Written Communication Jan 2004

Preserving the Figure: Consistency in the Presentation of Scientific Arguments

Jeanne Fahnestock University of Maryland, College Park

Abstract

Researchers studying science communication often examine how texts addressed to different audiences contribute to the formation of knowledge on a given issue. This article examines how arguments on scientific issues travel from text to text by considering how certain figures of speech persist from version to version. It uses a specialized genre of articles appearing in Science and Nature that introduces research reports appearing later in the issue. These pieces refer explicitly to a research report in the same issue, and in addition to their own agendas, re-present the researchers’ claims and supporting evidence. To investigate how the core of an argument survives, the expression claims and lines of support in epitomizing figures are compared. The articles sampled suggest that the figure antithesis, embodyingsingle-difference arguments,often persists from version to version. But in the process of perfecting a figured expression, arguments may be subtly changed in subsequent versions.

Journal
Written Communication
Published
2004-01-01
DOI
10.1177/0741088303261034
CompPile
Search in CompPile ↗
Open Access
Closed
Topics
genre theory scientific writing
Export
BibTeX RIS

Citation Context

Cited by in this index (12)

  1. Falconer (2024)
    The Discursive Boundary Work of Recontextualizing Science for Policy: Opening t…
    Written Communication
  2. Fahnestock (2020)
    Verbal Signatures of Dissociation: Epitomizing and Limiting Cases
    Philosophy & Rhetoric
  3. Gigante (2015)
    A Portrait of Exclusion: The Archetype of the Scientist at Work in Life Magazine
    Rhetoric Review
  4. Luzón (2013)
    Public Communication of Science in Blogs: Recontextualizing Scientific Discours…
    Written Communication
  5. Garwood (2013)
    Metonymy and Plain Language
    Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
Show all 12 →
  1. Ross (2013)
    Common Topics and Commonplaces of Environmental Rhetoric
    Written Communication
  2. Dyehouse (2009)
    The CyberspaceIncrementum: Technology Development for Communicative Abundance
    Rhetoric Society Quarterly
  3. Hutto (2008)
    Graphics and Ethos in Biomedical Journals
    Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  4. Ross (2008)
    Dam Visuals: The Changing Visual Argument for the Glen Canyon Dam
    Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  5. Dyehouse (2007)
    Knowledge Consolidation Analysis: Toward a Methodology for Studying the Role of…
    Written Communication
  6. Eisenhart (2006)
    The Humanist Scholar as Public Expert
    Written Communication
  7. Journet (2005)
    Metapahor, Ambiguity, and Motive in Evolutionary Biology: W. D. Hamilton and th…
    Written Communication

References (48) · 4 in this index

  1. 10.1038/35081227
     ↗
  2. 10.1038/35082026
     ↗
  3. 10.1126/science.1057243
     ↗
  4. 10.1126/science.1056466
     ↗
  5. 10.1126/science.291.5501.109
     ↗
Show all 48 →
  1. 10.1038/35082667
     ↗
  2. Brown, K. (2001). A discriminating taste for bitter. Science, 291, 1465-1466.
     ↗
  3. Dunwoody (1982)
    A question of accuracy
    IEEE Transactions on Professional Communication
  4. FAHNESTOCK (1986)
    Accommodating Science: The Rhetorical Life of Scientific Facts
    Written Communication
  5. 10.1177/016224398901400103
     ↗
  6. Fahnestock, J. (1999). Rhetorical figures in science. New York: Oxford University Press.
     ↗
  7. 10.1126/science.291.5502.312
     ↗
  8. 10.1126/science.291.5505.889
     ↗
  9. 10.1126/science.1055465
     ↗
  10. 10.1126/science.291.5506.997
     ↗
  11. 10.1038/35082182
     ↗
  12. Gregory, J. & Miller, S. (1998). Science in public: Communication, culture and credibility. New York: Plenum.
  13. 10.1126/science.291.5511.2064
     ↗
  14. 10.1177/030631290020003006
     ↗
  15. Kaiser, J. (2001). How rain pulses drive biome growth. Science, 291, 413-414.
     ↗
  16. 10.1038/35082075
     ↗
  17. Kennedy, G. (Trans.). (1991). In Aristotle (author), On rhetoric: A theory of civic discourse. New York: Oxfo…
  18. 10.1126/science.291.5508.1469
     ↗
  19. 10.1126/science.291.5503.481
     ↗
  20. Kucherlapati, R. & DePinho, R. A. (2001). Telomerase meets its match. Science, 291, 647-648.
     ↗
  21. 10.1177/030631295025003001
     ↗
  22. 10.1126/science.1059984
     ↗
  23. 10.1038/35082164
     ↗
  24. 10.1126/science.1058867
     ↗
  25. Mill, J. S. (1874). A system of logic, ratiocinative and inductive, being a connected view of the principles …
     ↗
  26. 10.1038/35082594
     ↗
  27. 10.1177/1461445603005002006
     ↗
  28. Nagounrey, E. (2001, April 10). Geography of dyslexia is explored. The New York Times, F7-F7.
  29. Nelkin, D. (1987). Selling science: How the press covers science and technology. New York: Freeman.
  30. 10.1126/science.1060025
     ↗
  31. 10.1038/35081034
     ↗
  32. 10.1126/science.1057179
     ↗
  33. Rowan (1989)
    Moving beyond the What to the Why: Differences in Professional and Popular Scie…
    Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  34. Rowan (1991)
    When Simple Language Fails: Presenting Difficult Science to the Public
    Journal of Technical Writing and Communication
  35. 10.1126/science.10.1126/SCIENCE.1057253
     ↗
  36. 10.1038/35081224
     ↗
  37. 10.1126/science.291.5508.1506
     ↗
  38. 10.1126/science.1058249
     ↗
  39. 10.1126/science.1059318
     ↗
  40. 10.1177/1075547001023002005
     ↗
  41. Whitley, R. (1985).Knowledge producers and knowledge acquirers: Popularisation as a relation between scientif…
     ↗
  42. Wilson, T. (1970). The rule of reason. Amsterdam: Da Capo. (Original work published 1551)
  43. 10.1126/science.1058773
     ↗
CrossRef global citation count: 23 View in citation network → Build reading path →

Related Articles

  1. Written Communication Jul 2025
    Women Scientists’ Digitally Mediated Activity, Genres and Digital Tools: A Cross-sectional Survey Across the Disciplines ↗
    Carmen Pérez-Llantada; Oana Maria Carciu; Rosana Villares
    rhetorical criticism genre theory writing pedagogy collaborative writing professional writing scientific writing
  2. Technical Communication Quarterly Jan 2024
    Reddit and Engaged Science Communication Online: An Examination of Reddit’s R/Science Ask-Me-Anythings and Science Discussion Series ↗
    Devon Moriarty; Ashley Rose Mehlenbacher
    genre theory service learning scientific writing
  3. Journal of Writing Research Jun 2023
    Thinking outside the box: Senior scientists’ metacognitive strategy knowledge and self-regulation of writing for science communication ↗
    Raffaella Negretti; Carina Sjöberg-Hawke; Maria Persson; Maria Cervin-Ellqvist
    rhetorical criticism genre theory writing pedagogy scientific writing
  4. Journal of Writing Research Jun 2023
    Cross-disciplinary language changes in 4th graders as a predictor of the quality of written scientific explanation ↗
    A. Meneses; M. Montenegro; D. Acevedo; J. Figueroa; E. Hugo
    genre theory writing pedagogy teacher development scientific writing literacy studies
  5. Written Communication Jan 2023
    A Systematic Review on Inquiry-Based Writing Instruction in Tertiary Settings ↗
    Vivien Lin; Neil E. Barrett; Gi-Zen Liu; Howard Hao-Jan Chen
    genre theory writing pedagogy scientific writing book reviews