It was also only 6 chimps and the experiments were run over many years. I bet replication is going to be troublesome.
"Some people know to only do their job when a manager is around. They behave similarly after all."
I also know some Hindi if that is a language you speak and can give you better notes, probably, with that language as well. Moving on to the notes:
-"know" is a transitive verb, so it always takes an object of its action. One must know something. When you add the extra "is" next to the verb "know," it indicates the passive, which would take an object, but none are indicated here. You could say "It is known that..." as a passive construction with the "that" beginning a new clause, but in your case it is better just to delete the "is."
-"for" is the preposition for the indirect object in English, so is "to" in many cases. I believe here you confused it with to, which can also be used to indicate an indirect object, but "to" has a number of different usages in English, whereas "for" is only used for indirect objects. It can also be used to form a complimentary infinitive, as we see here. Like, for instance "He eats to help him gain weight."
-"similar" is being used adverbial here, so it should be indicated as such by adding "-ly" to the end of the adjective. English has no cases in the same way as related languages, so its not possible to indicate adverbial usage of a noun or adjective without either transforming it or saying something like "they behave in a similar manner," where "in...manner" indicates the way in which the action is performed, like an adverb does.
Hope this helps
> Well, some people are known for only doing their job when a manager is around. They behave similarly after all [to the monkeys].
Also, some days I wish there was a way to fix typos in restaurant menus.
Although I would still be flummoxed by "Pork Floss, Chinese Sausage Scorched Rice" (cơm cháy chà bông lạp xưởng)
> some people is know
Some people are known
> for only do their job when a manager is around.
for only doing their job when a manager is around.
> They behave similar after all.
Their behavior is similar to the chimpanzees in the study.
Now, let’s put that all together:
> Some people are known for only doing their job when a manager is around. Their behavior is similar to the chimpanzees in the study.
That wasn’t so hard now, was it?
Edit: I see that the two sibling comments to mine interpreted it the same way.
most people who learn/are learning a foreign language appreciate getting corrections and suggested improvements. People willing to take the time and analyze and share are a valuable resource.
> "know": you should use "known" (adjetive) instead of "know" (verb).
And add more details in case the author or someone else ask for clarifications.
yeah but maybe these people are just as good when they aren’t in front of huge audiences..
But when I was a beginner at it, the stress was indeed crippling.
The cure for that kind of stress is to keep doing it, the stress will go away. Like if your throat freezes up when stepping behind the podium, just take every opportunity you can to public speak.
But that was because humans were watching you. I imagine it would be notably less stressful if you were being watched by an increasingly large population of chimpanzees instead of people.
Personally I imagine that the larger that group of chimpanzees got, the more relaxed I would feel. Just think about solving a problem in a room with 1,000 chimpanzees just chilling out and watching without a single other human in the room.
Likewise I suspect chimpanzees would perform different if watched other chimpanzees.
Obviously a chimpanze recognizes humans as something like itself, and that the humans opinions matter. At the very least a chimp knows that the humans totally control it's life.
You have a very different understanding of the relationship between yourself and any group of chimps.
Of course, silicon valley has taught that people who can speak and code at the same time are like best things, but if a team is not happy to accept other people’s shortcomings, am probably fine not working with them.
I feel your pain.
I had a fourth-round interview recently where I was expected to write code while narrating my thoughts to two people sitting either side of me - and while perched on a wobbly office stool at a standing desk. Couldn't think. Totally bombed it.
I can’t imagine adding two people, an unfamiliar desk setup, an unfamiliar keyboard even, all while talking about what I’m doing.
Yet for some of us the stress of being observed and scrutinized is crippling regardless of the task difficulty. I've bombed so many interviews because of this. :(