Writing Skills

When we write, language matters. Language shapes the way we think and perceive the world around us. Ludwig Wittgenstein, well-known philosopher born in Vienna in 1889, was particularly interested in language. He wrote, “The limits of language are the limits of my mind. All I know is what I have words for.” Language places limits on our ability to understand the Divine. And yet, language is what we have.

Language has two basic functions: expression and communication. It’s important to pay close attention to the language we use as we communicate. Let me share two examples of how language was used in a particular manner in order to shape the way we think in the public sphere:

The first appeared in 2006 in a newspaper article on a gubernatorial race. In describing candidates, the journalist described one male candidate as a “hard-charging, crusading advocate for consumers.” It described a male state senator as a “serious legislator with deep expertise in education and other policy issues.” The female candidate, however, was described as a “colorful character who thrills the party’s liberal activists.” Who wants to vote for a candidate because he or she is “a colorful character”? This demonstrates the bias of the writer, though the writer doesn’t state outright that the female senator isn’t a good choice. Given that she was a senator already, surely she had some serious qualifications that could have been listed.

Another example appeared in a newspaper in a review of the art exhibit “Mother Russia.” The critic opened with, “Long before American women started yammering about glass ceilings, equal pay for equal work and ‘leaning in’ to advance their careers, there was Vladimir Lenin speaking out about domestic drudgery.” The choice of the term “yammering” demeans and belittles the concerns and struggles of women in the U. S. in regards to the issue of equal pay for equal work. “Yammering” may be only one word out of many in this article, but its use in this instance is insulting to women.

Language matters in politics, and it matters in theology, for as Gail Ramshaw, a scholar of liturgical languages claims, “[I]n the utter loneliness of the human self, religion’s words give coherence to the world, meaning to chaos and death, answers to ultimate questions, indeed, the very questions worth asking.”3 The language we choose, matters. It matters when the only references to the divine are always “male” or always “female.” It matters when we create liturgy for worship services. It matters when we preach and when we provide pastoral care. Language always matters.

Extensive and Intensive Writing Practices

Our focus in this class is writing theology. The best way to learn writing is to write. When you learn to swim, you don’t get very far if you simply spend your time reading books on types of strokes or watching it on YouTube. It’s the same with writing. You could sit and read about writing day after day, but unless you actually write, you wouldn’t get very far. To that end, we engage in writing activities and write several papers in this course in order to give you practice.

The teaching of writing is sometimes broken down into two categories: “extensive” and “intensive.” When employing the manner of “intensive” practice we focus on grammar and finely edited essays. When we employ “extensive” practice we concern ourselves more with the larger development of the paper and quantity. In this course, there is cross-over in the practices of “intensive” and extensive” methods. I’ll mark your papers for grammar, and I’ll post areas of grammar to review in grammar that tend to be problematic, but I won’t focus on them. I must assume that if you’ve gotten this far you have certain skills. St. Martin’s Handbook should prove useful in terms of grammar.

Diction

A notable aspect that students struggle with as they begin writing in seminary is “diction.” Put simply, diction means “word choice.” The words we choose create tone—a certain attitude.

One such example of where diction matters in our seminary context is the use of the term “America.” When I write that “In America, the Christian church has stagnated in growth in regards to the number of members, I’m implying that there is only one “America.” This is highly ethnocentric. I live in a nation that is only one country in North America. Canada is part of North America. Guatemala, Nicaraqua and other nations are part of Latin America. And what of South America? There is no single “America.” In the United States, we are enculturated to think that we’re the center of the world; we’re not. I don’t think any of us would claim that God has a special place in the heart for the U. S., or that the U. S. is God’s most favored Nation.

So, when giving feedback on your papers I write “diction” in the margins, I’m suggesting that you reconsider your choice of words.

Instead of diction, I might write “colloquial language,” that is, “informal language.” Most papers that you’ll write at UTS require the use of formal language. Informal and formal language affects the tone. Colloquial language creates a conversational tone. It’s the everyday spoken language, and it gives writing a casual and relaxed effect. When I mark your paper with “colloquial,” it’s not that colloquial language is wrong in and of itself, rather, it is inappropriate for the formal tone you should be striving to Create.

An informal tone is appropriate in conversations and some written texts. For example, I’m using informal language as I create this file of information for you to read. I’m writing in a conversational tone (one indication is that I’m using of contractions—don’t use contractions in a formal paper).

Colloquial (informal) language is appropriate for some writing assignments in this course. For example, colloquial language is appropriate when you write in your blog, classroom discussion, chats, or the wiki contributions. I’ll expect it. Your first reflection paper will also be in “informal” language. That said, Tweets all of the other papers will be in formal language.

Learning to write in formal language is probably the most difficult new habit for some students to develop. Don’t panic. I expect you to work on it, not change overnight. We’re on a journey; we’re walking across a bridge that will take us into new territory, but we do so together.

Organizing Our Ideas

• For many entering seminary, writing can be difficult because we are writing about core issues of what it means to be human that are connected to our beliefs about the Divine.

• Often, we are afraid that by articulating our fears and lack of understanding we will lose our faith. The one thing we cannot lose is the love of God. But as Sister Mary Rose O’Reilly writes, what we might lose are our ideas about God and “as Buddha tells us, people with ideas only go around bothering each other” (O’Reilly, Barn at the End of the World, 2000).

• In seminary we go around bothering each other with our ideas about faith, our ideas about religion, about the human condition, our ideas about God. If anything should help us shed some of our fear about writing about such weighty matters, I think it is recognizing that we’re simply discussing and formulating ideas about our faith and about God.

Writing down our ideas helps us focus. Try it. It’s almost impossible to write about one thing while thinking about another.

Unfortunately, writing is not always an easy process, and beginning can be the most difficult part of the process.

At present we want to look at the overall organization of a paper. Organization is key.

Faced with any given assignment, as we begin a paper, perhaps without a clue as to what we want to write, relax, for as many have found, inspiration quite often comes during our work, rather than before it.

And knowing the basic organizational pattern of a paper gives us a template to work with at all times.

A Paper Has Four Main Parts:

1. Title

2. Introduction (with thesis)

3. Body (with subtopics)

4. Conclusion (that restates the thesis)

The Title

The title suggests what the paper will be about while attracting the reader’s attention. A good title is both accurate and interesting and provides a brief preview of what the writer has said in the essay.

Introduction

The introduction presents the essay’s topic in an interesting, informative way. It also presents the thesis statement (problem or assignment) which expresses the main point of the essay.

An introduction announces the topic of the paper, but it also must engage the reader and focus their attention on what is to follow in the rest of the paper.

Elements of an Introduction

• In the beginning… 

  • The most common kind of introduction follows a general- to-specific pattern, and ends with the thesis. It often states the writer’s subject, narrows it, and communicates an attitude toward it (TONE).

• Thesis

  • An introduction need not be fancy.

  • State your thesis and give your reader a general idea of the direction in which you are headed.

• Length

  • Introductions vary in length, depending on their purposes. 

  • A research paper may need several paragraphs to set forth its central idea and its plan of organization; on the other hand, a brief, informal essay may need only a sentence of two for an introduction. Long or short, good introductions tell us no more than we need to know when we begin reading. The length will vary depending on the complexity of the assignment.

• Design

  • Design your introduction so you have something to return to in your conclusion.

• Hint

  • By the way, it’s common to write the introduction last.

  • You need a working thesis to begin the paper, but not a full introduction.

  • Often writers write the introduction after they have learned what they were writing about.

• Trouble in paradise

  • Students encounter problems in writing an introduction primarily in one of two ways:

    • The first is by writing an unnecessarily long preamble to the thesis.

    • The second is creating an overly long introduction by placing in the introduction material that belongs in the body paragraphs.

Body (Main Text)

The body paragraphs develop the thesis statement with specific and logically organized information—examples, details, facts, reasons, and incidents in a logical, coherent manner.

The body paragraphs should develop two or more subtopics of the main point. If a thesis statement makes a point about three different problems, then these problems would become the subtopics. Body paragraphs should be clearly related to each other. A relationship among subtopics can be shown by ordering them logically (for example, in chronological order, order of importance, or spatial order) and by using transitions.

Conclusion

The conclusion ends the essay by recalling the thesis statement and completing the writer’s thought.

The conclusion should tie the essay together. It should remind the reader of the thesis statement. It should also complete the essay with fitting and possibly memorable examples, statements, quotations, or incidents. Sometimes a writer will use a particularly interesting observation or incident that is related to the topic or a forceful or witty statement to end the essay.

Never, ever add new information in the conclusion.

Argumentation - Booth

• Claim

  • An assertion that something is true or reasonable.

• Reasons

  • Based on evidence

  • Why should your reader accept your claim?

  • Reasons linked to claim with “because”

• Acknowledgements and Responses

  • How might others reach a different conclusion?

  • Imagine and anticipate what questions a skeptic may have for you and try to answer them.

  • Two parts: It is true that/it has been argued that/it is possible that/Admittedly/...HOWEVER /BUT/ON THE OTHER HAND...(e.g. the evidence for that is suspect/ I find it difficult to see how... /the premise of such a claim is flawed, etc.)

• Warrants

  • Respond to readers who may not dispute that your stated reasons are true in themselves, but rather whether your reasons are relevant to or support your claim.

  • Warrants have two parts: a general circumstance and the general consequence that readers should infer. (Whenever X then Y)

Activity: Identifying Booth’s Elements of Argument: 1 or 2 Chronicles

Claim: 1 and 2 Chronicles should be read as a single book.

• Reason #1: In antiquity, they were written on the same scroll as one continuous work. It is therefore likely that the authors’ original intent was for it to be read as one book.

  • Evidence: It is well known that the division of chronicles into two books was an invention of the Septuagint (a Greek translation of the Hebrew Bible ca. 2nd century BCE).

• Reason #2: Its timeline starts with the first person, Adam, and ending with Cyrus’ edict. This forms a cohesive story arch from pre-monarchic Israel to post-exilic Israel.

• Reason #3: The traditional division between 1 and 2 Chronicles seems artificial.

  • Acknowledgement: Admittedly, the division does occur at the death of the first great king, David, and the second book begins with the reign of his successor, so this is a logical break in one regard. Response: However, the Chronicler presents the reigns of David and Solomon as a continuous, glorious whole, so the division between 1 and 2 Chronicles is out of step with its authors’ message.

• Acknowledgement: Some have argued that 1 and 2 Chronicles are not a unit by themselves, but rather should be read with Ezra and Nehemiah as one book. After all, they seem to be written in a similar time period and have many linguistic similarities. Response: However, there are sufficient differences between the outlook of the Chronicler and the authors of Ezra and Nehemiah to consider them different works.

  • Evidence: Chronicles elevated David to lofty status, while Ezra and Nehemiah do not.

  • Evidence: Chronicles idea of who belongs is less exclusive than Ezra and Nehemiah.

  • Evidence: Chronicles is not nearly as strict about marrying outside the clan.

When to Use Warrants

• If the principle behind your reasoning is not common in your field. (e.g. your readers do not normally acknowledge that it is legitimate to compare a given ANE text with the HB)

• If your readers are unfamiliar with the kind of argument you are making. (e.g. your readers are unfamiliar with comparing biblical and ANE texts)

• If your readers do not want your argument to be true. This often occurs when you come up against strongly held or pervasive beliefs that are contrary to your statement.

• A warrant is a “baby step” for your reader. If you can get your reader to accept your warrant, then maybe he or she will accept that your reason is relevant to your claim.

Example: Why an alternative reading of the so-called “abomination” clause is necessary:

• Biblical Hebrew laws are terse: they do not contain superfluous information.

• The Hebrew phrase “to lie down with” on its own is a euphemism for sex.

• The phrase “as with a woman” is superfluous, unless it somehow limits or qualifies the phrase “to lie down with”

• If the above is true, the phrase “as with a woman” must have referred to a particular type of homosexual sex, not homosexual sex in general. If the regulation referred to homosexual sex in general, the phrase “as with a woman” would not be there. Sexual activities are culture-specific. In order to understand this phrase, we must consider the norms of sexual activity in ancient Israel and Judah. How did ancient Israelites and Judahites “lie down” “with a woman”?

Thesis Statement

• The thesis statement is the single thing that connects all portions of your argument.

• For your reader, your thesis statement clearly identifies your topic and the goals of your paper.

• For you, your thesis statement can be a tool to organize your thoughts as you write.

• For more about this particular take on thesis statements, see Kathleen Moore and Susie Lan Cassel, Techniques for College Writing: The Thesis Statement and Beyond. Belmont: Wadsworth, 2010.

Image Description: There are three arrows that indicate different steps in making a thesis statement. The first arrow says “context: the general area of discussion.” The second arrow says “subject: focus within the general area.” The third arrow says “claim: the argument that will be made about the subject. 

Examples of CSC thesis statements

• In the film version of Mary Shelley’s Frankenstein, the monster depicts the detrimental effects of isolation and alienation on the human subject.

• In The Book of Judges the literary effects of the redactor reveal a reconstructed past that was designed to legitimate political practices and perspectives in the redactor’s own time.

• Commonly held notions of women’s inferiority based on Genesis 1-3 are indefensible when these texts are read from an academic, critical perspective.

CSC (Context, Subject, Claim)

An effective thesis statement should narrow in focus as it progresses from context to claim.

One of Prof. Brink’s less than “stellar” thesis statements.

“Ugaritic literary evidence sheds the most light on Ugaritic astronomical perspectives, indicating that the Ugaritians believed that the stars had a direct impact on their daily lives, and that knowledge of the movement of the stars was a rare and coveted intellectual gift which could be used to affect weather and agriculture.”

Problems:

• Too wordy

• Not interesting

• Frankly, a little confusing

• Needs punctuation check

• What is the context?!

• Affect weather and agriculture? Really?

How to fix it:

A context-subject-claim format would give this mess structure and clarity!

Before: “Ugaritic literary evidence sheds the most light on Ugaritic astronomical perspectives, indicating that the Ugaritians believed that the stars had a direct impact on their daily lives, and that knowledge of the movement of the stars was a rare and coveted intellectual gift which could be used to affect weather and agriculture.”

After A: Ugaritic literary texts reveal that astronomical knowledge was viewed by Ugaritians as a rare and coveted intellectual gift, which could be used to understand weather and agricultural patterns.

After B: Although no truly scientific astronomical texts were found at Ugarit, Ugaritic literary texts show that there was astronomical knowledge at Ugarit, which Ugaritians used to understand weather and agricultural patterns.

Why Quote, Paraphrase, Cite?

To create a “constellation of scholarship” 

• When people read academic writing, they not only are trying to follow the intricacies of the author’s argument, they are also trying to place that author/argument within the large body of scholarship to which the author/argument belongs.

• It is important to quote, paraphrase, and cite properly not only to avoid serious ethical and legal violations, but also so that your reader can place your argument in its proper constellation of scholarship.

• Prof. David on Paraphrasing: How to Paraphrase: Avoid Plagiarism in Research Papers with Paraphrases & Quotations

The video clip, like a lot of stuff on YouTube, is useful, but missing a few things.

What Prof. David did well

• Nucanced/debunked “put it in your own words”

• Methods for paraphrasing so that you are writing in your own using your own phrases and sentences, thereby not mimicking the “voice” of your source text.

What Prof. David didn’t do

• What does he mean by “better flow”?

  • Importing quotes, especially large ones, means you’re importing someone else’s argument, logic, and argument language. If you quote too much, your source’s argument will clash with your argument and confuse your reader.

• It focuses on avoiding plagiarism, and that’s good, but you’re also trying to create a dialogue between yourself and other people.

Best technique for paraphrasing a quote, a al Lipson

• Read the other author’s text, but then set it aside and don’t look at it!

• Think about what point you want to make.

• Write it down in your own words (with a citation).

• Compare with the original quote. If they contain several of the same exact words, substitute them out with reasonable synonyms, trying to especially focus on distinctive language. This last part is hard, because often it is the distinctive language that we remember!

• Repeat the process until the quoted text and your paraphrase are very different from one another, especially in tone and distinctive language.

• If you’ve repeated the process once or twice and your paraphrase is still too much like your quote, take a break. Go grocery shopping. Call a friend and complain about your paper. Take a nap. Work on something else. Then, do not read the quote but try to paraphrase it based on your memory of it. This should do the trick. Usually time and distance will obscure the distinctive language that you were having trouble shaking.

Paraphrasing: Chronicles and “historical reliability”

Remember: Even when you paraphrase, you must cite your source!!

Useful Links re: paraphrasing

• http://www.plagiarism.org/plag_article_how_to_paraphrase_properly.html 

• http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/researchsources/includingsources/paraphrasing/without.cfm

How biblical authors cited each other

• Biblical authors did not quote, cite, or paraphrase the way we do. By our standards they would be plagiarists!

• Inner-biblical exegesis: the recognizable practice of biblical authors who comment on, argue with, and revise earlier biblical texts.

• Inner biblical exegesis should not be confused with “intertextual reading” which refers to a modern person reading one text in light of another without regard for which author wrote which text first. Inner-biblical exegesis is “diachronic” meaning that it is concerned with the historical sequence of the text. Intertextual reading is “synchronic” meaning that it is without concern for historical aspects.

• Biblical authors didn’t use quotation marks, but certain phrases signal a quotation:

  • “in accordance with what was written”

  • “as it was said”

  • “as it is written”

• Biblical allusion: when one biblical text invokes many of the same images, words, and ideas of an earlier text in order to create new meaning. Many allusions are easy to spot using McDonald’s rubric for literary dependence.

Example: biblical “quotation,” which is an indicator of inner-biblical exegesis

• 2 Kings 14:5-6

  • Once he had the kingdom firmly in his grasp, he put to death the courtiers who had assassinated his father the king. 6 But he did not put to death the children of the assassins, in accordance with what is written in the Book of the Teaching of Moses, where the LORD commanded, "Parents shall not be put to death for children, nor children be put to death for parents; a person shall be put to death only for his own crime."

• Deuteronomy 24:16

  • Parents shall not be put to death for children, nor children be put to death for parents: a person shall be put to death only for his own crime.

Example: Biblical Allusion (translations by B. Sommer)

• Jeremiah 2:3

  • Israel is the LORD’s holy item, the first-fruits He produced. All who consume Israel will incur guilt; disaster will befall them

• Leviticus 22:14-16

  • If a man consumes a holy item by mistake he must give a holy item to the priest plus one fifth of its value. The priests must not let the holy items donated to the LORD by the Israelites be defiled, nor may they allow the Israelites to incur punishment by consuming holy items.

“Priests and prophets, psalmists and scribes, composed Scripture by recycling Scripture, by turning it and turning it to find new truths in it. For many biblical writers, new words from God emerged from intense examination and reordering of old ones. The interpretation of a sacred text could yield revelation, as much as revelation yielded a sacred text.” - Benjamin D. Sommer, JSB, p. 1835

Brettler’s argument needs a warrant

Because a number of Brettler’s readers will likely not want to accept his thesis (that the Chronicler revised and fabricated historical facts and consciously attempted to legitimate his fabrication), it would help if he had a warrant.

What might this warrant look like?

“The picture developed throughout our discussion of biblical history writing may be disturbing to some. ...we should remember that for all [biblical historians], their greatest concern was not getting the past “correct.” Rather it was to collect, revise, and compose traditions in order to produce texts about the past that would be meaningful to their communities.”

The excerpts were from Marc Zvi Brettler, How to Read the Jewish Bible. New York: Oxford, 2005, with the exception of “Identifying Booth’s Elements of Argument: 1 or 2 Chronicles,” which was written by Professor Brink.

When is a paper over, a done deal?

• A paper is not finished until it has been revised.

• Proofreading and revision are not the same.

• Revision attempts to work on the argument.

• Proofreading means that we’ve finished and are looking for possible mistakes.

Tools in Revising a Paper

• Tool 1: The first tool is "word limit" or "page limit." This indicates how much space it should take to cover the topic adequately. If the word or page limit falls quite short, this may indicate the topic has not been adequately covered. Going significantly over the limit might indicate the writer has not been concise enough or has included information not necessary to the argument.

• Tool 2: Be aware of what your most common mistakes are and look for those specifically each time you rewrite. Make yourself a list and use that as a checklist for each paper you write.

• Tool 3: When possible, wait at least twenty-four hours before rereading the paper.

• Tool 4: Look at the number of quotes you’ve included. Don’t be tempted to include too many quotes rather than properly elucidating your argument. A quote is there to support your point, not make it for you.

Ask yourself the following questions:

• Do I have a title for my paper?

• Does the introduction contain a thesis (topic + claim)?

• Does the thesis statement fit the paper? Is it clear and easy to understand?

• Is the reasoning behind my argument coherent? Have I provided enough evidence (details and examples) to support each reason?

• Are there pieces of evidence in the body of the paper that are not absolutely necessary?

• Does each paragraph relate to the thesis? Is each sentence in a paragraph necessary?

• Would another order for the subtopics make the paper clearer?

• Are there any transitions that I could add to make the paper read more smoothly?

• Does the conclusion tie the paper together by restating the thesis?

• Are my sources reliable and appropriate? Does any of the evidence seem questionable?

Consider your use of language

Avoid Stereotypes: this is not a matter of “political correctness” but one of respect for others:

• Did you use stereotypes such as “the homeless” or “the disabled.” We mean no harm, but when we stereotype others in this manner we are defining them by one aspect of their lives.
  We unintentionally do harm by dismissing the other talents and abilities of a group of people.
  It is more respectful to write, “the person who is homeless,” “people who are homeless,” or “those who are homeless.”

• Some of us have learning disabilities or physical disabilities. We are not defined by these.
  If a writer lumps us into a category such as “the disabled,” that writer unintentionally defines us by one aspect of our lives. God has given us other talents and abilities. Our disabilities do not define us.
  It is more respectful to write “people with disabilities.” Rather than write “autistic people,” write “people with autism.”

• If I refer to a “female minister,” why? If gender is at issue, then yes, “female minister” might be appropriate; however, if gender is not at issue, we are indicating that “male ministers” are the norm.

• The same is true of race and ethnicity. If I write that an “African American” or “Asian” minister preached at a worship service that I attended, why? It would be appropriate to mention race or ethnicity only if it were somehow central to the discussion of the worship service itself, or if race or ethnicity is part of the topic being addressed in a paper.

• Is gender and race or ethnicity necessary when we refer to others? Sometimes yes. Sometimes No.

• Rules for the proper nouns for the names of God: Capitalize when a proper name but not when using the generic term god—only when referring directly to the God of a monotheistic faith.

• Standard punctuation in academia is to use lowercase for all pronouns referring to God.

• Keep in mind that when we claim that God is neither male nor female, but then turn around and use "he" or "she," we assign God a gender.

• Mari Heidt Rapela offers us a list of names that we might use to refer to the Divine in her book A guide for Writing about Theology and Religion (Rapela, Anselm Academic, 2012).

“Revision is all there is.”

Perhaps not “all” to everyone, nevertheless, Lucretia B.Yaghjian speaks rightly when she urges us to revise and offers the above quote by Nancy Sommers (Yaghjian, Writing Theology Well: A Rhetoric for Theological and Biblical Writers, 2006). 

Many students hate revision. It’s seen as a hurdle to jump in order to finish. It doesn’t have to be so.

Think of revision like sculpting—as an art form in and of itself.