Using the 2nd person "we" in single-authored (academic) writing

Question

Hi!I would like to know if it is correct to use the second person "we" in an academic paper that has only one author. For example: "*we* present a technique for constructing a ... transmogrifier ..."Thanks,- Olumide

Usenet · Accepted Answer

[nq:1]Hi! I would like to know if it is correct to use the second person "we" in an academic paper that has only one author. For example: "*we* present a technique for constructing a ... transmogrifier ..."[/nq]
I wouldn't think so, but 'We perfected a technique for constructing a transmogrifier' would be fine if there were several people on the team.

Charles Riggs

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]I would like to know if it is correct to use the second person "we" in an academic paper that has only one author. For example: "*we* present a technique for constructing a ... transmogrifier ..."[/nq]
1. We is the first person (plural,) not the second person.
2. The style "we present a method . . . " is normal inacademic writing, and commonly known as the Editorial We. (Newspapers also write: "We think the best recourse is . . . "

For details see references like Robert Day's How to Write and Publish a Scientific Paper (Institute for Scientiific Information, 1979.)

Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]1. We is the first person (plural,) not the second person.[/nq]
Thanks for the correction.
[nq:1]2. The style "we present a method . . . " is normal in academic writing, and commonly known as the Editorial We. (Newspapers also write: "We think the best recourse is . . . "[/nq]
I'm not speaking of a newspaper article. I'm talking of an academic essay on say mathematics authoured by one person.

Usenet · Answer

Try reading once again the first sentence following the numeral "2". You might also want to reflect on the function of "also" in the sentence after that.

Bob Lieblich
Paying attention

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]2. The style "we present a method . . . ... "We think the best recourse is . . . "[/nq]
[nq:1]I'm not speaking of a newspaper article. I'm talking of an academic essay on say mathematics authoured by one person.[/nq]
That is just the point. A single author who chooses to write "we" is using the Editorial We. Another English convention is that the monarch speaks of "we," "our government" etc. This is the Royal We. It is an accepted convention (i.e. is thus exempt from rules of grammar and number.)
As posted, " "we present a method . . . " is normal in academic writing." Your main alternative is to write everything in the passive voice, "a method of XYZ is presented." Both publisher's style books and specialized academic research style books discuss these points at length.
Don Phillipson
Carlsbad Springs
(Ottawa, Canada)

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]I'm not speaking of a newspaper article. I'm talking of an academic essay on say mathematics authoured by one person.[/nq]
[nq:1]That is just the point. A single author who chooses to write "we" is using the Editorial We. Another English ... method of XYZ is presented." Both publisher's style books and specialized academic research style books discuss these points at length.[/nq]
The whole thing could easily be depersonalised.
Example: "We present a method in which lead is transmuted to gold by baking at gas mark 6 with a rhodium catalyst" becomes "Lead is transmuted to gold by baking at gas mark 6 with a rhodium catalyst". That's how patent abstracts are written.
If it's really necessary to mention the author, and you don't want to say "I" if the author is one person, just say "The author presents a method...".

Paul
In bocca al Lupo!

Usenet · Answer

Don Phillipson filted:
[nq:2]I'm not speaking of a newspaper article. I'm talking of an academic essay on say mathematics authoured by one person.[/nq]
[nq:1]As posted, " "we present a method . . . " is normal in academic writing." Your main alternative is ... method of XYZ is presented." Both publisher's style books and specialized academic research style books discuss these points at length.[/nq]
Another popular technique is to eschew first-person pronouns altogether, and speak of oneself as "this author"..r

Usenet · Answer

[nq:1]Don Phillipson filted:[/nq]
[nq:2]As posted, " "we present a method . . . ... specialized academic research style books discuss these points at length.[/nq]
[nq:1]Another popular technique is to eschew first-person pronouns altogether, and speak of oneself as "this author"..r[/nq]
With variations such as "the present author", of course. Further variety available by referring to the book or article rather than oneself: "here", "the present volume", "a brief account such as this", and on and on. The OP should really get the hang of all these methods, even if he never uses most of them. And I do hope he won't use the ugly misbegotten verb "to author": it's quite unnecessary.

Mike.

Usenet · Answer

[nq:2]Another popular technique is to eschew first-person pronouns altogether, and speak of oneself as "this author"..r[/nq]
[nq:1]With variations such as "the present author", of course. Further variety available by referring to the book or article rather ... uses most of them. And I do hope he won't use the ugly misbegotten verb "to author": it's quite unnecessary.[/nq]
In my days as an administrative judge (fancy title, but very earthbound job) I wrote imitation judicial opinions speaking for a panel of three, the other two concurring (kinda like real judges do; I also frequently concurred in opinions written by others). Since we were in fact a group of three, of which I was the spokesman in the particular instance, I used the pronoun "we" unabashedly. In the rare cases when I wanted to express my personal views, I would usually do so in a footnote referring to myself as "the author of this opinion." Clumsy, to be sure, but more accurate than "I" and less likely to confuse people. If I went on at some length speaking for myself only, I might switch to I, because by then people would know who "I" was.

I submit that this practice, mutatis mutandis, might work in parallel situations where the paper is the product of more than one person even if only one is writing it.

Bob Lieblich
Who still knows who he is (he thinks)

Usenet · Answer

Jargon.
Source: Andreski 1972:193."One of the manifestations (unimportant in itself but very revealing) of the timorous but disingenuous humility characteristic of a burrowing apparatchik is the taboo on the word `I'. `One still shudders at the arrogance of the author in his repetitive use of the first singular concerning complex issues' - says a reviewer of one of my books, who for all I know may be the only creature in whom this obscene word can induce actual shudders, although by saying `one' instead of `I' he implies that most of his readers suffer from this allergy.

I doubt whether the reviewer in question favours the majestic first plural normal among the older French writers, and still common among their successors, but which in England is reserved for the Queen. Presumably he prefers the anonymous `it', and likes to see an expression like `I think that ...' replaced by `it is hypothesized ...', which, apart from expurgating the dirty word `to think') ministers to the bureaucratic underling's predilection for submissive anonymity combined with oracular authority.

I do not see why declaring that I - a mortal and fallible man but entitled to express his opinions - hold this or that view should be more arrogant than pretending to be the Voice of Science"

Steve Hayes from Tshwane, South Africa
http://www.geocities.com/Athens/7734/stevesig.htm
E-mail - see web page, or parse: shayes at dunelm full stop org full stop uk

Using the 2nd person "we" in single-authored (academic) writing

Top answer

Get the Weekly English Kit 📬

Related Questions