Dyed All Hues

Thinker and Experimenter,


This conversation is closed.

Academic Type Writing/Speech vs Conversational Type Writing/Speech

I have a hard time deciding on the topic above pros and cons of each.

Academic type writing/speech seems more clear, but can seem cold hearted to the average spoken person.

Conversational type writing/speech seems more emotional driven, but can sometimes lack clarity, if spoken/written incorrectly.

Is one better than the other?

How would society benefit from your thoughts if they were implemented?

  • thumb
    Jun 26 2012: Why not learn both?- it's not rocket science. When in doubt do both.
  • thumb
    Jun 21 2012: Derek, Thanks for directing me over here. I cannot speak for society. Sometimes I have trouble expressing myself. Please allow me to look at the total communications dilemma. Academic/technical/political fall in the first group. The directions enclosed in a item that needs assembly are confussing at best. Some bad some worse. Political writing is vague at best and attempts to assague a wide variety of voters / citizens and often time leaves both sides thinking they have won when in fact nothing was said and everyone lost. All political statements have a agenda. Find out what the agenda is and you will understand the talk / paper. Academic is most often directed to a specific target group with buzz words and jargon that eliminate outsiders from participation. Many academic talks and papers are designed to impress and put the rest of us in our place. That is why Sir Ken Robinson has a following he talks to us and makes us comfortable during the learning process. He makes complex points in simple terms. Conversational has almost become technical in todays world with the use of acronyms and fad terms to show we are hip and with it. In most cases we attempt to put ten pounds of sugar in a two pound bag.

    We have lost the art of "talk and writing". I read a lot and we have few authors who dazzle us. Most insert enough porn in the book to make the average reader happy. There is no panache.

    In summary, the arts are not well accepted as college degrees as they are not money makers. Those who have the talent cannot afford to dedicate the time to do justice to their work as they must work outside of their training to survive. In the renaissance writers / artists were sponsored by the wealthy. Our writers are lawyers turned writers such as Grishem. Don't even get me started on todays (non) actors.

    Out of space. Nice to hear from you. All the best. Bob.
  • thumb
    Jun 14 2012: I think you need the right tool for the right job. You need to consider your audience and the level of communication. So if you are writing for lay people you should move into a more conversational style. If, however, you are writing for scientific peers, you had better switch to technical writing. Technical writing is clear and typically contains less bias. Or maybe the bias is better hidden, not sure. But either way, both styles are important to have in your toolkit.
  • thumb
    Jun 13 2012: I think society benefits when we accept that people have different natural ways of speaking. Some people present themselves more formally and some less. Some people use common slang that others understand, and some people do not use slang. If in normal conversation we can accept the way other people express themselves most easily, we remove one barrier to the exchange of a diversity of ideas.
    Those who use speech or writing outside a social setting, that is, for example, in a journal or in a book they write, are wise to choose a form of communication that is comfortable for the audience. An academic who wants to sell his book to a popular audience- say Brian Greene writing about string theory or Lisa Randall writing about extra dimensions, they will not reach their audiences if they use the language of scholarship in their fields. But when they write for their colleagues rather than for mass audiences, they need to write in a language that conveys ideas in the most precise and efficient way to the specialist audience.
    I think we should try to accept how others speak and write and that each of us in speaking and writing should try to use language and arguments that we expect the audience of listeners or readers to understand. Beyond this we will gain, I think if we adopt the practice of assuming good intentions in others. For example, someone who uses academic-type writing or speech does that naturally rather than to show off. Someone who uses a lot of slang does so naturally rather than to show disrespect for anyone else.
    It is kind of like the clothes we choose to wear when we go to the grocery story. What people wear to run errands will typically be chosen out of comfort and convenience rather than to send its own message.
  • thumb
    Jun 13 2012: Question: How was your breakfast this morning?
    Sample Answers:
    Academic Style-- My morning meal was nutritionally complete and is providing the necessary energy for my early tasks.
    Conversational Style-- Poached eggs are much more tasty when seasoned with sea salt and fresh, cracked black pepper. Mmmmm good. I sure appreciate the difference between reconstituted orange juice and fresh-squeezed. You can almost feel the breeze blowing through the grove when you taste the fresh, sweet citrus. I could have eaten that entire breakfast again! Sometimes I think breakfast is my favorite meal but then I realize the truth. . . my favorite meal is the next one! How was your breakfast?
    • thumb
      Jun 13 2012: I think your answering my question and asking me at the same time?

      So my answer to your question is that, I had some eggs and toasted toast for breakfast. =)

      It was yummy. I am also waiting for lunch right now. =P
    • thumb
      Jun 13 2012: Thanks for the sample answer again, they made me hungry again. haha.