about personal and impersonal
Answers
Answered by
0
Scientific writers often try to avoid the use of personal expressions or statements in order to make their writing seem more impartial and formal. The following sentence has been written with both personal and impersonal expressions to highlight the contrast between the two writing styles.
impersonal The explanation for this phenomenon may be found in...
personal We/I believe that the explanation for this phenomenon may be found in...
However, used indiscriminately, writing impersonally can result in clumsy statements through an excessive use of the passive voice. This can lead to ambiguity or inaccuracy in your written work
i hope help you❤❤❤
impersonal The explanation for this phenomenon may be found in...
personal We/I believe that the explanation for this phenomenon may be found in...
However, used indiscriminately, writing impersonally can result in clumsy statements through an excessive use of the passive voice. This can lead to ambiguity or inaccuracy in your written work
i hope help you❤❤❤
Answered by
1
Personal or impersonal?
To me or not to me?
One of the most frequently asked questions by students is ‘should I use ‘I’ in my writing?’ The answer is that there is no single answer. Some subjects encourage the use of ‘I’ while others actually frown on it or ‘ban’ it because it is thought to show a lack of objectivity. More confusingly, in my experience as a Royal Literary Fellow, even tutors teaching the same subject will have different views about it. Some don’t mind but others will mark students down. So, one way to answer this question is (a) to find out what the convention is in your subject; and (b) ask your tutors what they expect to see in the essays they set you. However, there are other ways to help you think about whether to use ‘I’ or not.
Is it about you? 2: personal vs objective
One reason for not using ‘I’ and one reason why many tutors often dislike it is that it shows a lack of objectivity. To return to our analogy of the police detective: he does not say ‘I think X is guilty’ but rather ‘The evidence points to the fact that X is guilty’. Another reason for not using ‘I’ is that once you start it’s very easy to slip into a chatty style; and once you’ve slipped into a chatty style, it’s even easier to start spouting opinions and feelings and prejudices. A typical example would be ‘Professor X’s theory says this but what I think…’. Tutors who set and mark undergraduate essays are less interested in what you think than in what you know, what you can find out. To put that another way, they are more interested in your ability to exercise judgement than spout opinions.
Is it about you? 4: personal vs useful
Another question to ask yourself is: does a personal tone add anything useful to my essay? Let’s take a point from an imaginary essay and look at the two styles of writing it. Here’s the academic version:
In the light of Brown’s criticisms of Jones’s theory, the most surprising thing about Brown’s own theory is its marked similarities to Jones’s. Smith (1997, 13-15) even goes so far as to argue that the two models are virtually indistinguishable.
Here’s the personal version:
Having looked at Brown’s criticisms of Jones’s theory, I was really surprised to see how close Brown’s own theory is to Jones’s. Smith 1997, 13-15) even argues that they are almost the same.
Both versions are saying the same thing: they are describing the fact that despite one theorist’s criticism of another, their theories turn out to be virtually the same. Both versions support this discovery by referring to another theorist.
The personal style version actually uses fewer words; and its note of personal discovery – ‘I was really surprised…’ – is actually quite attractive and gives the reader a sense of a living, thinking person behind the words. In terms of the writer’s own development and learning, it’s important that they’ve made this surprising discovery.
However, in terms of accepted and established ways of academic writing, the most important thing is the fact of the similarity between the two theories not the fact that yet another undergraduate has discovered it. The personal style puts greater emphasis on the writer’s surprise than on the similarity of the two theories.
To me or not to me?
The stereotyping of the colonial subject, that which is produced through surveillance, is, therefore, always threatened with lack. It depends upon an illusory relationship of consent which seems to produce ‘in the scopic space’ a relationship between observer and observed.
To defend [my thesis] I need to look at the notion of mimicry and its relationship with mockery. How, in this drama of colonial subjectivity, does mimicry/mockery operate? What is its basis, how is it produced, what are its effects? In discussing these it will be clear that I mark a distance with Bhabha’s characterisation of mimicry
The article is eight and a half pages long. The first three pages summarise both Heaney’s poetry and Lloyd’s view of it. At the end of page three, Herron tells us what he’s going to argue and he does so in a personal style: ‘I am concerned’, ‘I will argue’, ‘I will demonstrate’, ‘I will term’ and ‘I argue’. The next two pages focus on a particular poem as an example of what is new in Heaney’s work. At the end of page five, we get the second passage, again in a personal style. The rest of the article develops the discussion of the Heaney poem from particular theoretical perspectives.
This has two effects. First, we get a good sense of a living, thinking person behind the writing. Second, we get an impression of active thinking as Herron stops to review what he’s said and tell us what he’s going to say next and how he’s going to say it.
To me or not to me?
One of the most frequently asked questions by students is ‘should I use ‘I’ in my writing?’ The answer is that there is no single answer. Some subjects encourage the use of ‘I’ while others actually frown on it or ‘ban’ it because it is thought to show a lack of objectivity. More confusingly, in my experience as a Royal Literary Fellow, even tutors teaching the same subject will have different views about it. Some don’t mind but others will mark students down. So, one way to answer this question is (a) to find out what the convention is in your subject; and (b) ask your tutors what they expect to see in the essays they set you. However, there are other ways to help you think about whether to use ‘I’ or not.
Is it about you? 2: personal vs objective
One reason for not using ‘I’ and one reason why many tutors often dislike it is that it shows a lack of objectivity. To return to our analogy of the police detective: he does not say ‘I think X is guilty’ but rather ‘The evidence points to the fact that X is guilty’. Another reason for not using ‘I’ is that once you start it’s very easy to slip into a chatty style; and once you’ve slipped into a chatty style, it’s even easier to start spouting opinions and feelings and prejudices. A typical example would be ‘Professor X’s theory says this but what I think…’. Tutors who set and mark undergraduate essays are less interested in what you think than in what you know, what you can find out. To put that another way, they are more interested in your ability to exercise judgement than spout opinions.
Is it about you? 4: personal vs useful
Another question to ask yourself is: does a personal tone add anything useful to my essay? Let’s take a point from an imaginary essay and look at the two styles of writing it. Here’s the academic version:
In the light of Brown’s criticisms of Jones’s theory, the most surprising thing about Brown’s own theory is its marked similarities to Jones’s. Smith (1997, 13-15) even goes so far as to argue that the two models are virtually indistinguishable.
Here’s the personal version:
Having looked at Brown’s criticisms of Jones’s theory, I was really surprised to see how close Brown’s own theory is to Jones’s. Smith 1997, 13-15) even argues that they are almost the same.
Both versions are saying the same thing: they are describing the fact that despite one theorist’s criticism of another, their theories turn out to be virtually the same. Both versions support this discovery by referring to another theorist.
The personal style version actually uses fewer words; and its note of personal discovery – ‘I was really surprised…’ – is actually quite attractive and gives the reader a sense of a living, thinking person behind the words. In terms of the writer’s own development and learning, it’s important that they’ve made this surprising discovery.
However, in terms of accepted and established ways of academic writing, the most important thing is the fact of the similarity between the two theories not the fact that yet another undergraduate has discovered it. The personal style puts greater emphasis on the writer’s surprise than on the similarity of the two theories.
To me or not to me?
The stereotyping of the colonial subject, that which is produced through surveillance, is, therefore, always threatened with lack. It depends upon an illusory relationship of consent which seems to produce ‘in the scopic space’ a relationship between observer and observed.
To defend [my thesis] I need to look at the notion of mimicry and its relationship with mockery. How, in this drama of colonial subjectivity, does mimicry/mockery operate? What is its basis, how is it produced, what are its effects? In discussing these it will be clear that I mark a distance with Bhabha’s characterisation of mimicry
The article is eight and a half pages long. The first three pages summarise both Heaney’s poetry and Lloyd’s view of it. At the end of page three, Herron tells us what he’s going to argue and he does so in a personal style: ‘I am concerned’, ‘I will argue’, ‘I will demonstrate’, ‘I will term’ and ‘I argue’. The next two pages focus on a particular poem as an example of what is new in Heaney’s work. At the end of page five, we get the second passage, again in a personal style. The rest of the article develops the discussion of the Heaney poem from particular theoretical perspectives.
This has two effects. First, we get a good sense of a living, thinking person behind the writing. Second, we get an impression of active thinking as Herron stops to review what he’s said and tell us what he’s going to say next and how he’s going to say it.
Similar questions