Coursework Сommunicative words
Код роботи: 4701
Вид роботи: Coursework
Предмет: Іноземна мова (англійська). Англійська мова (Foreign English)
Тема: Сommunicative words
Кількість сторінок: 30
Дата виконання: 2016
Мова написання: англійська
Ціна: 550 грн
1. Linguistics field
1.1. Literature review
1.2. Semantic field
2. Semantic field of communicative words
2.1. Semantic field of communicative words in historical sciences
2.2. The Application of Semantic Field
Scientists communicate to brainstorm ideas and be creative, formulate research questions, solve experimental or theoretical problems, disseminate results, and get feedback. Several authors emphasize the importance of communication to science. Garvey (1979) states: “communication is the essence of science.” Abelson, an editor of the journal Science said, “without communication there would be no science” (1980, quoted in Lacy & Bush, 1983, p. 193). The peer-reviewed journal article – polished, archived, and findable – is only one facet of the scholarly communication process. Science is inherently social and informal scholarly scientific communication forms the backbone that connects scientists and enables scientific progress.
Information and communication technologies have transformed our world in many ways; yet, informal scholarly scientific communication forms a socio-technical interaction network in which communication is influenced by technology but defined by the social structures of scientists and their organizations (Kling, McKim, & King, 2003; Lamb, Sawyer, & Kling, 2000). Researchers know a lot about informal scholarly scientific communication through a rich history of study of the social structure of science and scholarly communication prior to the widespread availability of information and communication technologies such as e-mail, the internet, and instant messaging. The purpose of this paper is review what we know about informal scholarly scientific communication and to examine exactly what influences information and communication technologies have had on the existing structures. An understanding of this interaction of social structure and media effects is important to better support the information seeking and communication of scientists.
The importance of the English language cannot be overemphasized. Comfort with English is almost a prerequisite for success in the world today. Regardless of the industry, proficiency in English is an important factor in both hiring and promotion decisions.
A lot of us have studied English in school and are fairly comfortable with reading and writing. However, we hesitate while speaking because we feel that we lack the fluency and may make grammatical mistakes. We are afraid of speaking English in formal situations and we are quick to switch to our native language once we are in the company of our family and friends.
There is no quick fix when it comes to improving your command over a particular language. It always requires a lot of time and effort.
As stated previously, English words come in all sizes and degrees of difficulty from numerous languages past and present to give us English-vocabulary words for better communication.
- Communication can not be achieved without words except for a few superficial methods; such as, a twitch, a wink, a nudge, a kiss, a hug, a caress, or with some kind of physical violence.
- Real communication, creative communication, communication that can sustain and uplift and inspire, is only possible with words.
- The richest of the world's languages, which number over two thousand, is English in its various modes of expression.
- The English language is rich because it is not pure.
- It is a vast ocean that has received global contributions from just about every language.
- Ralph Waldo Emerson (1803-82, U.S. essayist, lecturer, and poet) described English as, "the sea which receives tributaries from every region under heaven."
- It has taken just about two thousand years to evolve.
- Over the centuries, major contributions came from the Celts, Jutes, Angles, Saxons, Greeks, Romans, Danes, Normans, Dutch, Germans, Spaniards, Arabs, and the French.
1. Abels, E. G., Liebscher, P., & Denman, D. W. (1996). Factors that influence the use of electronic networks by science and engineering faculty at small institutions. Part I. Queries. [Electronic version]. Journal of the American Society for Information Science, 47(2), 146-158.
2. Allen, R. S. (1991). Physics information and scientific communication: Information sources and communication patterns. Science & Technology Libraries, 11(3), 27-38.
3. Allen, T. J. (1977). Managing the flow of technology: Technology transfer and the dissemination of technological information within the R&D organization. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
4. Allen, T. J. (1966). Managing the flow of scientific and technological information. (PhD, Alfred P. Sloan School of Management, Massachusetts Institute of Technology).
5. Anderson, C. J., Glassman, M., McAfee, R. B., & Pinelli, T. (2001). An investigation of factors affecting how engineers and scientists seek information. [Electronic version]. Journal of Engineering and Technology Management, 18(2), 131-155.
6. Anderson, C. M. (1999). The use of computer technology by academics to communicate internationally: Computer-mediated communication and the invisible college. (Univ Microfilms International). Dissertation Abstracts International Section A: Humanities and Social Sciences, 59 (7), 2375-2375.
7. Barjak, F. (2004a). From the “analogue divide” to the “hybrid divide”: No equalisation of information access in science through the internet. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the AoIR-ASIST 2004 Workshop on Web Science Research Methods: The Web as a Mirror of Scientific and Technical Achievements: Issues in Access and Measurement, Brighton, UK, Retrieved Mar 20, 2006, from http://cybermetrics.wlv.ac.uk/AoIRASIST/Barjak_hybrid_divide.pdf.
8. Barjak, F. (2004b). On the integration of the internet into informal science communication (Series A: Discussion Paper DPW 2004-02). Olten, Switzerland: University of Applied Sciences Solothurn Northwest Switzerland. Retrieved March 28, 2006, from http://www.fhso.ch/pdf/publikationen/dp04-02.pdf.
9. Barjak, F. (2005). Research productivity in the internet era (Series A: Discussion Paper DPW 2005-01). Olten, Switzerland: University of Applied Sciences Solothurn Northwest Switzerland. Retrieved April 10, 2006, from http://www.fhso.ch/pdf/publikationen/dp05_01.pdf.
10. Birnholtz, J. P., & Bietz, M. J. (2003). Data at work: Supporting sharing in science and engineering. GROUP '03: Proceedings of the 2003 International ACM SIGGROUP Conference on Supporting Group Work, Sanibel Island, Florida, USA, 339-348. Retrieved September 16, 2005 from http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/958160.958215.
11. Birnholtz, J. P., Finholt, T. A., Horn, D. B., & Bae, S. J. (2005). Grounding needs: Achieving common ground via lightweight chat in large, distributed, ad-hoc groups. CHI '05: Proceedings of the SIGCHI Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Portland, Oregon, USA, 21-30. Retrieved September 16, 2005 from http://doi.acm.org/10.1145/1054972.1054976.
12. Borgatti, S.P. & Cross, R. (2003). A relational view of information seeking and learning in social networks. Management Science, 49(4), 432.
13. Boyce, P., King, D. W., Montgomery, C., & Tenopir, C. (2004). How electronic journals are changing patterns of use. [Electronic version]. Serials Librarian, 46(1/2), 121-141.
14. Chin, J., George, Myers, J., & Hoyt, D. (2002). Social networks in the virtual science laboratory. [Electronic version]. Communications of the ACM, 45(8), 87-92.
15. Crane, D. (1972). Invisible colleges: Diffusion of knowledge in scientific communities. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
16. Ellis, D., Cox, D., & Hall, K. (1993). A comparison of the information seeking patterns of researchers in the physical and social sciences. [Electronic version]. Journal of Documentation, 49, 356-69.
17. Erdelez, S. (1999). Information encountering: It's more than just bumping into information. [Electronic version]. Bulletin of the American Society for Information Science, 25(3), 25-9.
18. Garvey, W. D., Lin, N., Nelson, C. E., & Tomita, K. (1970). Information exchange associated with national scientific meetings in relation to the general process of communication in science. The role of the national meeting in scientific and technical communication (pp. 1-47). Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Center for Research in Scientific Communication.
19. Glaser, J. (2003). What internet use does and does not change in scientific communities [Electronic version]. Science Studies, 16(1), 38-51.
20. Gresham, J.L., Jr. (1994). From invisible college to cyberspace college: Computer conferencing and the transformation to informal scholarly communication networks. [Electronic version]. Interpersonal Computing and Technology: An Electronic Journal for the 21st Century, 2(4), 37-52. Retrieved March 8, 2006, from http://www.helsinki.fi/science/optek/1994/n4/gresham.txt.