Academic Writing in englis h

1. Academic Writinginenglish Dr Martin Hinton University of Łódź

2. Introductions Whoisthisguyanyway?

3. Where is Łódź?

4. But i’m from…

5. My research • ArgumentationTheory • Fallacies • Language and Argument • Philosophy of Argument • Rhetoric • PoliticalSpeeches • Persuasive Devices

6. Elements of writing Basic structure

7. Titles - Whether you are given a title or choose one yourself, you must ensure that everything you write is relevant to it.

8. Introduction - In your introduction, avoid making general comments about the title, such as 'this is a controversial/interesting subject' - of course it is, that's why you've been given it.

9. Body - You should include all your arguments here, along with supporting evidence, results, citations, etc. Remember, if you include counter-arguments to your position you must say why they are not decisive.

10. Conclusion - state clearly for what your essay has argued. You must not introduce any new points, new possibilities or new authorities. You may indicate what further research needs to be done in the area.

11. Paragraphing - You must think in paragraphs. Each paragraph contains one idea, each sentence one thought.

12. Sentences - each paragraph should be constructed of sentences of different lengths. Long sentences can be impressive – if you don't lose control of them – but short sentences carry more punch.

13. Constructingan argument What do youthink and why?

14. Any piece of writing which is worth reading has something to say. And any piece of writing which is not worth reading is not worth writing either.

15. Whilst it is obvious that your opinions will be based on your own experience, you must not assume that others share that background – if you do, your work will seem parochial and irrelevant.

16. If your viewpoint can be neatly expressed, then it will be possible to sum it up in one clear sentence.

17. When writing we have the time to think out what we want to say, but we must get it right first time or our point is lost.

18. Youcan test whether or not your viewpoint is reasonable by setting out your reasons for maintaining it. If you can’t think of any, it’s time to do some more thinking.

19. Ifyoudon’tspeak with authority, whywould I listen to you? Your essay should express a clear confidence in the position it is expressing.

20. What is an argument? My chief objection to a quarrel is that it ends a good argument. G.K. Chesterton

21. In the philosophical sense, arguments are not disputes. Rather, they are what rational agents use to try to resolve disputes, to reach the truth and to achieve a consensus.

22. An argument must contain two things: a set of premises and a conclusion which is drawn, or inferred, from them. Without a conclusion, an argument has no purpose, without premises, it is merely a statement, an unsupported standpoint or opinion.

23. The argument must be valid. Validity depends on the logical structure of the argument: to be valid, the conclusion of an argument must actually follow from the premises. Secondly, an argument should be sound. The soundness of an argument depends on its being valid and having true premises. A good argument may be inductively valid. A good argument must also be relevant.

24. Stephen Toulmin divided premises into different types: data and warrants. P1. John has black hair. (data) P2. What is black may not be blond. (warrant) Concl. John doesn’t have blond hair. Warrants may be very obvious…

25. Or they may involve new information. P1. John is a British citizen. (data) P2. British citizens may vote in UK general elections. (warrant) Concl. John may vote in UK general elections.

26. Toulmin also recognised Backing for warrants, Rebuttals, and Qualifications: John is a British citizen (D) Since, British citizens may vote in UK general elections (W), according to UK law (B) Presumably (Q), unless John is in prison (R) or has lived abroad for more than 15 years (R) John may vote in UK general elections (C).

27. This is a very good model to follow in academic argumentation. You will usually have some data. You will combine it with a warrant, a general law or principle, for which you should be able to provide support, in order to reach a conclusion. You will acknowledge possible objections or exceptions, and qualify your conclusion as necessary.

28. These points also correspond to the places where a reader might disagree with your argument: 1. Doubting the data 2. Questioning the application of a principle 3. Questioning the principle itself 4. Rejecting the inference 5. Raising a rebuttal 6. Denying the scope/certainty of your findings 7. Denying their relevance

29. A properly structured paper helps you counter all these objections before they are even made.

30. Standard paper structure: Abstract Introduction Method Results Discussion Conclusion References.

31. Abstract: A quick review of what the argument will look like, how it will conclude, and, crucially, why it is relevant.

32. Introduction: An introduction to your work, not the subject in general. Contains the theoretical principles – the warrants – upon which your work is based. These will usually be backed by citations. Places your work within the field, showing its relevance.

33. Method: A properly explained method gives credibility to your data, and allows for the replication of results.

34. Results: Full and complete presentation of your data.

35. Discussion: Here you bring together your data and the theoretical principles you are relying upon. You consider possible rebuttals, and limitations or qualifications.

36. Conclusion: Your argument is briefly restated and the conclusion which you have reached is set out clearly. You may once again state its importance.

37. Using sources Citation and reference

38. Three ways to refer to the work of others: Indirectly – Some studies have shown a link (Smith 2009, Williams 2014), while others have found no connection (Jones 2012, Williams 2017). Directly – In their paper, Thomas and Soar (2011) claimed the cause was the youth of the participants. With a quote – According to Rogers, the poem is ‘a great example of the worst type of Romantic foolishness’ (1998: 31).

39. Which should you use? • A combination. • Indirect reference is best if there are a lot of papers. • Indirect reference is best if you have nothing more to say about that study. • Direct reference is a good introduction to authors you wish to discuss further. • Quotations need care!

40. Rules for quoting: • Only quote when you need to, not for the sake of it. • Only quote that which is interesting, striking, sums up the paper. • Only quote if you have the page reference. • Only use longer quotes (more than one sentence) if it is a key passage and can’t be easily paraphrased.

41. Quotes in the text: In a sentence - Capellen describes the word as ‘a semantic and pragmatic mess’ (2014: 270). As a quote - As Sampson puts it: ‘By now there are many cases where core elements of non-empirical linguists’ theories rest on intuitive beliefs’ (Sampson 2011: 199). As a single word – What Chomsky calls ‘innate’ (Chomsky: 1967). No page is necessary if the key word is used throughout the paper.

42. APA Style. Author. Year. Title. Volume or Journal. Location of publication. Publisher. Examples Wedgwood, R. (2007). The Nature of Normativity. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Finlay, S. & Snedegar, J. (2014). One Ought Too Many. Philosophy and Phenomenological Research, 89(1), 102–124. Freakonomics. (2010, October 29). E-ZPass is a life-saver (literally) [Blog post]. Retrieved from http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2010/10/29/e-zpass-is-a-life-saver-literally/

43. MLA Style. Author. Title. Volume or Journal. Publisher. Date. Location. Examples. Said, Edward W. Culture and Imperialism. Knopf, 1994. Bagchi, Alaknanda. "ConflictingNationalisms: The Voice of the Subaltern in MahaswetaDevi'sBashaiTudu." Tulsa Studies in Women'sLiterature, vol. 15, no. 1, 1996, pp. 41-50. Bernstein, Mark. "10 Tips on Writing the Living Web." A List Apart: For People Who Make Websites, 16 Aug. 2002, alistapart.com/article/writeliving. Accessed 4 May 2009.

44. Fallacies When arguments go wrong

45. Fallacies may be of very different types and it is not easy to give a definition which fits them all. However, they all involve using reasoning which is flawed or simply irrelevant.

46. Some well-known examples: Ad hominem arguments – attacking the arguer not the argument. Straw man fallacy – reconstructing your opponent’s position in a weaker form to make it easier to defeat. Begging the question – using your conclusion as one of your premises.

47. Many fallacies are actually good forms of reasoning used inappropriately.

48. Common fallacies in academic writing: • Fallacy of small numbers/anecdotal evidence. One case is an anecdote, 1000 cases are data. The line is not always clear: student research often has small numbers of participants. This needs to be reflected in the Qualifications.

49. 2. Argumentum ad verecundiam According to this argument, we should not dare to question some authorities: if Chomsky says it’s true, it must be true. While all scholars deserve respect, no-one is above doubt. Including a quotation from a respected author does not mean you have ‘proved your point’.

50. 3. Cause and correlation Two things which appear together do not have to have a cause and effect relation, and if they do, you still don’t know which way round. Many weak language students have classroom anxiety problems. Are they weak because they have problems or do they have problems because they are weak?