in terms of grammar

Question

Could you please give me your point of view on the following combination of words?

Let assume that a thesis is entitled as follows:

Blah Blah Blah: A Constructivist Grounded Theory Ethnography

Is the combination of words making up the second part of the title grammatical?

Thank you

Philip · Accepted Answer

This is perhaps way beyond me, but I'm going to suggest:  A Constructivist-Grounded Theory of Ethnography.  Also comes to mind:  A Constructivist-Grounded Ethnographic Theory.

Clive · Answer

In strict terms of grammar, it does not seem wrong, in the same sense that it is not wrong to say
eg A French Boiled Tomato Taxi..

In terms of meaning, it is incomprehensible to me.
eg What is a 'theory ethnography'?

Philip · Answer

CliveIn strict terms of grammar, it does not seem wrong, in the same sense that it is not wrong to sayeg A French Boiled Tomato Taxi..

Kipal · Answer

CliveIn strict terms of grammar, it does not seem wrong, in the same sense that it is not wrong to sayeg A French Boiled Tomato Taxi..In terms of meaning, it is incomprehensible to me.eg What is a 'theory ethnography'?

Thanks a lot, Clive.

That's why I said in terms of grammar. This topic is more related to research than grammar, I think.

There is a research method called 'grounded theory'. One version of this method is called constructivist grounded theory. Ethnography is another research method. In the aforementioned thesis, the two methods are combined, resulting in a troublesome title, maybe.

So, we have 'grounded theory' which made up of a noun and an adjective. The whole phrase is modified by the adjective 'constructivist'. Added to them is the word 'ethnography' which is a noun.

Now, do you think the title is correct, please?

Thank you

Clive · Answer

Your title still doesn't mean anything to me, but the main point is whether your readers will understand it.
Do you think they will?

Kipal · Answer

CliveYour title still doesn't mean anything to me, but the main point is whether your readers will understand it.Do you think they will?

The thesis is addressed to audiences of qualitative research, and research in general.

Filling the blah-blah part with a topic, I think it is clear.
By the way, consider this quote:

"Grounded theory ethnography gives priority to the studied phenomenon or process--rather than the setting itself."
(Constructing Grounded Theory, Charmaz, published by Sage)

So, the term "grounded theory ethnography" is not new. I just added the adjective 'constructivist', and the term 'constructivist grounded theory' is already established. It is a kind of assemblage of the first and second term.

Does it make sense to you now?

Concerning the blah-blah part, anything that can be researched can put there.

Thank you

Clive · Answer

Does it make sense to you now? No, but I'm not a researcher.
You seem sure that your audience will understand. That's good.

Concerning the blah-blah part, anything that can be researched can put there.
You mean like this?

eg Can elephants swim? A Constructivist Grounded Theory Ethnography.

Kipal · Answer

Concerning the blah-blah part, anything that can be researched qualitatively can be put there.
You mean like this?

eg Can elephants swim? A Constructivist Grounded Theory Ethnography.

Why not!

I'm sorry I forgot the word in red.

Thank you

Fivejedjon · Answer

There are situations in which my Fivejedjonian  Forum Retirement Necessity Awareness Theory seems validated.

Kipal · Answer

I didn't understand what you mean, but I feel a kind of insincerity, sarcasm or something like this.

in terms of grammar

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions