Linguistic dark matter

Victor Steinbok aardvark66 at GMAIL.COM
Sat Dec 18 06:18:56 UTC 2010

Don't forget that this comes from the people (collectively, not
specifically from the authors) who still think that psychology is in the
grips of behaviorism--and that that's a /good/ thing. It's like the old
New Yorker cartoon of two behaviorists in bed (not apocryphal--I
actually saw it): It was good for you, how was it for me? Sometimes
"science" is just overrated--especially when it's GIGO.


On 12/18/2010 12:25 AM, David Bowie wrote:
> Not to mention extremely specific—and that's a problem, because people
> are generally more likely to believe specific numbers (e.g., 52%) than
> round ones, approximations, or ranges (e.g., respectively, 50%, a bit
> over 50%, or 50–55%). The problem is that, given the assumptions they
> make, they need to be giving an approximation or a range—giving a
> specific number is unwarranted, but it makes for better headline.
> <snip>
> --
> David Bowie

The American Dialect Society -

More information about the Ads-l mailing list