I suppose though we don't always know how much help the writer had, in preparing the article (hence perhaps the more "proficient" parts); or how much work the editors had to do (it's easy to miss one error among many, esp. in on-screen editing). MrP
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
CalifJim<I was astounded by the simple mistakes the academicians made during their lecture>
Yes, I find that it's always hundreds of times easier to recognize errors when someone else makes them than to keep myself from making them.
MilkyI'm sometimes surprised, and somewhat puzzled, when I read linguistics papers written by nonnative speakers. The use of language in such articles can often range for highly proficient to quite poor.
CalifJim<I was astounded by the simple mistakes the academicians made during their lecture>
Yes, I find that it's always hundreds of times easier to recognize errors when someone else makes them than to keep myself from making them.
LinguaphileCalifJim<I was astounded by the simple mistakes the academicians made during their lecture>
Yes, I find that it's always hundreds of times easier to recognize errors when someone else makes them than to keep myself from making them.
Cool BreezeI'm sometimes surprised, and somewhat puzzled, when I read linguistics papers written by nonnative speakers. The use of language in such articles can often range for highly proficient to quite poor.Milky