Practice compound pre-modifiers answering the following questions and arranging a discussion.

1. Is there any link between work-related thoughts and performance-related fees? Are performance- related fees invariably higher than those people who live the job usually get? Is it hard for a workaholic to clear their heads of work-related thoughts at the end of the workday? For other people who are not that crazy about what they do? Is an efficient worker necessarily a workaholic? Which kind of worker are you? Can you stand sitting around doing nothing?

2. Does a home-grown professional have any advantages over a foreign-trained specialist? (In our country and abroad.)

3. Why do most people cling to the world of things? Isn’t it because things are slower to change than short-lived phenomena we classify as events? Isn’t it because things offer us a way of locating ourselves? Isn’t it sometimes hard to specify a present-day situation in an ever-shifting world? What do all of us typically want to do in a fluid situation? Under changing circumstances? When we see the world of things getting fluid around us as if in a time-lapse film? Do we try to construct a stable framework of reference against which our current experience can be measured? Some long-lived, long-lasting, deep-rooted stuck down benchmarks by which inconceivable events could be judged?

4. What kind of approach would you prefer to take up in research? A down-to-earth approach? (practical and sensible) A hands-on one? (tried personally without just talking about it) A sophisticated theoretical one?

5. Would you describe your list of priorties as an ever-growing one? What is a high priority in any research? What is your main priority at the moment? (your first priority, top priority) What is high on your list of priorities? What is a low priority for you now? What is a long way down your ever-growing list of priorities? (Honestly, …)

6. Unfortunately, history, and science history in particular, is often taken as no-longer-essential remains of the developmental process. Is that because of too much one-sided emphasis given on finished scientific achievements as they are recorded in the classics? Does science develop by the accumulation of individual discoveries and inventions? Does nonstop and ongoing research contradict the development-by-accumulation concept? What are out-of-date beliefs to be called? Are they to be called scientific components of past observations? For instance, the Ptolemaic system? Are those once current views of nature to be labeled myths or errors? Are state-of-the-art things always relevant?

7. Are there any internationally-recognized and well-respected research teams at the university? Are there any collaborative research projects funded by international framework programs? What is the aim of the project you have referred to? Is it a long-term collaborative project? A three-year collaborative project? Is the project due to establish close research interaction and collaboration between the research groups involved? Is it also to qualitatively advance our knowledge of the investigated phenomena and basic mechanisms responsible for their evolution, dynamics and effect produced on life and science? Is the project due to provide young researchers with extensive training in relevant research techniques and universally transferable skills? Is its goal to create a new generation of researchers that will exploit the data gained with the new facilities used in the course of study?

8. What are some particular techniques of simulation you use in your research? Do you create any novel models? Semi-empirical models? Do you apply numerical simulation or theoretical modeling of recently discovered phenomena?

9. What is your PhD looking at? Could everything you are doing be described as your goal-directed activity? Would you characterize your functional framework as a goal-related universe of your own? Is research an error-prone activity? Errors are to be avoided and their influence is to be overcome, but their presence is to be expected, isn’t it? Do you agree with the opinion that in a goal-related universe no errors are errors in themselves – they are only errors in relation to specific objectives?

10. Do you often dip into technical topics when you try to explain what you do to a layman? Do you ever work hard to make the concepts and notions you use transparent to someone who is not trained in your subject?