Comparison of Academic and Non-Academic Writing - Scholarship Essay Example

s ESSAY comparison of academic and non-academic writing ESSAY 2: summary of introduction to switching s Total word count: 1758 words ESSAY 1: Comparison of Academic and Non-Academic Writing Introduction There are two types of writing in English: the formal (academic) writing and the informal (non-academic) writing. Each of the methods has an appropriate place of use. The writing style to use depends on the occasion and the people that are communicating. Business letters and scientific reports must have formal writing style while writing to friends will have informal writing. Comparison and contrast of the two styles of writhing according to examples In the two examples being analysed, the writing in introduction to switching codes is an example of the formal writing style while the manifesto (2009) is an example of informal writing. Several differences can be brought out in analysing the writing style of each of the papers. The main areas of difference between formal and informal writing are vocabulary, syntax, tone and grammar. Other factors are voice, topics discussed and structure. In use of grammar, the manifesto (2009) uses word shortening or contractions. These include words like don’t and there’s instead of do not and there is. In the introduction to switching codes use of all the words without contractions is noted. Informal writings can use the first, second and third person while formal writings use the third person. In the Manifesto, the second person ‘you’ is mentioned severally which shows it is an informal writing. The use of ‘you’ to address readers also shows informal writing as used in ‘if you are looking for linearity and logic’. In the Switching codes, there is no reference to the reader. The paper is objective. Non-academic writings use imperative voice while academic writing avoids using it. For example in the manifesto, ‘looked backward as it moved forward’ is used to refer to the progress of the digital revolution and ‘that do more than talk the talk’ to refer to projects that are effective. In switching codes, there is no use of imperative voice. This shows that it is an academic writing. Informal writings use the active voice while academic writings do not. In switching codes passive voice is used repeatedly. Examples include ‘it will be helpful to note that Richard Powers…’ and ‘it is our belief that…’ The opposite of this is seen in the Manifesto where active voice is used. Non-academic writings use simple, poorly structured and short sentences. Examples from the Manifesto are several short sentences such as ‘Don’t whine’, ‘Move on’ and ‘join up’. An example of poor sentence structure is the ‘if you are looking for linearity and logic… or for an academic treatise… the genre here is all M’s: mix: match::mash::manifest’. Sentences used in the introduction to switching codes are comprehensive, long and well structured.it also has a good structure of paragraphs and sentences. In terms of vocabulary non-academic writings use words such as colloquial expressions and words while academic writings avoid it. It may also use short forms, clichés and abbreviations. In the manifesto abbreviated words used are IP and AP. Additionally; non-academic writing has no regard for correct use of simple language basics such as capitalizations and sentence structure. Some of the sentences in the manifesto have mixed capital and small letters and have inappropriate use of punctuation marks. An example of this is the ‘it restores the word COPY to its original meaning: abundance’. Another factor that differentiates academic and non-academic writing is the tone of the writing. Formal writing is usually aimed at achieving set objectives of the topic. They do not involve opinions but are a presentation of arguments and theories. On the other hand, non-academic writings are usually subjective and may at times be personal. Their tone may be conversational, ironic, thoughtful or serious. The tone of the manifesto is casual and conversational. It seems to address the reader. The tone of the introduction to switching codes is serious and objective. The article focuses on the topic by providing a detailed introduction to the switching codes. Academic writing is usually composed of sentences following a specific structure while non-academic writings are not. The Manifesto is loosely structured with uneven paragraphs and distorted number lists. Some lists are hidden in paragraphs and one must read carefully to see them. Some of the sentences in the Manifesto are not in paragraphs as they ought to be. The sentence structure in the Introduction to Switching codes is clear. The topics are presented in an order. All of the sentences and paragraphs are in the right structure. There are no sudden numbered lists and diagrams that may confuse a reader. In terms of location of the thesis, all academic writing explain the thesis in the first or second paragraphs while non-academic writing explain the topic under discussion anywhere in the essay. In the Manifesto, the topic being discussed is highlighted in the second page. In the introduction to switching codes, the main topic is explained in the first paragraph. This is another differentiating factor of the two writing styles. Most academic writings use sources such as academic article and historical events while non-academic writings use life lessons as a reference source. The Introduction to switching codes is an analysis of literature done by several authors such as Alan Liu, Mark Stefik and George Quasha. The Digital Humanities Manifesto has no academic sources. It is a statement that expresses the thoughts of a person without referring to the source of the information relayed. Thus, it is an informal writing. Conclusion Several factors can be used to differentiate formal and informal writing styles. As explained above, they include the structure of the sentences, use of passive or active voice, use of word contractions, use of colloquial words or statements, tone of the writing, point where thesis is explained, types of sources used and use of imperative voice. It has been proved that thee Digital Humanities Manifesto is an informal writing due to its poor structure, casual tone and lack of scholarly sources. An introduction to switching codes is on the other hand proved to be a formal writing because it has a serious tone and correct sentence structure. Word count: 1,010 ESSAY 2: SUMMARY OF INTRODUCTION TO SWITCHING CODES The main objective of this volume is the reflection on the effects of digital technology on the thoughts of humanities and arts using the ideas of other scholars, artists and scientists. This is one of the best articles on switching codes. Richard Powers, who wrote the epilogue, after being requested by the author to respond to the ten essays, came up with a bibliographic tale that insinuated that the latter days of digital revolution are unknown. Switching codes is aimed at facilitating the communication between Powers and other similar contributors on the effect that Information Technology has had on arts and humanities. Several integrations between the computer technology and humanities are known but a review of expert opinions from the two areas has been used. Switching codes has four sections, an interlude and an epilogue. The epilogue is in form of figment which is an original game designed by Eric Zimmerman. It is a game that shows a player the habits that have developed due to electronic advancements and trackback protocols. The discussions are interactions across people of the concerned disciplines. For an understanding of how the thought and practise of humanities and arts have been affected by digital technology, cross-cultural communication should be cultivated in order to achieve the points of reference as well as a shared vocabulary. This can happen if it is carried out from the bottom levels to the top ones. In the first section, the response by Alan Liu is an explanation of the important issues that were not addressed by the first essays. He also insists that most contributors are concerned in projects that integrate the two areas. In reviewing the article as whole, it is noted that several themes are brought out. Digital humanities, has been observed, has been successful. It has allowed people to access data on the internet. This issue has however raised questions on how the information will be stored, arranged, filtered, marked as meaningful or organized. All these concerns are important and several contributors tried to address them to no conclusion. Another important topic is the fact that digital humanities has led to collaborative methods of working in scholarships, culture and arts. Most scholarships are awarded as societal actions and not individualistic acts. Networked collaboration is a result of digital humanities. In switching codes, another concern that is raised and addressed by several contributors is the position of the human being in the world. According to Aristotle, the human being was between the divine and the bestial. With modernism, the notion changed such that the line between human being and animal was harder to draw. And the divine was not considered by many philosophers as a category to consider. More than seven contributors have responded to this with some concluding that a human being is a person of machines due to the current automated computation. Ian Forster, in response, stated that automated computations will in certain aspects change “what it means to be human”. The new information technologies have acutely affected publishing in that the future of the traditional codex has become a speculation for those that write on technology and the virtual world. Cases of publishing on paper have reduced. Habits of mind and hand that regard writing, publishing and reading of books now have to be cultivated over time. Switching codes is aimed at quick reflection on the venerable medium. The figment is a game that is aimed at drawing attention to the materiality of the codex while requiring the use of cards and ink on paper that can be drawn from this report. It is curious that some methods of writing presented by D’lorio and Barbera were very similar to the traditional writing methods used in the platonic dialogue. This is observed by Alan Liu after the two simulated a Skype conversation and printed it as a conversation on print media. These presents the fact that digital evolution may be regarded by some as best of times and by others as worst of times. With regard to our antihero, the main character in the epilogue is still a hero. Most of the contributors to this review are daily hard workers that are focussed on evaluating and explaining the complex factors that the future world powers define. They have portrayed their work in terms of achievements and opportunities. It is hoped that switching codes will be a reflection and be a stimulant of the caution and enthusiasm that is accorded by its contributors. Word count: 754 words References Bartscherer, T. & Coover, R. (2011), Switching codes: thinking through digital technology in the humanities and the arts, University of Chicago Press Books. Presner, T., Schnapp, J., & Lunenfeld, P. (2009). The digital humanities manifesto 2.0. In UCLA Mellon Seminar in Digital Humanities. Retrieved on 20th January 2015 from< http://www. humanitiesblast. com/manifesto/Manifesto_V2. pdf> Read More