“It appears the authors contrived a contextual audit of distinct, historical orators and their praxes in order to generate a conspectus of western rhetorical practices”
Yikes! I’m embarrassed to say this lengthy sentence can be found in my
first grad school assignment. I’m still
not sure I know what it means, and I don’t think I knew then either. Luckily, I
had a very patient professor that saw right through my attempt at sounding
collegiate. They told me that good writing didn’t mean long-winded sentences
full of multi-syllabic words I had looked up in a thesaurus. Again, Yikes.
Sure enough, I had written my
paper in (what I thought) was a good example of scholarly voice. It had been awhile since I had been in
school, and I was very self-conscious of my writing. I had no idea what my
professor expected of me in my first paper, and I couldn’t help but compare
myself to my peers. A number of them were in their second and third semesters
of grad school, and some had already been published in academic journals! I
thought I had to compensate for my inexperience by writing with complex jargon
and ideas, void of any individual style.
I couldn’t have been more wrong! Scholarly
writing is often viewed as dull and long-winded, but it doesn’t need to be. In
fact, the best examples of scholarly writing are clear and direct, and they use
concise language to inform and persuade.
However, like all forms of
writing, developing a scholarly voice requires practice. Although my professor
had explained where I went wrong with my first assignment, it took time and
practice to hone the rules of good scholarly writing. For example, I had to
learn to balance a formal tone with clarity and concision. In my example
sentence, the tone is formal, but the words themselves are unnecessarily
complex. To edit this sentence for clarity, I could replace the word
“contrived” with “created” and “praxes” with “habits.”
In fact, to edit this
sentence for scholarly voice, I would rewrite it as follows:
“The authors created a list of
distinct, historical orators and their habits to create a summary of western
rhetorical practices.”
While I substituted some of the
complex language for simpler ideas, the meaning of the sentence is still
obscured. For example, while authors could in fact “create a list of orators,”
the word “researched” better explains the authors’ specific actions. My second
revision is as follows:
“The authors researched a list of
distinct, historical orators and their habits to create a summary of western
rhetorical practices.”
Finding your scholarly voice takes
time and patience, and sometimes you have to accept help to discover your mistakes
and opportunities for improvement. However, the Writing Center’s staff is here to
support you through your journey. We get that scholarly writing is challenging
and can be intimidating, because we’ve been in your shoes! Eventually, we all
found our scholarly voice, and you will too.
Now it’s your turn! How would you revise
my sentence, “It appears the authors contrived a contextual audit of distinct,
historical orators and their praxes in order to generate a conspectus of
western rhetorical practices” for clarity and concision? Or, if you have a
personal example of a sentence you have edited for scholarly voice, please share
with us in the comments!
Tasha Sookochoff is a writing instructor in the Walden University Writing Center. Along with earning degrees from the University of Wisconsin, Stout and Depaul University, Tasha has written documentation for the U.S. House of Representatives that increases government transparency, blogged for DePaul University, copy-edited the Journal of Second Language Writing, tutored immigrants and refugees at literacy centers, and taught academic writing to college students.
.png)
Never miss a new post; Opt-out at any time
