“A writer’s greatest pleasure is revealing to people things they knew but did not know they knew”, according to Andy Rooney. A reasonable general statement it is though, I have a bit doubt as to if that would be at all. Certainty to those who write literature review, it is more to a provoking thought.
With reference to citations, "that proper documentation demonstrates your expertise as a researcher and increases your readers’ trust in you and your work but getting the documentations can be a confusing job and frustrating, especially for a writer who is not familiar with the citation system." is also hereto a general statement well understood since posting each single citation accurately can require what seems an inordinate amount of time looking through the style manual.
This shouldn’t be though a problem to a professional writer, an academic writer mostly, since academic communities are very much on your back just as they are for your front.
However, the need reflected with a practical problem which is familiar to academic communities remains, at least appears to be so, whether this dilemma should be instructed anecdotally without the dimensional modalities permitted for constructions to be realized, remembered, and extended in universal principles or should instead be rather instructed monostratally as for this being with only a minimal concern to the special need of writers in order to avoid possible multiple level of phantom elements.
An explicit knowledge of this kind is needed by academic writers is perhaps much the same way as a professional driver need to know something about the mechanical working of motor vehicle, but there appears to be always some problems with this take.
However, as in here, for example, a university page demonstrating the Citation style under Bibliography with reference to Reference list is not relevant:
BookPinchin, C. 1990, Issue in Philosophy, Macmillan Education, London.JournalMori, Y. 2002, ‘Optional diving behavior for foraging in relation to body size’, Journal of Evolutionary Biology, vol. 5, no.2, pp. 270-276.
I have however only few guesses as to how something could have been materialized for students and fellow academics to make up their citations the way as shown above. I could make only a guess accordingly so as if there could have been someone on the top position than the most in academic writing conventions, particularly in descriptive grammar and citation, whom perhaps this could have been asked as such for an input to the said university page Referencing.
Referencing is not an issue for many in the outer world certainly, but those who write dissertations or publish materials in the form above alike certainly wouldn't be surprised with the facts that them being incorrect--neither for bibliography nor for reference list other than for harvarding the APA in author-date but yet still not wanting for separating the traditional dating system as in reference list.
With reference to this page and other pages here in LangLing many literature reviews are to be found. I think still exact references should be made available explicitly so that the exact locations whereabouts are to be found at ease to readers.ReplyDelete
This is usually a matter of an institution and is decided by an instructor or a department or faculty. Citation with an established authority is the norm. We use Harvard author-date system and we are now thinking of going for Vancouver author-number system. I think Vancouver citation system is simpler and nicer. In Harvard author-date, we separate date from the author by comma while Vancouver does with semicolon in fact of publication. I don’t however know why Vancouver system is generally called ‘author-number’ rather than documentary-note system. If you are familiar with most citation systems for some reasons and know good answer to this, that would be something.ReplyDelete