This book has already taught me things that I have never heard of or thought about using in my academic writing like that writing is a response to someone's claims and that templates don't, in fact, stifle the writer's creativity. However, the most important aspect of academic writing that I have learned thus far is how to properly summarize someone's opinions or arguments. I think that this balancing act is intriguing but seems quite complicated. I believe that the authors of this book are absolutely correct in saying that there needs to be a balance between the writers ideas and the ideas of the person who wrote the works that you are summarizing. If there isn't a balance in the writers paper it would be biased and there would be no controversy which, in my opinion, would make the paper boring. I think that writing with a balancing act would be difficult because you have to put your ideas and voice on the back burner, while still morphing your summary of another persons ideas so that it fits in with the main idea of your paper. On a side note, I also think that using signal verbs like extol, repudiate, and exhort really make a paper powerful and make it stand out from the rest.
No comments:
Post a Comment