This section addresses the best attitude to adopt in writing papers for history and classics courses. Things like sarcasm, joking and abbreviations are best avoided. Instead, aim at clear, strong and sophisticated statements of fact.
1. Informality
Much as I may like you individually and as often as I may joke around because I'm enjoying the class, it's important to bear in mind that I'm your teacher and you are my students. We have an important duty to perform together—your education!—and we need to make that the highest priority in everything we do, especially writing.
Because I have to evaluate your writing for a grade, it's best if you are not too casual when you write, for the simple reason I need to know exactly what you have learned in order to assess your efforts fairly. Precision is, in fact, crucial in everything we do in this class—after all, you're expecting me to give you correct dates, names, and places, aren't you?—and that extends to employing precise language, too. Since informal expressions are usually imprecise, they do us little good here, so it's best to keep them to a minimum.
What Is "Informal" Language?
Mostly, I mean slang, humor and sarcasm. If you say, "The pyramids are so rad!" or "Augustus was a total wimp, dude!," what exactly am I to make of that? While I appreciate your enthusiasm—please don't lose that!—I need to know, in this context especially, what you've learned. Common informalities seen in student papers include "a lot," "a (little) bit" and "get." All in all, it's important that your writing be precise, since I can't grade something when I don't understand what's being said.
For much the same reason, your writing assignments in this class are not a very good arena for jokes or stand-up comedy either. In general, humor tends to fall flat on the pages of history. Please save the jokes for a different party, bro!
Sarcasm is even more of a problem, because it says the opposite of what the writer actually means. For instance, when I read, as I recently did, that "Greek women were not exactly looked up to, you know!," I find myself wondering exactly what this student does know. That is, how exactly were ancient Greek women looked to? Does this student mean, in fact, they were looked down on because they were all really short? Or, were they simply not worth looking at because they all had warts? Too often sarcasm ends up making a "non-statement" (see #4 below). That is, it just doesn't say anything meaningful.
The basic problem with humor, slang and sarcasm in this type of writing stems from the essential difference between spoken and written discourse. Since it is impossible, for instance, to reproduce through the written word the snarling tone in which the quote above about Greek women was probably meant to be delivered, the statement ends up adding little or nothing to what the writer's saying. That is, to assert Greek women were "not looked up to" is about as helpful to a history paper as claiming they did not live on Mars. It's meaningless.
Abbreviations and Numbers
Here are three other features which are commonly found in informal writing and are things to avoid in academic prose:
- No abbreviations: Do not use &, w/, #, or anything found under "Iconic Symbols" on the pull-down menu of your computer! And never under any condition use "etc." If there are more items in your list, then cite them; if not, put an "and" in front of the last one and leave the "etc." out. Also, avoid "and/or." All in all, abbreviations are fine in a shopping list, but not a history paper, because they imply haste. Do you want to give your reader, especially a teacher, the impression you rushed through the preparation of your paper and didn't have the time to cite all pertinent data?
- Numbers: Write out simple numbers, e.g. four, two hundred, one thousand, eighteenth, sixty-first. If, however, more than two words are required in writing a number, then use an arithmetic numeral (124; 2,453,799; 11:24; 407th). Exception: Always use numbers to write dates (1 A.D., 31 BCE, 476 CE), citations of passages in literature (Iliad 12.36; Hippolytus 26-89) and bibliographical references (page 34; volume 4).
- You and Me. Formal language works best when it appears to be impersonal, driven not by opinion but fact. That entails creating distance between the reader and the writer, in that such a posture makes a statement seem more objective.
- Among other things, objectivity precludes the use of personal pronouns like "you" and "yours" which bring reader and writer into direct contact. This also includes imperative (command) forms which imply "you." Examples of such imperative forms are "Remember how important it is . . .," "Bear in mind that this is true . . .," "Take for example . . ." and "Note the ways in which Sophocles uses character . . ."
- For the same reason, "I/me/my" and "we/us/our" should also be avoided as much as possible.
- Who and That/Which. The pronouns "who" and "that/which" should be employed properly. That is, say "who(m)" when you are referring to people: "Julius Caesar who (not that) conquered Gaul was a famous Roman general." Conversely, use "that" or "which" in reference to things: "Julius Caesar conquered Gaul which subsequently became a Roman province."
In sum, there's a great disadvantage to writing informally in a history or classics class, since it makes you look both casual and rushed, neither of which will help your grade. Conversely, there's a great advantage to writing formally, especially here, since formality forces you into a posture where you appear to create some distance between your own feelings and the cause you're arguing for. That's good in this case, because it puts you in a more objective stance right from the start. Objectivity—or even the mere appearance of being objective—is good in academic writing.
Moreover, it's my experience that, if I write formally, I think formally too. Where sound critical judgment is at a premium, we should do everything we can to form the sanest, soberest opinions possible, even if they only look that way. It's all part of learning to speak and listen to each other with respect.
Check Your Comprehension
Use these resources to test your comprehension of this section of the Writing Guide.
Comprehension Check (Powerpoint) Comprehension Check (PDF)
2. Definitive Statements
In general, it's best to make statements as positive and definitive as possible. Rather than saying, for instance, "The Romans might seem to be possibly the greatest success story in Western Civilization," make a bolder assertion instead, something like "The Romans are the greatest success story . . ." Wishy-washy statements, undercut by waffling like "might seem to be possibly," are usually the product of incomplete thinking. It suggests the writer hasn't yet made up his mind about the Romans' achievements and isn't ready to commit them to paper.
Indeed, the force with which you drive home your ideas is a good measure of how well you've done your homework. If you've tackled a problem head on and really wrestled with it, you will have strong opinions about the subject. In that case, the words you use to express those opinions will naturally be forthright and clear.
Let me put it clearly. Keep away from "may," "might," "could," "would," and "seem." Their adverbial counterparts, "possibly" and "probably," also weaken an argument. Instead, do everything you can to avoid writing a paper laced with uncertainties. Study the facts and then trust yourself to declare your opinion in clear and definitive terms.
Check Your Comprehension
Use these resources to test your comprehension of this section of the Writing Guide.
Comprehension Check (Powerpoint) Comprehension Check (PDF)
3. Overstatements
"The Romans always loved their state."
"All Greeks hated outsiders."
"In teaching his philosophy to others, Socrates never gave answers but only questioned people."
Overstatements such as these can undercut an argument. Technically, the sentences above are wrong, not so much because their authors don't understand the nature of the past but because they went too far in the right direction.
If, for example, you say "All Romans loved their state always!" and if I can think of a single exception, some Roman who only liked but didn't love his state—Nero, perhaps?—then your statement is, strictly speaking, incorrect. And was there not one single ancient Greek who preferred barbarians to his own kind? How about Alexander the Great? So then did Socrates never give a simple lecture without questioning people? What about at his trial, as recorded in Plato's Apology, where the court officials expressly forbade any philosophical cross examination on his part?
The moral here is "Don't overstate your case." Back off a little. Say, instead, "Most Romans felt a strong commitment to their state." "On the whole the ancient Greeks hated outsiders." "Socrates preferred to guide others to an understanding of his philosophy by questioning them rather than telling them explicitly what he thought." The point remains the same, but the statement is now technically correct. And whatever exceptions exist are just that, exceptions. So, as a general rule avoid "all," "always," "completely," "never," "only" and any word that backs you into a corner with no way out.
Check Your Comprehension
Use these resources to test your comprehension of this section of the Writing Guide.
Comprehension Check (Powerpoint) Comprehension Check (PDF)
4. Meaningless Words and Non-Statements
"The Romans were incredible."
"Democracies are just the greatest."
"Julius Caesar fit the society he lived in."
What do these statements mean? The words I have put in bold here are basically meaningless in the context given. Most of them—adjectives more often than not*—have technical definitions that do not suit the statement at all. For instance, according to the dictionary "incredible" means "unbelievable, hard to see as real or true, unlikely." Does that sense work in the statement above? Were the Romans really "unlikely"?
Instead, use clear and precise vocabulary with specific meaning. Shy away from gross generalities in your thinking which invite statements like "democracies are the greatest." The greatest what? Pain in the neck? And how exactly did Julius Caesar "fit" his society? If the writer believes that Caesar presents a good example of corrupt, late-Republican power politics in action, the writer should say that, and then provide examples from Caesar's career which support the case.
In short, words like "incredible," "greatest" and "fit," when used imprecisely, leave a reader puzzled about what the writer means. And, if I'm unable to follow your paper because I don't know what you mean, how can I evaluate the quality of your thinking or assess your efforts? That's why it's important to use words in strict and exact ways, the more specific the better.
Check Your Comprehension
Use these resources to test your comprehension of this section of the Writing Guide.
Comprehension Check (Powerpoint) Comprehension Check (PDF)
5. Choppy Sentences
Small sentences are boring to read. Many of them strung together look bad. They appear simple. Your thoughts look simple, too. It's like you can't sustain an idea for more than a few words. You can think in only trivial, simplistic ways. Small thoughts seem to come from small minds. You will leave your reader with the impression of simplemindedness. Is that what you want?
Many short sentences in succession make it appear that a writer is incapable of sustaining a complex thought. Rather than small, choppy sentences, construct ones that have some weight and depth. That doesn't always mean length, but formal academic writing tends to avoid, for instance, more than three sentences in a row with fewer than ten words in them. While an occasional short sentence is good because it delivers a strong "punch"—it does indeed!—to have that punch, the short sentence must be set off by longer ones so its brevity stands out.
If you find that you readily write in choppy sentences, it's a very easy problem to solve. Add some "and's," "or's" and "but's." In other words, push some of the sentences together and make compound sentences linked by conjunctions.* Or, even better, throw in some subordination, that is, clauses. Clauses are sentences units introduced by words called subordinating conjunctions, like "When . . .," "Since . . .," "Although . . .," and "Even if . . ."**
The lesson here is to turn your choppy sentences into longer, more complex ones by making them compound sentences with several subjects and verbs. The reason for doing that in formal writing is simple. When your writing is more intricate, it makes your thinking look that way, too.
It's a very easy thing to do really, as a revision of the choppy sentences at the opening of this section shows. By adding subordination and creating compound sentences, I can quickly and easily improve the presentation of these same thoughts.
Small sentences are boring to read and, in fact, many of them strung together look bad because they appear simple. If your thoughts look simple, it will seem like you can't sustain an idea for more than a few words and can think in only trivial, simplistic ways. Since small thoughts seem to come from small minds, you will leave your reader with the impression of simplemindedness. Is that what you want?
In sum, here is a good guideline for whether you are writing in choppy sentences or not. If over the course of four or more successive lines, there are more periods than lines (i.e. fewer lines than sentences), your syntax is too abbreviated and you need to add something to make your sentences longer.
Check Your Comprehension
Use these resources to test your comprehension of this section of the Writing Guide.