![]() I often find myself reading prose that has the same idea presented in multiple ways – sometimes word for word, from one paragraph to the next! Regardless of how this happens, redundancy highlights the importance of taking a break from your work. You keep making the same point over and over again. People often assume the thesaurus will help them sound smarter, but instead leaves your reader thinking, “wow, she/he really loves her/his thesaurus.” Use fun words sparingly, and aim for clarity. Take opportunities to be creative, but not at the expense of clarity.When you’re over your word count on an abstract or conclusion section, look to cut sentence padding first, before you start cutting your cool ideas.Relentlessly go over your prose to remove junk.“Utilize” is rarely more appropriate than “use.”.“Highly” isn’t needed in front of “likely.”.Words like “arguably” or “furthermore” or “thus” rarely do any heavy lifting in sentences, and are often implied anyway.“It is entirely likely that” can be replaced with a single word (likely): “Your prose is likely…”.“In order to” is not necessary when “to” will do.It’s full of “junk” phrases that serve no purpose whatsoever.It crams too much, abusing semi-colons and parentheses for useless purposes.Double (or triple)-dipping with adjectives when one would do.My example sentence above has a few issues: Perhaps a consequence of assigning papers with word counts, text padding is one of the most common issues with student writing, especially for those writing their first manuscripts. Extraneous, superfluous or otherwise unnecessary additions.Įxample of bad writting: It is entirely likely that your prose is padded with extraneous, superfluous, or otherwise unnecessary additions furthermore, the utilization of such redundant verbiage is arguably obfuscating your points (thus, in order to improve the clarity of your writing, it is highly recommended that you eschew such stylistic choices, including run-on sentences filled with fluff, padding, and filler). We are a storytelling species – we like a little drama!Ģ. The active voice is more engaging to read by its very nature, which makes otherwise dry methods sections just a bit less tedious. For instance, “We demonstrate the usefulness of our method” is much nicer to read than “The usefulness of the method is demonstrated”. Why is the active voice better? Because science is an active process, done by human beings: “I” and “we” statements are appropriate when describing action. results in unnecessarily long sentences and.This is an understandable mistake, because not only are we taught to write passively in primary and secondary school science classes, but many of my colleagues still cling to the idea that solid, objective scientific writing must be in the passive voice. The following is heavily based on a blog-post of Jacquelyn Gill. 6.3 Rob J Hyndman: Avoid Annoying a Referee.4.2 Asymptotics under the Classic Regression Model.4.1.4 Hypothesis Testing under Normality.4 Ordinary Least Squares: The Classical Linear Regression Model.3.2 Significance Level, Size and p-Values.2.6.2 Tools for deriving asymptotic distributions.Sometimes you'll see, which means the package was installed as a dependency of some other package. In addition to at the end, now in the list of repository components indicates that the package is currently installed. When the package is installed, appears prominently at the end of the line. Note: I use Kile, which is why you see it.In the Terminal, enter the command line: apt list texmaker texlive miktex kile texlive-full and you will see the installation status (and more) of each package on your Ubuntu.metapackage pulling in all components of TeX Live ![]() Of the TeX Live packages which should suffice for the most common tasks. This metapackage provides a decent selection Then when you used sudo apt-get install texlive-full then ran Texmaker before installation was complete, Texmaker was using texlive, hence it was able to compile an output.Ībout the texlive and texlive-full package description in Synaptic Package Manager: I believe when you installed Texmaker (referring to #2), Software Center installed the texlive package. There is the texlive package, and then there is the texlive-full package.How can I tell which Latex (MikTex or TexLive) I have installed on Ubuntu? So you are 99.99% using TeX Live from Debian/Ubuntu. MikTeX is available also for Linux, but it is not packaged in any way. Software Center did not install MiKTeX (a TeX distribution) on your Ubuntu because: When you installed Texmaker (an Editor) via Software Center, Software Center automatically installed TeX Live (a TeX distribution) along with Texmaker.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |