Your choice of words can have a major impact on the style of your writing, even if their meaning is similar. You may find yourself deciding between words of a different register: colloquial, neutral, formal, and over-formal. You also have the choice of whether idiomatic language might aid your expression or introduce unnecessary cliché. If the language you use is too colloquial, it may not appear serious or professional. Moreover, many idiomatic or colloquial expressions are imprecise, and may gloss over or obscure your meaning, as they rely on a shared understanding of what they loosely mean, rather than a precise meaning which needs to be established through argument, definition and evidence. Sometimes, however, an idiomatic phrase might be the best way to convey your meaning, and if you choose to use such a phrase, you can avoid the impression of uneven tone and indicate your awareness that it is not part of your usual academic register by putting it in inverted commas (bear in mind that some supervisors may find these 'scare quotes' too journalistic, however). If a more formal phrase would express the same meaning without adding unnecessary words, then you should choose it.
Activity
Read the following text and identify those instances where you feel that the language may be too colloquial, or might be overly formal. What alternatives might you suggest?
There is an important consideration to be made when analysing the Miller's tale, however. In defining it as a fabliau is to place it within the confines of that genre. However the Miller's tale is not a run-of-the-mill fabliau by any means. They were usually tailored to a clearly defined audience; a fabliau for nobility would depict the baseness and ribald nature of the poor and a fabliau for the poor would depict a character of lower station achieving some kind of victory over a social 'superior', usually a member of the church. The Miller's tale, however, is not so black and white. For example, although a "clerk" is depicted as having initially "bigyle[d]" a mere carpenter, an approach consistent with more middle or upper class explorations of the genre, Chaucer then appears to invert the approach in Nicholas and Alison's fooling and mockery of Absolon, a member of the church. Is this Chaucer subverting our expectations as a reader, or is this consistent with other fabliaux?
Feedback:
There is an important consideration to be made when analysing the Miller's tale, however. In defining it as a fabliau is to place it within the confines of that genre. However the Miller's tale is not a run-of-the-mill fabliau by any means. They were usually tailored to a clearly defined audience; a fabliau for nobility would depict the baseness and ribald nature of the poor and a fabliau for the poor would depict a character of lower station achieving some kind of victory over a social 'superior', usually a member of the church. The Miller's tale, however, is not so black and white. For example, although a "clerk" is depicted as having initially "bigyle[d]" a mere carpenter, an approach consistent with more middle or upper class explorations of the genre, Chaucer then appears to invert the approach in Nicholas and Alison's fooling and mockery of Absolon, a member of the church. Is this Chaucer subverting our expectations as a reader, or is this consistent with other fabliaux?
The tone in this text varies from the overly formal and rather wordy phrases in red text, to the more idiomatic phrases underlined above. This suggests that the writer is not fully in control of their register. Most of the phrases could be replaced with a more appropriate alternative. Moreover, some of them add unnecessary words, and others are rather empty of meaning, such as 'by any means' or 'some kind of', 'In defining it as a fabliau is to place it within the confines of that genre'. The word 'depict' is somewhat formal but still appropriate; however, its repetition is distracting, suggesting that the formality is used for effect alone, and that a more neutral synonym might have been unnecessarily avoided.