Of Mountains from Molehills
Once again, I've stalled, and this time, my excuse is that I can't get around usage of the passive voice in my dissertation. I'm running through the corrections of my Results section that Barb has handed to me, and one of the first things she writes in the margin is:
I found an online guide to dissertation writing and they had this to say about passive voice:
First person:
Grrr...once I've figured out this sentence, I can look forward to rewriting practically this entire section. Perhaps I can look forward to seeing daylight again this weekend.
Stay away from the passive voice in this section - and as a general rule in science writing.Okay, fine. I was also taught (yes, I know - passive voice) that writing in the passive voice is to be avoided, but come on - this is a scientific dissertation. How else am I supposed to prove my scientific aptitude if I can't bore my readers into submission?
I found an online guide to dissertation writing and they had this to say about passive voice:
Avoid passive voice. Example: "Systems were built which caused fires (Bain 1986)." Better: "Bain (1986) documents a fire caused by a poorly designed system."Okay, I get it. Passive voice = bad. Here's the sentence that's preventing my progress:
"Mono-Mac-6 cells were chosen as a representative monocyte/macrophage cell line because of its robust response to LPS challenge."The way I see it, here are my options:
First person:
"I chose the Mono-Mac-6 cell line for their robust response to LPS challenge."Well, I've eliminated use of the passive voice, but I'm of the opinion that using 'I' or 'we' or any other first person subject is a no-no for a formal document such as one's thesis dissertation. Let's try third person instead. Except I can't resist the urge to give myself a really cool nickname:
"The Mike-Meister selected Mono-Mac-6 cells as a representative monocyte-macrophage cell line because of their robust response to LPS challenge."Again, I've successfully avoided use of passive voice, but also introduced an unsavory informal element to the document.
Grrr...once I've figured out this sentence, I can look forward to rewriting practically this entire section. Perhaps I can look forward to seeing daylight again this weekend.
posted by Mikey at 10:36 AM
6 Comments:
Have you thought of something entirely stiff and formal but utterly unnatural sounding like, "this researcher selected Mono-Mac-6 cells as a representative monocyte-macrophage cell line because yada yada yada"?
Perhaps appending "bitches!" to the end of every sentence would make you feel better about the casual language. Like, "I chose the Mono-Mac-6 cell line for their robust response to LPS challenge, BITCHES!" You know, makes the choice to use "I" seem less casual due to the influence of the gratuitously abusive language.
Of course, you could just go with the third person objective and pretend you didn't even do any of the research. Like, "the Dude chose the Mono-Mac-6 cell line, etc. etc." Removes the informal tone while also making a freakin' sweet nod to The Big Lebowski. Huh? HUH?
Kinjo: Yeah, hmm, this researcher might work. Borders on perhaps a little too casual? I'll test it out. Definitely like appending the 'B' word. Barb would love it - HA! I might just throw it into the first draft to see her reaction. If it doesn't make it into the final dissertation, you can bet your behind that it'll be prominently featured in my defense!!!
Turtle: Flatterer. Thank you very much. I'll definitely check out your blog, too. I must say that I have major envy of your awesome photograph in your profile.
Anonymous: Thanks for the inivite. I'll check it out.
Mike,
You're remembering the instruction to avoid the use of 'I' or 'We' from when? From when you were taught to write using the passive voice?
The use of "I" or "We" is, IMHO, perfectly acceptable in a thesis. Use "I" if it was your idea, "We" if it was a collaborative decision or if Barb just said so, since it is, undoubtably, inappropriate to write, "My supervisor made me use the Mono-Mac-6 cells because..."
If anything, "We" is becoming more common in papers because it oozes ownership and authority. Read a few looking for it, and you'll start to notice it everywhere, and then you won't feel so awkward about putting it in your thesis.
Very few people refer to themselves as "The researcher" in papers - my bet is your whole comittee will toss that out.
So how about going back to what you are trying to say in the sentence - the point is not the choice, but the suitability of the cell line.
I suggest:
The representative monocyte/macrophage cell line Mono-Mac-6 demonstrate a robust response to LPS challenge.
Mike: This blog reader doesn't think this researcher borders on too casual as much as it borders on too completely-divorced-from-sanity. Bitches!
Lia: Your avatar is making me nervous.
Kinjo: Wait a minute - are you saying that this researcher is divorced from sanity or that using this researcher as my subject would indicate being divorced from sanity or the fact that I'm even considering usage of this researcher is insane?
Or - wait-a-minute - is there really a difference between any of the above?
Lia: Thanks, again. Yeah, I'd be worried about your avatar, too, except - look at Kinjo's.
Since I'm buys procrastinating on a 10-pager which will tolerate no bullshit, I'll make this suggestion, with the caveat that this is coming from a history major, and I really have no idea what you're trying to say:
"(Some number of) monocyte-macrophage cell lines were considered for use in this study. The robust response of Mono-Mac-6 cells to LPS challenge gave Mikey the best possible chance of having something to write about."
What I mean is, you're trying to say too much in one sentence. Try breaking it up into two or three. Did you try other cells that responded poorly? Why is the LPS challenge your most important factor? And screw the anxiety over passive voice. I've been reading a bunch of legal opinions for this paper I'm writing, and they've got TONS of passive voice. PV has it's place, specifically for emphasis on the object being acted upon. It's very probably okay in this case.
Jocelyn
Post a Comment
<< Home