up so much animosity. You would think that members of the scientific community would thrive to divulge a myth, that scientists, and mathematicians are just one sided. Also that they would do this in a positive way, that would bring positive connotation to the science and math community, as opposed to negative backwash like is being done now.

when using the word exemplary to describe my english skills, i simply mean i am above average. i am no english god, nor do i wish to be one. i have a much greater interest in becoming proficient in the mathematics i will be taking. math and labs for science are my current weak points, and i have already aced the college english courses i needed to take.

tell me how i have below average english skills in this post? capitalization aside due to laziness, i get my point across, and deliver a clear fluid argument, with good word choices. although i did make a careless mistake and say divulge when dispel should have been used.,/

i suppose since the person i was quoting said it was clear my english skills were poor, he is not good at science. after all he did not go through the scientific method, using my english skills. he just bypassed the theory process and said it was CLEAR that my skills are poor. which means it is a fact.

also i guess you logical physicists aren't too logical after all. after all you say i assume things when i never made any assumptions. questions are far from assumptions. in fact some people ask questions to avoid making assumptions

 

[Cyrus]

tell me how i have below average english skills in this post? capitalization aside due to laziness, i get my point across, and deliver a clear fluid argument, with good word choices. although i did make a careless mistake and say divulge when dispel should have been used.,/

i suppose since the person i was quoting said it was clear my english skills were poor, he is not good at science. after all he did not go through the scientific method, using my english skills. he just bypassed the theory process and said it was CLEAR that my skills are poor. which means it is a fact.

also i guess you logical physicists aren't too logical after all. after all you say i assume things when i never made any assumptions. questions are far from assumptions. in fact some people ask questions to avoid making assumptions

This is the second time you misused the word theory. Look it up! Theory does not mean hypothesis.

 

[dx]

above average has many levels. extremely good is one of those levels.

No one says 'above average' when they mean 'extremely good'. You seem to have problems even with the common usage of english.

 

[sportsstar469]

This is the second time you misused the word theory. Look it up! Theory does not mean hypothesis.

never said it did, i know perfectly well what a hypothesis is. something is a theory long before it is a afact. and the passage from theory to fact is through the scientific methods.

 

[Cyrus]

never said it did, i know perfectly well what a hypothesis is. something is a theory long before it is a afact. and the passage from theory to fact is through the scientific methods.

but you said this:

Well, as someone who thrives in sciences, you should know the difference between a theory and a fact. Using clearly, would denote that you have put my english skills through the whole entire scientific method, and it is a clear fact that my english skills suck! Since that is not true, and you are speculating, my english competency based on some improperly capitalized posts on this site, your ideas are nothing but speculation and theory. it is for that reason that the word CLEARLY should be omitted from your post.
Mr. physicist.

The use of the word theory here is wrong.