universidade federal de santa catarina pós-graduação em letras ...

328• unclear• makes very little sense• lack of coherent and definitivestatement of functionalprinciples• opaque• lack of internal coherence• audience never clear• organizing principle of book isnot clear• confuses [concepts]• logic occasionally difficult tofollow• not clear distinctions• unevenness in the level ofpresentation• too much documentation• cumbersome• overcrammed with fragmentaryquotations• patchy theoretical framework• constant call for bridge theories• lack of contextualization• basic innacuracies indefinitions• complete neglect of notions• fuzzy theory with much roomfor improvement• inconsistent views• patchy theoretical framework• inconsistency• leaves too much for thereader’s ability to read betweenthe lines• ‘late-comers’ will be confused• heterogeneous• jumble• lack of focus, specificity• lack of understanding[linguistic matters)• lack of congruence• little meaningfulcommunicative context• does not promote meaningfuldiscourse•• written in a haste• printing errors• wrong titles• book loosely organized• item missing in bibliography• reader cannot make head or tail• typographical errors• book contains inconsistencies• not much explanation of thesignificance of equations• confusing• no information about practicalconsequences• sudden insertion of terms• contains too many gaps to beuseful to inexperienced readers• spelling mistakes• difficult to determine whichcompounds and results wereimportant• unclear whether the class ofmaterials had actually foundindustrial application• each area is considered inisolation making it difficult toelucidate trends• research that was summarizedseemed to lack a sense ofpurpose• no attempt to place results incontext• wealth of information not easy tofind• adequate• consistent picture of topic• some repetition• incomprehensible abbreviations• spelling mistakes• questionable and contradictory• •• it is not clear• assumption not clear• argument not clear• misleading analysis• general and broad criteria• important differences are ignored• more difficult• papers are only marginallyaccepted journal articles• the central articles are toodisparate• author must choose which wayto interpret an idea• need of a strong concludingchapter to bring differing viewsand perspectives together• paradigmatic approach of theintroduction does little to explainor contextualize followingchapters• information remains inadequateto sustain the thesis• underlying thesis very poorlyedited• clear theme gets lost in adisorderly presentation• faulty on a number of crucialpoints• contradictory views are ignored• lack of coordination betweenpopulation figures• several logical problems withtheoretical arguments• contradictory views amongcontributors• book lacks balance• unnitiated readers will becomeconfused• adventurous and eccentrictreatment of materials• very uneven result• factual errors and distortions• overall lack of focus anddirection