• yesman@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    45 minutes ago

    In defense of jargon:

    coming up with new ideas and expressing them to others requires new vocabulary. You can’t simply say things in “plain English” especially when you want to communicate with peers.

    This is why academia is so often refereed to as a discipline; you must train yourself in new ways of thinking. Making it accessible to the layperson is the job of scientific communicators, not scientists at large.

    And it’s not like this is a unique issue with acedemia, every organization I’ve ever participated in had special vocabulary if it was necessary or not.

  • Contramuffin@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    ·
    2 hours ago

    It’s something that people, in least in my field of microbiology, have been recently aware of and are trying to correct. The problem is not just an in-group signifier, since everyone, even experts, finds the author insufferable and difficult to understand

  • InverseParallax@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    24
    ·
    edit-2
    2 hours ago

    Yeah, it’s an in-group exclusivity signifier.

    Shame, math is some of the worst at this, everything is named after some guy, so there’s 0 semantic associativity, you either know exactly which Gaussian term they mean, or you are completely clueless even though they just mean noise with a normal distribution.

    edit: Currently in a very inter-disciplinary field where the different mathematicians have their own language which has to be translated back into first software, then hardware. It’s so confusing at first till you spend 30 minutes on wikipedia to realize they’re just using an esoteric term to describe something you’ve used forever.

    • MBM@lemmings.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      23 minutes ago

      Gotta love Dirichlet boundary conditions (the function has to have this value), Neumann boundary conditions (the derivative has to have this value) and Cauchy boundary conditions (both).

      On the other hand, there’s a bunch of things that are so abstract that it’s difficult to give them a descriptive name, like rings, magmas and weasels

    • AFallingAnvil@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      1 hour ago

      IT guy here, we suffer from a similar problem where everything is an acronym so it sounds like alphabet soup that if said as a word means sometimes you can’t even quietly go look it up later. You either nod along knowing what it means or nod along not knowing what it means but having no chance to learn without outing yourself.

      • enkers@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 hour ago

        And you can’t out yourself because, in many workplace cultures, the appearance of knowing is more important than actually knowing. :/

  • OhStopYellingAtMe@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    ·
    2 hours ago

    I dated a girl who acted like writing / talking like they made her better / smarter than other people. She got off on the elitism. I’m no academic slouch, but my philosophy is if you can’t break it down in basic terms that anyone can understand, then you don’t understand it enough yourself.

    • dohpaz42@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      21 minutes ago

      I would go so far as to say that knowing and understanding something is only half of the issue. The other half is being able to clearly convey it to others. And that’s where a lot of people (myself included) fall short.

  • ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    6
    ·
    edit-2
    1 hour ago

    This post reports that the requirement to use words like “novel” and refer to ourselves using the third-person “we” was circumvented following our transition to industry. Furthermore, the capability to write original text without using the passive voice was gained. These developments represent a significant improvement in clarity. Additional increases in the efficiency of communication may be possible as the ability to express concepts in a straightforward manner is developed further.