![]() ![]() ![]() When you start a new section, the heading is a sufficient signpost you don't have to say what the previous section said the reader knows because they just read it. You don't have to list all the mechanisms in advance. If you feel you need a paragraph setting out the scope of a chapter, by all means say something like, " the following sections will outline the primary mechanisms involved in nanostructure formation", but keep it as concise as possible. You can also refer back to previous sections, "as seen in chapter 3." For example, if you say "this will be discussed further in chapter 6", it indicates that you have more to say about the subject. Occasionally, cross referencing other chapters is useful. Or I could strip away all traces of signposting and just say, "a better way is to.", in which case I wouldn't need to tell you where we're going because we've already arrived answering the question before it's been asked. It's a natural question to ask, following on from the previous point, and asking the question implies that I'm going to try to answer it.Īs long as I meet the expectation I've just planted in the reader's mind, no further signposting is necessary. Or I could strip it down further and just say, " is there a better way?". And do I really need to tell you what's next? I don't think so.įar better to say something like, " if such explicit signposting is a problem, is there a better approach?" The signposting here is hidden within the rhetorical question, providing an implicit link between the previous point and the next. I could say, " the previous section stated that there are problems with signposting, the next will outline other approaches", but do I really need to tell you what I've just told you? No. How to set up expectations without signpostingĪs I'm writing this I'm faced with a choice. If your writing is good, signposting isn't necessary. It's better if the route is clearly enough laid out that every turn is obvious when you get to it. The problem with thoughtless signposting is that the reader has to put more work into understanding the signposts than she saves in seeing what they point to. It does not help the reader in any way, instead overloading them with information they can neither make sense of nor remember. The problem here is that this paragraph only makes sense after you've read the rest of the chapter. Finally, I will review the main points of the preceding discussion. The fourth subsection covers issues having to do with excessive abstraction, including overuse of nominalization and passives. Following this, the third subsection explains the issue of prespecified verbal formulas. The second subsection reviews three issues: the problem of focusing on a description of professional activity rather than an exposition of subject matter, the overuse of apologetic language, and the disadvantages of excessive hedging. The first subsection introduces the concept of "metadiscourse", followed by one of its principal manifestations, the use of signposting. The rest of this chapter is organised as follows. Steven Pinker, cognitive scientist and linguist, gives the following example of bad signposting in chapter 2 of " A Sense of Style" If you have a table of contents or an abstract, if you set out clearly the problems you want to solve and if your writing flows smoothly from one point to the next, there's no need to outline every single step in advance and there's no need to say everything three times. But common practice isn't always good practice, and while some subtle signposting can be useful, most of the time it's unnecessary, patronising to the reader and oh-so-very dull. One such common practice is signposting your writing saying what you're about to say, saying it, then saying what you just said. ![]() These may be formally defined, as in the style guides of individual journals, or informally adopted through common practice. Within every academic domain, there exist certain conventions around writing. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |