Note to academics. Just read an article that uses the word “situatedness” without any good reason. Stop inventing words when you don’t need to. Especially if you’re in a scarcely established field that already struggles to justify its existence as a unique discipline. Inventing words doesn’t aid your cause — if anything, your weak attempts at establishing a jargon for yourselves serves only to highlight your tenuous existence outside the parameters of established fields. Praxis is where this all falls apart on you, so stop making up words and go do some real research to back up your mediocre methodologies. When you’re beaten to the punch by both commercial / non-profit utilities in developing not only methodologies but also tools for the same analyses you’re flogging as your own, it’s time to go and fold back into the disciplines from whence you came and stop pretending to be something new.
*ahem*
Well, that feels better. But I still need to write about it :(
‘Situatedness’ is not a made up word. It’s an uncommon, legitimate extension of the word ‘situated’. Actually making up words, I’m prepared to bet, is rather rare? As for uncommon extensions, I make them all the time. Sometimes to be deliberately annoying, but mostly because I’m writing something and it just seems to be the most appropriate word…
Come to think of it, what’s actually annoying is the severe limitations of the Word dictionary. Surely it’s not that difficult to make a dictionary, that rather than a giant look-up list (as it appears to be) applies rules. Thus, it would know that ‘ness’ is a legitimate suffix to ‘situated’, and not have the stupid red squiggle under it.
Come to think of it, what’s actually annoying is the severe limitations of the Word dictionary. Surely it’s not that difficult to make a dictionary, that rather than a giant look-up list (as it appears to be) applies rules. Thus, it would know that ‘ness’ is a legitimate suffix to ‘situated’, and not have the stupid red squiggle under it.