|
Post by Vadim on Jul 15, 2008 11:11:52 GMT
Hi all,
Just a quick question that cropped up whilst going through my thesis. How would "the board" write the following?...
Most importantly, Webster’s results show that the developed coherent circular nozzle is significantly better than the other nozzles tested, especially at long distances from the grinding zone.
I used "large" instead of long. My supervisor suggested the change. It confused me a little. Your thoughts (other thoughts on the paragraph also welcomed)?
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jul 15, 2008 11:40:24 GMT
Well, it's like hot temperatures, cheap prices and young ages -- all technically wrong. The thing is hot, cheap or young: If I buy a car for one pound, the car is cheap but the price is low.
Having said that, some of it is so usual that it could be regarded as idiomatic. Old age for example -- would anyone really regard that as wrong?
I suppose it's like "I spent a miserable afternoon" -- it's me who was miserable, not the afternoon. There's a Greek word for the rhetorical device of transferring the characteristics to the "wrong" thing, isn't there?
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Jul 15, 2008 14:21:44 GMT
How about greater, especially if this is a progressive effect?
Or include the word relatively?
|
|
|
Post by Tone on Jul 15, 2008 20:38:00 GMT
Vadim,
How about "far"?
(Or even "distances greater than *** from ...".)
And I feel that you might need some strategically placed hyphens in your definition of the nozzle.
Tone
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jul 15, 2008 20:46:56 GMT
I can't see where any hyphens would be correct.
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Jul 16, 2008 8:21:47 GMT
I can't see where any hyphens would be correct. Agreed.
|
|
|
Post by Vadim on Jul 16, 2008 8:56:26 GMT
I can't see where any hyphens would be correct. Agreed. I was thinking the same thing. Every time I write a similar sentence I want to use the hyphens (that the kind members have alerted me to) however, I can never decide where they go .
|
|
|
Post by Vadim on Jul 16, 2008 9:00:06 GMT
How about greater, especially if this is a progressive effect? Or include the word relatively? The problem I have with greater is that it's not a linear effect. I could describe it very technically, but the sentence requires a different and more "soft" stance in the context I am writing. For a quick explanation, the jet remains constant (jet width) for a set distance, then begins to break up. This length is generally at long/large distances from the nozzle. When I am talking of nozzles relative to other nozzles, I use the term - relatively.
|
|
|
Post by Dave on Jul 16, 2008 11:02:47 GMT
I don't think that greater implies linear. If your effect is in relation to the square of the distance, for instance, it's still greater. Consider your audience for this writing: what do they know (or are expected to know) and how technical does your explanation need to be for them to act after reading it?
|
|
|
Post by Pete on Jul 16, 2008 20:09:33 GMT
Surely if your audience is reasonably technical, they will know that the nozzle size and shape has an impact on the distance beforee the jet breaks up. So maybe you want to recast, so that it says that the average distance before break up is greater for any given nozzle pressure with a circular nozzle than with other apertures.
|
|
|
Post by Tone on Jul 16, 2008 20:46:55 GMT
>I can't see where any hyphens would be correct.<
In essence, I am querying the use of the word "developed". Is it "developed" because some people have designed/improved it from an earlier form, or is "developed" being used in the mathematical sense to define its shape?
Tone
|
|
|
Post by Vadim on Jul 16, 2008 21:39:26 GMT
>I can't see where any hyphens would be correct.<In essence, I am querying the use of the word "developed". Is it "developed" because some people have designed/improved it from an earlier form, or is "developed" being used in the mathematical sense to define its shape? Tone The first (bold) one, Tone.
|
|
|
Post by Tone on Jul 17, 2008 20:23:39 GMT
OK. Then I'd put the hyphen here: "coherent-circular".
But I would write: "the coherent-circular nozzle that has been developed is ...". The use of "developed" would be quite alright in general (ficko) usage, but once you are writing "technical" (which I assume that you are) then the reader (or, at least, Tone) would tend to pause to evaluate the meaning.
Tone
|
|
|
Post by Paul Doherty on Jul 17, 2008 20:31:25 GMT
Surely it's coherent and circular, not coherent-circular?
|
|
|
Post by Tone on Jul 17, 2008 20:53:03 GMT
>Surely it's coherent and circular, not coherent-circular?<
I think we'd both have to know more detail about Vadim'e nozzle (!) to make that judgement. Paul just jumped t'other way from that which Tone did.
Diagram requested, Vadim. Then I might concede. (Or -- go on, show us yer nozzle!)
Tone
|
|