3 May 1887 – 24 March 1951
Posted on 03/23/2023 10:31:29 PM PDT by Ozguy1945
Aussie girl Lorna Hodgkinson was the first woman to earn a doctor of education degree from Harvard University in 1922.
In Australia, she spoke up critically to an official enquiry about mismanagement in care for intellectually disabled children. The government minister set up another enquiry which trashed her reputation with false allegations.
She left government service and thrived in the private sector.
As Harry Houdini said of his own work: “My chief task has been to conquer fear."
(Excerpt) Read more at freedom-demokrasi-and-civilised-humanity.com ...
So who was the first woman to earn a doctor of education degree from Harvard University a year earlier, in 1921?
Lede should instead read:
In 1922, Aussie girl Lorna Hodgkinson was the first woman to earn a doctor of education degree from Harvard University.
Regards,
same constraint whether stated beforehand or afterwards especially as it concerns time
Wrong!
Moreover, the original opening sentence also leaves it unclear as to whether other women may have earned other degrees from Harvard prior to Miss Hodgkinson's earning her "doctor of education" degree. (I didn't originally address this issue.)
Ideally, the sentence should have been broken up, for clarity, thusly:
Aussie girl Lorna Hodgkinson was the first woman to earn a doctoral degree from Harvard University. That was in the year 1922. Her degree was in education.
The fact that it was in the year 1922 rather than in the year 1921 or 1923 is secondary. So is the fact that her doctorate was in education rather than in, say, geology.
FACT: By adding on info AT THE END of a sentence, the writer is giving the impression that these are conditional or restrictive clauses, limiting the meaning - rather than simply incidental pieces of additional information, providing mere background.
Imagine, if you will, the following sentence:
Aussie girl Lorna Hodgkinson was the first woman to earn a doctor of education degree from Harvard University in 1922 while struggling to support herself and her orphaned little brother.
Such a statement would imply that other women may have likewise earned doctorates in education from Harvard - perhaps earlier, perhaps later than Miss Hodgkinson - but that she was the first to do so while simultaneously supporting an orphaned brother.
Breaking this lead sentence up into shorter sentences may seem infelicitous to you, but it avoids falsely presenting additional, incidental facts as though they were important constraints.
Regards,
Didn’t realize that ‘wrong’ is synonymous with ‘unclear’
Regardless, placing the condition beforehand doesn’t modify the affect on the dependency when the grammar stipulates the outcome is the same — or the grammar doesn’t stipulate the outcome is not the same.
Ping
3 May 1887 – 24 March 1951
She went on to provide a solid living with her three children on through the Depression.
Tough lady!
Why would you go all Karen on someone’s post? It’s giving “I’m really insecure, so let me prove my manhood by writing a long tedious grammar police rant on someone’s post.”
Really tedious dude. And rude.
I wish I had as much time on my hands to waste as you do. LOL.
No such thing.
Not a PhD.
Ed.D.
Congrats on her accomplishments
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.