Calling all editors and academics

[stormbind]

In my academic scripts, the use of long words is offputting to my audience. I have taken tips from textbooks for editors, such as phrasing things in a positive way, and this has not assisted.

Readers will not understand and quickly lose interest in my work. They continue (because they have to) and are utterly lost before the end. Feedback is always poor. Lecturers have had meetings in which they try to fathom my meaning. Grades for written work are low

Some definitions for aesthetics endure without a work of art [1]. The author is concerned with aesthetics in reflective perception [2] and specifically, the formulation of content as a philosophical problem [3].

Innovations transform techniques of the arts [1], yet there remain human endeavours in the history of every piece.

Help

 

[Bill3000]

Try to be less like Cartfart and you'll be fine.

 

[Bast]

I find they really want you to make a point. Every word and sentence should be towards arguing for a point. I'm guessing that's where you're going wrong.

 

[Dr Tiny]

I always ask my tutees to plan their dissertations ahead of time. As they plan they must think how the dissertation will be ordered so as best to answer the question (ie the title).
I ask them to start quite generally and then as the dissertation progresses they must become more specific.
They must show they understand and have thought about what they are writing, and going on the small example of your writing I think you need to do something similar.
For example, what are the definitions of aesthetics and how do they relate to philosophical problems - give examples that support your statements to this effect.
What are the human endevours, how are they observed in the art, how does it relate to the message that the art is trying to convey. Importantly, how do they relate (if at all?) to the philosophical problems in the previous sentence?

 

[Brighteye]

Some definitions for aesthetics endure without a work of art [1].

All definitions of everything endure (exist) without a work of art. What are you trying to say? Do you mean that some definitions refer to things other than art? Then you say so.

The author is concerned with aesthetics in reflective perception [2] and specifically, the formulation of content as a philosophical problem [3].

'I am...', not 'the author is...'. I don't know what reflective perception is. I assume it's a piece of jargon. Content is never a problem. What is the philosophical problem? Contents of what? Of course your professors are going to be confused if you don't tell them what you're talking about.

Innovations transform techniques of the arts [1], yet there remain human endeavours in the history of every piece.

Every piece of what? Piece of the arts? Your sentences refer to things that are only in your mind. You need to write down things that you refer to later.
Why did you write 'yet'? Are you trying to contrast the contributions of methods and of effort in the making of beauty? What you're actually saying is that 'new methods change how we make art [which is tautologous] yet effort is required to make any of the arts' I don't see any contrast between these entirely unrelated statements.

 

[stormbind]

This is very good, Brighteye & Dr Tiny. You are repeating the feedback I receive from others - please discuss this with me.

All definitions of everything endure (exist) without a work of art. What are you trying to say? Do you mean that some definitions refer to things other than art? Then you say so.

Are you asking me if some definitions of aesthetics do not refer to art?

I am playing. Thank you for saying this

'I am...', not 'the author is...'. I don't know what reflective perception is. I assume it's a piece of jargon.

I thought it was best maintain a third person perspective?

I had thought that the inclusion of any citation inherently implied that any term was not jargon. Three sources might use different vocabulary to mean the same thing.

For example, I used Reflective Perception because a cited source does so. Without this influence I might have said Higher-Cognitive Perception, but no cited source does so, and I have no reason to believe my reader has a definition for higher-cognitive.

How important is it to match the vocabulary of cited authors?

Assuming no prior understanding of any topic requires an author to embed definitions, and too many definitions would exceed word limits. Knowing when and when not to provide a definition is significant. Is there a rule of thumb?

Content is never a problem. What is the philosophical problem? Contents of what? Of course your professors are going to be confused if you don't tell them what you're talking about.

I was referring to higher-cognitive perception and the act of formulating arbitrary philosophical problems.

My former and informal panel of markers had backgrounds in Information Systems and Music only. Writing interdisciplinary scripts has proven stressful, if not painful.

Every piece of what? Piece of the arts? Your sentences refer to things that are only in your mind. You need to write down things that you refer to later.
Why did you write 'yet'? Are you trying to contrast the contributions of methods and of effort in the making of beauty? What you're actually saying is that 'new methods change how we make art [which is tautologous] yet effort is required to make any of the arts' I don't see any contrast between these entirely unrelated statements.

Thank you

 

[On Yer Flour]

Thought "the author is" sounds a bit pretentious, I didn't have any trouble understanding that snippet of text. Then again, my father's a writer - I literally grew up in his library, as it was my bedroom - and I'm an artist who's versed in the language of art criticism and appreciation and aesthetic theory, so... Maybe you're just not defining your terminology clearly enough?

 

[Mandeville]

I would just try to include a who, what, where, when, why, and how in every idea and then restructure the paragraph so it flows smoothly. In your department I suspect it would be inappropirate to use the first person so I understand your use of "The author"

 

[JZ_UK]

Are you asking me if some definitions of aesthetics do not refer to art?

I would assume he means either: definitions are enduring -or- as I think you're trying to say, some concepts stand without an exemplar piece.

I thought it was best maintain a third person perspective?

Best practice, but sometimes you need to slip into the first person, say for example, "I would contend"

I had thought that the inclusion of any citation inherently implied that any term was not jargon. Three sources might use different vocabulary to mean the same thing.

I dunno... if Prof Y comes up with a new piece of jargon you'd cite him on it if it was useful.

How important is it to match the vocabulary of cited authors?

Depends on your style I'm afraid... you could always play with what they said and cite it but not quote directly if that helps you?

Assuming no prior understanding of any topic requires an author to embed definitions, and too many definitions would exceed word limits. Knowing when and when not to provide a definition is significant. Is there a rule of thumb?

I was referring to higher-cognitive perception and the act of formulating arbitrary philosophical problems.

Provide a definition only when it is required to show your understanding of a subject - or - if you're told to write so laymen can understand it... you're writing for academic consumption they know what you're talking about... hopefully

 

[Valka D'Ur]

Yikes.

I used to be a teacher, and I've edited a wide variety of academic papers and manuscripts and fiction. I write, and have lectured on astronomy. My grandmother was an artist, and I used to have my own crafting business. I am currently learning how to skin forums.

And I have absolutely not the foggiest idea of what you are talking about.

Sorry, but that's the blunt, honest truth. Just who is your target audience? Students, sure, but what year? What program? What is your goal, and what is their goal? Will they be tested on this material?

Is it possible to explain the concepts using ordinary language?

One sure-fire way of telling if an academic presentation or paper is done well is to hand it to a complete stranger who is not an expert on the subject matter. If that person can understand at least most of it, you're on the right track. If not, you need to revise.

You need to revise.

(If you would like more specific suggestions, drop me a PM )

 

[EdwardTking]

Post your whole article, and we might be able to deduce something.

 

[JZ_UK]

Post your whole article, and we might be able to deduce something.

Fear the plagiarism! Also... Unis claim copyright over your work

 

[QuoVadisNation]

I often find myself compromising my 'technical' babble in order for the great majority of people to understand it. But try doing what I do; when I need people to understand me, I say whatever I write down out loud. If the sentences sound awkward, then that's because it probably is awkward and needs to be revised.

If you want to maintain interest, you also need to keep your audience in mind.

 

[Brighteye]

This is very good, Brighteye & Dr Tiny. You are repeating the feedback I receive from others - please discuss this with me.

Are you asking me if some definitions of aesthetics do not refer to art?

I am playing. Thank you for saying this
I thought it was best maintain a third person perspective?

I had thought that the inclusion of any citation inherently implied that any term was not jargon. Three sources might use different vocabulary to mean the same thing.

For example, I used Reflective Perception because a cited source does so. Without this influence I might have said Higher-Cognitive Perception, but no cited source does so, and I have no reason to believe my reader has a definition for higher-cognitive.

How important is it to match the vocabulary of cited authors?

Assuming no prior understanding of any topic requires an author to embed definitions, and too many definitions would exceed word limits. Knowing when and when not to provide a definition is significant. Is there a rule of thumb?
I was referring to higher-cognitive perception and the act of formulating arbitrary philosophical problems.

My former and informal panel of markers had backgrounds in Information Systems and Music only. Writing interdisciplinary scripts has proven stressful, if not painful.
Thank you

Yes, I was telling you to clarify what you said, because the sentence as it is seems to make a pointless statement. Where you said 'some definitions of aesthetics', I would put 'all definitions of anything', and assume it be an obvious fact.
So I therefore assume that actually you're trying to say something else. I was wondering what. Aesthetics does not necessarily only cover constructed artwork: it can also include natural beauty. Hence this might be the point you're trying to convey. I just can't tell from what you've written.

The third person perspective may be good in truly academic papers, but if yours is being marked by professors, I'm guessing that it's actually a student essay, and not an academic paper at all. In this case, it might be perceived as merely pretentious.

My reference to jargon was an invitation for you to define it for me. A professor might know what you mean if the cited paper is a well-known one, but otherwise definition will help. This 'reflective perception' sounds to me like an obscure way of saying human subjectivity. I'd normally take subjectivity of beauty as a given, and not feel the need to specify it. Maybe the field of aesthetics has contrasting ideas: some which lay out certain rules, and some which rely on the judgement of the beholder, and some which seek to find rules governing the judgement of the beholder (all of which shade into each other). In this case limiting yourself to one area of a general field is alright. I just can't be sure.
As for the philosophical problem, to a layman it isn't apparent. I don't see a problem with 'content'. Content of what? If the whole essay is about this problem, I really would recommend defining it yourself, even if it's a well-known concept in the field. With a definition of your own you have a solid starting-point, and you're not going to have disagreement or confusion because a reader is using a different definition of the problem.

 

[.Shane.]

First rule of communication is, know your audience.

 

[Ecofarm]

Also... Unis claim copyright over your work

In the US, I'm quite sure that one's work is their own. We pay to go to uni, to assist us in developing our writing and are thus inherently not very publishable, at least in our disiplines. If the school would like to publish work that I contributed to, they need my signature.

Professors must publish in peer reviewed journals. They also write books and collect the proceeds (textbooks with xteenth editions are notorious fund generators) privately, as far as I know.

UK uni professor publications are copywritten by the universities, or the journals they are published in?

 

[JZ_UK]

In the US, I'm quite sure that one's work is their own. We pay to go to uni, to assist us in developing our writing and are thus inherently not very publishable, at least in our disiplines. If the school would like to publish work that I contributed to, they need my signature.

Professors must publish in peer reviewed journals. They also write books and collect the proceeds (textbooks with xteenth editions are notorious fund generators) privately, as far as I know.

UK uni professor publications are copywritten by the universities, or the journals they are published in?

In the UK your work to their set questions is the Uni's proof you're worthy of your degree classification so they hold onto it and claim a copyright over it. If however you're an undergrad (I'm not clear on postgrad's positions... especially where its a research based award) and off your own back you get something published in a journal then the Uni has no claim on that... wasn't really in the pursuance of your studies with them...

Professors/Lecs/Researchers have a different set of rules their work is their own, say an art lec's paintings done in their own time with their own paint... or an English researcher's paper on Where Exactly Is Wally?... difficulty appears when the work of faculty is actually of value better believe no genetics professor who comes up with a mega-crop is going to be able to run off and make agricultural gold without a fight

 

[Mise]

Can you explain what it means, to someone who knows nothing about ... whatever it is it's about?

In other words, write the same three sentences again, as if you were telling your mother.