Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

Re: [Phys-l] Fuzzy language



The linguistic discussions can contribute to physics education because
physics students need to use language precisely. I would put the discussion
of "since" as a debatable point a la Strunk and White. But sometimes it is
better to bend the "official" rules to make the meaning clear. I see
nothing wrong with "since", but it may be debatable. I don't think I
defended the usage, but rather clarified what I might have been thinking
when I used it.

But let us remember that language changes, and even math conventions change.
Whom is dropping out and like is now almost universally used instead of as.
The more regular word hippopotamuses is now being used instead of the
Latinate Hippopotami. Some of us still resist "officing" and use the
vanishing subjunctive.

Maybe we should be willing to change some physics terminology to make it
clearer. The big one is "heat". It is used to mean the transfer of
internal energy, but the universally used term "heat flow" implies that heat
is a noun. Some well regarded texts define heat conventionally and then
proceed to use it in such a way that the student will associate it with
internal energy. So I go with the Modeling recommendation of using the word
"heating". The other term we should consider adopting is "working".

John M. Clement
Houston, TX


I wrote very similarly (copied as I remembered) to the below before John's
defense of "conflation", had a second thought (I had deleted the draft,),
and then had a third, so wrote the below, which details his conflation.