1.1 The importance of English to the scientists

The importance of English to the scientist today is obvious. English is the language used for most forms of international communications, such as research journal publications, multimedia communications, international conferences, and correspondence. Various reasons can be given for this phenomenon, one of the foremost probably being convenience-communication requires a common language. Unfortunately, this raises many problems for researchers for whom English is not their first language. The material for this course represents the essence of what I myself have learned from helping many Japanese scientists tackle the problems of how to express what they want to say in English.

However, before going any further, let us first take a step backward to consider what is most important in our study of English. English is a language, and language is basically a tool for communication. If we had no need to communicate or nothing to say, we probably would not need language. If we consider communication as our major goal in using language, then this means that the receiver of the language, or the “audience” is very important. 

Here, “audience” refers to the people who will listen to or read what you are communicating. This audience can be thought of as the group of people whom you are addressing-here, let us call this group the “discourse community.” By using the word “community” we introduce the idea of a social network which has its “rules and expectations.” This means that a word which has one meaning to one discourse community may mean something entirely different to another; e.g., “CIA” to a researcher may be the acronym for “cathode ion analysis” but to many, it stands for “Central Intelligence Agency.” Likewise, CD may mean “circular dichroism” to a scientist but “compact disk” to the average consumer.

This concept of a discourse community also raises the issue of differences in cultural expectations in communication. For example, English for science usually uses a straightforward, “no surprises” approach; the “conclusion” or main message is clearly stated first and then the details and/or evidence is given afterwards. This differs from the chronological approach often used by Japanese writers in which the “conclusion” or main message is not given until the end or sometimes not given at all!