Communities

Writing
Writing
Codidact Meta
Codidact Meta
The Great Outdoors
The Great Outdoors
Photography & Video
Photography & Video
Scientific Speculation
Scientific Speculation
Cooking
Cooking
Electrical Engineering
Electrical Engineering
Judaism
Judaism
Languages & Linguistics
Languages & Linguistics
Software Development
Software Development
Mathematics
Mathematics
Christianity
Christianity
Code Golf
Code Golf
Music
Music
Physics
Physics
Linux Systems
Linux Systems
Power Users
Power Users
Tabletop RPGs
Tabletop RPGs
Community Proposals
Community Proposals
tag:snake search within a tag
answers:0 unanswered questions
user:xxxx search by author id
score:0.5 posts with 0.5+ score
"snake oil" exact phrase
votes:4 posts with 4+ votes
created:<1w created < 1 week ago
post_type:xxxx type of post
Search help
Notifications
Mark all as read See all your notifications »
Q&A

Parentheses in scientific writing

+1
−0

I occasionally use parentheses in scientific writing when a piece of information is related to a previous statement but not to the central story.

Is it bad style in scientific writing to use parentheses that contain more than a handful of words or even full sentences?

For example, would the following paragraph be better without the first pair of parentheses (but with the parenthesized sentence in the same position)?

We use a fleeblesheemed plumbus to analyze floob concentrations in groat dairy. (Despite the similar name, this idea is not related to the plumb-o-fleeb machine of Kimble et al., which is used as a krimkram lubricator for the production of shleem films in anorganic blamf synthesis.) The fleeblesheeme coating, which we apply at 142° Celsius, sensitizes our plumbus to groat dairy when submerged in the floob of their yeanlings for three to four minutes. After a short cooling period, the floob coefficients can then be read off the plumbus' dingle bop. To accelerate the subsequent re-hydration, we follow the warming scheme of Grumbles. The necessary optimization steps are discussed in Section 2. Finally, in Section 3, we apply our fleeblesheemed plumbus to 2016 floogro (714.A314). Contrary to previous belief, we find that floob concentrations stay below hazardous levels, when consumption occurs around midnight without direct exposure to noom radiation.

As an alternative, I could move the content of the parentheses to the end of the paragraph. At this point, however, they would lose their function to prevent readers from possible confusion.

History
Why does this post require moderator attention?
You might want to add some details to your flag.
Why should this post be closed?

This post was sourced from https://writers.stackexchange.com/q/38567. It is licensed under CC BY-SA 3.0.

0 comment threads

0 answers

Sign up to answer this question »