At first glance, there might not appear to be a difference between that and which, two relative pronouns used to introduce a dependent clause in a sentence. But in careful writing, that and which have distinct uses that can drastically change the meaning of a sentence.
To be fair, writers in the UK may already be perplexed by this question, given that in British English, the words are more or less interchangeable. However, in North American English, there is a major distinction between the relative pronouns that and which.
Decades ago, I studied abroad in Moscow, in the Soviet Union. One day, my Russian friends and I were walking along at VDNkh and came across a billboard that read Выставка ПрогрессаVystavka Progressa. One friend decided to translate the billboard: “The exhibition of the progress.”
“Uh, no,” I responded. “Just ‘the exhibition of progress.'”
“Why?”
“I don’t know.”
Native speakers of English usually have no trouble with the use of the definite article the or the indefinite article a/an, but we can’t always explain the rule for their use. And non-native speakers, especially ones whose native languages are like Russian and lack both definite and indefinite articles, often have a really hard time figuring out when to use them.
So, for the benefit of learners of English and native speakers alike, let’s explore how definite and indefinite articles in English are used.
Scientific research is hard; writing a scientific paper in good English style can be even harder.
Pick up almost any paper in a scientific journal, and you’ll encounter sentences like the following:
The radially symmetric solution of the three-dimensional foundation-soil interaction is obtained.
Further, it was also captured from the velocity-time history curves that there was a large negative wave crest after the first positive peak.
Finally, the most relevant details of its construction process carried out to ensure the exact position of the timber laths are presented.
A systematic literature review is performed to assess to what extent the current evidence addresses the effects of the sound environment on cognition and learned helplessness measured by motivation in children and young adults until the age of 21.
Each of these sentences reflects a tremendous amount of scientific research and effort but is equally incomprehensible to lay readers—and probably to many scientists as well.
In this article, we’re going to look at some of the pitfalls of scientific writing and how you can make your writing clearer and more effective without sacrificing any of its scientific quality.
The Passive Voice Isn’t More Formal
The first sentence above (The radially symmetric solution of the three-dimensional foundation-soil interaction is obtained) is a very frequently encountered type of sentence in scientific writing. The sentence uses a passive construction to describe the obtainment of a particular result: The solution … is obtained. Such sentences are a challenge to readers because one often has to wait until the very end of the sentence to find out what happened.
There are a couple of reasons why scientists write like this. The first is that doing so sounds more formal than the standard word order. Second, it sounds more formal because it leaves the scientist out of it; it doesn’t sound as personal as saying, “We obtained” or “I found.”
However, plenty of good scientific writing references the researcher directly. Some very fine papers use constructions like we have shown, we investigated, or we found that. Formality isn’t necessarily established by word order, and, in some cases, the word order can interfere with the comprehensibility of the writing.
As I have noted elsewhere, a simple method for improving the clarity and comprehensibility of writing is to ensure that each sentence of a given paragraph has the same subject. The problem with using the passive voice is that when the performer of each action is the researcher, using the passive voice requires changing the subject in every sentence. For example, compare these two versions of someone’s morning routine:
The alarm clock was first turned off after having been placed on snooze three times. Subsequently, teeth were brushed and clothing from the dresser were donned. Breakfast was prepared and consumed in under 10 min. Using keys previously collected, the car door was opened and the ignition turned on. The vehicle was driven down the road at a velocity of 60kph.
Lina hit snooze on her alarm clock three times before turning it off and getting up. She brushed her teeth and got dressed with clothes from her dresser. She ate breakfast in only ten minutes, grabbed her keys, opened the car door, and started the ignition. She drove down the road at 60 kilometers an hour.
Now, these two paragraphs are in markedly different styles, but it is not style alone that differentiates them. The second one is much easier to understand and feels much less like a disjointed series of actions than the first. The first paragraph, because it uses the passive voice throughout, creates a series of actions that do not feel otherwise connected.
Thus, Sentence 1 above can be rewritten as We obtained the radially symmetric solution for the three-dimensional foundation-soil interaction or The researchers obtained the radially symmetric solution for the three-dimensional foundation-soil interaction without any loss of quality and with a great improvement in the comprehensibility of the writing.
The Curse of Knowledge
One of the hardest things for a writer to remember is that not everyone knows what you know. When we write, we know what we mean to say, so it doesn’t occur to us that no one else might understand what we’ve written.
There are a couple of ways to avoid this very common pitfall.
Background
Even the most seasoned professional needs the occasional reminder about developments in the field. Brief explanations of phenomena or processes can provide much-needed clarity.
Now, given that most of the people reading your paper will be familiar with the subject matter, you don’t need to go into great depth—you don’t need to do what legal writers often do. As one colleague noted: “Before they can talk about this year’s car models, they have to go through the whole invention of the wheel.” Having said that, if you wish to be understood by a broader audience or the media, providing a little background can help.
Use Verbs, Not Nouns
Consider the following sentence:
(1) Morale in the department has improved ever since the reorganization.
It is good to know that morale has improved, but the reader doesn’t have any sense of why it has because reorganization is opaque. The reorganization of what? How?
Consider this sentence:
(2) Morale in the department has improved ever since we reorganized the supervisory structures for our employees.
Here, the nature of the reorganization and its likely reasons for having improved department morale are much clearer. The remainder of the text can refer to “the reorganization” and be much more understandable.
Putting the Lessons into Practice
With these guidelines, let’s see how the example sentences from above can be reworked to be clearer and in a more natural English style.
Original Version
Edited Version
The radially symmetric solution of the three-dimensional foundation-soil interaction is obtained.
We obtained the radially symmetric solution to the three-dimensional foundation-soil interaction.
Further, it was also captured from the velocity-time history curves that there was a large negative wave crest after the first positive peak.
Further, the velocity–time history curves allowed us to capture a large negative wave crest after the first positive peak.
Finally, the most relevant details of its construction process carried out to ensure the exact position of the timber laths are presented.
Finally, we present the most relevant details of the construction process used to ensure the exact position of the timber laths.
A systematic literature review is performed to assess to what extent the current evidence addresses the effects of the sound environment on cognition and learned helplessness measured by motivation in children and young adults until the age of 21.
We perform a systemic literature review, examining the extent to which the current evidence addresses the effects of the sound environment on cognition and learned helplessness in children and young adults up to 21 years old, using the children’s motivation to measure their cognition and learned helplessness.
Some of these edited sentences are shorter, and some are longer; all of them are clearer.
Conclusion
The primary function of writing is to communicate effectively. Writing that is difficult to follow or that does not express its ideas clearly undermines effective communication.
Writing in clear and accessible language is essential for effective scientific communication. Avoiding excessive use of the passive voice, providing background information, and using specific verbs can significantly improve the clarity and comprehensibility of scientific writing.
When we narrow the gap between scientific knowledge and reader understanding, we not only make our writing clearer and more enjoyable, we enhance the impact and accessibility of scientific research to the wider world.
Let Schaefer Wordsmithing help you with your scientific writing. We are experienced in editing academic and scientific papers, articles, and other publications. Communicate your ideas more clearly and effectively and improve your chances for publication and greater impact.
Editing and writing revision services for scientific papers.
Schaefer Wordsmithing can help scientists looking to submit English-language papers to correct their English grammar, improve readability and flow, and improve clarity and English style.
We offer three rates for editing depending on your editing needs and timeline: Basic, Advanced, and Premier.
I was feeling cheeky and a little curious, so I asked ChatGPT to write me an essay on why using human writers was superior to AI. Perhaps the most fascinating thing about this exercise is that the writing is simultaneously good and awful. It’s good in that it’s grammatical, clear, and competent. It’s awful in the sense that it’s flat, dull, and lacks, for lack of a better expression, “soul.”
So, let’s take a look at the essay that ChatGPT wrote for me—“The Superiority of Human Writers over AI,” to see just how right it is in its conclusions.
To say that our cultural consciousness on matters of gender identity is rapidly evolving is an understatement. In a few short years, our awareness as a culture went from practically none to a kind of “how could you not know that?” state. Let me give you a quick illustration.
For many years, I had the privilege of working in a campus ministry context. The community I served was a community of students committed to sharing the radical, all-inclusive love of God with a broken world through acts of worship, devotion, service, hospitality, and especially social justice. Of the religious communities on campus, aside from the Unitarians, they were by far the most progressive.
Once, at a student leadership meeting in 2010, one of the students made an announcement about the men’s group breakfast the following weekend. “So, if you like Canadian bacon and don’t have a uterus, you’re welcome to come.” In three years’ time, in that same community—a community that would invite “all female and female-identifying persons” to attend women’s group meetings—this comment would have been viewed as terribly transphobic. But in 2010, no one even batted an eye—in the most progressive and social justice-conscious religious community on a very liberal campus.
The speed of this change means that a lot of people are still catching up to the understandings of gender and how it differs from sex and biology. But it also means that even for well-meaning older folks, there are different obstacles that are hard to eradicate in quick order.
The passive voice is one of the most popular no-nos for good English writing. Most style guides—and writing software like Microsoft Word and Grammarly—will tell you: avoid using the passive voice in your writing. But the passive voice is often used to great effect (as it is in this very sentence).
Lower Manhattan, well after the Dutch. Photo by Seva Kruhlov on Pexels.com
There are a lot of things to keep straight when you’re writing a story: characters, plot, setting, timeline, names, language, background, and more. It’s a lot of information that you have to keep track of—and a lot of information to convey to your readers.
Given that, it can be tempting to dump all of that information in large blocks of exposition or in character descriptions rather than communicating that information in the narrative. But the advice given to filmmakers and playwrights is just as relevant for writers: show, don’t tell.
In the old days of writing with a typewriter, there was no option to distinguish between an apostrophe ( ’ ) and a single quotation mark ( ‘ )—they were typed with the same key that produced the same character meant for both situations: ( ' ).
The only people who had to worry about distinguishing between them were professional typesetters, and they knew what they were doing.
But then along came Microsoft Word and other word processing software, which offered the user the option to choose to add “typographer’s quotes” (sometimes called “smart quotes” or “curly quotes”) automatically. What this meant was that you could type "quotes" and it would render what you’d typed as “quotes.” If you wrote you're, it’d render it as you’re. This was a pretty nice feature.
But as with all simple fixes, it often failed to perceive important distinctions between the two punctuation marks. And so, there are an awful lot of single quotation marks out there where apostrophes should be.
Questions of racial justice and equity have occupied—as they should—a large role in our national discourse of late. A long-overdue examination of the embedded biases and structural inequities in our society is taking place. Among the many such examinations is the exploration of how our use of language supports or reinforces racial inequity. In one particular instance, writers have wondered whether it is appropriate to capitalize the terms black and white when they refer to race.
Interestingly, there does not appear to be a consensus on whether to capitalize the terms, so we’ll take a look at the different positions and see if we can come to any conclusions.
