Hi Karen, some writing manuals suggest avoiding "It is xxx that" because such a construction is almost always needless. Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us.
Thank you very much, Ma'am, for this invaluable guidance! Being ESL student writers, we are hardly aware of such facts. Even professors are not teaching us these things. Because of that, top journals rejecting so many research papers though the research work themselves are not in itself unworthy. I am sure lots of students will get benefitted from it. I hope to see more videos like it from you soon.
Thank you very much! I have written well without cliches, perhaps intuitively, and on other occasions I have used cliches. This video will make me strive towards avoiding cliches and improving my writing further.
Thank you so much Dr.McKee for this wonderful presentation and brilliant advice on avoiding cliches. I appreciate your guidance a lot. Best regards, Devendra Singh(Health Psychologist and Neuroscience researcher).
Could you argue why the cliches are bad? I don't believe that constant usage is enough of an argument to show that something is worse. For instance, the proposed rewriting in 1:21 is longer and more tedious to read. One could argue that something well-known in a field is a sentence not deserving of such length in a paper. If there is an agreement in the scientific community from that specific domain, getting the sentence across with the fastest method possible would be clearly preferred. I believe the video lacks convincing arguments to qualify as good advice. Especially given that the initial introductory images could be considered a straw man fallacy.
Using cliches can make your writing seem unoriginal and pedestrian. Of course, it depends on which cliches and how many times they are used. Using one cliché such as “It is well known that…” or “It is important to note that…” in a paper is not so terrible. But use of cliched phrases can grate on some readers and make them conclude that you are a lazy writer. In addition, starting a sentence with “it” (whatever that is) is not elegant writing. The information can be presented better without such a phrase. I agree that a well-known fact in a field need not be explained in detail in a paper. However, sometimes a writer must provide brief background information to justify the approach taken and in so doing repeat facts that those in the field already know (and that non-specialists do not, thereby widening your readership). The example I gave (at 1:21) dropped the cliched phrase and combined two sentences that were necessary to introduce the topic of the paper (facilitation) and emphasize its relationship to the traditional focus of such studies (competition): “Although competition has been emphasized as an organizing force in plant communities, recent investigations support facilitation as an important mechanism influencing plant distribution and success.” In this example, the reader is being told that the paper focuses on a less-studied topic but one that is important to the field. That information helps to orient the reader and pique their interest. A final point is that AI tools such as ChatGPT seem to use a lot of hedging phrases such as “It’s important to note that…”. AI detectors look for such generic language to identify AI-generated text. In my opinion, a writer is better off avoiding such lazy wording.
Yes but I see clichés in titles from well published authors still. A classic in my and your field of bluecarbon was about seaweed sequestration.. Starting with The elephant in the room...... How would a search engine deal with that, lol
Hi Karen, some writing manuals suggest avoiding "It is xxx that" because such a construction is almost always needless. Thanks for sharing your knowledge with us.
I agree. Thanks for the suggestion.
Thank you very much, Ma'am, for this invaluable guidance! Being ESL student writers, we are hardly aware of such facts. Even professors are not teaching us these things. Because of that, top journals rejecting so many research papers though the research work themselves are not in itself unworthy. I am sure lots of students will get benefitted from it. I hope to see more videos like it from you soon.
I’m glad you are finding my videos helpful.
Very valuable advice. I really appreciate it. Thank you so much for your great videos. I learnt a lot from you, my dear professor.
Glad to hear that!
Thank you very much! I have written well without cliches, perhaps intuitively, and on other occasions I have used cliches. This video will make me strive towards avoiding cliches and improving my writing further.
Glad it was helpful!
Thank you so much Dr.McKee for this wonderful presentation and brilliant advice on avoiding cliches. I appreciate your guidance a lot. Best regards, Devendra Singh(Health Psychologist and Neuroscience researcher).
Glad it was helpful!
Thank you Karen. Great tips!
Thanks for watching!
Thank you very much.
Could you argue why the cliches are bad? I don't believe that constant usage is enough of an argument to show that something is worse.
For instance, the proposed rewriting in 1:21 is longer and more tedious to read. One could argue that something well-known in a field is a sentence not deserving of such length in a paper. If there is an agreement in the scientific community from that specific domain, getting the sentence across with the fastest method possible would be clearly preferred.
I believe the video lacks convincing arguments to qualify as good advice. Especially given that the initial introductory images could be considered a straw man fallacy.
Using cliches can make your writing seem unoriginal and pedestrian. Of course, it depends on which cliches and how many times they are used. Using one cliché such as “It is well known that…” or “It is important to note that…” in a paper is not so terrible. But use of cliched phrases can grate on some readers and make them conclude that you are a lazy writer. In addition, starting a sentence with “it” (whatever that is) is not elegant writing. The information can be presented better without such a phrase.
I agree that a well-known fact in a field need not be explained in detail in a paper. However, sometimes a writer must provide brief background information to justify the approach taken and in so doing repeat facts that those in the field already know (and that non-specialists do not, thereby widening your readership). The example I gave (at 1:21) dropped the cliched phrase and combined two sentences that were necessary to introduce the topic of the paper (facilitation) and emphasize its relationship to the traditional focus of such studies (competition):
“Although competition has been emphasized as an organizing force in plant communities, recent investigations support facilitation as an important mechanism influencing plant distribution and success.”
In this example, the reader is being told that the paper focuses on a less-studied topic but one that is important to the field. That information helps to orient the reader and pique their interest.
A final point is that AI tools such as ChatGPT seem to use a lot of hedging phrases such as “It’s important to note that…”. AI detectors look for such generic language to identify AI-generated text.
In my opinion, a writer is better off avoiding such lazy wording.
Yes but I see clichés in titles from well published authors still. A classic in my and your field of bluecarbon was about seaweed sequestration.. Starting with The elephant in the room...... How would a search engine deal with that, lol
"In recent years" - this can be interpreted by readers as they know which year's paper they are reading. Is it really that important to avoid this?
No, it's not as important to avoid as some of the other cliches. The point is to be clear about the time frame, if possible.