(May 3, 2023 at 2:43 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(May 3, 2023 at 8:09 am)FlatAssembler Wrote: I simply don't see how I can write an interesting paper about a long but morphologically transparent placename in Ireland. My latest paper is about the idea that that k-r that repeats in the Croatian river names (Krka, Korana, Krbavica, Krapina, Karašica (2x) and Kravarščica) was the Illyrian word for "to flow", and you can easily write a 13-pages-long paper about that that's almost guaranteed to get published, especially if you apply some informatics (collision entropy and birthday calculations).

Why should that trouble you? You have yet to write an interesting paper about the names of Croatian rivers.

Boru

But I have written a paper about the Croatian river names and published it in two journals. That's my latest paper.

Pineapple.

(May 3, 2023 at 5:05 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote:

(May 3, 2023 at 2:43 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: Why should that trouble you? You have yet to write an interesting paper about the names of Croatian rivers.

Boru

But I have written a paper about the Croatian river names and published it in two journals. That's my latest paper.

‘Published’ does not equal ‘interesting’.

Boru

(May 3, 2023 at 6:53 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(May 3, 2023 at 5:05 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: But I have written a paper about the Croatian river names and published it in two journals. That's my latest paper.

‘Published’ does not equal ‘interesting’.

Boru

Of course. The vast majority of published papers are bloody boring. The vast majority of published papers are not interdisciplinary, they are using some established boring methodology and they are generally finding nothing new. They are way more boring than my latest paper.

(May 3, 2023 at 7:31 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote:

(May 3, 2023 at 6:53 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: ‘Published’ does not equal ‘interesting’.

Boru

Of course. The vast majority of published papers are bloody boring. The vast majority of published papers are not interdisciplinary, they are using some established boring methodology and they are generally finding nothing new. They are way more boring than my latest paper.

That’s my point. If you can write a mind-numbingly boring paper about Croatian river names, you should be able to write an equally boring paper about the names of Irish townlands.

Don’t sell yourself short - I’m sure you can be achingly dull on a number of topics.

Boru

(May 3, 2023 at 7:38 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(May 3, 2023 at 7:31 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: Of course. The vast majority of published papers are bloody boring. The vast majority of published papers are not interdisciplinary, they are using some established boring methodology and they are generally finding nothing new. They are way more boring than my latest paper.

That’s my point. If you can write a mind-numbingly boring paper about Croatian river names, you should be able to write an equally boring paper about the names of Irish townlands.

Don’t sell yourself short - I’m sure you can be achingly dull on a number of topics.

Boru

Why would my paper about Croatian river names be "mind-numbingly boring"? It is, unlike most papers about toponyms, interdisciplinary, it applies informatics (collision entropy and birthday calculations) to the toponyms, rather than just philology. It uses a radically different methodology from most papers about toponyms (though, in my opinion, it is my methodology that follows from mathematics and basic principles of historical linguistics, rather than the established methodology). And it also reaches a relatively radical conclusion.
Have you skimmed over the Dubravka Ivšić'es PhD thesis? That is mind-numbingly boring.

(May 4, 2023 at 1:49 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote:

(May 3, 2023 at 7:38 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: That’s my point. If you can write a mind-numbingly boring paper about Croatian river names, you should be able to write an equally boring paper about the names of Irish townlands.

Don’t sell yourself short - I’m sure you can be achingly dull on a number of topics.

Boru

Why would my paper about Croatian river names be "mind-numbingly boring"? It is, unlike most papers about toponyms, interdisciplinary, it applies informatics (collision entropy and birthday calculations) to the toponyms, rather than just philology. It uses a radically different methodology from most papers about toponyms (though, in my opinion, it is my methodology that follows from mathematics and basic principles of historical linguistics, rather than the established methodology). And it also reaches a relatively radical conclusion.
Have you skimmed over the Dubravka Ivšić'es PhD thesis? That is mind-numbingly boring.

It is mind-numbingly boring because it’s about the origin of river names in Croatia, which is a mind-numbingly boring topic. If it was an interesting topic, Steven Spielberg would have made a film about it by now.

Boru

(May 4, 2023 at 4:34 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:

(May 4, 2023 at 1:49 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote: Why would my paper about Croatian river names be "mind-numbingly boring"? It is, unlike most papers about toponyms, interdisciplinary, it applies informatics (collision entropy and birthday calculations) to the toponyms, rather than just philology. It uses a radically different methodology from most papers about toponyms (though, in my opinion, it is my methodology that follows from mathematics and basic principles of historical linguistics, rather than the established methodology). And it also reaches a relatively radical conclusion.
Have you skimmed over the Dubravka Ivšić'es PhD thesis? That is mind-numbingly boring.

It is mind-numbingly boring because it’s about the origin of river names in Croatia, which is a mind-numbingly boring topic. If it was an interesting topic, Steven Spielberg would have made a film about it by now.

Boru

To me, Control Engineering is much more boring than the origin of river names.

(May 4, 2023 at 5:01 pm)FlatAssembler Wrote:

(May 4, 2023 at 4:34 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: It is mind-numbingly boring because it’s about the origin of river names in Croatia, which is a mind-numbingly boring topic. If it was an interesting topic, Steven Spielberg would have made a film about it by now.

Boru

To me, Control Engineering is much more boring than the origin of river names.

But how many people will pay you for researching river names, compared to paying you for Control Engineering?  If you're independently wealthy you can do anything that appeals to you, but otherwise you'll have to provide a product or service that someone else is willing to pay you for.

I have a diploma in TV and radio production, but never had an opportunity to work in that field.  My first two jobs were as an accounting clerk.  It wasn't exciting, but it paid my rent and bought my groceries.  My last job involved typing for nearly seven hours a day, for over thirteen years (but fortunately it was interesting medical stuff, so I was rarely bored).  Now I'm retired, with a pension and some money in the bank, and now I can do what I want.  That would have been impossible when I was in my twenties, because no one would have paid me to write novels and study Latin and putter around in the garden.

At some point you'll have to seriously consider what you would be willing to do all day for the benefit of someone else.

Pictsies.