Bi Filof
'Congruency' or 'Congruence'? 'Put' or 'Putted'? I’m currently reading scientific articles about topics related to physiotherapy, and I’m finding some unknown vocabulary. It's my first analysis on study protocols. Does word ‘congruency’ exist? Here it’s the complete sentence: “Any additional X-rays are used only to exclude other diagnoses, such as a fracture or disturbance of the joint congruency, based on the Ottawa ankle rules [5].” I did not find any meaning for that word, just ‘congruence’. What does ‘congruency’ mean actually? Another rare word is ‘putted’. ”In 2000 Pijnenburg et al. conducted a meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials of existing treatment strategies, in which they also putted results after treatment versus minimal treatment against each other [9].” Is ‘putted’ the same as ‘put’ (past tense)? Is it really common? Thank you very much :)
May 7, 2016 7:37 PM
Answers · 6
I think that the "putted" should have been "pitted". To "pit A against B" means to compare A with B in a competitive situation e.g. "Only one member of the class could win the prize, and so this meant that I was pitted against some of my friends."
May 7, 2016
1. 'Congruence' and 'congruency' both exist. 2. It is wrong to say 'putted' here. The past and past participle of 'put' is always 'put'. I wonder if it is some kind of typo and the writer meant to say 'inputted'. The word 'putted' only exists in golfing - if a golfer 'putted' the ball, he hit the ball with a gentle stroke on the short grass near the hole. This isn't what the writer meant here, obviously.
May 7, 2016
Sorry but I can only give a partial answer to this. I've only heard the past tense of "put" to be "put." Never "putted." The only time I think "putted" would be a word would be in golf, if someone putted the ball. (that would be pronounced like "shut-id"
May 7, 2016
Just to answer Jerry's (ჯერი) question above, it's becoming very common for non-native speakers to publish their research and studies in English. In some cases, the articles are submitted without proofreading and so some very awkward English can turn up in these papers, often in spite of the writers' level of English. It's also possible that the article was proofread, but not properly. Or, the writers relied on a spell-checker. The original text is here, is anyone wishes to double-check: For Bianca's question, yes the word "congruency" exists. I didn't have any problem with recognising it. I agree that "pitted" is probably the correct word here, but I would never have guessed that without Michael's help. Cheers! :)
May 8, 2016
I don't mean to be harsh but I'm curious as to why up you would believe that a scientific publication would use a word that doesn't exist ( congruency )?
May 8, 2016
Show more
Still haven’t found your answers?
Write down your questions and let the native speakers help you!