It requires repetition to help readers shift gears with you and follow your train of thought.

Such terms help you create the flow we spoke of earlier, enabling readers to move effortlessly through your text.

The following is a list of common transitions categorized by function: addition, elaboration, example, cause and effect, comparison, contrast, concession, and conclusion.

For readers to follow your train of thought, you need not only to connect your sentences and paragraphs, but also to mark the kind of connection that you're making.

All these moves require that you always look back and, in crafting any one sentence, think hard about those that precede it.

This chapter addresses the issue of how to connect all the parts of your writing.

Each sentence for Alex existed in a sort of tunnel isolated from every other sentence on the page.

Each sentence essentially starts a new thought rather than building on or extending the idea of the previous sentence.

Once you've decided to introduce a differing or opposing view into your writing, your work has only just begun, since you still need to represent and explain that view with fairness and generosity.

If you categorically reject all labels, you give up an important resource and even mislead readers by presenting yourself and others as having no connection to anyone else.

If you categorically reject all labels, you give up an important resource and even mislead readers by presenting yourself and others as having no connection to anyone else.

Some people believe that labels confine individuals to boxes, stereotyping them and overlooking what makes each of us unique. And, indeed, labels can be misused in ways that ignore individuality and promote stereotypes.

In other words, a naysayer can be labeled, and you can add precision and impact to your writing by identifying what those labels are.

We are urging you to tell readers what others might say against you, but our point is that doing so will actually enhance your credibility, not undermine it.

This little story contains an important lesson for all writers, experienced and inexperienced alike. It suggests that even though most of us are upset at the idea of someone criticizing our work, such criticisms can actually work to our advantage.

When writers fail to use voice-marking devices like the ones discussed in this chapter, these summaries of others' views tend to become confused with their own ideas and vice versa.

To alert readers about whose perspective you are describing at any given moment, you don't always have to use overt voice markers like "X argues" followed by a summary of the argument.

"We are all middle-class."

Paying attention to these voice markers is an essential aspect of reading comprehension.

Hence, even before Mantsios has declared his own position in the second paragraph, readers can get a pretty solid sense of where he probably stands.

This chapter takes up the problem of moving from what they say to what you say without confusing readers about who is saying what.

When you tackle the summary itself, think about what else is essential beyond the central claim of the argument

The authors you summarized at the college level seldom would "say" or "discuss" things.

A hallmark of good actors.

Despite our previous comments that well-crafted summaries generally strike a balance between heeding what someone else has said and your own independent interests, the satiric mode can at times be a very effective way of critique.

This advice to summarize authors in light of your own agenda may seem to be painfully obvious.

Summarizing another text requires you to represent fairly what it says; it also requires that your own response exert a quiet influence.

There are many writing situations in which, due to matters of proportion, a one- or two-sentence summary is precisely what you want.

If, as a writer, you cannot or will not suspend your own beliefs in this way, you are likely to produce summaries that are so clearly biased that they undermine your credibility with readers.

Writers who make strong claims need to map their claims relative to those of other people.

Even as you tacklethe same purpose, what may be motivating for one group may be off-putting to another. Calibrating your message to your audience andpurpose is both difficult and necessary.

Attitudes: What attitudes do audiences bring to your writing? Arethey hostile? Excited? Wary? Are they interested in your subject orindifferent to it?

Needs: What does your audience need from your piece of writing?Essentially, what is the writing being used for?

persona, thecharacter we perceive through the writing

in some cases, it won’t really matter if we can identify thespecific genre, as long as we know how it’s working and what we’retrying to accomplish as we engage our audience

To know what kindof essay is being written requires deeper knowledge of why we’rewriting and who we’re writing to.

Reading like a writer changes the question from what to how, as in,“How does this say what it says?”Reading like a writer involves asking questions of the piece ofwriting in order to understand what it’s trying to do and how it’s tryingto do it.

Usually, we spend most of our time reading for meaning, taking inand assessing the ideas presented in a piece of writing.

reading like a writer.

the dynamic world of ideas must be done not asisolated individuals but as social beings deeply connected to others

A few things that add warmth to the passage are Coryell’suse of everyday colloquial language

Ultimately,then, creativity and originality lie not in the avoidance of establishedforms but in the imaginative use of them.

It is plagiarism, however, if the words used tofill in the blanks of such formulas are borrowed from others withoutproper acknowledgment. In sum, then, while it is not plagiarism torecycle conventionally used formulas, it is a serious academicoffense to take the substantive content from others’ texts withoutciting the authors and giving them proper credit.

naysayer

manuscript

caricature

scapegoat

disparage

nobody is likely to disagree with it

the phantom “they say”here is the common belief

Alexander avoids two common temptations: to either burychallenges to her argument, or to acknowledge them but in mocking,dismissive ways.

Alexander avoids two common temptations: to either burychallenges to her argument, or to acknowledge them but in mocking,dismissive ways.

views he treats not as objections to his already-formedarguments but as the motivating source of those arguments

element of contrastwithout which it won’t make sense

summarizing what others say andthen using it to set up what they want to say

stating our own ideas but in listeningclosely to others

critical thinking and writing go deeper than anyset of linguistic formulas

Instead of focusing solely on abstract principles of writing, then,this book offers model templates that help you put those principlesdirectly into practice.

key premises is that these basic moves are socommon that they can be represented in templates

The same applies to writing.