I'm specifically curious about passive voice and how it's often said to be a weak writing style. Since linguists ostensibly might view scorning passive voice as maybe a meaningless rule, would it be more acceptable to use passive voice in academic writing in linguistics than in other fields?
It seems like what is being argued here is whether a different register should be applied by texts that are written by linguists, compared to those written by the general populace, by virtue of the fact that a particular construction is accepted by linguists more readily than it is by the average individual.
I am not outraged by the notion: it is nothing out of the ordinary for different styles to be applied depending on what type of audience or readers a work is meant to be enjoyed by; however, I won't be quoted as saying that a discretely different register is being used, like it's considered its own named style, as opposed to simply being regarded as one of many variations that can be employed. It can be seen as a matter of clustering, if you will: is this small detail worthy of being leveraged to having a new cluster in the set of registers being created, or should it simply be taken to belong somewhere in the "main sequence" of unmarked registers?