|
|
Re: An alternative to ST and AAT
Paul Crowley (Paul@crowleyp.demon.co.uk)
Fri, 29 Nov 96 00:29:34 GMT
In article <329A7034.127F@scn.org> bh162@scn.org "Phillip Bigelow" writes:
> Paul Crowley wrote:
> > I accept that there are all kind of ways of walking.
> > The English language makes fine distinctions: saunter, stroll,
> > shuffle, shamble, hobble, limp, totter, stagger, lurch, slouch
> > drag, mince, prance, stalk, strut, swagger, sidle, roll, swing,
> > amble, - and many more.
>
> Those are general usage words. "Stride" in science has a specific
> biomechanical meaning. Gerrit defined it for you in a previous post.
BS. Gerrit, knowledgeable and praiseworthy as he may be, is not
a scientific institution. It is not within his power to establish
a "scientific . . meaning". Gerrit's account of bipedal striding
was, in fact, quite confused and the whole purpose of my posts was
to point out that it did not permit essential distinctions.
Paul.
|