What's been said

Presenting an annotated bibliography of Army writing on writing

Figure. Frequency of keywords in 78 articles on military writing

** Applications for the Harding Fellowship are open through 10 September. Learn more here and apply! **

Lots has been said about military writing–and not just by us. Part of renewing the Army’s journals must involve understanding the history of professional discourse in the Army. 

As Army students start schools this summer, this post presents an annotated bibliography on professional writing and some initial analysis into what the Army has said about professional writing over the last century. By reading 78 articles or reports on military writing, we’ve found that how-to guides are the most common type, while calls for clarity and original research into professional writing are tied for second. 

Below, I discuss trends in writing on writing found by reading all these articles. Scroll to the bottom if you want to download the annotated bibliography.

Methodology

I took a “snowball” approach to locating the articles in this annotated bibliography. Based on keyword searches at the Combined Arms Research Library, Google Scholar, the Air University Library Index of Military Periodicals, and my own knowledge of this area, I built an initial list and then scoured works cited pages and previous bibliographies to build this list. The bibliography below only includes the articles where I could attach a PDF, but there are certainly more–and I’d welcome your contributions! (If you want to browse the actual documents, I can provide you access to my Zotero repository.) To produce this analysis, I annotated each bibliographic entry and then assigned one to three keywords from a list of 38 keywords.¹

For example: 

Millen, Anthony. “Acronymania.” Military Review 54, no. 8 (August 1974): 48–52.

This article, by a British exchange officer, skewers the American infatuation with acronyms. He takes special issue with acronyms that select random letters from the base words to include, "backronyms", and turning acronyms into verbs.

Tags: jargon, gobbledygook

In all, the annotated bibliography contains 78 articles with 142 total key terms assigned and a mean number of key words of 1.8 per article. The analysis in the next section is based on the themes in the articles that make up this bibliography.

Common themes

The most common subjects of these articles included how-to guides, arguments for why soldiers should write, calls for better military writing, articles calling for more uniformed strategists, and original analysis of Army writing. Figure, above, shows the frequency of keywords assigned for those with more than one assignment.

How-to

Sixteen articles aimed to improve writing or offer tips for new writers. How-to articles connect to a variety of other ideas like improving speech, outlets to write for, and others. The best of these were “Write it up for the journal” and “Modernize your speaking ability.”

Why write

This type of article is adjacent to the how-to articles, but instead explains why troops should write. The best articles were “Professional Writing: A Professional Obligation” and “The Need for an Intelligence Literature.” While the latter article was written for the Central Intelligence Agency’s journal, the author keenly describes why professionals should write and why professions need a body of literature. 

Good military writing

Twelve pieces critiqued military writing and advocated for clarity. While clarity is an important attribute, two others argued for specificity, another two focused on selecting the right word, and one article even called for study of semantics. My favorite formulation came from a Canadian writer who argued for “clear, concise, simple, and accurate” writing. 

Closely related to clarity are articles criticizing military jargon and acronyms. One term we might revive is “goobledygook.” That word cropped up four times in the 1970s and once in the 1955, but not since. 

Seeking strategists

Seven articles bemoaned the lack of American military thinkers in the post World War II period. Seeing an increase in civilian security intellectuals with the rise of the United States as a great power, these articles called for professional writing and other policies that might improve military thinking. 

Original analysis

I located 12 pieces that presented scholarly research into military journals. These took a variety of forms, including content analysis, surveys, and author analysis. “Informing the Army Officer” is my favorite as it shows the timelessness of effective data use.

In all, these articles form a rich source to think more about professional writing.

Next steps

In future posts, we will look at what we can learn on how-to write and why writing for professional journals matters. This annotated bibliography also offers a place to start for students who might want to study professional discourse as part of their professional education. Based on this review of 78 articles, the Army would benefit from more thinking on the purpose and function of our professional journals and the connections from military writing to doctrine and professional military education.

If you’re a military student interested in writing on professional discourse, send me a note at zach@hardingproject.com and I’ll get you access to the Zotero repository.

Griffiths (annotated Bibliography Of Professional Writing)

157KB ∙ PDF file

Download

Download

1. The keywords included; 
Barriers: The article discussed reasons why service members do not write.
Bibliography: The piece was a bibliography related to professional writing or discourse.
Call to write: The article called for more professional writing. 
Clarity: An argument in favor of clear writing.
Clear, concise, simple, and accurate: A specific formulation by a Canadian writer that I liked.
Concision: An argument in favor of succinct writing. 
Critical thinking: Related to how writing helps develop critical thinking.
Critique: A sharp attack on the state of military writing.
Ethics: Related to ethical concerns about military writing.
Evaluations: Related to military performance evaluations. 
Gazette: Articles from the Marine Corps Gazette. 
Ghostwriting: Discusses writing for a senior officer.
Gobbledygook: Mentions of this specific term related to jargon.
Historical interest: Of interest to those interested in previous models of professional discourse.
History: Related to the history of professional discourse.
How-to: Describes how one begins in a facet of professional discourse. 
Jargon: Related to military-specific terminology.
Only first page: Partial PDF included.
Original analysis: Presents original research into professional discourse. 
Outlets: Informs on available publishing outlets.
PME: Related to professional military education.
Professional development: Discussion of how discourse helps with military professionalism.
Purpose: A clear articulation of the functions for professional writing. 
Reading: An argument related to the importance of reading.
Renew: A call to renew professional discourse.
Report: An academic report (as opposed to a military journal article)
Semantics: An argument in favor of deeper study of semantics.
Share lessons: An argument in favor of sharing lessons through writing.
Sketches: A good example of how sketches can improve military journals.
Specificity: An argument in favor of specificity over concision.
Speech: An argument related to speech as part of the profession.
Staff writing: An argument related to the importance of writing for staff assignments. 
Starting: An article related on how to start professional writing.
Strategists: A call for more uniformed strategists that write.
Typology of writers: A description of types of military writers or non-writers. 
Valuable: A piece worth wide reading.
Why to write: An argument related to why service members should write.