GOPEN AND SWAN PDF

George D. Gopen and Judith A. Swan [The Science of Scientific Writing] (1).pdf – Download as PDF File .pdf), Text File .txt) or read online. *Examples and explanations from Gopen, George D. and Judith A. Swan. “The Science of Scientific. Writing,” American Scientist 78, no.6 (November-December . Among other things, I was told to read The Science of Scientific Writing, by George Gopen and Judith Swan. Being told that you suck is great;.

Author: Daikora Kajikree
Country: Timor Leste
Language: English (Spanish)
Genre: Music
Published (Last): 14 April 2010
Pages: 166
PDF File Size: 4.72 Mb
ePub File Size: 10.41 Mb
ISBN: 661-6-62641-704-9
Downloads: 44334
Price: Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]
Uploader: Samusho

What was my main finding and its significance? Incidentally, there must be a link between what Gopen and Swan say about writing and our theories about how people go;en visualizations; I have to learn more about this!

Nor is it the length of the sentence. I urge you to go and read the whole thing. Did you give up about half-way through? Simplify, simplify I also began paying more attention to the language I used in writing and speaking.

You may have even decided that it was your fault—that your lack of comprehension was due to a lack of background in whatever topic was being presented. My problem was that I was presenting information I wanted the viewer to know— rather than what they needed to know.

A Summary of “The Science of Scientific Writing”

Are they science literate but know nothing about your particular topic? Swxn is your research important to society? This wording lacks the details about Species A and B, but these are not really needed.

  FMINCON TUTORIAL PDF

In the first post of this series, I described the first lesson I learned, which has had a huge effect on my overall communication skills: Distill, distill I learned gkpen always distill my message before leaping into writing a paper or preparing a conference talk or seminar.

The Science of Scientific Writing

Learning to distill my message has helped me write better journal articles…and blog posts! An improved version might read:. Wnd learned to always distill my message before leaping into writing a paper or preparing a conference talk or seminar. Actually, the fault lies entirely with the author or presenter.

For more insight into how structure affects comprehension of scientific writing, see Gopen and Swan Readers expect to be provided with old information context at the beginning of a sentence, which prepares them for the amd information to be given at the end. I have recently received a large amount of excellent writing advice, and I want to share some of it with you.

A Summary of “The Science of Scientific Writing” — Lawrence A. Crowl

First, grammatical subjects should be followed as soon as possible by their verbs; second, every unit of discourse, no matter the size, should serve a single function or make a single point; and, third, information intended to be emphasized should appear at points of syntactic closure.

I also began paying more attention to the language I used in writing and speaking. If gppen use cryptic, equivocal, or imprecise language, you risk the audience misinterpreting your message. In the next post, I will talk about Part 2: Gopen and Swan argue that good writing is about successfully managing the expectations of readers. Have they heard of sea-level rise? Now ewan have a much clearer picture: Many writers will see nothing wrong with this construction.

  AASIMAR & TIEFLING A GUIDEBOOK TO THE PLANETOUCHED PDF

A final point is that this reverse construction is passive because the verb is acting on the subject: Are there some interesting applications based on your work? This third principle was a true eye-opener to me.

We test the accuracy of the DDA by using the DDA to compute scattering and absorption by isolated, homogeneous spheres as well as by targets consisting of two contiguous spheres.

Subject-verb separation is just one way a writer can confuse the reader. Poor communicators tend to ignore the needs of their audience.

The sentence I listed earlier also minimizes the number of words between subject and verb:. Only later did I realize that this was not enough. Scientists are rarely trained to write and speak clearly and effectively; we are expected to develop these skills on our own.