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?

  • 8
    Linguists are forever trying to beat the ridiculous notion that there’s anything wrong with passive constructions out of people’s heads. Most people have copped on to that one by now, though; and besides, most of the people who still deluded themselves that passives are bad generally wouldn’t know a passive if it hit them on the head with a golf club and shouted, “Now who’s passive?!” at them. – Janus Bahs Jacquet Sep 5 '19 at 22:59

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?

  • 2
    What was done there by you, was seen by me. +1 – Mark Beadles Sep 6 '19 at 11:46

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.