EPTAsk and answer stupid questions here! - Page 721
| Forum Index > General Forum |
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18277 Posts
On March 30 2019 22:56 JimmiC wrote: This seems like good logic unless Speedy's hat provides him with the speed, something like Sampson's hair Roadrunner also keeps stopping to make fun of wile e coyote. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45707 Posts
On March 30 2019 09:11 JimmiC wrote: Who would win in a race speedy gonzales or the roadrunner? Sprints = Speedy Distance = Road Runner Edit: Reading all those great explanations for square roots made me happy  | ||
|
riotjune
United States3394 Posts
 | ||
|
AbouSV
Germany1278 Posts
On March 30 2019 11:34 Atreides wrote: ya in general the nth root of x is just equal to y such that y^n=x. As long as you are conceptually ok with 'exponentiation' its not fundamentally any different. The fact that it is somewhat difficult to calculate is kind of irrelevant. Division is much more difficult to calculate than addition/subtraction as well. In your example you happen to pick an example for division thats an even integer. Its equally irrelevant to say 'i know how to take the sqrt of 49 it is 7, I don't know exactly what the 49 divided by 11 is except its roughly between 4 and 5... Or you say it is 4 and 5/11. and strictly speaking someone else might break down 42 similarly to its 'smallest parts' and say the sqrt(42)=sqrt(2)*sqrt(3)*sqrt(7). Visually this is finding squares of various sizes that span the diagonal of your original sqare corner to corner. One way to define exponent for any non-negative real number is to say: a^b = exp(b*ln(a)) because: a^b = exp(ln(a^b)) = exp(b*ln(a)) This requires you to properly define exponential and ln functions though, but still. | ||
Fecalfeast
Canada11355 Posts
| ||
|
pheer
5398 Posts
edit: I do suggest living in a college town though, and going to college parties, so you don't feel like you missed all that. | ||
|
JimmiC
Canada22817 Posts
| ||
|
KwarK
United States43959 Posts
My Masters was geared as an intro to CPA course but the profession is much larger than can be taught from the outside and the education at college was very time inefficient. There wasn’t much that wasn’t relevant, but there was a lot of time spent over explaining practical stuff that was easily derived from the theory. | ||
|
AbouSV
Germany1278 Posts
| ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
Normally I'd think to say, "what is this?" "This is a dog/frog/what the fuck ever" for something I'm not referring to with some degree of personhood, I guess? Or intimacy or whatever. Same question for "Make a dialogue," because normally I'd say "Have a dialogue." | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18277 Posts
On April 07 2019 16:02 Zambrah wrote: Is "who is this?" and "this is a dog/elephant/etc." grammatically correct in British english because this person insists it's correct and I'm curious if my American school system upbringing has given me diarrhea of the grammar, because it sounds wrong. Normally I'd think to say, "what is this?" "This is a dog/frog/what the fuck ever" for something I'm not referring to with some degree of personhood, I guess? Or intimacy or whatever. Same question for "Make a dialogue," because normally I'd say "Have a dialogue." "Who is this?" is fine, both grammatically and as a question. But it does refer to something with a name. The answer isn't "this is a dog", it's "oh, I'm Acrofales", or sometimes "meet Barkofales, our new dog." | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45707 Posts
On April 07 2019 16:02 Zambrah wrote: Is "who is this?" and "this is a dog/elephant/etc." grammatically correct in British english because this person insists it's correct and I'm curious if my American school system upbringing has given me diarrhea of the grammar, because it sounds wrong. Normally I'd think to say, "what is this?" "This is a dog/frog/what the fuck ever" for something I'm not referring to with some degree of personhood, I guess? Or intimacy or whatever. Same question for "Make a dialogue," because normally I'd say "Have a dialogue." Afaik, using who vs. what for animals is largely subjective, with a conventional line drawn at "whether or not you have a personal relationship with the animal". That's possibly because we tend to anthropomorphize our pets, but also grammar "rules" tend to be more fluid than we realize. Source: I read a bunch of articles online, and asked two good friends (English/ grammar teachers) and my wife (veterinarian, also a good friend I suppose). | ||
|
Simberto
Germany11813 Posts
"Who is this?" "This is dog!" As seen in many memes. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45707 Posts
On April 06 2019 05:27 Fecalfeast wrote: For those of you who have a 4+ year college degree and also have a day-to-day job in the same field as your degree: Do you feel like you use aspects from the entire scope of what you learned in school? If there was a degree that was specifically geared toward learning how to do your current job only, how much less time do you think your degree have taken to earn? Do you think someone who took this hypothetical niche course would be just as capable of doing your job with the same aptitude as someone with the full, general degree? I majored in math, where I learned a ton of higher-level maths that only minorly assist me in my daily job as a high school math teacher. From an educational perspective, I can appreciate just how advanced the maths become and how algebra can lay the ground work for calculus, which can lay the groundwork for additional branches of graduate-level mathematics, but I don't think that 90% of the high-level math I learned is really informing how I teach my high school math students. That being said, most college majors aren't geared towards one specific job prospect, but rather to provide you with options for professions that require various subsets of that knowledge, and to provide you with enough of a framework so that you can continue to pursue graduate level studies in that major if you wish. When I took my Praxis assessment to become certified to teach all grades K-12, the fact that I had been tutoring K-12 math every week for many years was much, much, much more valuable to me than what I had learned as a math major, because the weekly content was exactly what I was being assessed on, and exactly what I teach now. I appreciate my college degrees, but they're mostly useful for getting that first job after college... after you've started working in that field and have real professional experience, the degree - and especially the major - become less and less important on your resume for the second, third, and later jobs. | ||
|
oBlade
United States6089 Posts
| ||
|
Zambrah
United States7393 Posts
Also, for context, were teaching children English, so one of the things we do is show a flash card ask what it is and wait for them to answer, so I don't want to get into a fight with the other teacher, but she has an "I'm always right and zis is ze only way to speak english," mentality, so I'm curious if in a scenario where you have a flash cards depicting an elephant, is it appropriate to go, "what it is this?" "This is an elephant." And, I mean, one doesn't assume familaiarity with flash cards right? Also whether one has a dialogue or makes a dialogue. | ||
|
buhhy
United States1113 Posts
On April 06 2019 05:27 Fecalfeast wrote: For those of you who have a 4+ year college degree and also have a day-to-day job in the same field as your degree: Do you feel like you use aspects from the entire scope of what you learned in school? If there was a degree that was specifically geared toward learning how to do your current job only, how much less time do you think your degree have taken to earn? Do you think someone who took this hypothetical niche course would be just as capable of doing your job with the same aptitude as someone with the full, general degree? Depends on the degree. I have a software eng degree and work in tech. While there is no substitute for experience, you can also usually tell who is a self-learned/bootcamp coder vs a graduate. Most of the course material is not relevant in the real world, but the thought processes and design patterns are very applicable and it's up to the individual to extract that knowledge from the fluff. | ||
|
DarkPlasmaBall
United States45707 Posts
On April 07 2019 18:58 Zambrah wrote: So "what is this" isn't wrong? My coworker keeps telling me about the "only correct way" and to be honest Im starting to be unable to tell what is and isn't proper English anymore. Also, for context, were teaching children English, so one of the things we do is show a flash card ask what it is and wait for them to answer, so I don't want to get into a fight with the other teacher, but she has an "I'm always right and zis is ze only way to speak english," mentality, so I'm curious if in a scenario where you have a flash cards depicting an elephant, is it appropriate to go, "what it is this?" "This is an elephant." And, I mean, one doesn't assume familaiarity with flash cards right? Also whether one has a dialogue or makes a dialogue. I think it's highly relative and situational. For me: If I'm teaching a small child about recognizing animals, I might point to a cartoon picture of a dog and ask the child "What is that?" and they'll hopefully respond with "That's a dog!" That's more in line with your specific example. However, if my friend sees a picture of my dog with me (or if a friend sees me actually walking my dog, in person), they're more likely to ask "Awww, who is that?" to which I'll respond either with "That's my dog, Nike!" or "He's my dog, Nike!" In that case, it's already implicitly obvious that they know *what* a dog is, so they're more interested in understanding *who* this specific dog is. | ||
|
Acrofales
Spain18277 Posts
On April 07 2019 18:58 Zambrah wrote: So "what is this" isn't wrong? My coworker keeps telling me about the "only correct way" and to be honest Im starting to be unable to tell what is and isn't proper English anymore. Also, for context, were teaching children English, so one of the things we do is show a flash card ask what it is and wait for them to answer, so I don't want to get into a fight with the other teacher, but she has an "I'm always right and zis is ze only way to speak english," mentality, so I'm curious if in a scenario where you have a flash cards depicting an elephant, is it appropriate to go, "what it is this?" "This is an elephant." And, I mean, one doesn't assume familaiarity with flash cards right? Also whether one has a dialogue or makes a dialogue. I agree with DPB. Flash cards are pretty undoubtedly "what is this", as the intention is to learn vocabulary (in most cases). Ask your colleague what she'd do if instead of animals they had inanimate objects on them. And if she just generally objects to the word "what", ask her who she'd do if they had inanimate objects on them  As for the other question, while I have never actually heard of anybody "making dialogue", my guess is that you could use it in the same way as "making conversation" or "making small talk". Dialogue is a bit weird, in that thinking about it, I don't really "have dialogues" either. Mostly I would have a discussion or a conversation. Having a dialogue is correct, but seems like weird use-of-language to me. Less weird than "making dialogue" though. @simberto: I would definitely not trust the "I can has cheezburger!" corner of the internet for grammar advice. | ||
| ||
