Can any of you writerfags give me some help? I'm a stem

>caring about prose in your papers
bitch what the fuck
just clearly state what you're trying to state

>>9393050
>2017
>possible to get less than an A on a paper
What do you usually get marked off for? Hard to give you any advice without knowing what you're doing wrong.

S T U P I D
F R O G P O S T E R

>>9393086
I feel like my grammar is decent. They usually just say lacking substance or something similar. I have no idea how to add that substance. Current paper is a 6 page hamlet paper on a thesis of my choice if that helps at all. I was thinking about doing it on how manipulation tears at hamlet from multiple sources like ghost dad, king/mom, religion, and supplements to his madness.

>>9393137
This is a bad thesis do something else

>>9393050

A few days isn't enough time to turn you from a bad writer into a good one. I'd strongly suggest you pick up a good introduction to rhetoric. I personally like Classical Rhetoric for the Modern Student.

BUT, my advice is first, make sure your essay structure is good. The simplest structure is this:

1. State the argument of the paper in full. Example: Frogs are the greatest animals because green is the best color, they are ambitious, and they have had broad cultural impact.
2. Take each part of this statement of the argument and then fully explain the statement and prove the full explanation. This often involves statements of sub-arguments. Green is the most pleasing color. (Sub argument:) It is associated with all good things, like greenery, healthy food, etc. Sometimes you will have to refute common counter-arguments. For example, the case has been made that red is the best color, but it's not because x y and z.
3. Close the paper with a statement contextualizing the argument. Why is accepting this argument important? What changes would general acceptance of this argument make? How does this differ from the status quo or the acceptance of the major counter arguments?

The big stylistic things to worry about are clarity and word choice. To be clear, be careful not to repeat yourself a bunch of times, and to be as precise as possible. For word choice, avoid being conversational, but also avoid trying to sound smart. Just say it plainly.

>>9393137
>stem
>some shit about hamlet
what?

I thought you were talking about research papers dawg

>>9393171
STEMfags are required to take English classes too, man
source: am one, just got an A on a paper about how Sir Pelleas was a harbinger of the downfall of Camelot

To OP: They don't give a shit about how pretty your words are, only about how clear they are. Come up with your ideas, first, then organize them well, then just state them clearly and you'll make easy A's.

>>9393181
>STEMfags are required to take English classes too
Autismus maximus.

>>9393137

"Lacking in substance" means you aren't studying the work you're supposed to be studying close enough. You need to re-read things at least one more time, and actively. Since you're a STEMlord you're not going to be able to instinctively bullshit all of the liberal arts papers like the people coasting on their language aptitude.

Also your thesis is terrible because it takes something contentious, Hamlet's madness, as a fact.

Another thought that just came to me based off of some research I've been doing. WARNING: only proceed if you have extreme autism and really struggle to understand how to write a paper. This is not a method for everyone. In fact, this is not a method for most people. But it might help a total stemlord to have some procedure to apply.

Writing papers is sometimes described as a "recursive U pattern", which means something like this:
-State your main point (Hamlet is manipulated by lots of things)
--Strongest subpoint supporting your main point (Hamlet is manipulated by Claudius)
----Weakest subpoint supporting your main point (Hamlet is manipulated by ghost dad)
--Another strong subpoint (Hamlet is manipulated by religion)
Conclusion that ties your main point into a bigger context (These all make Hamlet even crazier)
So you make a sort of "U" shape out of the level of detail in your paper, with the end part going higher than the beginning, so your conclusion will be broader scope than your introduction. Then you apply that recursively, making the same "U" shape out of each point:

-Subpoint (Hamlet is manipulated by Claudius)
--Strongest sub-subpoint (Claudius blatantly plays Hamlet via Gertrude)
----Weakest sub-subpoint (Claudius uses Laertes to manipulate Hamlet's mental state)
--Another strong sub-subpoint (Claudius uses R&G to play Hamlet towards the end)
Greater context (Claudius was fucking with Hamlet, trying to make him go crazy)

repeat until you've added all the detail you can. This way you'll also start to see patterns emerge (for example, Claudius uses cat's paws constantly) and those patterns might lead you to more compelling points or thesis than before.

There. I told you it was bad.

>>9393050
Be clear, have a solid thesis that can actually be argued, and avoid redundancy.

>>9393168

i second this post.

>>9393167
Fuck really? Any input as to why so I don't repeat my mistake?

>>9393168
This is great thanks man

>>9393171
Nah need six English credits for med school shit sucks

>>9393236
I was going to use part of my paper to support why I found the madness to be something out of hamlet's control but i see your point

>>9393251
That's actually great I'm gonna use it

File: gary.png (1MB, 1087x766px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1087x766px

Someone read my article
REEEEEEEEEEE

https://medium.com/@PhilipVogel/ucsc-girls-college-boys-are-creepy-arrogant-and-suck-in-bed-1e3329ccbd93

File: 700423460505001997.jpg (60KB, 1024x696px) Image search: [Google]

60KB, 1024x696px

Someone REEEEEEEEEEEad my article

https://medium.com/@PhilipVogel/ucsc-girls-college-boys-are-creepy-arrogant-and-suck-in-bed-1e3329ccbd93

>>9393265

A good thesis is like a good hypothesis. It's specific enough to be provable in the amount of words/pages you have at your disposal, but also interesting. It's also clear.

The more interesting it is the better. Quite often a good thesis connects the thing its examining to a broader concept (Hamlet is an Existential hero) or helps resolve something unclear in the text (how insane is Hamlet?) Like a good hypothesis, GENERALLY SPEAKING it furthers our knowledge of the thing it is examining even if it doesn't do one of these two things. You don't need to prove Hamlet seems insane.

A good thesis also gives a clear overhead view of what the paper is about. It's sort of like the first page of a study. This is what we were interested in, this is what we did to find out if this was true, it's either true or its false, this is what we found, this is why it matters. You should often be checking your thesis against what you've written. I often write my thesis last.

>>9393276
>>9393294
was good for some (You)s over on /r9k/, thanks for all the hard work anon