*watches as brain leaks out*
May. 15th, 2005 11:22 amI've been doing more OU work today. This time round, reading about changes in science and attitudes towards science in the 1960s. On the face of it, it's an interesting topic. Unfortunately, the author of the section managed to render it dry and dull...barring the odd and rather amusing grammatical errors. To be fair, the author's a trained scientist (which actually probably explains a great deal), but still, you'd think he'd have a proof reader to protect him from such gems as: "...as support for the friendly government in South Vietnam, which was under attack from a gurrilla insurgency from the north of the country (called the Viet Cong)." Uh, no. The north of the country was, astoundingly enough, called North Vietnam. The Viet Cong were the gurrillas and, technically, they were South Vietnamese who had been trained by the North.
*sigh*
I really do hope this module picks up...
*sigh*
I really do hope this module picks up...
Hey!
Date: 2005-05-15 06:03 pm (UTC)I'm a trained scientist. :P
Re: Hey!
Date: 2005-05-15 07:34 pm (UTC)Re: Hey!
Date: 2005-05-16 02:48 am (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-15 08:33 pm (UTC)I know GORILLAS (= very big hairy apes) and "guerrillas" (= members of an irregular fighting force, from French/Spanish "guerre").
Sorry, couldn't resist ... and yeah, I too have often wondered why being trained in science seems to dry up
coherency andlanguage abilities in some people ...(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-16 02:26 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Date: 2005-05-16 02:58 pm (UTC)