« previous next »
Pages: [1] 2   Go Down

Author Topic: The Reason IS Why  (Read 9573 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline swpalmer

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 146
The Reason IS Why
« on: Jul 25, 2006, 07:37:21 PM »
It's a pet peeve of mine, and I've heard more than one person on the panel do it now so I must say something.

PLEASE stop saying, "The reason why ..."

It's poor english.  It's redundant. The words "reason" and "why" mean the same thing in that context.  Do not use them side by side in the same sentence.

Instead you should be saying, "The reason that ..." or just "The reason ..."

E.g.:
"The reason the bird doesn't fall from the sky is that he keeps flapping his wings to create lift."

Or...

"The flapping of the wings creates lift.  That's why the bird doesn't fall from the sky."

...which is a sentence that works just as well with "reason" ...

"The flapping of the wings creates lift.  That's the reason the bird doesn't fall from the sky."

The example above shows that the two words have the same meaning and it makes no sense to put them side by side in most circumstances.

I know, I know... it's a nitpicky, frivolous thing.  It doesn't really matter all that much.  I should get a life, etc...   But that doesn't make it right :)

Perhaps you can blame it on the poor textbooks you used in english class.
Logged

Offline Luna

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 830
The Reason IS Why
« Reply #1 on: Jul 25, 2006, 11:07:27 PM »
Is this post needed? Im sure Dr. Novella and the rest of the skeptics rouge don't think twice about it. On paper of course but in everyday conversation is it really needed to point out in your own words something that is " redundant and frivolous". I do wonder the reason why you would post this? ;)
Logged
Praise Jesus.

Offline swpalmer

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 146
The Reason IS Why
« Reply #2 on: Jul 26, 2006, 07:52:44 PM »
Quote from: "Luna"
Is this post needed?


No.  Are any of the posts needed?

Quote
Im sure Dr. Novella and the rest of the skeptics rouge don't think twice about it. On paper of course but in everyday conversation is it really needed to point out in your own words something that is " redundant and frivolous". I do wonder the reason why you would post this? ;)


Why not?  If I make a mistake I would like someone to point it out.  If I'm aware of it and I continue to make that mistake by choice because I don't bloody care then so be it, but if I'm not I want to know about it.   No big deal, it's just something that irritated me... like fingers scratching the chalkboard or that sound of rubbing styrofoam (man I hate that).  :)
Logged

Offline cosmicvagabond

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2203
The Reason IS Why
« Reply #3 on: Jul 28, 2006, 02:57:07 PM »
Language is not a static phenomenon. It constantly changes over time, and one of the main engines for change is popular usage. What is considered improper grammar in one generation may become acceptable in another due to frequency of use. Besides, words can have multiple meanings. Using the expression "the reason why" differentiates the meaning from "the reason for"... a nitpicky difference, but i think a valid one. And that's the reason why it is acceptable usage.
Logged
Bold ideas, unjustified anticipations, and speculative thoughts are our only means for interpreting nature... Those among us who are unwilling to expose their ideas to the hazard of refutation do not take part in the scientific game.    ---Karl Popper, "The Logic of Scientific Discovery"

Offline swpalmer

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 146
The Reason IS Why
« Reply #4 on: Jul 28, 2006, 06:34:29 PM »
Interesting...  I had not considered the possible "reason why" vs. "reason for" ambiguity.

I am of course aware that language evolves.. though I'm not convinced it improves in doing so :).   The evolutionary pressures on the english language seem to be making it "dumb".

I will throw out another of my language peeves that is more related to science:

The improper pronounciation of "kilometer".  The "scientifically" correct way to pronounce it would be ki-LO-me-ter,  but so often it is pronounced ki-LOM-et-er.

The reason that one way should be considered more correct than the other is related to the intended meaning.  The second pronounciation is used when refering to an instrument  (e.g. ther-MOM-eter) where as the first pronounciation refers to a unit. (e.g. cen-TI-me-ter)

And to add some credibility to that point, consider what would otherwise be ambiguous "micrometer" (or spelled properly for us Canadians "mi-CRO-me-tre") the unit, vs. "mi-CROM-et-er" the device for measuring the small units.

Yes, the context usually is enough to calrify what is meant, and in most cases the improper pronounciation has no associated device or unit. Language evolves and so I must live with it.  But I still find it irritating to listen to :).
Logged

Offline zylark

  • Not Enough Spare Time
  • **
  • Posts: 201
The Reason IS Why
« Reply #5 on: Jul 28, 2006, 07:33:36 PM »
Pfff, stupid anglo-saxxons and their stupid imperial-measurements system. Grow up, go metric. It makes sense, and ya'll know it :D

You do realize that the failed Mars Polar Lander, probably slammed into Mars due to a programmer assuming the wrong measurement system in a subsystem controlling the descent.

Logged

Offline cosmicvagabond

  • Frequent Poster
  • ******
  • Posts: 2203
The Reason IS Why
« Reply #6 on: Jul 28, 2006, 08:29:11 PM »
Yeah, I guess we all have our own language pet-peeves. Mine is when people use the word "literally" improperly. A co-worker once told me that our boss had "literally exploded" upon receiving some bad news. I suggested that the word she meant to use was "figuratively". She insisted, "oh, no...he literally exploded". I sighed and went back to work.
Logged
Bold ideas, unjustified anticipations, and speculative thoughts are our only means for interpreting nature... Those among us who are unwilling to expose their ideas to the hazard of refutation do not take part in the scientific game.    ---Karl Popper, "The Logic of Scientific Discovery"

Offline Joe Shmoe

  • Chief Rape Apologist
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5347
The Reason IS Why
« Reply #7 on: Jul 28, 2006, 08:48:18 PM »
I use "hyperbolically" just to fuck with people.  I know I'm exagerrating, no need to hide it...
Logged

Offline Ze Kraggash

  • Brand New
  • Posts: 9
The Reason IS Why
« Reply #8 on: Jul 28, 2006, 09:49:06 PM »
Quote
I use "hyperbolically" just to fuck with people. I know I'm exagerrating, no need to hide it...

If you use parabolically instead, then you are just a skosh away from an ellipse (conically speaking). That’ll make their heads spin.  :wink:
Logged

Offline Joe Shmoe

  • Chief Rape Apologist
  • Stopped Going Outside
  • *******
  • Posts: 5347
The Reason IS Why
« Reply #9 on: Jul 29, 2006, 01:47:55 AM »
My dad and I used to use the term "as the buzzard flies" based on the premise that while crows apparently fly in straight lines buzzards like to fly in circles.  I might be five feet from my destination I might be five miles away "as the buzzard flies".  Ironically we also realized that it was far more likely that as the buzzard flies it may simply not be possible to get to my destination at all.  Our reasoning?  How the hell is the buzzard supposed to know where I want to go?

My family rules!
Logged

Offline Perry

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 38
The Reason IS Why
« Reply #10 on: Aug 05, 2006, 02:07:11 PM »
Threads like this are the reason why I seldom post.
Logged

Offline TKO

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 35
The Reason IS Why
« Reply #11 on: Aug 11, 2006, 12:47:07 AM »
Now for my crazy pet peeve

It drives me crazy when people say thing like 'three times less' and similar.  It doesnt make any sense but you hear and read it in ads all the time.  Three times less is nonsense speech, one third as much or one third as many is what they are trying to say.

I have heard the guys say it on the podcast a couple times and I know there is a difference between saying it and writing it but it still drives me crazy.
Logged

Offline Sci_BA

  • Off to a Start
  • *
  • Posts: 14
  • evidence trumps experience
    • The Dangerous Question
The Reason IS Why
« Reply #12 on: Sep 04, 2006, 11:57:54 AM »
You're absolutely right, TKO. All language, written or spoken should be held to rigorous logical standards, even when it impedes comprehension or convention. Centrifugal force? Pah! Decelerate? Never! It's acceleration with a vector opposite the vector of motion!

...Or perhaps the conventions of language exist so we can communicate, and have a context which indicates a level of appropriate precision and clarity. My guts twist when I hear some of the loose language quoted in this thread - but if I can understand the intent of the statement with sufficiently low ambiguity for the situation, I take a breath and move on.
Logged
Conscious of my anosognosia.

Offline Timothy Clemans

  • Seasoned Contributor
  • ****
  • Posts: 722
The Reason IS Why
« Reply #13 on: Sep 04, 2006, 12:19:31 PM »
That is not a standard format when talking or speaking therefore it kinda up to the people speaking how rigorous they want to be.

Writing for a academic journal demans a lot of rigor in style and research.

This podcast is more about the rigor of agruments in science and anti-science.
Logged
url=http://www.theskepticsguide.org][/url]

Offline BiochemGirl

  • Brand New
  • Posts: 9
The Reason IS Why
« Reply #14 on: Sep 04, 2006, 02:50:47 PM »
Quote from: "Perry"
Threads like this are the reason why I seldom post.


Agreed.
Logged
quot;Reality is that which, when you stop believing in it, doesn't go away." - Philip K. Dick
Pages: [1] 2   Go Up
« previous next »