Lately, I have been thinking quite a lot about what can possible go wrong with someones

vocabulary usage when they are writing an academic essay. Ive started to keep a
running tally of all the errors I can think of, and this is my list so far. I started off by
looking at the detailed marking code for the Effective Writing Test
(http://www.efwr.ucalgary.ca/markingcode), and I went on from there. I think some of
the items in the list might overlap, but I think Im off to a good start.
Semantic error
A word is used that had the wrong meaning for the context.
Miscollocation
Words are used in inappropriate combinations, as in the difference between a torrential
rainstorm and a torrential snowstorm*, or highly educated vs. greatly educated*.
Topic constraints
Register constraints
Genre constraints
Certain words can only be used in certain situations, depending on the topic, register
and genre.
Inappropriate synonym choice
Synonyms have different connotations. An example of this is the difference between
Scott is a famous teacher at the University of Calgary, and Scott is a notorious* teacher
at the University of Calgary. (or maybe I am notorious . . . )
Trite language
This involves the use of clichs and overused expressions such as rabbits are not a valid
food choice because they are as cute as a button. Another example would be, its
important to think outside the box when dealing with financial problems.
Excessive jargon
This occurs when overly technical and specialized vocabulary is used when writing for a
general audience.
Pretentious word choice
Big words are not necessarily better words. Overly complicated words and language are
not better than simple and precise more common words and language.
Immature word choice
This occurs when writing about daddies instead of fathers, bunnies instead of rabbits,
and choo-choos instead of trains.

Over repetition
The same words are used over and over again. For example: Completing high school
should be mandatory. Mandatory high school classes will keep young people off the
streets. If high school becomes mandatory, students will learn more. If school is
mandatory, society will benefit. If it is not mandatory, there will continue to be
problems. That is why a high school education must be mandatory.
Artificial variation
Too many synonyms are used making the writing seem unnatural. For example, Cats are
important pets for senior citizens. Without their kitties, many old people feel lonely.
Once arriving in the golden years, a feline companion is a necessity. Without pussy cats,
oldsters wont have the same quality of life. Granny and grandpa cant do without these
mini lions and tigers.
Word form
The wrong part of speech is used. Scott is a success* teacher, instead of Scott is a
successful teacher.
Derivational error
This occurs when words are put together incorrectly, usually with inappropriate affixes.
for example: After completing my analization* of the problem, I realize there was no
solution.
Inaccurate lexical bundling
Some words operate in lexical bundles that are fairly inflexible. For example: on another
hand* vs. on the other hand.
Mixed metaphor
This occurs when two different metaphors are combined. For example: We need to stop
swimming against the current and follow the herd.
Inappropriate metaphor
This often happens when metaphors are translated from the first language, but they
dont quite work in the second. For example: After making many mistakes the
government took a different tunnel.
Omission
This occurs when the writing is lacking transitions and connectors.
Imprecision

This happens when a general type of word, such as people, humans, things and stuff, is
used in place of a more specific word.
Omnibus words
This occurs when the writer tries to incorrectly bring together many different ideas into
a single word such as factor, aspect, situation, or concept.
Posted by Scottat 2:39 PM
M O N D A Y, F E B R U A R Y 1 6 , 2 0 0 9

My New Favourite Book: Proust and the Squid

I just read an amazing book by Maryanne Wolf called Proust and the Squid. Basically the
book is about the history of reading, how people learn to read, the implications reading
has on people and the development of their brains, and what happens when people have
trouble learning how to read.
While a lot of the book really struck me as I was reading it, one part in particular I found
very interesting in relation to my work in the area of undergraduate writing
competence. I often wonder about what are the implications of not being a competent
writer in university. One issue is that students who are not competent writers are not
going to be able to convey their thoughts in a precise and meaningful manner. However,
Maryanne Wolf takes this one step further when she discusses the ideas of Lev Vygotski
and how he believed that the act of writing does not just convey thoughts, but when
spoken words and unspoken thoughts are put into writing, this act releases and, in the
process, changes the thoughts themselves. He felt that as people learn to use written
language more and more precisely to convey their thoughts, their capacity for abstract
thought and novel ideas accelerates. In other words, there is a germinating relationship
between writing language and new thought (pp. 65-66).
I really was intrigued by the idea of a generative relationship between word and thought
and how the process of writing down thoughts leads people to refine those thoughts and
to discover new ways of thinking (p. 73). Writing enables students to think of new things
that they would not have thought of if they werent able to write with academic
competency. Taken further, being a fluent writer is going to aid students in generating
new thoughts they would never have had if they werent fluent. Based on Wolfs
interpretation of Vygotski, writing isnt just about reporting what people think, its
about generating new ideas through the act of writing.
The implications for my research would be that if students havent reached a certain
level of undergraduate writing competence, it isnt just about them not being able to

convey their thoughts in a precise manner. They will be missing out on the generative
nature of the writing act. The less able the students can write fluently, the less able
they will be to come up with novel ideas as they write. It is the transition from
laboriously reporting thoughts to creatively putting together thoughts as they write. This
idea of a continuum from simply reporting thoughts to generating creative ideas has cast
a new light on the Effective Writing exams Ive been looking at in my doctoral research.
There always seemed to be a certain panache to the papers that did very well on the
exam. I am always struck by their novel way of putting together words and coming up
with ideas. I am particularly struck by how easy it seemed for the writer to write
compared to papers which did not pass. Thinking about it again, it looks like the better
writers were coming up with creative responses to the essay prompts during the act of
writing, while the poorer writers were perhaps painstakingly trying to write down what
was in their heads, or they were going at it one idea at a time. Hmmm, maybe as I
write, Im generating new ideas . . . . Anyway, Im going to have to think a bit more
about this, but Im starting to worry that the repercussions of not being a fluent writer
are much greater that I first thought.
Posted by Scottat 2:37 PM3 comments:
M O N D A Y, J A N U A R Y 2 6 , 2 0 0 9

Typing Away
I cant believe that it is already about two months since my last blog. Its amazing how
time flies by when you are working on your PhD. The latest thing that I have been
focusing on is typing up hand written essays for my thesis project. So far, I have about
800 essays, with about 250 having been written by non-native English speakers, and
another 550 written by native English speakers. All of the students in my study are first
year undergraduate students. Right now, I am focusing on typing up the essays written
by the native speakers. Its so fascinating doing this because I am really entering into the
mind of a first year undergraduate student. Its been almost 20 years since I first went to
university, and I think I had forgotten what it was like to be a first year student. What
has struck me the most so far is the ease with which they express themselves. I guess
that with almost 10 years of looking only at papers written by non-native English
speaking students, it was surprising how fluid and unlaboured the writing of the native
speaking students is. Although I am focusing on a comparison of the use of less frequent
vocabulary items between the two groups of students, again and again, it is the use of
the simple clear language used by the native English speakers that is standing out. In
addition to that, I have noticed the use of lexical bundling and collocations that provide
clarity and precision to the native English speaking writing that seems to be lacking the
non-native English speaking papers. However, taken as single words, these are not low
frequency lexical items. Instead, the native speakers seem to be putting together the

high frequency vocabulary differently than the non-native speakers. Interestingly

enough, it seems to be the non-native speakers who are trying to use the big
academic words, and then slightly misfiring with the meaning, while it is the native
speakers who are using a high frequency set of vocabulary, but in such as way to convey
precise meaning. Ill have to think more about this.
Anyway, that is what I am up to right now. I figure Ill be typing away for the next month
(hopefully Ill be done by the end of February). As soon as Im done typing up enough
native English papers, I provide some examples to support my musings above . . .