PDA

View Full Version : APA or otherwise?



Mekugi
1st June 2005, 21:45
In Highschool I was always taught to use the Cambridge style guide. When I went to college became painfully apparent they were using the APA style guide. Looking back, I hate both of them equally. They seem to ring in my writing into some kind of drab dissertation that no one wants to read.

My personal hatred aside, in scholarly writing on an international level, is the APA appropriate? Cambridge? Oxford? Does it matter as long as it is consistent and homogeneous? Thoughts? (Perhaps more to the point, HELP!)

-R

Trevor Johnson
1st June 2005, 22:53
Consistent and homogeneous, yes. For punctuation and style help, you might try reading "Eats, Shoots, and Leaves" by Lynn Truss. It's wonderful, scholarly and funny at the same time. I personally think that much of style is personal preference, and as long as your style is cohesive and communicates well, you should be fine. Avoid spelling mistakes and gross grammatical errors, though. (In other words, don't write like many online do. )

That said, if you are trying to publish in a specific journal, you should look at their website. They will most probably have a set of guidelines to use.

mooncrow
1st June 2005, 23:51
For the work I've been doing at University of Hawaii, they seem to be consistently requireing MLA style, mainly with regards to paper formatting and citations of references.

http://www.mla.org/style

Here is a link with an overview of MLA style
http://owl.english.purdue.edu/handouts/research/r_mla.html

Trevor Johnson
2nd June 2005, 00:15
In Highschool I was always taught to use the Cambridge style guide. When I went to college became painfully apparent they were using the APA style guide. Looking back, I hate both of them equally. They seem to ring in my writing into some kind of drab dissertation that no one wants to read.

One thing I'd suggest to fix this is, read. Read anything and everything, but I'd focus on writers like Twain, O'Henry, Beirce, Sturgeon, Zelazny, and others who knew how to make the language sing. Do not, I repeat, do not imitate Dickens. The limits of style are more a framework to build upon. They can be used, and in some cases bent, in good cause.

It's like the human body for a martial artist. We all have the same basic configuration, and much of our art is based on that framework. If we all had a third leg, for example, we'd train very differently, and kicks wouldn't be as risky.

nicojo
2nd June 2005, 07:47
If you are talking about "style" in terms of academic writing, Twain et al won't be much help. Though he has a reputation of a wild, go-it-alone and self-taught master who met all comers and struck them down with his idiosyncratic technique, Twain's message and influence is still debated by today's writers. Whether, for example, he was writing for his own time and circumstance or if modern-day business leaders have anything to learn from his cryptic thoughts.

There are specific documentation books and manuals of style for the major conventions. But that is the easiest to get. Each organization has its toho or seitei that pales in comparison with time-honored wisdom. If you want to be "a better writer" then find a licensed sensei with a good reputation. :p Slinging ink around with your friends is no way to learn! Several people have been hurt doing just this sort of irresponsible thing. Stay away from bottles and other additives that seem to give confidence, but actually inhibit proper technique.

I can suggest some (more helpful) things tomorrow when I'm at the school if you want, Russ.

Trevor Johnson
2nd June 2005, 17:48
If you are talking about "style" in terms of academic writing, Twain et al won't be much help. Though he has a reputation of a wild, go-it-alone and self-taught master who met all comers and struck them down with his idiosyncratic technique, Twain's message and influence is still debated by today's writers. Whether, for example, he was writing for his own time and circumstance or if modern-day business leaders have anything to learn from his cryptic thoughts.

Not sure I agree with you. I get to write molecular biology, and one of the things that really has helped me is the enormous volume of reading in other fields/disciplines/genres that I've done. Academic writing in scientific journals, particularly by people who don't use English as their first language, is excruciating. I would NEVER recommend using it as a good example of writing. Clarity, elegance of form and phrasing, clarity, the ability to communicate immensely complex ideas as simply as possible, and once again, clarity, is extremely important. No paper will ever get the best publication site if it's not well-written, and poor writing puts grants in jeopardy. Once you have your periods, homophones(their/they're/there, people who get these right are lightyears ahead), and other basic structure down, you need to be able to make it flow and ring properly. Proper phrasing and organization really helps people move through without snags, and prevents misunderstanding. There are papers that have grace and elegance to them, a felicity of style that makes them easier to read. This doesn't mean that they're playing with the wrong style, or being inappropriately light, just that they're using the basic forms that they have to use as a foundation for something that reads with elegance. That's what any academic worth their salt needs to strive for, imho.
Anyhow, this is where writers like Twain and such really help. They provide examples of felicity of style, and load enough examples into your brain that you learn certain metastylistic skills.

nicojo
2nd June 2005, 18:32
It was a joke. I'm an English teacher at a college. I was drawing a funny parallel between Twain, who wrote "The Gilded Age", and Musashi, who wrote...ah well never mind. :rolleyes:

The stuff about seitei and all that was not very serious either. Hopefully Russ thought my crack about self-training on bottles was funny. Just as long as he doesn't end up like Raymond Carver or somebody like that.

:)

Trevor Johnson
2nd June 2005, 18:58
Twain at least BATHED.

nicojo
7th June 2005, 09:11
Russ I am working on a long post for you. I will try to have it up by tomorrow and we will see what people say. Sorry it is taking so long.

nicojo
8th June 2005, 01:05
Okay Russ, here's how I see it.

You are talking about "style,” which itself can be looked at in at least three or so different ways. One of these is the conventions and regulations that every system of documentation, such as the APA, MLA, or Cambridge styles have. This is, actually, pretty easy to inflict upon your writing in order to get it publishable. It isn't fun, it is tedious and it mostly revolves around making sure your periods and underlines are all in the right place when you write out a source citation. There was a bit of a discussion about this, specifically about citing sources in an academic context, in the Koryu forum before the hack and it starts around the third page of this thread (http://www.e-budo.com/forum/showthread.php?t=29641&page=3). These citing conventions can easily be found off the web, though you will want to buy one of the manuals put out by the organization you choose to work with, such as this one (http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/tg/detail/-/1557987912/qid=1118188767/sr=8-1/ref=pd_csp_1/103-4841446-8616657?v=glance&s=books&n=507846), for the APA. Once you achieve a sort of consistency and know what the general rules of thumb are, it is relatively easy to move to another system of documentation if needed; for example, if you are accustomed to APA and your editor wants it in CMS.

In addition to the citation requirements are those particular concerns of each convention. Each manual of style will have these, but if this is what is worrying you most about writing, I'd say that it shouldn’t be such a worry. This is from the APA Publication Manual, under “Writing Style”:


Thought units—whether a single word, a sentence or paragraph or a longer sequence—must be orderly. So that readers will understand what you are presenting, you must aim for continuity in words, concepts, and thematic development from the opening statement to the conclusion. Readers will be confused if you misplace words or phrases in sentences, abandon familiar syntax, shift the criterion for items in a series, or clutter the sequence of ideas with wordiness or irrelevancies.

Well, that is pretty much just common sense—good organization, coherence, etc. And it is followed by a few more such things that can be found in any handbook on writing! These sorts of stipulations shouldn’t pose much problem for anybody that is careful.

Then there is the “house style” a given publisher or company will have. This may be important when one is actually ready to submit writing to a journal, but unless one is a full-time employee of, say, the Washington Post, and therefore needs to aim for a consistent, conformist style, such as whether the . goes after or before the ” and if it is spelled email or e-mail, you won’t need to worry about this much, either. In most cases, journals and other publishing companies provide such information, either on their webpage or in the actual printed journal, or in both locations. In all cases, if house style or documentation style is all that's keeping your gem from being published, an editor should be good enough to work with you--if not, scroo'm.

Finally there is stylistics, ways of writing well, which really come down to practice and observation. This is what makes for a good writer. Yes, read Twain and others, but it is better if you think about your audience and locate writers you like that also write for that audience. If you are thinking about writing about MA, then look at the five or so really good writers that have moved from just reportage or academic writing, or worse, self-promotion, to an individual and personal voice while still communicating and informing effectively. Dave Lowry, in his posts and his books, sounds like Dave Lowry and not any other MA writer. I think a few others, in tone, topic and style, are as instantly recognizable—for me at least. I could quote from a post and see if you could guess who it was. Then we could analyze it to see what conscious choices they make as they write—but this is likely only to appeal to one of the smallest of subcultures within MA.

What is better, then, is for you to take a well-written paragraph from a writer you’d be happy to write like, and act as if it’s a kata, at the beginner level: copy it exactly, word for word, noticing to the best of your ability the nuances of parallelism, subordination, vocabulary, syntax, and so on. Write the same thing EXACTLY! Do it with another writer or three or four. Notice what they are doing, and how they are each doing it differently. After a while, seriously, you will start to recognize these tactics and be able to pick up and use them yourself.

Don’t worry about “academic writing". It is a slithy thing. There are many bad examples, but I am convinced that it is only another mode, a method, that can be adjusted and reformed. Write like you write first, and then do the editing/agonizing. But there is no point to worrying if there is nothing written.

The best way to be a good writer, then, is to have something worthwhile to write. Then read widely in the particular area you’d like to write yourself, and pay close attention. Then do it. I can’t think of a better or more widely-recommended way of working on stylistics than that.

Of course I can suggest some books and things, some writers here and there, and explain what is effective subordination and what grammar hang-ups are worth having. But it starts with being a good reader. I am chock-full of opinions and lectures like this; like a lot of people I can be gabby about things I am interested in. But I will refrain.

And then there are always free-lance editors, with professional copy-editing experience, who teach this stuff for a living, who might be amenable to reviewing an article for more directed help…

Finally, let the audience, purpose, and topic guide the writing. My "creative writing" sounds different than my essays, different than my scholarly stuff, different than e-budo posts: all according to what I see as my task. But someone who had read all of my stuff would see a consistent style, or at least common techniques I use; good? well that is debatable.

HTH

Trevor Johnson
8th June 2005, 01:09
Nicely done for two hours of sleep. Sums it all up well! :smilejapa

nicojo
8th June 2005, 01:17
TY Trevor, I hope it is somewhat helpful for somebody. I don't want to talk about specific things that make academic writing bad, such as overuse of latinate constructions and faulty subordination, without examples of such, and I think that is more than what I can do this week!

And to be really useful, I'd have to deal with actual quotes and then we could all point out what was good or bad, and that, I am sure, appeals to almost no one!

Mekugi
22nd June 2005, 12:47
Thank you all for your your responses!!