Raise your hand if you actually parsed this paragraph from Dani Rodrik's guest blogger, Arvind Subramaniam, on first reading:
The World Bank’s statisticians have changed the economic facts. Under these circumstances, Keynes, the economist, would have us change our opinions, while the great scientist, Einstein, would have us tamper with the facts especially if they clash with our theoretical priors. Which should it be? A little bit of both, it seems.
The hardest thing for economists, when writing for a popular audience, is remembering all the things they didn't know before they were economists.
The hardest thing I find about having an economics degree is not saying ceteris paribus in casual conversation
We have a similar problem in computer technology. And the various acronyms (DHCP, TCP, PCI, USB, etc.) are even more useful than "ceteris paribus".
If you just s/ceteris paribus/all else being equal/g it works out okay.
But conversations get really long when you have to say "You will be re-requesting your Internet Protocol address, the number which refers to your computer's location in the network, from the Dynamic Host Configuration Protocol server, the system that keeps track of that information and tells other computers on the network how they should be set up."
But on the more complex stuff (I think liberalrob is still mad at me for thinking he should learn what deadweight loss is) you have my sympathy.
The hardest thing I find about having and economics degree is not injuring myself by banging my head on my desk when I hear regular people talking about economics.
I don't get it! Is it that, in the first sentence, that statisticians don't create facts? And in the rest of the sentences, that they're weird and make no sense? But yall figure only an economist would think this comment is lame? I don't get it!
If you had a decent education, you wouldn't write "parse" when you meant "construe".
con·strue (kn-str)
v. con·strued, con·stru·ing, con·strues
v.tr.
1. To adduce or explain the meaning of; interpret: construed my smile as assent. See Synonyms at explain.
2. Grammar
a. To analyze the structure of (a clause or sentence).
b. To use syntactically: The noun fish can be construed as singular or plural.
3. To translate, especially aloud.
v.intr.
1. To analyze grammatical structure.
2. To be subject to grammatical analysis.
n. (knstr)
An interpretation or translation.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Middle English construen, from Late Latin cnstruere, from Latin, to build; see construct.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
con·strual n.
parse (pärs)
v. parsed, pars·ing, pars·es
v.tr.
1. To break (a sentence) down into its component parts of speech with an explanation of the form, function, and syntactical relationship of each part.
2. To describe (a word) by stating its part of speech, form, and syntactical relationships in a sentence.
3.
a. To examine closely or subject to detailed analysis, especially by breaking up into components: "What are we missing by parsing the behavior of chimpanzees into the conventional categories recognized largely from our own behavior?" Stephen Jay Gould.
b. To make sense of; comprehend: I simply couldn't parse what you just said.
4. Computer Science To analyze or separate (input, for example) into more easily processed components.
v.intr.
To admit of being parsed: sentences that do not parse easily.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[Probably from Middle English pars, part of speech, from Latin pars (rtinis), part (of speech); see per-2 in Indo-European roots.]
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
parser n.
The American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition copyright ©2000 by Houghton Mifflin Company. Updated in 2003. Published by Houghton Mifflin Company. All rights reserved.
dearieme??
Observe:-
"1. To break (a sentence) down into its component parts of speech with an explanation of the form, function, and syntactical relationship of each part.
2. To describe (a word) by stating its part of speech, form, and syntactical relationships in a sentence."
That's parsing, that is, but it's surely not what was meant. Whereas:-
"To adduce or explain the meaning of; interpret".
That's construing, which is what was meant.
If one misuses these words, one joins the company of cheapskate lawyers and marxist biologists. Put otherwise, if you are going to use affected language, try to use it with precision. Alternatively, just use plain English. It's remarkably serviceable, as earlier generations of Americans often demonstrated.
Or, just to rub it in:-
The hardest thing for college graduates, when writing for a popular audience, may be remembering all the things they didn't know before they were college graduates.
The second hardest thing is remembering that a better educated generation of college graduates will still poke fun at their affectations and imprecisions.
Can anyone explain what he meant by saying Einstein would tamper with the facts? Unless it just means he is utterly ignorant of Physics.