Hello Jonathan,
I echo Gunnars' comments....have a short moment here to add a note bout languages. From experience, and having not only fought for the language of my own thesis but also the rigour associated with languages either of "objective" and "subjective" kinds of language, I offer the following ideas...First, be sure that the language suits the purpose. If you are writing about reflective or lived experiences, the language should reflect this; conversely, statistics and their presentations demand the appropriate third person view.
When I wrote my Ph.D., and perhaps because of where I wrote it, the "voice" we used echoed the position we took as emerging researchers. First person language reflects the position of the researcher. If your thesis is about first person perspectives, constructivist paradigms, or your position as a researcher, by all means use first person, if this appropriately supports what you are saying and the logic of the arguments that you bring forward.
However be mindful of who the target audience is as well as what exactly the purpose is of the doctoral work that you are doing. In my own case, I used three languages, the third being a visual language, to express the concepts withi the thesis. This was vital for me to define at the outset of the thesis, for the purposes of providing a way for the readers to understand the perspectives within the thesis and the reasons for them, let alone the problematic, the study purpose, etc.
Regards
Tiiu Poldma
-----snip---------
> Date: Sun, 7 Apr 2013 13:19:03 -0400
> From: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: How not to write a PhD thesis
> To: [log in to unmask]
>
> On Apr 7, 2013, at 9:50 AM, Jonathan Bishop <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> >>> My
> >>> proof reader insists one using "it is thought" to express my own
> >>> opinions, whereas others say it is find to use the 'I' pronoun.
> >>
> >> Why would they want something less precise (and arguably more pretentious)?
> >>
> >>
> >
> > Probably because they know that the reflexive approach to research is
> > still vehemently challenged by
> > materialist/positivist/empiricist/objectivist traditionalists? :-)
>
--------snip---------
-----------------------------------------------------------------
PhD-Design mailing list <[log in to unmask]>
Discussion of PhD studies and related research in Design
Subscribe or Unsubscribe at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/phd-design
-----------------------------------------------------------------
|