Sometimes going back to writing or editing a formal piece of writing after working on the blog, I am really struck by how much of a useful crutch it can be to be able to drop into an informal, conversational register.
-
Näytä tämä ketju
-
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @BretDevereaux
I don't think writing in a way that respect the reader's finite capacity for concentration is a "crutch". The more I write, the more I dislike "formal writing" as a way to actually communicate information.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 5 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @vhranger
I think good formal writing can do this too, but it takes a lot more effort. The key is varying sentences by length and syntactical complexity. I suppose a paragraph should have a big complex topic sentence, then simpler detail sentences, then a complex concluding sentence.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 2 tykkäystä -
Vastauksena käyttäjille @BretDevereaux ja @vhranger
But actually making that happen when trying to write with academic precision in a formal register is tough. You have all of these necessary caveats that need to go in.
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 1 tykkäys -
Vastauksena käyttäjälle @BretDevereaux
It's also that structurally academic writing is incentivized to defend against peer reviewers rather than maximize reader enjoyment (and all other perverse publishing incentive). In a way the blog has the purest writing incentives -- to delight expected readership
1 vastaus 0 uudelleentwiittausta 3 tykkäystä
Peer review is certainly a factor. But it is also important when doing original research and pushing the boundaries of knowledge to present it in a way that has the absolute minimal amount of ambiguity and maximum amount of clarity. Which often isn't super exciting writing.
Lataaminen näyttää kestävän hetken.
Twitter saattaa olla ruuhkautunut tai ongelma on muuten hetkellinen. Yritä uudelleen tai käy Twitterin tilasivulla saadaksesi lisätietoja.