Writing a paper is hard. Getting others to read it seriously
is often harder. Writers often make the
second task harder for readers by overwriting and the review process often encourages
it, with authors trying to bury reviewers’ critical comments under pages of
caveats that serve mainly to obscure the main point of the paper. Here are a
couple of posts that I’ve found that deliver some useful advice to authors (here
and here).
The first post is on Elmore Leonard and his
ten rules for writing. If you have never heard of him or never read any of his
novels, let me recommend them to you wholeheartedly. He is a terrific “crime”
novelist whose books are one of life’s guilty wonderful pleasures. As you will
notice, not all the suggested rules will be all that applicable to linguistics
writing (though if the paper is on expletives (i.e. it’s raining) then maybe the first one should be ignored. However,
I agree with Taylor about 2 and 10 with one caveat. Throat clearing should be
avoided but a concise description of the problem of interest and why it is of interest is often very
helpful. This more or less is what
Krugman is highlighting in his deliciously nasty piece.
David Poeppel used to emphasize the importance of explaining
why anyone should care about the work
you are presenting. Why is the paper worth anyone’s time? Why is the problem
important? Why is the data worthy of note?
Why should anyone who has access to a good Elmore Leonard novel spend it
reading your paper instead? You’d be
surprised (or not) how often this simple question stumps, and if it stumps an
author, then chances are it will have baleful effects on a reader.
I enjoyed reading this article - very resourceful
ReplyDeleteSeo is tricky and gets harder every year as search engines change how they scan pages and pages like this helps the learning steps to improve traffic clicks
https://freshcoatpaintingservice.weebly.com/