学术写作中的蒙昧主义

Jens Kjeldgaard‐Christiansen
{"title":"学术写作中的蒙昧主义","authors":"Jens Kjeldgaard‐Christiansen","doi":"10.7146/lev92023136279","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Obscure academic writing is vague, ambiguous, jargon-filled, or otherwise difficult to interpret. Obscurantists use such writing to hide the shallowness or incoherence of their ideas. There is value in being able to see through their attempts so that one does not waste one’s time on, for example, the psychoanalytic verbiage of Jacques Lacan. Therefore, this article identifies five recognizable characteristics of obscure—and especially of obscurantist—academic writing. Specifically, obscurantists tend to (1) fail to distinguish between truistic and radical versions of their claims, (2) employ paradoxical formulations, (3) avoid giving examples of their ideas (4), overuse abstract nouns, and (5) insist on their own lucidity. The article concludes by suggesting that the deepest problem with obscure academic writing is that it insulates arguments and theories from criticism.","PeriodicalId":213915,"journal":{"name":"Leviathan: Interdisciplinary Journal in English","volume":"87 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-23","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Obscurantism in Academic Writing\",\"authors\":\"Jens Kjeldgaard‐Christiansen\",\"doi\":\"10.7146/lev92023136279\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"Obscure academic writing is vague, ambiguous, jargon-filled, or otherwise difficult to interpret. Obscurantists use such writing to hide the shallowness or incoherence of their ideas. There is value in being able to see through their attempts so that one does not waste one’s time on, for example, the psychoanalytic verbiage of Jacques Lacan. Therefore, this article identifies five recognizable characteristics of obscure—and especially of obscurantist—academic writing. Specifically, obscurantists tend to (1) fail to distinguish between truistic and radical versions of their claims, (2) employ paradoxical formulations, (3) avoid giving examples of their ideas (4), overuse abstract nouns, and (5) insist on their own lucidity. The article concludes by suggesting that the deepest problem with obscure academic writing is that it insulates arguments and theories from criticism.\",\"PeriodicalId\":213915,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Leviathan: Interdisciplinary Journal in English\",\"volume\":\"87 1\",\"pages\":\"0\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2023-03-23\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Leviathan: Interdisciplinary Journal in English\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.7146/lev92023136279\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Leviathan: Interdisciplinary Journal in English","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.7146/lev92023136279","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

晦涩的学术写作是模糊的、模棱两可的、充满行话的或难以解释的。蒙昧主义者用这种文字来掩盖他们思想的浅薄或不连贯。能够看穿他们的企图是有价值的,这样一个人就不会浪费时间,例如,雅克·拉康的精神分析的废话。因此,本文确定了模糊学术写作的五个可识别的特征,特别是蒙昧主义学术写作。具体来说,蒙昧主义者倾向于(1)无法区分他们主张的老生常谈和激进版本,(2)使用矛盾的表述,(3)避免举例说明他们的观点(4),过度使用抽象名词,(5)坚持自己的清晰性。文章最后指出,晦涩的学术写作最深层的问题是,它将论点和理论与批评隔离开来。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Obscurantism in Academic Writing
Obscure academic writing is vague, ambiguous, jargon-filled, or otherwise difficult to interpret. Obscurantists use such writing to hide the shallowness or incoherence of their ideas. There is value in being able to see through their attempts so that one does not waste one’s time on, for example, the psychoanalytic verbiage of Jacques Lacan. Therefore, this article identifies five recognizable characteristics of obscure—and especially of obscurantist—academic writing. Specifically, obscurantists tend to (1) fail to distinguish between truistic and radical versions of their claims, (2) employ paradoxical formulations, (3) avoid giving examples of their ideas (4), overuse abstract nouns, and (5) insist on their own lucidity. The article concludes by suggesting that the deepest problem with obscure academic writing is that it insulates arguments and theories from criticism.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The Cherokees and the Constitution Grammatical Gender and Cognition Video Game Aesthetics in Squid Game Musical Aptitude and the Acquisition of Pitch and Duration in L2 Vowels Cinematic Unreliability in The Father
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1