By Ken Hyland Journal of English for Academic Purposes (2010) Constructing Proximity: Relating to Readers in Popular and Professional Science By Ken Hyland Journal of English for Academic Purposes (2010) 5 Facets of Proximity

Interpersonality & Proximity According to Hyland, “Academic writing is interpersonal.” Academic texts “aren’t as completely ‘author evacuated’ as we had once supposed.” Translation: research writing is still a personal interaction between the author and the reader. Proximity is “a writer’s control of rhetorical features which display both authority as an expert and a personal position towards issues in an unfolding text.” It includes the idea of the interpersonal relationship between author and reader, but is larger than that. Proximity also is concerned with the material itself and how the ideas are expressed for a given audience.

5 Facets of Proximity Hyland compared two collections, or corpora, of science articles: “120 research articles from 4 science and engineering fields and a sample of 120 popular science articles.” He looked at the differences in how the writers negotiated proximity with their readers in each of the two genres. Hyland categorized the differences according to the following five “facets of proximity”: Organization Argument Credibility Stance Engagement

Organization Research Papers Popular Science Articles Visuals are used as arguments to provide proof Main claims are located towards the end of the paper Visuals are used as explanations to engage the reader Main claims are located near the beginning of the article

Argument Structures Research Papers Popular Science Articles Novelty is shown by synthesizing the new research with the existing literature Focus of the argument is on the procedures & analysis Information is framed by using “technical terminology, acronyms, reference to routine craft practices, and specialized forms of equipment” Novelty is shown by being newsworthy – e.g., breakthroughs with immediate value/benefit Focus is on the objects of the research, rather than the methods Information is framed more accessibly by “constantly defining new concepts… and making explicit links.” Jargon is avoided and complex concepts are compared to everyday objects & experiences

Credibility Research Papers Popular Science Articles Established by “the writer’s display of craft practices & expert handling of recognized research methods” Attributions are used to align author with other “camps” or acknowledge previous work Almost no direct quotes are used Results are often presented impersonally to distance themselves and thereby enhance objectivity Established by the scientist’s position with an institution Attributions to other researchers are used only if directly relevant to the story Direct quotes are frequently used to bring the scientist’s voice and words “to life” Scientists are “allowed to tell the story themselves” in a way that feels more conversational

Stance Research Papers Popular Science Articles Writers use hedges “to avoid overstating their case and risk inviting the rejection of their arguments” Writers rarely use explicit attitude markers (opinion words) Hyland’s corpus showed 1 attitude marker for every 350 words in engineering and 1 for every 200 words in other fields Writers take a clear personal stance with “more emphatic claims” Writers frequently use attitude markers to highlight important points and to engage the reader Attitude markers are not necessarily the writer’s opinion but what the average person might think

Reader Engagement Research Papers Popular Science Articles Pronouns “you” and “your” are rarely used The pronoun “we” is used to indicate membership in the same professional community Asking questions to the reader is almost never done and may be looked at with suspicion by other scientists Readers are often directly addressed with pronouns “you” and “your” The pronoun “we” is used more to imply “a shared, taken-for-granted way of seeing the world.” Questions are often put to readers in order to engage them and to help them to understand the concerns of the scientists at the time of the research