The Life Scientific - R4

[Bryn]

....she wasn't/doesn't make anything....except logic/mathematical logic/abstract mathematic logic....alright for some

....the reason I put that utube up was (and I couldn't find the one I really wanted) to show how extraordinary i found hearing her speak; having unusual unexpected properties....

Such as her apparent inability to pronounce "nuclear" as written.

[jean]

And because of this, she has nothing of interest to say?

[Bryn]

And because of this, she has nothing of interest to say?

The metathetic form "nucular" may simply be an amusing annoyance when employed by ignorant politicians. When used by someone presenting an item on science of technology, it is far less acceptable, I feel. It make me wonder about their credentials regarding the subject of their presentation. The item which follows the YouTube clip linked to has a male presented with the same affliction. What is so difficult about pronouncing "nuclear"? Even "New clear" is better than the meaningless "nucular".

[ardcarp]

Even Tony Blair said 'nucular'. It seems a widespread speech problem. I wonder if it goes hand-in-hand with 'allelulya' ?

Must listen to the programme.

[Bryn]

Even Tony Blair said 'nucular'. It seems a widespread speech problem. I wonder if it goes hand-in-hand with 'allelulya' ?

Must listen to the programme.

I have seen is suggested that the mispronunciation is sometimes found even among scientists due to their being used to words such as molecular. Frankly is seems uncular[sic] to me why such different words should share pronunciation of their final two syllables.

[vinteuil]

I have seen is suggested that the mispronunciation is sometimes found even among scientists due to their being used to words such as molecular. Frankly is seems uncular[sic] to me why such different words should share pronunciation of their final two syllables.

... indeed so : and one imagines scientists wd also be familiar with a word such as 'nucleus'. Would they pronounce it 'nuculous'?


.

[Cockney Sparrow]

And because of this, she has nothing of interest to say?

(as to the sentiment of your post).
Based only on what I heard (i.e. I haven't checked her out independtly of the broadcast) she is an impressive woman. Like many of the programmes in the series, good to hear - and in this case, out of the ordinary, her involvement in both maths and the arts, and her involvement with humanities students, primary school children etc.

[ardcarp]

And because of this, she has nothing of interest to say?

I've just listened to the programme and found it crashingly boring. Nothing to do with the sex of the interviewee. I find quite a lot of these programmes (though not all) terribly disappointing, as the lives of scientists are not necessarily as interesting as the science they work on. (This one was frankly incomprehensible. Even Jim Al-Khalili gave a guffaw of disbelief at one point.)

I wish they'd do some retrospectives, e.g. on Dorothy Hodgkin or Rosalind Franklin.