Tired with all Metadiscourse, For Restful Death I Cry
Metadiscourse should be, if not banned, then rationed. Academics should get perhaps 20 metadiscourse references per 200 pages. Probably less. Ration books should be provided.
I just finished reading an academic book on biz administration. (I’ll add the link when it gets published—I got the page proofs.) Interesting ideas; way too much wasteful metadiscourse. “As I said in Chapter 7, blah blah blah.” “We’ll discuss this more in Chapter 3,” “The rudiments of this argument are presented in Chapter 5.” Someone please send a container of editors with balls to the most prestigious business press in the United States. The ball density in their editorial offices seems to be heading south.
Why do I, the reader, give an eighth of a shit that the author said something in Chapter 7? Why not give me a short synopsis if one is needed? Certainly I’m not going to remember some concept just because it was in Chapter 7. “Oh, right, Chapter 7. Now I remember.” Matter, please, not manner. Metadiscourse wastes words, as I mentioned in the previous paragraph and went on to mention in this paragraph, and which I was about to mention in a paragraph to follow, which, of course, I didn’t write, but I could have should I have wanted to.