HISTARCH Archives

HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY

HISTARCH@COMMUNITY.LSOFT.COM

Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
SouthArc <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
HISTORICAL ARCHAEOLOGY <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 21 Apr 1999 18:42:01 -0400
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (26 lines)
Maybe they use it to disguise the fact that they really haven't got a clue
what they are talking about (or maybe they are talking about nothing).  So
if it is couched in convoluted complex terms using words that have to be
looked up in the Oxford dictionary, no one will catch on to the
truth--there's nothing there!

                        Lucy Wayne
>In a message dated 4/21/99 4:33:45 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
>[log in to unmask] writes:
>
><< He claims that this is by intent, that there is something of a scholarly
>trend in which authors are now consciously choosing to write densely in order
>to make the reader pay more attention or something like that. >>
>
>In that case, Geoff does get to blame it on Foucault. I think it is utter BS.
>It seems to me that people use academeze because 1. They want to sound like
>they know more than they do, 2. They want to sound like they know more than
>you do, and 3. They want to make their writing exclusive and inaccessible to
>all but those they believe are on their level.
>
>Michelle Schohn
>Dept. of Anthropology
>University of South Carolina
>
>

ATOM RSS1 RSS2