User talk:Ykb09/sandbox

Victoria,

This article was fantastic! You can tell from you references that you put a lot of work into this and it really paid off. I found the introduction wonderful because it was so precise and got right to the point. The flow of the article, placement of the headings and use of subheadings was great too.

Some of the uses of dashes made the sentences run on a little bit but other than that they served great purpose for explaining the point. I found the information you put in brackets very helpful as well because they increased the value of what was being said.

I think the use of more links would benefit the article. The average person may not understand some of the terms or vocabulary that you used so having the links for more information on the term would be a big help. Italicizing and bolding some of the key terms would also increase the value of the article.

I also really enjoyed the comparison chart. Great idea to use that for the similarities and differences between chimps and children.

Overall, I found this article very informative. Bringing the writing down to a level where the more general population could understand would make the article that much better.

Great work ! :)

- M.golchuk

Hi Victoria, here are a few suggestions for your already fabulous article!

Spatial Cognition – I believe APA format states its preference for the use of the Oxford (or serial) comma, which is the comma placed directly before “and” in a list. I included it for you in your sentence: “...of this space, and the recall based on memory...” The last sentence is a little hard to understand at first; perhaps change the wording around? Also regarding the last sentence, as this is an article and not a study/paper, I don’t think you need to outline what you will be presenting information on.

Origin in Philosophy – commas should be inserted after philosopher and Descartes; just general dictated grammar rules. I added them in for you. Also, Rene actually has an accent aigu or acute accent on the latter “e.” I changed that for you as well. Since Descartes is a French philosopher, maybe include the French translation of “cogito ergo sum” as well as to be consistent with his nationality. I believe you were going for the long dashes for this sentence: “The mind itself is not seen as occupying a perceived space-even though the frontal lobes of the person's brain have a spatial extension-,” There’s a ‘special characters’ drop down in the edit box that you can find the en dash; a space goes between either side of the dash and no comma is needed. I think “position/point” or just “point” would suffice to convey your point. I added a comma after interacts to break up the longer sentence and also changed your dash in the last sentence to a semi colon as I think it makes more grammatical sense to break up your sentence that way.

Origin in Physics – I would change the order of the words “therefore” and “while physics” to make visual reading more pleasing to the eyes.

The Connection to Cognitive Science – Maybe adjust the first sentence to include less “of’s”? I’m not sure how you could but if that’s possible it would make the sentence a lot more easy to read/understand. Also, I’m not 100% sure but I think “Physics, Biology and Psychology” don’t need to be capitalized.

The Three Spaces of Spatial Cognition – I really liked how well explained this section was as well as the Landmark and Object Recognition sections.

Use of Landmark in Animals – Would “Use of Landmark Recognition in Animals” make more sense?

Body Mapping and its relation to Physical Space – I capitalized “relation” for you (see overall comments). I like that you included links to “embodied cognition” and “body schema.” It really helps to understand the entire section.

Limitations – the second sentence was really hard to understand for me because of the ‘Yoda’ use of object-subject-verb word orders. See Yoda-speech and the "object-subject-verb word orders" wikipage for your own enjoyment/learning. I found this to be true of several sentences as well. Please revise.

Future Research – perhaps include the acronyms for fMRI and PET as they give a more popularized understanding of what they are. This would help interested but not necessarily academic readers recognize the technology better. If some elaboration on visual information/proprioception/cognition in relation to spatial representation/cognition could be added that might help to more clearly identify your suggestions for future research.

Overall – I noticed many inconsistencies in your subheadings in terms of capitalizing or not capitalizing the right words. I took the liberty of fixing all of that for you as it was just a few subtitles. I also really liked how well integrated your citations were throughout the entire article. In general, I really enjoyed reading your article. I found it to be comprehensive but wordy at times (tendencies towards long sentences). I think breaking up some sentences and editing some minor grammar errors would really perfect your article. Great job!

Hi M.golchuk, thanks for reading my assignment carefully. I appreciate your comments. Indeed, the wording of my text was a bit scientific, but I tried to find the best balance between the level required to do due service to the subject matter on one side and try to address a general audience on the other. I am sure a technical subject like this one would not typically be read by the population at large, but more likely by someone with an intellectual interest, like you did. Nevertheless, I may try to change some passages according to your suggestions. Victoria Boateng (talk) 03:28, 10 April 2013 (UTC)

To the second reader: thank you for a very thorough job dealing with interpunctuation in my article. With respect to your comments re technical difficulty of reading some passages of this article, please refer to my response to M.golchuk above. I wish to point out, though, that Descartes did not write his seminal work containing Cogito ergo sum in French, but in Latin. Note that it is very difficult to translate concise philosophical quotes from one language to another as the variability in semantic width of terms may misconstrue the essence of the quote. I addressed the wording issue you raised for the Limitations section.Victoria Boateng (talk) 03:41, 10 April 2013 (UTC)