4 ms·
The “royal we” is common for single author academic work. I’m honestly unsure why. StackExchange seems to think it refers to both author and reader together. I
by bglazer 2y ago
The “royal we” is common for single author academic work. I’m honestly unsure why. StackExchange seems to think it refers to both author and reader together. I think it conveys a sort of distance from the author, giving the writing less of a personal and more general tone.
https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/2002/how-did-royal-we-become-a-standard-of-scientific-writing https://hsm.stackexchange.com/questions/2002/how-did-royal-w...
- NotAnOtter 2y agoIt's assumed you at some point talked to someone in the lab, or your advisor, or your advisee, or literally anyone about the paper. If you didn't that's probably problematic. So "we" gives non-formal credit to your community.
- tgv 2y agoI have never heard that as an explanation. That kind of credit is often expressed in foot/end notes, at least in the field I worked in. It is implied that the authors speak for themselves.
- NotAnOtter 2y agoWell IMO if you're giving some trivial level of credit someone else, you should use 'we', since you're both 'talking. If you reference them by name in the paper somewhere, I feel even stronger about my stance.
- noqc 2y agoWhen I use it, I mean it the way stackexchange says it is meant