Academese

Academese is a term referring to unnecessary jargon associated with the field of academia, particularly common in academic writing in humanities, and the opposite of plain language. The term is often but not always pejorative, and occasionally can be used to refer to complex but necessary terminology. Critics of academese argue that it usually creates unnecessary difficulty in communication for both readers and scholars, with the most harsh critics arguing this is intentional with users aiming to impress the readers and hide the fact that they are not saying anything of substance.

In the context of medical sciences, a similar term "medicalese" exists; likewise, legal science jargon is called "legalese". In context of English language, the term "Engfish" has also been used. Another related and highly pejorative term is "academic bullshit".

History, examples of usage and criticism

The usage of the word in English has been traced to at least 1917, and is attributed to Will Durant, who in his Philosophy and the Social Problem defined it as an opposite of "plain language". It has been suggested that prevalence of academese in humanities (unlike in science) has seen significant increase in the last century or two. Academic writing (particularly in the fields of humanities, namely art and literary criticism) was the subject of criticism by George Orwell in his 1946 essay Politics and the English Language; similar criticisms were expressed by Steven Pinker in his 2014 essay Why academics stink at writing?. In 1985, Jacob L. Mey criticized academese harshly as follows: "Academese is a misuse of language, a road-block on the way to knowledge, erected by the mafia of the pseudo-scientists and their linguistic connection: it obstructs, rather than promotes communication. It discriminates against Academe's outsiders by ridiculing their ways of expressing themselves".

One of the reasons for this is the rise of the postmodernist tradition (and the computer program Postmodernism Generator that generates "postmodernist writing" has been described as an automatic way to generate sample academese). Some of the related issues have been popularized by the Sokal affair in 1996. Alan Sokal produced a text that "not only exemplifies academese in what might be one of its worst—that is, most inaccessible— forms, but also unabashedly mocks anyone who uses it", published in a purported academic journal specializing in postmodernist texts, and then published a critique of this process in another journal.

Academese has been criticized through mock awards by several organizations. Since 1974 National Council of Teachers of English has been awarding the "Doublespeak Award", an "ironic tribute to public speakers who have perpetuated language that is grossly deceptive, evasive, euphemistic, confusing, or self-centered". From 1995–1998 the journal Philosophy and Literature sponsored a ‘Bad Writing Contest’, which lampooned "the most stylistically lamentable passages found in scholarly books and articles published in the last few years", with philosopher Judith Butler, "winner" of that contest in 1998, often cited as one of the most notorious users of academese.

Howard S. Becker, author of several guides on academic writing addressed to young scholars, has been described as having "an aversion to academese".

In 2012 Mark Blyth noted that in order to popularize scientific research, scholars need to "let go of the academese".

In 2013 academese was a topic of the Calvin and Hobbes cartoon. Another comic that made fun of this topic is Piled Higher and Deeper.

In 2016 the concept has been described as a common stereotype of academic writing in general.

Purpose and characteristics

Academese has been criticized not just for being overly complex, but for being overly complex on purpose. This intentional overcomplication is intended to impress readers, and hence, text written in academese is seen as intended to impress readers first and communicate any ideas only as a secondary goal. The existence of the language is also a form of power relation between those who use it and those who do not (or do not use it well enough), serving to separate individuals into different groups, and manipulate, exclude or discriminate against those who are not fluent in it. Conversely, it can help academics recognize one another quickly and helps them to socialize with one another. Additionally, academese is also criticized for purposefully obfuscating and attempting to make "small, irrelevant ideas appear important and original". In extreme cases, it has been suggested that those who use academese on purpose may do so as part of an inferiority complex.

It has also been suggested that for some writers in humanities, the goal of writing is not to convey information efficiently, but a combination of self-presentation and challenging the readers to a mental exercise of trying to decipher the author's meaning, and learn from the process of deciphering rather than from the information conveyed (this type of writing is referred to as the "self-conscious style").

While the term is often seen as pejorative, it can be sometimes used in neutral fashion as a synonym to academic writing, or jargon in that field, some of which is considered necessary to express certain advanced concepts.

See also

• corporate jargon
• ethnofiction
• officialese
• journalese
• manual of style
• physics envy

External links

• Martinez, Shantel (2013-10-01). "Tongue Tied: Resisting "Academese"". Cultural Studies ↔ Critical Methodologies. 13 (5): 379–382. doi:10.1177/1532708613496381. ISSN 1532-7086. S2CID 144162165.