On Mon, 14 Apr 2008, [EMAIL PROTECTED] went:
However, I agree it is awkward. Getting through the method section
in particular seems to be hard because of the seemingly constant
need to use an active agent for each step of the process and quite
frankly sometimes it's a constant stream of "I" (or "we") did this
or that.
I have had two recent manuscripts corrected on every single eensy
teensy tiny slip I made, so I know it's being rigidly enforced by
editors.
If that happened to me, I would refer the editors to "The Science of
Scientific Writing" <http://www.amstat.org/publications/JCGS/sci.pdf>:
|The information that begins a sentence establishes for the reader a
|perspective for viewing the sentence as a unit: Readers expect a unit
|of discourse to be a story about whoever shows up first. "Bees
|disperse pollen" and "Pollen is dispersed by bees" are two different
|but equally respectable sentences about the same facts. The first
|tells us something about bees; the second tells us something about
|pollen. The passivity of the second sentence does not by itself
|impair its quality; in fact, "Pollen is dispersed by bees" is the
|superior sentence if it appears in a paragraph that intends to tell
|us a continuing story about pollen. Pollen's story at that moment is
|a passive one.
If they need to hear it from the APA Manual itself, they can turn to
page 42:
|The passive voice is acceptable in expository writing and when you
|want to focus on the object or recipient of the action rather than on
|the actor. For example, "The speakers were attached to either side
|of the chair" emphasizes the placement of the speakers, not who
|placed them--the more appropriate focus in the Method section. "The
|President was shot emphasizes the importance of the person shot."
--David Epstein
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
---
To make changes to your subscription contact:
Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
