In writing a scientific report, Overused of contractions should be avoided.
When writing a scientific report it is best to use formal writing. If too many contractions are used, then the reader may get put off. Scientific writing needs to be dense to engage the reader with all the information provided. Also by avoiding the overuse of contractions the reader will not get confused to the results when reading.
The writer also needs to take into consideration non-native speakers of English, especially when they want to publish their report. When used correctly though the readers may have an easier time reading the content of the report.
For more information on Scientific Reports, visit these links:
- brainly.ph/question/1921652
- brainly.ph/question/1710574
- brainly.ph/question/1924514
New questions in English
2 Eapp Week 11-20
Uploaded by, document information, original title, share this document, share or embed document, sharing options.
- Share on Facebook, opens a new window Facebook
- Share on Twitter, opens a new window Twitter
- Share on LinkedIn, opens a new window LinkedIn
- Share with Email, opens mail client Email
- Copy Link Copy Link
Did you find this document useful?
Is this content inappropriate, original title:, reward your curiosity.
- Share on Facebook, opens a new window
- Share on Twitter, opens a new window
- Share on LinkedIn, opens a new window
- Share with Email, opens mail client
Taboo Words in a Research Paper
By bizhan romani.
A research paper is a piece of scientific writing written by a researcher or a student containing the author’s original research on a particular topic for a specific field of study. Additionally, a research paper should include the analysis carried out in the course of the research as well as the interpretation of the research findings (See best advice for writing a research paper ).
Research writing is entirely different from writing for a general audience. If you are already used to writing for a general audience, it might take time to acclimate to research writing. Writing a research paper has its set of expectations that should be met; it requires proper diction and following grammar rules. Research writing does not give room for informal writing; every sentence and choice of words should be formal.
Research writing requires formal language, has to be well-structured and written clearly. Writing a research paper with informal and unsophisticated expression can distract from the message the paper is passing across. Many of the words and expressions that are acceptable in conversations or informal writing are considered inappropriate in research writing.
When writing a research paper, authors should try to avoid vague, exaggerated, or subjective words as well as those words that are unnecessary or incorrect. There are some words students use in research writing that have been considered as overused or generally unnecessary. In the process of writing a research paper, some particular words or phrases should be avoided to maintain professionalism.
Some certain words and phrases can disrupt the clarity and conciseness of research writing. In the process of writing a research paper, it can be tempting to use phrases that sound good to you. However, some of the words that might sound good to you might end up being unnecessary or muddle the meaning of the sentence, and you can lose the focus of your readers.
Clutters are languages that are unnecessary when trying to convey a message or the meaning of something. Avoiding clutters at all costs remains one of the too rules of proper English writing. To eliminate clutters completely, it is good to be aware of the list of overused words or phrases that obscure clear writing.
Take advantage of our service for editing research papers !
Words and Phrases To Avoid When Writing A Research Paper
The following are the type of words and phrases to avoid when writing a research paper.
A research paper is meant to be concise and clear. Therefore, the use of phrases that makes the sentences too wordy should be avoided.
Examples of wordy phrases that should be avoided include the following:
- Due to the fact that
- It should be noted that
- In this study, we will
- In consequence of this fact
- It is worth mentioning/considering
- Future research is needed
If the phrase is too wordy, it is advisable to find an alternative that will make the research paper concise.
Incorrect and redundant phrases
When writing a paper, authors should try and avoid phrases that are redundant or otherwise incorrect. They could alter the clarity of the paper and render it unprofessional.
Examples of incorrect and redundant phrases on “average,” “end result,” and “used to”
- Intensifiers
Avoid using adverbs that modify a verb but are not needed to convey your point in a research paper. Adverbs that are considered intensifier are as follows:
- Literally and many others.
- Repetitive phrases
Avoid using words or phrases that could cause repetition in the sentence structures
- Clichés
The words that we use in our everyday conversations do not translate well in research writing. Those phrases can be exaggerated, too informal or too overused. Although, there are informal phrases that can be accepted in research writing, if you are not sure which is which, it is better to avoid them.
Examples of clichés that should not find their way into your research papers include:
- On the other hand
- Sleeping like the dead
- At the end of the day
- Paradigm shift
- Contractions
Contractions are words that are formed from two words that have been abbreviated. Contracting words are not appropriate for research papers because they make your writing informal . Always write in full when writing a research paper.
Examples of contracting words that should be avoided
- Don’t
- Can’t
- Should’ve
- We’ll
- She’ll
- Won’t and a lot more
- Run-on expression
In research writing, avoid using run-on expressions when listing examples avoid ending your list with run-on expressions.
Examples of run-on expressions
- And so forth
- Too unsophisticated
Using too many simple terms in your research paper can make the run the risk of feeling elementary, it is advisable not to overuse them.
Examples of unsophisticated words that do not have a place in research papers
- Get attention
- Gives and overview
- Good example
- The figure shows
- Vague quantities
When writing a research paper, ensure to use the exact amount or exact values whenever you can, and if you do not have the exact value, use formal words like many, countless, or myriad.
- Totalizing words
Using totalizing words is frowned upon in research writing. This is because they often make oversimplified claims that turn a complex situation into facts. Examples of totalizing words include, always and never. Endeavor to use more totalizing words like “rarely,” “usually,” or “generally.”
- Dogmatic claims
When writing a research paper, you should try stating your opinion or making dogmatic claims. Also, dogmatic claims are phrases that state your opinion in a rather pompous manner. The word “must” is a dogmatic claim that should be avoided in a research paper.
Useful sources
Leave a Comment Cancel reply
Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.
Related Posts
What is a Conjunction? Definition & Examples
September 9, 2021
What Is an Adverb? Definition & Examples
August 8, 2021
What Are Run-on Sentences?
What Is a Pronoun?
July 7, 2021
Compound Sentences and Complex Sentences
June 6, 2021
- Terms of Use
- Privacy Policy
Purdue Online Writing Lab College of Liberal Arts
Avoid Common Pitfalls
Welcome to the Purdue OWL
This page is brought to you by the OWL at Purdue University. When printing this page, you must include the entire legal notice.
Copyright ©1995-2018 by The Writing Lab & The OWL at Purdue and Purdue University. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, reproduced, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed without permission. Use of this site constitutes acceptance of our terms and conditions of fair use.
This resource will help you write clearly by eliminating unnecessary words and rearranging your phrases.
1. Avoid overusing expletives at the beginning of sentences
Expletives are phrases of the form it + be -verb or there + be -verb. Such expressions can be rhetorically effective for emphasis in some situations, but overuse or unnecessary use of expletive constructions creates wordy prose. Take the following example: "It is imperative that we find a solution." The same meaning could be expressed with this more succinct wording: "We must find a solution." But using the expletive construction allows the writer to emphasize the urgency of the situation by placing the word imperative near the beginning of the sentence, so the version with the expletive may be preferable.
Still, you should generally avoid excessive or unnecessary use of expletives. The most common kind of unnecessary expletive construction involves an expletive followed by a noun and a relative clause beginning with that , which , or who . In most cases, concise sentences can be created by eliminating the expletive opening, making the noun the subject of the sentence, and eliminating the relative pronoun.
2. Avoid overusing noun forms of verbs
Use verbs when possible rather than noun forms known as nominalizations . Sentences with many nominalizations usually have forms of be as the main verbs. Using the action verbs disguised in nominalizations as the main verbs—instead of forms of be —can help to create engaging rather than dull prose.
3. Avoid unnecessary infinitive phrases
Some infinitive phrases can be converted into finite verbs or brief noun phrases. Making such changes also often results in the replacement of a be -verb with an action verb.
4. Avoid circumlocutions in favor of direct expressions
Circumlocutions are commonly used roundabout expressions that take several words to say what could be said more succinctly. We often overlook them because many such expressions are habitual figures of speech. In writing, though, they should be avoided since they add extra words without extra meaning. Of course, occasionally you may for rhetorical effect decide to use, say, an expletive construction instead of a more succinct expression. These guidelines should be taken as general recommendations, not absolute rules.
(2/4 words)
Below are some other words which may simplify lengthier circumlocutions.
- the reason for
- for the reason that
- owing/due to the fact that
- in light of the fact that
- considering the fact that
- on the grounds that
- this is why
- on the occasion of
- in a situation in which
- under circumstances in which
- in reference to
- with regard to
- concerning the matter of
- where ________ is concerned
- it is crucial that
- it is necessary that
- there is a need/necessity for
- it is important that
- cannot be avoided
- has the opportunity to
- has the capacity for
- has the ability to
- it is possible that
- there is a chance that
- it could happen that
- the possibility exists for
- FRONT MATTER
- TABLE OF CONTENTS
Special Stylistic Issues in Technical Writing
To become an effective technical stylist, you must understand some of the key governing conventions. A few stylistic issues emerge as worthy of special attention here, especially since professors can be particularly sensitive to them. See the lessons in this section not as binding restrictions on your style, but as opportunities to understand (and in some cases, debunk) some oft-repeated rules of professional communication. In technical writing, as in chess, it is prudent to wield your creativity only within the rules.
Eliminating Contractions
Contractions—in which an apostrophe is used to "contract" two words into one by joining parts of them—are considered to be informal, conversational expression. In the formal writing that you do for your classes, or as you submit formal work for an editor’s or superior’s perusal, you simply do not have the option of using contractions unless you are quoting something that contains contractions. If you use contractions in formal writing you may appear sloppy and unprofessional. The safest idea is to avoid them entirely. If you avoid contractions, you will discover that your writing becomes more emphatic and leans toward the active voice, so the benefits are multiple. Remember: in technical writing, apostrophes contracting two words (e.g., "it’s," "they’ve," "who’s") signal that the two words can and should be written out separately.
Curbing Feelings and Personification
Of course scientists and engineers have feelings, but use of the word "feelings" or the verb "feel" in technical writing often leads the writer into trouble. Phrases such as "I feel that the best answer is 3.2" or "we feel that this conclusion is correct" can draw large frowns from your readers. "Feel" has emotional connotations, and feelings are not a relevant part of rational conclusions in your writing, at least not on the page. Also, the needless use of the term can lend the appearance of uncertainty, especially when applied to quantities or conclusions as it is above.
A related issue is the use of unintentional personification—i.e., assigning human traits to inanimate objects—in technical writing. In a phrase such as "when the drillstring feels the weight," the seemingly literal claim that an inanimate object such as a drillstring "feels" anything is clearly inaccurate. Similarly, a sentence such as "Boeing stock enjoyed a 2% increase today" could imply that stocks have emotions. Although such a sentence may well appear in the daily newspaper, its tone would not suit a technical paper. In technical writing, avoid unintentional personification, which is always revealed by the verb you use to express a noun’s action.
Choosing Gender-Neutral Language
From a stylistic standpoint, one of the best things about the need for writers to choose gender-neutral language is that it forces them to explore the options that have always been available to them. Most students are aware that they should choose gender-neutral language when they write and give oral presentations, but if it just causes them to use "his/her" repeatedly then they are not living up to their obligations to keep their writing highly readable and efficient. Also, writing a sentence such as "Someone should lend their voice to this problem" is still grammatically unacceptable because "someone" is singular and "their" is plural. Most good writers attack the problem in the following ways:
- By simply being more specific or creative about word choice (writing "humans" rather than "man").
- By using plural nouns rather than singular ones when appropriate ("scientists" rather than "a scientist"), or by avoiding gender-specific pronouns ("the author" rather than "he").
- By writing "he or she" (not "he/she") when it is not awkward or overly repetitive to do so.
- By changing some words to other parts of speech, thereby avoiding gender-specific pronouns ("walking" might work better than "he walked" as long as the grammar of the revision is sound).
- By alternating between using "he" and "she" (as I have done in this handbook), especially in longer pieces.
With these tactics in mind, consider the following example:
The consumer himself has the power to reduce fuel costs: If he sets his residential thermostat 2 degrees higher in the summer and 2 degrees lower in the winter, he saves energy.
In a revised version of this sentence, the gender-specific language of the original is avoided:
Consumers have the power to reduce fuel costs: By setting their residential thermostats 2 degrees higher in the summer and 2 degrees lower in the winter, they save energy.
Standard English usage still calls for the masculine form ("he" or "his") to refer correctly to either gender in writing, but rely on this only when you have to. In technical writing, do not let your concern for gender-neutral language cause your usage to be too unconventional ("personhole cover"? "personkind"? "s/he"?); instead, do exercise your options as a writer wisely, and remember that our language is always in flux. Keep your eye on it.
Do you crave more on gender-neutral language? Then pay these academic sites a visit:
"Statement on Gender and Language" from the National Council of Teachers of English
"Gender-neutral Language" article by Dennis Jerz, Seton Hill University
Keeping Jargon in its Place
Jargon, especially that which has grown out of computer usage, genuinely enriches our language, so I do not want to give it a bad rap. (Why not delight, for example, in jargon such as "debug," "flame," and "FUBAR"?) However, many professors and employers criticize the use of jargon (sometimes called "buzzwords" or "gobbledygook"), especially in formal writing, so you must understand how to recognize it and when it is unacceptable.
The forms of jargon range from redundancy ("red in color"), overly formal wordiness (using "at this point in time" rather than "currently"), and specialized technical slang (using "airplane rule" to describe the concept that greater complexity increases the likelihood of failure). Clearly, when jargon takes the form of redundancy and wordiness, simple editing is critical; when jargon becomes specialized slang, we must consider audience and context to decide on how much jargon is appropriate. A hip group of hackers might know that "angry fruit salad" refers to visual design that includes too many colors, but a general, educated audience would not.
When discerning whether to use jargon, employ the following principles:
- When tempted toward a wordy construction or fancy word, elect the simpler wording or word (e.g., "today" rather than "in today’s modern society"; "sandy" rather than "arenaceous").
- When you feel jargon is necessary in speaking or writing but your audience members might not understand it, explicitly define the terms you use (as I did in the previous paragraph), or define terms by creating context for them in the sentence.
- Use technical slang, but do not overuse it, in presentations, in conversation with peers, in interviews, in e-mails and memos, and in cover letters, but only when your audience is certain to understand your meaning.
Professional and government organizations are just as concerned about overuse of jargon as your professors are. Check out these sites for tips and an action plan to reduce jargon and communicate more clearly:
"Jargon in Technical Writing" article from the Weed Science Society of America
"National Action Plan to Improve Health Literacy," from the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Destroying Dangling Modifiers
Dangling modifiers are a common occurrence in technical writing and are easily overlooked by the writer, who assumes the reader will automatically follow the sentence’s meaning. Especially when you use passive voice, it is easy to create dangling modifiers—that is, descriptive words that seem to "dangle off by themselves" because they do not accurately describe the words next to them. Most often, writers dangle modifiers at a sentence’s beginning. Grammatically, a group of words preceding a sentence’s main subject should directly describe the subject; otherwise, that group of words can become a dangling modifier. The following sentences contain dangling modifiers:
Using an otoscope, her ears were examined for damage. Determining the initial estimates, results from previous tests were used.
Even though these sentences are understandable, grammatically they are unacceptable, because the first implies that the ears used the otoscope, while the second implies that the results themselves determined the initial estimates. The words that describe a sentence subject must be sensibly related to the subject, and in these two sentences that is not the case. Although here the intended meaning can be discerned with some minimal work, readers often have a hard time sorting out meaning when modifiers are dangled, especially as sentences grow longer.
Revisions of these sentences to avoid dangling modifiers involve changing wording slightly and shuffling sentence parts around so that the meaning is more logical:
Her ears were examined for damage with an otoscope. Results from previous tests were used to determine the initial estimates.
Particularly when you are writing the "Experimental" section of a technical report, or anytime when you must use the passive voice regularly, take special care to watch out for dangling modifiers. The more frequently dangling modifiers are used, the more likely a sentence’s meaning can become obtuse. The result is sentences that may be both unclear and inelegant.
Further reading on dangling modifiers is available from these two university sites:
Exercise on modifier placement from Capital Community College
"Avoiding Misplaced and Dangling Modifiers" article from Towson University
Using "I" and "We"—the First Person
A few years ago, an old dog taught me a new trick. I edited a technical report for a gentleman who works for a government agency and has authored over 200 papers. He was highly respectful of all my editorial suggestions, but corrected me on one. I told him that he was bucking convention by using "we" throughout his report, and that the standard was to avoid using the term in technical writing, just as I had been told by others. He assured me that he had "breezily been getting away with it" for 40 years, and I agreed just as breezily that he should not change his practice after such a winning record. Finally, I came away from our interaction with an important question: Was this scientist-author a maverick, or was he in fact practicing the customary?
To form an answer, I pulled 40 journals at random from one of my university’s technical library’s shelves. The journals ranged from the international refereed European Journal of Mineralogy to the more advertising-driven Spray Technology and Marketing . To my surprise, in 32 out of the 40 journals, the authors indeed made liberal use of "I" and "we" (referred to grammatically as "the first person"). In one case (an article in Water Resources Journal ), the authors used "we" in nearly every paragraph. I realized then that I had been upholding a principle that was either outmoded or at least in flux, without considering the convention in the published literature. A lesson learned.
Nevertheless, addressing the issue here is not as simple as saying "go ahead and use the first person freely." Here are some considered guidelines to follow:
You can use the first person in an abstract or introduction to stress the foundations of your particular approach, express authorial intentions, or emphasize your scientific convictions:
In this paper, I argue that . . . In contrast to other authors, we conclude that . . .
- When the first person does not suit you or your reader’s taste, but you need to be self-referential, consider the common alternatives such as "this author," "this paper." Keep in mind, though, that these options can sound a bit stilted.
- In memos, especially when they involve one-on-one communication between you and one other party, use the first person (and the word "you") as needed, in particular in the introduction and conclusion.
Use the first person plural ("we") when you wish to include the reader as part of a collective, thinking body:
We can agree that something must be done about the quality of care in HMO programs.
- Limit your use of the first person so that you do not create circumstances requiring you to use it repeatedly. For example, by convention, avoid using the first person in the "Experimental" section of a technical report—if you begin to use "we" in this section, you would continually have to repeat its use for consistency.
- Be particularly cautious with first-person terms suggesting ownership—e.g., "my" and "our." It would be awkward to write "I connected my patchcord" or "We closed our tank," in that the issue of ownership is irrelevant to the science and interpretation.
By convention, you may use the first person plural ("we") to introduce equations:
We can calculate the green densities of the pellets with the equation . . .
Despite what I have outlined above, recognize that some professors and editors will adamantly reject the use of first person pronouns in technical writing. Revise accordingly when needed.
Using "This," "It," and Other Pronouns
Do you want to annoy and confuse your readers? Then paste a paragraph together with "this" or "it" as a connecting word in nearly every sentence. Moreover, do not refer to anything specific with the "this" or "it"—keep the meaning vague. (For the highly literal among you, please note that I have just employed mild sarcasm.) Without realizing it, many writers habitually plant a "this" or "it" wherever they sense that flow is needed. However, they often create confusion by doing so. Most of the time when you use "this" or "it" you are actually referring to a specific noun or verb that is nearby, or to an idea that has just been implied if not explicitly stated. To avoid confusion, one sound practice is to name whatever the "this" refers to immediately after it (i.e., "this phenomenon," "this principle," "this variation"). Note how much clearer the following sentences are because "this assumption" is used rather than just "this" by itself:
The burial by thrusting is believed to occur rapidly. This assumption, however, is difficult to test.
Here, "this assumption" clarifies that a belief is being described rather than the burial by thrusting or its rapid occurrence.
Commonly, "it is" is overused as a sentence beginning. "It is this water that could become . . ." is better written as "This water could become . . . ." When the use of "it" is vague or unnecessary, try to simply eliminate the word.
The same principle described above applies to pronouns such as "that" and "these": Do not overuse them, and when you do be sure that the reader can easily discern the words or ideas being referred to.
Because I decided against making this manual too much of a grammar text, I have only scratched the surface here on the subject of effective pronoun usage (e.g., I have not even touched on the dreaded "who" and "whom" distinction). If you find that you consistently have trouble with pronouns, I recommend further study.
For more guidance on proper pronoun usage, I highly recommend these instructive websites:
Exercises on pronoun/antecedent agreement from D'Youville College's Online Writing Lab
Exercises on pronoun/antecedent agreement from Capital Community College
Writing with Infinitives—to Split or not to Split?
A split infinitive is a phrase in which one or more words are placed between the word "to" and its accompanying verb. "To boldly go" is a split infinitive (a famous one, in fact, even to non-Trekkies) because "boldly" is interrupting the more basic pattern "to go." Split infinitives are pet peeves of many professors (and grammar checkers too), so you must consider how you will handle this issue. Read on:
The grammatical thorn that emerges when infinitives are split essentially has to do with the concept of unit interruption. Our ears (and the "rules" of our language) prefer that certain units not be interrupted. For instance, for many writers, "have worked diligently" is more acceptable than "have diligently worked," in that the verb "have worked" is not interrupted in the first instance. (Also, work in itself cannot be "diligent," per se, and the phrasing "have diligently worked" could imply otherwise.) To dramatize the point further, consider the serious, especially irksome unit interruption that occurs in an incorrect phrase we have all heard: "a whole nother."
Now consider this sentence, which contains a split infinitive:
The plastic contains a catalyst that causes it to completely and naturally disappear in a few months.
In this sentence, some readers would insist that "to" and "disappear" are too far away from each other, in that their grammatical purpose here is to serve as one uninterrupted unit. A revised version of the sentence would bring together the two words in question, thus:
The plastic contains a catalyst that causes it to disappear completely and naturally in a few months.
Now, "completely and naturally" is more obviously describing the intact phrase, "to disappear." As in this case, usually the words that split an infinitive can go outside the infinitive or be omitted altogether.
Nevertheless, split infinitives do appear in writing, and many writers (including me) find them acceptable as long as they are infrequent and that they do not disturb either sense or sound. At times, in fact, split infinitives are the most logical, euphonious choice:
After the mishap, he was encouraged to never report to work again. It is comforting to finally understand differential equations.
The bottom line: If you split infinitives, do so infrequently, and understand that some of your professors might view them as unacceptable or sloppy style.
Ending Sentences with Prepositions
Prepositions—small connecting words such as at, about, to, under—are used to clarify relationships between other words, especially between verbs and the receivers of the verb’s action. We have all heard admonishments against ending sentences with prepositions, but such a rule never really existed—as with the principle of not splitting infinitives, it was mostly passed down by grammarians who were attempting to make written English conform to the rules of Latin. Even the purist grammar handbook that I began using in the 1980s, Martha Kolln’s Language and Composition , calls the notion that sentences may not end with prepositions an "absurd warning."
Of course, as a matter of style, ending a sentence with a preposition can give undue stress to the preposition, leaving the reader with the feeling that the sentence has ended weakly (e.g., "He wasn’t sure which sample to look at."). Therefore, if a sentence ending with a proposition sounds weak to you, revise it by moving or eliminating the preposition, but do not defy meaning or the natural word order.
And for those who would argue with you over this issue and insist on the "rule," point out to them that it is sometimes just darned inconvenient and illogical not to end a perfectly understandable and strong sentence with a preposition. You can even cite two authorities on language: William and Winston. Shakespeare’s Henry V includes the line, "Who servest thou under?" And the always quotable Winston Churchill, to demonstrate the inconvenience when the so-called rule is followed, is reported to have put his feelings on the matter thus:
This is the sort of English up with which I will not put.
IMAGES
VIDEO
COMMENTS
The definition of report writing is creating an account or statement that describes in detail an event, situation or occurrence, usually as the result of observation or inquiry. The two most common forms of report writing are news report wr...
To write a meeting report, use the agenda as a guide. Talk about past business that was concluded, summarize what each speaker said, and list the goals that were identified as action items.
Depending on what style is used to write the report, a variety of samples can be found online to assist the writing process. The Purdue OWL gives extensive information about writing in MLA or APA style.
TRUE OR FALSE: In writing a scientific report, Overused of contractions should be avoided. - 1924514.
When writing a scientific report it is best to use formal writing. If too many contractions are used, then the reader may get put off.
In writing a scientific report, Overused. of contractions should be avoided. True. Format of a research paper. IMRaD. A Latin word which means. genuine.
In writing a scientific report, overused of contractions should be avoided. Select one: True False Question 6. Not yet answered. Marked out of 1.00.
writing a scientific report, overused of contractions should be avoided.
writing a scientific report, overused of contractions should be avoided.
When writing a research paper, authors should try to avoid vague, ... of the list of overused words or phrases that obscure clear writing.
In writing, though, they should be avoided since they add extra words without
the "Experimental" section of a technical report, or anytime when you must
These terms make your paper sound unsure and tentative. Delete these words for a stronger, more direct paper. Avoid overused “scholarly” phrases. Never write “
Table 2 lists some of the more egregious examples. Table 2: Phrases to avoid in technical writing. Instead of, Use. due to the fact that, because.