If I’m reading a book review by a scholar, I want to know your thoughts and feelings on the books arguments and methods. How does it advance or combat existing scholarship? I don’t give a shit about the extra word on page 74!
#twitterstorians #AcademicChatter
-
-
Show this thread
-
Weehoo, lad! Thanks for the heads up on that dangling participle on page 27! That was a close one.pic.twitter.com/YbVretR1aH
Show this thread
End of conversation
New conversation -
-
-
This Tweet is unavailable.
-
But seriously though. I saw it so much as an undergrad that I thought pointing out typos was part of what made it a “scholarly review.” But now I’m just likepic.twitter.com/IHbgXRTjT0
End of conversation
-
-
-
Helpful for reprint corrections
Thanks. Twitter will use this to make your timeline better. UndoUndo
-
-
-
I think this is less common than it used to be. The habit might have arisen as an attempt to replace the errata slips publishers no longer produce. This particular example seems overpunctilious, but if there are so many typos as to distract from the book that seems worth noting.
-
It's also some guarantee the reviewer actually read the book! Which you would think went without saying, but.
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.