The Language Delicacy ‘Matrix’: Key Concepts

In this course we try to take the perspective of the reader/audience, while foregrounding the social and cultural dimensions of language - and of academic communication. We focus, for example, on how language can betray intellectual confusion and laxity, for example through:

• over-generalisation,
• mis-representation,
• failure to attribute source or idea

We look at how, in these and other ways,  less skilled academic writers can alienate the reader. To this effect, the Matrix introduces 2 binary concepts for evaluating the position and aim of a writer: chain & choice, & saying & doing.

I. Chain & Choice: Writers can fail to satisfy the expectations of a reader either by

• not complying with conventional expectations of organisation and support (chain), and also possibly making the text cognitively hard to process, or
• arguing crudely, e.g. making over-certain or confident claims - an issue of choice – making the text problematic from a sociological or ideological perspective.

‘Chain’ is a term which refers to the ‘chain’ of language stringing a text together. The relationship of words, sentences and paragraphs to each other, supporting an argument, or explaining a process, are examples of this ‘chain’. The more common term for this quality is grammar - the rules which binds words together - but organisation of a whole text goes well beyond grammar rules.

‘Choice’ is used here to refer to the choices we face when either evaluating or representing:

• a thing, event or process (in the form of nouns, verbs, adjectives), or
• the surrounding circumstances (adverbials).

The choices that make our arguments persuasive require a degree of language awareness, and a delicate use of the language. Problems arise either though poor

· vocabulary choice - word choice which can result in

- over-generalisation (e.g. of a characteristic)
- over-assertion (e.g. of a proposition)

or of poor

· choice of proposition - what is said and left unsaid, this can lead to

- mis-representation (e.g. of a position)
- all kinds of logical fallacies (false conclusions, missing support, etc.)

2. Saying vs Doing

What someone is saying is often taken to be clear from the words used. I.e. underneath the vocabulary and grammar in any sentence we are supposed to find a transparent meaning. But behind the choices of expression and the sequencing of statements lie more complex things, like the intentions and goals - and the stance and ideology - of the writer. We need to be sensitive to the difference between seeing a piece of writing as the writer simply informing us, presenting us with `facts' , and seeing it as doing something else - such as persuading us to accept the writer's stance or a particular version of events.