Psycho-Babble Politics | about politics | Framed
This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | List of forums | Search | FAQ


Posted by alexandra_k on May 25, 2020, at 23:46:09

In reply to Re: cold war?, posted by alexandra_k on May 25, 2020, at 23:33:19

there's this thing about 'conversational implicature' and someone writes a letter of reccommendation or reference...

and instead of my supervisor at Waikato saying I should apply to the University he came through -- so he could write me a letter for there since he was alumni... He doesn't mention that. I don't know if he wanted to stabotage me... Seems unlikely. I was going overseas no matter what... Maybe it simply did not occur to him.

Anyway... There's this thing about conversational implicature. And maxims of quality, quantity, relevance, and manner.

Not 'rules' but expectations. That are startling if violated.

So if someone writes in a letter of reccommendation that so and so completes their work on time and doesn't say much in the way of anything else then that suggests there isn't much of anything else that one can say in reccommendation of the candidate. Because relevance would suggest they would say more if it was relevant. Quantity would suggest more information if it is relevant. Etc.

But from that my supervisor seemed to think that getting work done in a timely fashion was irrelevant.

But that doesn't follow!

It's more like 'necessary but not sufficient'.

Because most things in life have a time-deadline.

If you are working on a funded project there is an expectation that this government report will be done in 3 months. Deadline. Do the best you can in the time you have got. Etc.

And as an undergraduate you have deadlines on when your work is due in (Friday the 7th by 5pm or whatever). You have an examination on x day and you get 3 hours only. Maybe you can make alternative arrangements becuas eof whatever. But there are still deadlines on when and where and how much time you have.

And then you get to graduate study!

And now all of a sudden you must be too stupid to have basic reading comprehension even. And nobody has a deadline. You aren't done until they say you are done!!

And teh funding runs out... And now you are expected to work for free...

Because they never were going to pay you.

NOt unless you agree to throw them up the stairs. ONly advance those without time management and without reading comprehension. TO better smooth the next generation of graduate students who will work indefinately for no / low pay while passing themsleves off as professors to the kiddies... Again with signing them off for handing in late. SIgning them off for lackign basic reading comprehesion...

THe low road to growth.


The time thing is about the ability to work to a deadline. Start -- work good as you can -- and pens down. Stop. You are done. And now it goes to external examiners who are not prejudiced either for or against to examine it on it's academic merits according to the standard set by international academic community.


it is not about age.




Post a new follow-up

Your message only Include above post

Notify the administrators

They will then review this post with the posting guidelines in mind.

To contact them about something other than this post, please use this form instead.


Start a new thread

Google www
Search options and examples
[amazon] for

This thread | Show all | Post follow-up | Start new thread | FAQ
Psycho-Babble Politics | Framed

poster:alexandra_k thread:1110335