|
Rhondish |
|
Advanced Member |
| Female |
|
|
Friday, March 20, 2009 |
|
Wednesday, March 28, 2012 3:33:43 PM |
256
[0.02% of all post / 0.06 posts per day] |
|
The 1st is grammatically correct, but may I ask the context?
I only ask because many women, in general, are changing careers and pursuing careers in the sciences for multiple reasons:
1. These careers are non-traditional for women (unlike teaching or nursing which are considered traditional) and there are more financial aid dollars. BTW - this is not gender biased, men can pursue teaching and nursing and will find more financial aid. This may be the US only and state specific.
2. Many women pursue further education AFTER raising a family, and the sciences offer more opportunites are not as subject to bias based on age.
3. Many women in Nursing are pursuing further education in the sciences to advance their careers.
4. Many women in Law are pursing further education in the sciences to be able to specialize.
The above being said "How many women are pursuing careers in science?" would be best if your context is referring to women as a whole.
To complete you actual question "How many are young women pursuing careers in science?", has no adverb/verb/subject agreement. "How often are young women pursuing careers in science?" would be correct, but again, this would depend on the context.
|
|
I cannot say I see it in books, but I definately hear it in conversation, though one would think it would be a natural transition. I have to say I am getting a bit frustrated with how lazy we have become. When did the 't' in often change from being silent? When did it become acceptable to use ain't and irreguarless? When did we begin to embrace phrases such as "Where you at?". My 17 year old nephew cannot read my cursive. When did we stop teaching penmanship? Is this going the way of the dodo with Phonics? Sorry, I am taking this opportunity to vent.
|
Star,
I am reporting you. You need to remove your bias, your hatred, your ignorance, and you mental blight from this forum.
|
I love the idea of lightening to subject by comparing with "Young Frankenstien".
If you have not read the book. Check out the film remake with Robert DeNiro. It is quite true to the novel, unlike the B & W film.
Also, if you wish to keep it serious, the author refers to Prometheus, in the title as well as within the novel. You could expand the comparison.
Another is to discuss Mary Shelley and the writing of the novel itself. If this is a Lit class, you can expand on her relationship with poets Lord Byron and Percy Shelley.
|
Who released the study?
An aspirin manufacturer no doubt.
|
|
Then I move to Canada!
|
|
Can't wait to watch Bill Maher after this interview airs.
|
Omotee wrote:Well, cofee is not always "decaf" as they say it is. Caffeine is veeeeeeeeery bad for the body and people should watch what they ingest. It's like saying cigarette's good for you.
Indeed, caffine is an addictive substance, and the chemical used to decaffinate coffee is the same chemical used to dry clean clothes (yech!).
The Swiss Water process to decaffinate is cleaner but makes the coffee VERY expensive.
With either method, there is always residual caffine.
Tea has lots of caffine too, but your body processes it differently so you do not feel the negative effects as intensly.
Everything in moderation is the key!
|
Atiya wrote:Very informative  But only thing I like about coffee is its aroma, I am a religious tea drinker.
The steam from fresh brewed coffee is filled with the homocyclic enzymes that combat free radicals in the body. Breathe deeply my friend, no consumption required.
|
Well, they say timing is everything.
I was just laughing at my boss in regard to his two finger 'Hunt and Peck' typing this morning. As a 'Keywatcher' myself, I want to thank you for this.
Free is good and practice makes perfect.
Again, thanks!
|
|