On this page

---

However, there is no general rule as to whether you can use "I" in your text or not. Influence.  

Author role – Where am I in my text?

There is an author behind every text - even behind academic texts. However, authors rarely appear clearly - they are mostly invisible (for example, when authors hide themselves by using Passive Voice or terms such as "The present work..."). Situating oneself as an author is one of the most difficult tasks when writing an academic text. On the one hand, academic texts are supposed to be "objective", on the other hand, they cannot be totally objective, as every presentation represents a personal perspective. In addition, the use of "I" in academic texts is often taboo, especially in german-language text. You may have been taught that you should not use "I" when writing academic texts. 

However, "I" may appear in very different forms. Here are three examples: 

1. In the following, I will explain the above-mentioned milestones in bilingual research in more detail.
2. In my understanding of bilingualism, I agree with Triarchi-Herrmann (2006: 19).
3. I chose these two because I have used them often when addressing other communication challenges and feel confident using them.

Check yourself: Which examples do you find acceptable, which not?

In all three cases, "I" is used, but there are differences: the first example serves to give the reader an overview of the text structure. In the second example, the researcher "speaks" and situates him/herself in a discourse. The third example is about the author him/herself. It is autobiographical. 

In an empirical study, Steinhoff (2007) asked scientists to rate examples from scientific texts as to whether they found the use of "I" acceptable or not. The first two examples were accepted, the third was not. Steinhoff's conclusion is therefore that the use of "I" depends on the function it serves in the text. If the aim is to orient the readers or to express one's own research position, "I" is acceptable. Only the so-called "narrator ego" is unacceptable, because scientific texts do not narrate, they argue.

Nevertheless, there is no general rule as to whether you can use "I" in your text or not. Whether or not you can use "I" may be influenced by: 

• Your discipline
• The personal preferences of your examiners
• The language in which you are writing. For example, use of "I" is more acceptable in English than in German. 

Essentially the strength of your text depends on your engagement with the subject matter. Your connection to the topic and goal for the text should be visible from the way you situate yourself as an author. 

Linguistic Requirements

Linguistic requirements exist, no matter what language you choose to write in. How you react to these linguistic requirements depends largely on your language identity (your native language(s) and comfort writing in the chosen language of your text). 

Scientific language is different from every-day language, regardless of which languages you grew up with. Therefore, every student must learn how to use 'scientific language' no matter which language you are writing in. The more knowledge you have in and about the respective academic language, in this case English academic language, the more resources you can draw on when writing.

One type of linguistic is subject-specific vocabulary. For example, if you if you don't understand the term, "aerosol," you won't be able to understand a paper discussing aerosols. However, the meaning of technical terms can usually be looked up. On the other hand, there are some types of linguisitc requirements that are more difficult to grasp but are equally as important. These are the words that are "between the technical terms" and which Ehlich (1999: 8) describes as "everyday scientific language". Everyday scientific language is a concept that can be used to describe differences in the use of words in different contexts such as a journal articiles vs. everyday use. Compare the following formulations:

"x is being discussed" - "we are discussing x"

In both cases, the verb is "discuss. " Nevertheless, one formulation "fits" better in a scientific text than the other.

In order to cope with the linguistic requirements, it is helpful to understand what scientists want to do with their texts, what their intentions are. These intentions are often implicit (not clearly stated). Linguistic actions include,  presenting a situation, criticizing a position/supporting a position, justifying something, etc.

QUELLEN

Andresen, Melanie (2016): Im Theorie-Teil der Arbeit werden wir über Mehrsprachigkeit diskutieren – Sprechhandlungsverben in Wissenschafts- und Pressesprache. In: Zeitschrift für Angewandte Linguistik (ZfAL) 64(1), 47–66. doi:10.1515/zfal-2016-0001

Ehlich, Konrad (1999): Alltägliche Wissenschaftssprache. In: Info DaF 26 (1), 3–24.

Text Organization

For example, many empirical research articles are structured as follows: introduction, methods, results, discussion, conclusion. Depending on the disciplinary contexts, this structure might vary, with some disciplines requiring a theory or literature review section between the introduction and the methods section. In most cases, most readers familiar with the basic structure would know how to navigate the text and to find the information they are looking for.

The topic of text organization includes,

• Orienting your reader
• Text Structure
• Conventions

Orienting the Reader

A scientific text is not a novel - but it should still be fun to read! Your writing should have a through line or a plot (the "Rote Faden" in German). As an author, take your readers by the hand and guide them through the text. When writing, keep in mind that academic reading is different than reading a novel: it is more targeted and often selective. You can also help your readers follow the logical flow of your paper, you can use transition phrases (such as, “In the following <chapter, subsection, etc.>, I will...”) or explicitly explain the structure of your paper.  In extensive texts (such as a thesis), summaries at the end of the chapter support selective reading. In addition to these structures, you may, for example, also add a short text at the end of sections summarizing key points.

Text Structure

The headings of each section should make the text structure visible. They divide the text into meaningful sections (chapters and sub-chapters). The sequence of these sections depends on the type of text/genre and is often regulated by conventions. Any text can be described with the help of "introduction - main part - conclusion." However, such a description is of no use to either writers or readers, as the division is far too rough. Help your readers follow your specific structure with headings that reflect your topic and content. 

Introduction

The introduction introduces the topic and tells the reader when to expect from your work. To better understand the function of the introduction, you can ask yourself as a writer: 'What is my text about? What is my topic? Why do I want to show what? How do I proceed? What can readers expect from my text?'

Body

The structure of the body (main part) varies. An essay is structured differently to a term paper, an empirical study in psychology differently to a literary interpretation, etc. Depending on the subject, there are also more or less strict conventions for text structure. Typical components of the main body are; state of research/literature review, methodology, results, and discussion. 

Conclusion

Finally, depending on the scope of the text, the most important findings from the work are summarized. Even if it often seems redundant from the writer's perspective, this summary is an important tool for orienting the reader. In addition, a good scientific text is characterized by a change of perspective at the end; the conclusion considers what has been achieved and what could/needs to be done now in order to advance the research.

Conventions

The conventions can be seen, for example, in the way quotations and paraphrases are integrated into your own text. You can find examples of this here.