English writing-Fact paper
Citationland: or how to use citations to more than simply “prove” (support) your points…
Generally, citations are used in this way:
“It is commonly understood that the U.S. House of Representatives is the most democratic of the branches of federal government, since its representatives are in proportion to state populations and districting principles.[footnoteRef:1]” [1: Smith, Robert (2010). The politics amongst as. New York: Bedford St. Martins.]
In the above example, the citation (though used in conjunction with a footnote, as opposed to purely in APA format), is inserted to “prove” the claim contained within the sentence.
But, let’s look at the information contained within a typical APA citation:
Author
Year of publication
Location of publication
Title
Publisher
Type of prose (essay, book, article, unpublished work, web page, etc.)
When you begin to look at these “packets” of information as just that—you begin to understand that you can use those “packets” to influence what the reader understands about the primary text (where in the example above, the primary text is written in red ink).
The primary text, or primary narrative , is what you’re trying to convince your audience of directly.
The subtext, or information contained within typical APA citation (above in blue), is what you can use to augment, supplement, or change the audience’s understanding of the primary narrative . For example, consider the following two sentences:
Sentence 1: “Global trends of warming climate temperature are being studied[footnoteRef:2].” [2: Jackson, Blake (1967, April 9). The inquisitive scientist. National Geographic, 55, 28-31]
Sentence 2: “Global trends of warming climate temperature are being studied.[footnoteRef:3]” [3: Smart, Peter (2013, August 20). A comprehensive study of the effects of fuel emissions on the man-made global warming trend. International Science Journal, 14(4), 5-62. ]
What are the different perceptions you derive from the above two sentences?
Why?
Fact vs. Truth
Facts can be verified (in exactly the manner in which they are stated/written).
The truth is what we often mistake for fact, but there are very few “truths” in life, rather, perspectives.
Let’s look at a statement:
Let’s assume I’ve been sitting at home all day Saturday, I didn’t see anyone all day, and I say:
“I went to the grocery store, and did lots of chores Saturday.”
This statement is neither fact, nor truth, if we define truth as something that can be verified by independent sources. Think about it, can anyone verify that we “went to the grocery store, and did lots of chores?” No… therefore, the statement is not factual. And, since I began this hypothetical stating that you stayed home all day Saturday, we know the statement isn’t “true” either.
But, let’s change the diction (word choice):
“The discussion was that I went to the store, and did lots of chores on Saturday.”
This statement, at least the part about me ACTUALLY going to the store and doing chores, is still not true, but at least now, it’s fact. Look at the key differences:
“The discussion was that I went to the store, and did lots of chores on Saturday.”
It’s the part in red that we are able to verify (confirm with others). So, we ask ourselves, can we verify whether there was a discussion about Brohne being at the store, not whether Brohne was actually at the store.
However, because so much of the sentene still contains the same subject and verb (focus) on Brohne, and his trip to the store, it focuses the audience’s attention on that part, tricking the audience (when used throughout an essay, for example), into perceiving that fact is the same as truth; i.e., that Brohne did go to the store (when all you’re really saying factually is that there was a conversaion…