Cultures are, essentially, characterised by a set of anthroposyncratic practices and prescribed norms which need to be adhered to, if one wishes to become their full-fledged member on a daily basis. These practices and norms, in turn, constitute the Form[al] of the given culture, across the given time-span and within the given social space. One of the constituents of the form[al] is also the specific language used. Another, the prescribed structure, or structures, in which this language is to be embedded, if an interface between the speaker-writer and the target audience is to be established. Thus, conveying one’s idea in accord with the above said minimises the cognitive-load in the audience’s behalf while, at the same time, fostering the [adj.] in-group understanding. The same can be said to apply for the academic culture as well. Therefore, in line with the former, the purpose of this introductory Guide is, first and foremost, to present young cognitivists with a thumbnail of the Form[al] underlying the academic writing practices. Second and aftermost, to furnish them with rudimentary skills and tools of the scholarly trade that will allow them to enter the written world of academia not as outsiders, but formally-versed cultural insiders. Vladan Sutanovac
Essentials of Academic Culture Although quite formal in its approach to structuring both the outer frame and the inner substance of a text, Language[English] for Academic Purposes, or L[E]AP for short, is, nevertheless, primarily a pragmatic entity. In other words, an exponent of language in use. As such, it is, principally, reliant on and shaped by the pragmatic kernels, before those of the formal. These pragma-kernels include: [a] context of culture, [b] context of situation and, their conjoiner [c] interactional/communicative competence. Now, in order for the prolific common ground to be established from the onset, and the interaction between the author and the audience to be mutually satisfactory, certain types of context need to be addressed first. Pursuant to this, and keeping in mind that each interaction is, on an initial plane, shaped by specific cultural values and norms (cf. Wierzbicka, 1991), the "context of culture" as a key reifier of the culture itself, can be regarded as an initial stepstone. For, it provides the interlocutor with the key to demystifying: a) the target audience (i.e. the specific academic community), b) the "target language" (i.e. the specific academic community language/jargon) c) the manner in which this language is to be used most productively (i.e. for conveying ideas in a fashion the community is most accustomed to).
Essentials of Academic Culture [cntnd.] A further stepstone that also plays an essential role in the formation of an adequate written utterance is the “context of situation”. Namely, it serves as a sign post that points the author in the direction of the appropriate genre. That is to say, in the direction of the given academic meta-setting e.g. a conference, scientific journal, poster presentation, research report etc. By internalising it, i.e. by being aware of it at all times, the author gains an indispensable skill “mental morphism” (Sutanovac, 2014). Or the ability to transform the written utterance in such a way that it responds to all the requirements of the meta-setting, without the loss of its substance, i.e. the intended message it seeks to convey. By making the above kernels an inherent part of one’s academic identity, the author arrives at the third essential - the interactional/communicative competence - the ability to construct informative scholarly “heterofonic narratives” [Ibid.]. This is ensured by constantly keeping in mind that L[E]AP is a three-partite exponent of: a) language in use, b) culture-specific language and c) L[E]AP-culture specific language.
Conventions of the academic genre The following chapter can be regarded as an interface between, on the one hand, the conceptual, i.e. the theoretical (above-said) and, on the other hand, the perceptual, i.e. the practical (below-said). Its purpose, therefore, shall be to provide its readers with a thumbnail of formal characteristics a written text needs to take into account, if it seeks to become an informative written entity. Given that an academic text is, in essence, a narrative, it represents an amalgam of a number of considerations. These considerations, in turn, shape its written fabric so as to make it cognitively accessible to the readers in such a way that minimises the cognitive load, while at the same time maximising comprehension. Owing to a decades-long research on the topic (cf. Swales & Feak 2012 et. al.), the following dimensions have been pinpointed as the most crucial: [a] Audience, [b] Purpose (Strategy), [c] Organisation, [d] Style, [e] Flow, [f] Presentation. 　　
Conventions of the academic genre [cntnd.] Including a number of characteristics that, despite certain cross-disciplinary variation, can still be considered as “recurring features” (cf. Johns 1997) of the academic genre/text at a discourse level. The main purpose of these recurring features, known as “moves”, is to prepare the reader(s) to read and understand a text efficiently & effortlessly: [1] establishing or introducing the topic and discussing its importance, [2] reviewing published (or other) sources of information, [3] preparing the ground and reasoning for the present analysis and/or synthesis of information (or demonstrating how the present examination can accomplish what has not been accomplished previously), [4] introducing the present examination and stating its purpose. In addition, a number of recurrent formal linguistic features of the academic text, complementing those at the discourse level, can be found across practically all disciplines and subgenres.
Conventions of the academic genre [cntnd.] These lexical and syntactic features, that have in the course of time become highly valued in the general expository academic prose, are: [a] Lexical precision and careful use of vocabulary, [b] Careful and purposeful uses of text and signposts, such as discourse and metadiscourse markers, [c] Appearance of the writer's objectivity and impersonal register, [d] Nonjudgmental interpretations of information, findings, and events, [e] A guarded stance in presenting argumentation and results.
Citation and referencing conventions [Traditional] MLA (Modern Language Association) Adolphs, Ralph. “How Do We Know the Minds of Others? Domain-Specificity, Simulation, and Enactive Social Cognition.” Brain research 1079.1 (2006): 25–35. Web. 8 Mar. 2013. CHICAGO MANUAL OF STYLE Adolphs, Ralph. 2006. “How Do We Know the Minds of Others? Domain-Specificity, Simulation, and Enactive Social Cognition.” Brain Research 1079 (1) (March 24): 25–35.doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2005.12.127. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/16507301. IEEE [1] R. Adolphs, “How do we know the minds of others? Domain-specificity, simulation, and enactive social cognition.,” Brain Res., vol. 1079, no. 1, pp. 25–35, Mar. 2006. APA Adolphs, R. (2006). How do we know the minds of others? Domain-specificity, simulation, and enactive social cognition. Brain research, 1079(1), 25–35. doi:10.1016/j.brainres.2005.12.127
Computer tools of the trade CITATION MENDELEY http://www.mendeley.com/ CITAVI http://www.citavi.com/ ENDNOTE https://www.myendnoteweb.com/EndNoteWeb.html ZOTERO http://www.zotero.org/ OnLINE VOCABULARY BUILDING WEBCORP LSE http://wse1.webcorp.org.uk/ LEX TUTOR (VOCABULARY PROFILER) http://lextutor.ca/ OffLINE VOCABULARY BUILDING WORDSMITH http://www.lexically.net/wordsmith/version5/index.ht ml WordNET http://wordnet.princeton.edu/wordnet/ [Large lexical database of English. Nouns, verbs, adjectives and adverbs are grouped into sets of cognitive synonyms (synsets)]
Computer tools of the trade [cntnd.] CONCORDANCE TEXT ANALYSERS http://www.textworld.eu/scp/ [Simple Concordance Program] http://neon.niederlandistik.fuberlin.de/en/textstat/ [ Txt Analys.] http://www.adelaide.edu.au/red/adtat/ [Concordance Tool|Univ. of Adelaide] PLAGIARISM [DOs AND DON’Ts] :::IN PRACTICE Rutgers University: Interactive Tutorial - Real Life Examples http://library.lmunet.edu/content.php?pid=20353 4&sid=1702827 IEEE: Identifying Plagiarism http://www.ieee.org/publications_standards/pub lications/rights/ID_Plagiarism.html
[1] Henning, E, S Gravett, and W. Van Rensburg. 2005. Finding Your Way in Academic Writing. 2nd ed. Van Schaik Publishers. [2] Hinkel, Eli. 2004. Teaching Academic ESL Writing: Practical Techniques in Vocabulary and Grammar. LAWRENCE ERLBAUM ASSOCIATES, PUBLISHERS, Mahwah, New Jersey/London. [3] Hyland, Ken. 2011. “Disciplines and Discourses: Social Interactions in the Construction of Knowledge.” Writing in Knowledge Societies: 193–214. [4] Lillis, Theresa. 2003. “Student Writing as’ Academic Literacies': Drawing on Bakhtin to Move from Critique to Design.” Language and Education 17 (3) (September): 192–207. [5] Page, J. 2004. “Cyber-pseudepigraphy: A New Challenge for Higher Education Policy and Management.” Journal of Higher Education Policy and Management 26. [6] Sutanovac, Vladan. 2013. “The Acculturation of Language for Specific Purposes (L[E]SP): ESP as Culture - Specific Language.” In Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on Teaching English for Specific Purposes, 692–701. and In Vistas Of English For Specific Purposes, Cambridge Scholars Publishing (In Press). [7] Schneider, Barbara, and J. Andre. 2007. “Developing Authority in Student Writing Through Written Peer Critique in the Disciplines.” Writing Instructor: 1–11. [8] Swales, J, and C. Feak. 2012. Academic Writing for Graduate Students: Essential Tasks and Skills. 3rd ed. University of Michigan Press/ELT. [9] Swales, John. ''The Concept of Discourse Community." Genre Analysis: English in Academic and Research Settings. Boston: Cambridge UP, 1990.21-32. Print. [10] Swales, John. '1990. CARS model: Create A Research Space [11] Vaughan, C. (1991). Holistic assessment: What goes on in the raters' minds? In L. Hamp-Lyons (Ed.), Assessing second language writing (pp. 111-126). Norwood, NJ: Ablex.