I read the following description on page 521 of this book [1]:

```
Indeed, we will see that the same theory can describe a phenomenon such as polarization in terms of a Berry phase and topological classification of the electronic structure in terms of Chern numbers.
```
The above statement for two consecutive times using the same phrase "in terms of". Is this a good style?

[1] https://hk1lib.org/book/6037268/3f7c7b

Regards,
HZ

Thus spake hongy...@gmail.com:
> I read the following description on page 521 of this book [1]:
>
> ```
> Indeed, we will see that the same theory can describe a phenomenon such as
> polarization in terms of a Berry phase and topological classification of the
> electronic structure in terms of Chern numbers. ``` The above statement for
> two consecutive times using the same phrase "in terms of". Is this a good
> style?

Why wouldn't it be? What would you substitute for either occurence
that would be better?

> [1] https://hk1lib.org/book/6037268/3f7c7b
>
> Regards,
> HZ

/dps

--
We’ve learned way more than we wanted to know about the early history
of American professional basketball, like that you could have once
watched a game between teams named the Indianapolis Kautskys and the
Akron Firestone Non-Skids. -- fivethirtyeight.com

On 3/8/2022 10:45 PM, hongy...@gmail.com wrote:

> I read the following description on page 521 of this book [1]:

> ``` Indeed, we will see that the same theory can describe a
> phenomenon such as polarization in terms of a Berry phase and
> topological classification of the electronic structure in terms of
> Chern numbers. ``` The above statement for two consecutive times
> using the same phrase "in terms of". Is this a good style?

> [1] https://hk1lib.org/book/6037268/3f7c7b

Yes. There is nothing wrong with parallel constructions.

I would have written "phenomena", though, since the writer mentions two
phenomena, linked by "and". "Phenomenon" would have been correct if the
conjunction had been "or".

On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 10:45:58 PM UTC-5, hongy...@gmail.com wrote:
> I read the following description on page 521 of this book [1]:
>
> ```
> Indeed, we will see that the same theory can describe a phenomenon such as polarization in terms of a Berry phase and topological classification of the electronic structure in terms of Chern numbers.
> ```
> The above statement for two consecutive times using the same phrase "in terms of". Is this a good style?
>
> [1] https://hk1lib.org/book/6037268/3f7c7b

It's a parallel construction with "gapping":

we will see that the same theory
--can describe
------a phenomenon such as polarization
----------in terms of a Berry phase
--and (can describe)
-------topological classification of the electronic structure
-----------in terms of Chern numbers.

"Gapping" means leaving a "gap" in a sentence by omitting
an exact repetition of a parallel structure.

Your ESL textbook probably uses a different term for doing it.

On Thursday, March 10, 2022 at 12:44:12 AM UTC+8, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 10:45:58 PM UTC-5, hongy...@gmail.com wrote:
> > I read the following description on page 521 of this book [1]:
> >
> > ```
> > Indeed, we will see that the same theory can describe a phenomenon such as polarization in terms of a Berry phase and topological classification of the electronic structure in terms of Chern numbers.
> > ```
> > The above statement for two consecutive times using the same phrase "in terms of". Is this a good style?
> >
> > [1] https://hk1lib.org/book/6037268/3f7c7b
> It's a parallel construction with "gapping":
> we will see that the same theory
> --can describe
> ------a phenomenon such as polarization
> ----------in terms of a Berry phase
> --and (can describe)
> -------topological classification of the electronic structure
> -----------in terms of Chern numbers.

Thank you for your sentence breaking. But I would rather break it into the following:

we will see that the same theory
can describe
--a phenomenon such as polarization
----in terms of a Berry phase
--and
--topological classification of the electronic structure
----in terms of Chern numbers.

>
> "Gapping" means leaving a "gap" in a sentence by omitting
> an exact repetition of a parallel structure.
>
> Your ESL textbook probably uses a different term for doing it.

On Thursday, March 10, 2022 at 2:03:57 AM UTC-5, hongy...@gmail.com wrote:
> On Thursday, March 10, 2022 at 12:44:12 AM UTC+8, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> > On Tuesday, March 8, 2022 at 10:45:58 PM UTC-5, hongy...@gmail.com wrote:
> > > I read the following description on page 521 of this book [1]:
> > >
> > > ```
> > > Indeed, we will see that the same theory can describe a phenomenon such as polarization in terms of a Berry phase and topological classification of the electronic structure in terms of Chern numbers.
> > > ```
> > > The above statement for two consecutive times using the same phrase "in terms of". Is this a good style?
> > >
> > > [1] https://hk1lib.org/book/6037268/3f7c7b
> > It's a parallel construction with "gapping":
> > we will see that the same theory
> > --can describe
> > ------a phenomenon such as polarization
> > ----------in terms of a Berry phase
> > --and (can describe)
> > -------topological classification of the electronic structure
> > -----------in terms of Chern numbers.
>
> Thank you for your sentence breaking. But I would rather break it into the following:
>
> we will see that the same theory
> can describe
> --a phenomenon such as polarization
> ----in terms of a Berry phase
> --and
> --topological classification of the electronic structure
> ----in terms of Chern numbers.

Yes. Your structure is exactly the same as my structure.

> > "Gapping" means leaving a "gap" in a sentence by omitting
> > an exact repetition of a parallel structure.
> >
> > Your ESL textbook probably uses a different term for doing it.