- Email: [email protected]
Investigative Grammar
0022-534 7/89/1416-1488$02.00/0
Vol. 141, June
THE JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
Printed in U.S.A.
Copyright © 1989 by Williams & Wilkins
INVESTIGATIVE GRAMMAR When a friend of mine, a news reporter, telephoned recently, we fell to reminiscing about our graduate school days in an English department. The question of whether the study of literature contributes anything to a practical journalist came up. I argued that it didn't. He disagreed. "I admit I scarcely remember which books I read," he said. "But surely you remember the one thing all those classes had in common: the belief that writers seldom say what they mean openly. Did you ever hear of an English professor or graduate student taking anything he read at face value?" "You mean all those critical theories about 'deep structure' and 'subtext' and rot like that," I said. "Just euphemisms for reading between the lines," said the reporter. "But it was a useful bit of training for me. When I talk to people as a reporter, most of what they say is a thin screen of verbal camouflage concealing an abyss of unspoken subtext. Everybody delivers unspoken messages, either accidentally or deliberately. If I couldn't decipher subtext, I couldn't do my job." "I understand," I said. "But the people I work with are scientists. Scientific writing is remarkably free of subtext. There's rarely any occasion for reading between the lines." "You're joking," my friend replied. "I'll send you an issue of the journal to read," I said. "That's fair; I read your newspaper. Then you can point out the alleged subtexts to me." In due course we spoke again. "I'm ashamed to admit," my friend said, "that I have little idea what the articles in your journal are about. The subtexts were the only bits of the stuff I could understand. But the disguised meanings stand out like rockets against this dense technical prose. There is plenty of illuminating subtext in these papers. Your scientists turn out to be deeply human after all." "Please give me examples," I asked. "For instance, half these papers contain some such statement as, It is generally understood ... or It is well known ... et cetera. In my racket, phrases like that only mean 'A guy told me' or 'I remember reading this somewhere.' Except we call it 'informed sources.' Then, some of your writers take the opposite tack. Evidence has increased that . . . or There is some evidence to suggest . . . Is this a way of saying 'Nobody believes this idea yet, but I'm working on it anyway'? "Here's another in the same vein. Little has been published about ... I am sorely tempted to regard that phrase as a substitute for 'This is a notorious non-issue.' "And here's a juicy expression I found: While such and such
is beyond the scope of this experiment, neverthless . . . Surely this means, 'While I have no reason to think so, I stubbornly insist .... ' "Many delectable subtexts are associated with the words findings and conclusions. For instance, The significance of these findings remains to be elucidated by further observations. Can this mean otherwise than 'This experiment was so obscure that even we don't understand it'? Or These findings must be reconfirmed, which could be interpreted as 'These findings are so unlikely that the next guy better start from scratch.' I also spotted Some conclusions can be drawn ... , which makes me wonder what happened to the conclusions that couldn't be drawn. Were they like that ten-pound bass I almost caught?" "My friend," I said coldly, "these are mere bits of jargon. Arguably they have double meanings, but it's just as likely that they were never intended to have even single meanings." "Oh year? How about those ubiquitous 'acknowlegments'? We are indebted to Sheila Roo for expert technical assistancedoes that mean that Sheila did the handwork? Or Thanks are due to Dr. Gray Eminence for help and advice-meaning, 'Dr. Eminence salvaged this disaster at the last possible minute.' Or We are grateful to Susan Typesmith for assistance in the preparation of this paper-sounds like Susan wrote the paper, to my suspicious ears." "Nothing can be proved," I said. "The next one was my favorite," the reporter continued. "We have no hesitation in recommending this procedure for use in appropriate circumstances. That means that every time it doesn't work, the circumstances were inappropriate. Runnerup was Included to provide greater objectivity in evaluation . .. which surely means 'Included to make the results come out right.' I would give third prize to Variation in the criteria for assessment exists in the literature. If that phrase doesn't give fair warning, no phrase ever did. "Then there was the fairly frequent These results will be reported in a later communication. Does this mean, 'If we ever get any more results, we'll write another paper'?" "I've heard enough these slanders to get the point," I said. "Don't you have anything good to say?" "In order for me to say anything constructive, further studies will be necessary." Everything I've ever heard about the brutalizing effect of newspaper journalism on otherwise sensitive writers appears to be true. Gary Mawyer Editorial Assistant
1488
Vol. 141, June
THE JOURNAL OF UROLOGY
Printed in U.S.A.
Copyright © 1989 by Williams & Wilkins
INVESTIGATIVE GRAMMAR When a friend of mine, a news reporter, telephoned recently, we fell to reminiscing about our graduate school days in an English department. The question of whether the study of literature contributes anything to a practical journalist came up. I argued that it didn't. He disagreed. "I admit I scarcely remember which books I read," he said. "But surely you remember the one thing all those classes had in common: the belief that writers seldom say what they mean openly. Did you ever hear of an English professor or graduate student taking anything he read at face value?" "You mean all those critical theories about 'deep structure' and 'subtext' and rot like that," I said. "Just euphemisms for reading between the lines," said the reporter. "But it was a useful bit of training for me. When I talk to people as a reporter, most of what they say is a thin screen of verbal camouflage concealing an abyss of unspoken subtext. Everybody delivers unspoken messages, either accidentally or deliberately. If I couldn't decipher subtext, I couldn't do my job." "I understand," I said. "But the people I work with are scientists. Scientific writing is remarkably free of subtext. There's rarely any occasion for reading between the lines." "You're joking," my friend replied. "I'll send you an issue of the journal to read," I said. "That's fair; I read your newspaper. Then you can point out the alleged subtexts to me." In due course we spoke again. "I'm ashamed to admit," my friend said, "that I have little idea what the articles in your journal are about. The subtexts were the only bits of the stuff I could understand. But the disguised meanings stand out like rockets against this dense technical prose. There is plenty of illuminating subtext in these papers. Your scientists turn out to be deeply human after all." "Please give me examples," I asked. "For instance, half these papers contain some such statement as, It is generally understood ... or It is well known ... et cetera. In my racket, phrases like that only mean 'A guy told me' or 'I remember reading this somewhere.' Except we call it 'informed sources.' Then, some of your writers take the opposite tack. Evidence has increased that . . . or There is some evidence to suggest . . . Is this a way of saying 'Nobody believes this idea yet, but I'm working on it anyway'? "Here's another in the same vein. Little has been published about ... I am sorely tempted to regard that phrase as a substitute for 'This is a notorious non-issue.' "And here's a juicy expression I found: While such and such
is beyond the scope of this experiment, neverthless . . . Surely this means, 'While I have no reason to think so, I stubbornly insist .... ' "Many delectable subtexts are associated with the words findings and conclusions. For instance, The significance of these findings remains to be elucidated by further observations. Can this mean otherwise than 'This experiment was so obscure that even we don't understand it'? Or These findings must be reconfirmed, which could be interpreted as 'These findings are so unlikely that the next guy better start from scratch.' I also spotted Some conclusions can be drawn ... , which makes me wonder what happened to the conclusions that couldn't be drawn. Were they like that ten-pound bass I almost caught?" "My friend," I said coldly, "these are mere bits of jargon. Arguably they have double meanings, but it's just as likely that they were never intended to have even single meanings." "Oh year? How about those ubiquitous 'acknowlegments'? We are indebted to Sheila Roo for expert technical assistancedoes that mean that Sheila did the handwork? Or Thanks are due to Dr. Gray Eminence for help and advice-meaning, 'Dr. Eminence salvaged this disaster at the last possible minute.' Or We are grateful to Susan Typesmith for assistance in the preparation of this paper-sounds like Susan wrote the paper, to my suspicious ears." "Nothing can be proved," I said. "The next one was my favorite," the reporter continued. "We have no hesitation in recommending this procedure for use in appropriate circumstances. That means that every time it doesn't work, the circumstances were inappropriate. Runnerup was Included to provide greater objectivity in evaluation . .. which surely means 'Included to make the results come out right.' I would give third prize to Variation in the criteria for assessment exists in the literature. If that phrase doesn't give fair warning, no phrase ever did. "Then there was the fairly frequent These results will be reported in a later communication. Does this mean, 'If we ever get any more results, we'll write another paper'?" "I've heard enough these slanders to get the point," I said. "Don't you have anything good to say?" "In order for me to say anything constructive, further studies will be necessary." Everything I've ever heard about the brutalizing effect of newspaper journalism on otherwise sensitive writers appears to be true. Gary Mawyer Editorial Assistant
1488