Full text PDF download of one of the major critiques of corporatism.
(via situationist)
(via situationist)
You sure about that?
Let’s say you’re reading a paper for a class. The paper’s title is “Fooing the bar: Baz for the Qux and the Quux” by A. Sheila and S. Bloke and it was published in 1999 in the Journal of Quxian Studies.
Suppose you want to talk about what the authors say in the paper. You do not say:
In the paper “Fooing the bar: Baz for the Qux and the Quux” by A. Sheila and S. Bloke, they introduce the concept of blah blah blah…
(Don’t tell me the title, I can find it in your reference list.)
You certainly don’t say:
A paper by A. Sheila and S. Bloke in the 1999 Journal of Quxian Studies argues that the concept of blah blah blah…
(The paper doesn’t argue, Sheila and Bloke argue. And I can find the name of the Journal in your reference list.)
You do say:
Sheila and Bloke (1999) were the first to introduce the concept of blah blah blah…
And then you give a full and correct reference.
Heh. You also should make the effort to find legitimate synonyms for “argue”, if you’re trying to avoid repetition. When doing so, ask yourself whether the word in question is something you would use in conversation. ”Suggest”, for example, may be a suitable alternative; “identify” - especially with no object - is not.
Now run along.
My Top 5 Artists (Week Ending 2009-11-8) -
Imported from Last.fm Tumblr by JoeLaz
(via ummhello)
hollywoodchina:(via sabiineoh)
So true. What the hell happened to men?
(not all men, just 99% of them)
