Comments on: In terms of what? http://www.matjjin-nehen.com/2008/02/18/in-terms-of-what/ a linguist without a language Mon, 28 Nov 2011 10:47:10 +0000 hourly 1 http://wordpress.org/?v=3.2.1 By: Bruce http://www.matjjin-nehen.com/2008/02/18/in-terms-of-what/comment-page-1/#comment-978 Bruce Mon, 18 Feb 2008 06:57:38 +0000 http://www.matjjin-nehen.com/2008/02/18/in-terms-of-what/#comment-978 In terms of Kuhn, I don't think Garrett's presented a sufficient anomaly to bring about the revolution of an "in terms of-free" paradigm. ;-) In terms of Kuhn, I don’t think Garrett’s presented a sufficient anomaly to bring about the revolution of an “in terms of-free” paradigm. ;-)

]]> By: michael http://www.matjjin-nehen.com/2008/02/18/in-terms-of-what/comment-page-1/#comment-970 michael Mon, 18 Feb 2008 00:32:55 +0000 http://www.matjjin-nehen.com/2008/02/18/in-terms-of-what/#comment-970 I've certainly heard "in terms of" derided. In fact I myself kept tally of the instances of its use by a fellow student in one of my undergraduate classes. But that was mostly <em>his</em> overuse that bothered me. Not the term itself. My guess regarding Mr Naumann's lament is that he believes that anyone who uses the term (too much? at all?) is being lazy linguistically. Ergo therefore and thus: lazy linguist. I’ve certainly heard “in terms of” derided. In fact I myself kept tally of the instances of its use by a fellow student in one of my undergraduate classes. But that was mostly his overuse that bothered me. Not the term itself.

My guess regarding Mr Naumann’s lament is that he believes that anyone who uses the term (too much? at all?) is being lazy linguistically. Ergo therefore and thus: lazy linguist.

]]>