Stylish Academic Writing |Steven Pinker | Office of Faculty Development & Diversity | Summary and Q&A

TL;DR

Academic writing often suffers from abstract language, passive constructions, excessive signposting, and other sins that hinder clarity and communication.

Key Insights

• ✍️ Academic writing tends to lag in clear prose due to abstract language, passive constructions, and excessive signposting.
• 🪡 The curse of knowledge makes writers overestimate readers' understanding and forget the need for clear explanations.
• ✍️ Self-consciousness and skepticism are inherent in scholarship but can hinder clear writing.
• ❓ An inherent mismatch exists between the demands of clear prose and the activities of scholarship.
• 🧑‍🔬 Clear prose relies on joint attention and a naive realist model of communication that scientists often employ.
• 🧑‍🔬 Science popularizers often excel in clear prose because the mental model of scientists aligns well with classic style.

Transcript

STEVEN PINKER: Thank you. The invitation to this conference summarized its theme in words that I think that Helen wrote, "Pick up any guide to effective writing and what will you find? Probably some version of the same advice that Strunk and White offered in the 1950s," which I think actually dates back to the 19-teens from course lectures from Pro... Read More

Questions & Answers

Q: Why is academic writing often difficult to understand and engage with?

Academic writing is prone to using abstract language, passive constructions, and excessive signposting, which hinder clarity and communication. The curse of knowledge also leads writers to assume that readers share their understanding of concepts and abstractions.

Q: What is the significance of self-consciousness and skepticism in academic writing?

Self-consciousness and skepticism are inherent in scholarship, but they can also hinder clear prose. Scholars must strike a balance between the demands of clear writing and the need to scrutinize their own theories and constructs.

Q: How does the curse of knowledge affect academic writing?

The curse of knowledge makes writers forget that others may not have the same understanding of concepts and abstractions. This can result in unclear explanations and assumptions of shared knowledge.

Q: What are some common sins of academic writing?

Common sins of academic writing include using zombie nouns (abstract nominalizations), excessive abstraction, passive constructions, hedging, apologizing, and excessive signposting. These elements detract from clarity and engagement.

Summary

In this video, Steven Pinker discusses the problem of academic writing and why it often lacks clarity and effectiveness. He suggests that the root of this problem lies in the mismatch between the natural way our minds think and the demands of academic communication. He presents three principles that contribute to this issue: our inner primate, the curse of knowledge, and the difference between naive realism and postmodernist self-consciousness. Pinker also explores the specific sins of academic writing, including the use of zombie nouns, excessive abstraction, passive constructions, hedging, apologizing, and excessive signposting. He concludes by offering ways to resolve this discrepancy and improve the quality of academic prose.

Questions & Answers

Q: What is the main reason why academic writing often lacks clarity and effectiveness?

The main reason is the mismatch between the natural way our minds think and the demands of academic communication. Our minds have evolved to understand the world through vision, space, force, and motion. Abstraction is a learned process, and academic writing relies heavily on abstract concepts that may not be immediately accessible to all readers.

Q: What is the curse of knowledge?

The curse of knowledge is the difficulty of imagining what it's like not to know something that you do know. It is common among both children and adults. It makes it challenging for writers to gauge the knowledge level of their readers and can lead to assumptions that may cause confusion or misunderstanding.

Q: How does the mental model of prose communication recommended by Mark Turner and Francis-Noel Thomas differ from academic writing?

The mental model they recommend, called classic style, emphasizes joint attention and the notion that writing is a window into an objectively existing world. It assumes that truth can be known, that thoughts are concrete images, and that the purpose of prose communication is to help the reader see reality. Academic writing, on the other hand, often contains metadiscourse, excessive signposting, apologizing, and hedging, which reflect the self-conscious, reflective nature of scholarship.

Q: What are the sins of academic writing mentioned by Pinker?

Some of the sins of academic writing include the use of zombie nouns (abstract nominalizations), excessive abstraction, passive constructions, hedging, apologizing, and excessive signposting. These sins contribute to the lack of clarity and effectiveness in academic prose.

Q: How can writers resolve the inherent discrepancy between clear prose and reflective scholarship?

Writers can write as if the canons of classic prose are true and count on the reader to fill in the missing hedges, apologies, qualifications, and self-conscious remarks. Human language relies on conversational implicature, where readers naturally fill in the gaps and make connections based on common sense and shared expectations. This allows for more concise and effective writing without explicitly stating every assumption or qualification.

Q: What advice does Pinker offer for improving the quality of academic prose?

Pinker suggests avoiding the sins of academic writing and striving for clearer, more concrete language. Writers should be mindful of how their readers may perceive their writing and strive to orient readers to concrete elements in the world rather than the activities of the writer or the field of study. Additionally, writers should be aware of the curse of knowledge and avoid excessive signposting, apologizing, and hedging. They should strive to communicate in a more conversational and engaging manner while still acknowledging the reflective nature of scholarship.

Q: Why does Pinker believe that science popularizers often have clearer prose?

Pinker believes that science popularizers often have clearer prose because the mental model of communication employed by scientists is similar to the ideal model of clear prose. Scientists tend to focus on joint attention, provide concrete examples, and convey a sense of confidence and clarity in their writing. Science popularizers are skilled at making complex ideas accessible to the general public, and their clear prose style is often a result of their alignment with the mental model of effective communication.

Q: What is the role of abstraction in academic writing and how does it contribute to the problem discussed by Pinker?

Abstraction plays a significant role in academic writing as it allows us to generalize, categorize, and make sense of complex ideas. However, the reliance on abstraction in academic prose can create a disconnect between writers and readers. Writers may assume that readers have already packaged their own experiences into the same abstract concepts, leading to a lack of clarity and understanding. The challenge lies in finding a balance between using abstraction to convey complex ideas and ensuring that readers can easily engage with and comprehend those ideas.

Q: How does the inherent difficulty of writing as an academic contribute to the problems discussed by Pinker?

Writing as an academic is challenging because it involves communicating with an unknown audience, often distant in time and space, about topics that may not be familiar to them. The inherent difficulty of this task can lead to excessive metadiscourse, self-consciousness, and an overemphasis on the activities of the writer or the field of study rather than the subject matter itself. Graduate students, in particular, may struggle with these challenges as they navigate a new world of expertise and try to find their place in it.

Q: How can writers overcome the challenges of writing as an academic?

Writers can overcome these challenges by being mindful of the inherent difficulties and biases associated with academic writing. They can strive for clarity, engagement, and accessibility by focusing on concrete examples, minimizing hedging and excessive signposting, and considering the knowledge level of their readers. By using clear and simple language and considering the needs and expectations of their readers, writers can improve the quality of their academic prose.

Takeaways

The main takeaway from Pinker's discussion is that academic writing often lacks clarity and effectiveness due to a mismatch between the natural way our minds think and the demands of academic communication. This discrepancy is evidenced by the sins of academic writing, such as the use of zombie nouns, excessive abstraction, passive constructions, hedging, apologizing, and excessive signposting. However, by being mindful of the challenges and biases inherent in academic writing, writers can strive for clearer, more engaging prose. They can focus on concrete examples, be wary of assumptions and excessive self-consciousness, and aim for simplicity and objectivity in their communication. By striking a balance between clarity and reflective scholarship, writers can improve the quality of their academic prose.

Summary & Key Takeaways

• Academic writing frequently fails to engage readers due to its use of abstract language, passive constructions, and excessive signposting.

• Self-consciousness, skepticism, and irony contribute to the challenges of academic writing, as scholars try to balance the demands of clear prose and reflective scholarship.

• The curse of knowledge makes writers forget that others may not have the same understanding of their abstractions and concepts.