SEL3053: Analyzing Geordie Lecture 17. How to write a research paper

1. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper One of the most important things a university education provides is the ability to express one's views on any given topic clearly in writing. The present lecture develops the core principles of essay planning and structuring. Every academic discipline has its preferred style of written discourse, and academic linguists use the one that is standard in the natural and social sciences. The remainder of this lecture presents the essence of this science-based style, and we would like our English Language and Linguistics students to use it in their work.

2. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper The lecture is in three main parts. The first part reviews that lecture 2 said about the nature of science: what is the object of scientific research and of research in English Language and Linguistics specifically? The second part looks at how research results are presented in writing. The third part offers some suggestions on how the ideas presented in (1) and (2) can be applied to essay writing.

3. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 1. Scientific Method The aim of science in general is to understand the natural world: physics studies the relationship between physical matter and energy, genetics studies the mechanisms of biological structuring, cognitive science studies the relationship between mind and brain, and so on. An academic discipline, philosophy of science, is devoted to explicating how the scientific attempt to understand the natural world should be conducted, and, perhaps predictably, controversy abounds. In  practice, however, most scientists explicitly or implicitly base their work on the philosophy of Karl Popper who, in essence, proposed the following:

4. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 1. Scientific Method The scientist begins by stating a hypothesis about some domain of interest --that there is a black hole at the centre of our galaxy, for example, or that smoking causes cancer. The validity of the hypothesis is tested by observation of the domain --the structure of the galaxy is observed astronomically and compared to what the theory of black holes predicts / cancer rates among population samples of smokers and non-smokers are compared. If observation is compatible with the hypothesis, then the hypothesis is said to be supported. If not, the hypothesis is falsified, and it must then either be rejected or emended so that it is compatible with observation.

5. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 1. Scientific Method A hypothesis can never be proved to be true, only disproved by falsification. Support for a hypothesis by repeated and extensive observation of the domain of interest makes it more and more likely that it is true, but one can never discount the possibility that, one day, a falsifying observation will turn up. To take a trivial example, if the hypothesis is that all swans are white, one could travel the globe seeing tens of thousands of white swans, but that doesn't prove the hypothesis: one day a black swan will turn up and the hypothesis will be falsified. It can then either be rejected or modified to say that all swans are either white or black.

6. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper Scientific Method Science is, therefore, a collection of hypotheses that are best guesses about what the natural world is like, and those hypotheses are constantly being refined by observation and new ones formulated. It never claims absolute truth, though --that's the domain of religion.

7. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper Scientific Method Where do these hypotheses come from? In principle, it doesn't matter because the Popperian method will soon weed out the untenable ones. One could, for example, wake up in the middle of the night with an utterly novel and brilliant hypothesis that, say, unifies quantum mechanics and Einsteinian relativity, but this kind of inspiration is highly unlikely and must be exceedingly rare.   In practice, scientists develop hypotheses in something like the following sequence of steps: the researcher

8. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper Scientific Method (i) selects some aspect of the natural world that s/he wants to understand, (ii) becomes familiar with the selected research domain by observation of it, reads the associated research literature, and formulates a research question which, if convincingly answered, will enhance scientific understanding of the domain, (iii) abstracts data from the domain and draws inferences from it in the light of the research question, and (iv) on the basis of these inferences states an hypothesis to answer the research question. The hypothesis is subsequently tested for validity with reference to the domain and emended as required.

9. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper Scientific Method Linguistics is a science. Its aim is to understand such things as the nature of the language faculty in the context of the human cognitive system, its use in everyday communication, and its evolution over time. Because it is a science its practitioners use or should use the scientific method just described, and that includes undergraduate students of English language and linguistics.

10. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 2. Scientific writing Scientists present the results of their research in the form of articles in subject-specific journals or, if the results are extensive, as books. The present discussion concentrates on journal articles because they are closely akin to student essays, which are the main object of interest here.

11. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 2. Scientific writing Such articles are of three broad types: those which propose a new hypothesis, (ii) those which provide supporting evidence for existing hypotheses based on observation, and (iii) those which falsify existing hypotheses from observational evidence and, sometimes, propose emendations to those hypotheses. In all three cases, the articles have a pretty much standard structure; there are exceptions here as in most areas of human activity, but what follows is typical.

12. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 2. Scientific writing (i) There is an introductory paragraph which states, in this order: The research question: given a domain of interest, what was the aim of the study the results of which are about to be described? What question did the researcher ask himself or herself? The hypothesis: what is the answer to the research question? A new hypothesis? Support for an existing one? Rejection or emendation of an existing one? The methodology: what is the structure of the discussion in the remainder of the article that describes how the research question was answered? What evidence was used? What arguments were given, and in what sequence?

13. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 2. Scientific writing (ii) The body of the discussion in which the evidence and arguments are presented in the way set out in the introductory paragraph.

14. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 2. Scientific writing (iii) A conclusion that Restates the research question Restates the hypothesis Summarizes how the evidence and arguments presented in the body of the discussion (ii) support the hypothesis.

15. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 2. Scientific writing The aim throughout is logical coherence and clarity of presentation. Logical coherence in a scientific article is, broadly, the property that the argument in support of the hypothesis, and the hypothesis itself, are free of contradictions. Intuitively, the argument and hypothesis must make sense: one can't present evidence of a correlation between lung cancer and smoking and then claim that there's no connection, for example. The ability to argue in a logically coherent way is innate in humans but is developed via education and practice, and is in a deep sense what university education is all about. It certainly can't be taught in a single lecture like this one. What can be taught, however, is clarity of presentation.

16. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 2. Scientific writing Clarity of presentation in scientific writing is achieved on several levels. (i) The discussion is explicitly divided up into sections, subsections, and where necessary sub-subsections which reflect the structure of the argument. Each section, subsection, and sub-subsection has a heading that describes what it's about. (ii) Within each section, subsection, and sub-subsection, the discussion is divided into paragraphs, and each paragraph is about some well defined topic that differs from the topics of subsequent paragraphs. (iii) Within any paragraph, each sentence states a proposition or set of propositions relevant to the topic of the paragraph, is properly punctuated, and is separated from other sentences by a full stop. (iv) Words are chosen with care to say exactly what is intended, and their spelling is without exception correct. Click here for an example.

17. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 3. Practical application How, exactly, does one put the things said in the previous two sections into practice when writing an essay? Here's a suggested sequence.

18. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 3. Practical application 3.1 Whether an essay title is selected from a list provided by the module leader or self-generated, it's crucial to realize that the title is the research question. In English Language and Linguistics modules it's rare to be offered a title that asks merely for a description of something. Typically, the title offers a research question that requires of the student a hypothesis and an argument to support that hypothesis.

19. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 3. Practical application 3.1 For example: Why is symbol grounding such a problem for the computational view of mind? How is syntax involved in determining the meanings of sentences? In a solipsistic universe, how is linguistic communication possible? In all these cases, the person writing the essay must formulate a hypothesis and support it with a logically coherent and clear argument. Careful reading and understanding of the title is, therefore, the first and most important step in essay writing.

20. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 3. Practical application 3.2 Having decided on the hypothesis, the next step is to formulate the supporting argument. How?  Note that, in the foregoing sample essay titles, each one has some key words or expressions. Why is symbol grounding such a problem for the computational view of mind? How is syntax involved in determining the meanings of sentences? In a solipsistic universe, how is linguistic communication possible?

21. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 3. Practical application 3.2 What should be done with the key words / expressions once they've been identified? The answer is straightforward: understand what each one means, and then understand how they interrelate in a way that supports the hypothesis. This understanding may and almost certainly will involve some reading in the subject.

22. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 3. Practical application 3.3 At this stage, the introduction can be written. It has three main components: Statement of the research question Statement of the hypothesis Outline of the argument. In relation to the first of the above essay titles, 'Why is symbol grounding such a problem for the computational view of mind?', the introduction might as follows.

23. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 3. Practical application 3.3 (i) This essay addresses the problem that symbol grounding poses for a computational view of mind. (ii) It argues that the lack of a well-defined account of symbol meaning is at the root of the problem, and that, until such an account is formulated, the computational view of mind will be inadequate. (iii) The discussion is in three main parts. The first part explains the nature of symbol grounding, the second describes the computational view of mind, and the third examines their relationship in detail and explicates the nature of the problem. (i) is the research question, (ii) is the hypothesis, and (iii) is the argument outline.

24. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 3. Practical application 3.3 It is stressed that, until the introduction is written, there's no point is starting on the body of the essay because it's only once the research question, hypothesis, and shape of the argument are fully understood that one knows what one is doing. Usually it's necessary to go through several drafts of the introduction, revising each until it feels right.

25. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 3. Practical application 3.4 The body of the essay can now be written. The discussion should be divided into sections that correspond to the structure stated in the introduction. Very often, this means that each of the key words / expressions is defined in detail in a separate section, followed by a section on their interrelationship. For the example used in (3) above, the essay structure might look like this:

26. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 3. Practical application 3.4 Introduction 1. Symbol grounding 1.1 The nature of symbols 1.2 The grounding of symbols in the real world 2. The computational view of mind 2.1 The nature of computation 2.2 Theories of mind 2.3 The computational theory of mind 3. The computational mind and symbol grounding 3.1 Computational theory and meaning: the Chinese Room 3.2 How can mental symbols acquire meaning? 3.3 The need to redefine computation relative to the structure of mind.

27. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 3. Practical application 3.5 Conclusion: Restate the research question and the hypothesis, and summarize the arguments of the body of the essay, making explicit how those arguments support the hypothesis.

28. SEL3053: Analyzing GeordieLecture 17. How to write a research paper 3. Practical application Some final observations: Stick to the point. Everything said in an essay must be relevant to the argument in support of the hypothesis. Never put tangential or irrelevant material in, no matter how intrinsically interesting or hard-won, because it compromises clarity. Don't gabble. When the point has been made, stop and move on. Strive instead for economy of expression. Correct sentence construction, spelling, and punctuation are not frills. They are fundamental to clarity. Correct referencing and a properly constructed bibliography are also fundamental.