Academic vocabulary · Attributing

Attributing in academic English

This is the language that does one job: it makes clear whose claim each sentence is — yours, the prompt’s, or somebody else’s. Every discussion essay depends on this. If the reader cannot tell which sentences report a view you are about to answer and which ones are your own position, the whole essay reads as one confused opinion — and that costs marks under Task Response before Lexical Resource is even reached.

6 itemseach with the pattern it requires

2 worked exampleswith the word doing the work marked

2 common mistakeswith the repair

4 exercisesrecognition first, then production

Start here · the long version

What attributing really asks you to decide

Attribution makes clear whose claim each sentence carries — yours, the prompt’s, or somebody else’s — which is what lets a discussion essay be read as an argument rather than a muddle.

The reader cannot tell unless you say

A discussion essay reports views in order to answer them. If a reader cannot tell which sentences report a position you are about to reject and which carry your own, the whole response reads as one confused opinion — and that costs on Task Response before Lexical Resource is even considered. The fix is four words at the front of a sentence, and it is the cheapest structural improvement available in the paper.

Naming who holds a view also makes the view weighable. “Some people say cars should be banned” names nobody, so the reader cannot judge it before you answer. “Public health researchers argue that…” lets them assign it the weight it deserves, and it costs you nothing because you are about to disagree anyway.

The trap is inventing the source. “Studies have proven” claims a specific thing you do not have, “it is widely held” claims a spread you cannot verify, and an invented percentage is a fabricated fact. The honest constructions — “research indicates”, “proponents argue”, “it is frequently claimed” — carry attribution without pretending to a citation.

Whose claim is this?

Every sentence in a discussion essay belongs to somebody. Say who, or it defaults to you.

Name the holder

“Critics”, “proponents”, “employers”. Four words, and the view becomes weighable.

“Research” is uncountable

“Research indicates”, never “researches indicate”. And it indicates; it does not prove.

“According to” is not for you

It reports somebody else. For your own view the essay is already yours — just state it.

What it costs you to skip this

Without attribution a discussion essay reads as though the writer holds every view in it simultaneously, which is exactly the failure the essay type is designed to expose. And an invented source damages beyond its own sentence: once a reader has seen one fabricated statistic, every other claim is read with suspicion.

Where it stops applying

Attribution reports; it does not endorse or refute. Naming who holds a view does not answer it, and an essay made entirely of attributed positions has no author in it. And it cannot manufacture authority — “according to experts” with no experts named is the same empty claim as “everybody knows”, with an academic coat on.

Examples · why precise words score better

The same idea, twice

Lexical Resource is one of the four criteria, and it is not a count of long words. What it rewards is whether your word choice adds information — and the fastest way to see that is to watch one sentence become precise. Nothing was added below except accuracy.

Vague

People say that private cars should be banned from city centres.

Attributing

Precise

Advocates of car-free city centres argue that a full ban is the only measure that meaningfully reduces congestion.

“People say” names nobody, so the reader cannot weigh the claim. Naming who holds a view — advocates, critics, researchers, employers — costs four words and turns an unattributed rumour into a position you can then answer.

What the precise version earns
precision · range · register. No page here promises anyone a score: these are the things the criterion actually looks at, and they are the things you can control.

The language

Each item, and the pattern it demands

Knowing a word and not its pattern is exactly what produces a sentence that reads like a translation. The preposition, the verb form and the article are the part that carries the marks.

According to X,

Safe to use

Preposition plus its object, then a comma: “According to researchers, …”. Never split from the object, and never “according to me”.

Research suggests that

Safe to use

Followed by a clause. “Research” is uncountable here — “research suggests”, never “researches suggest”.

Proponents / critics argue that

Safe to use

Names who holds the view, then a clause. The cheapest way to make a discussion essay readable.

It is widely held that

Watch the pattern

Impersonal passive plus a clause. Useful when the view genuinely is widespread, and dishonest when it is not — you cannot verify “widely”.

be attributed to

Watch the pattern

Passive plus “to” plus a noun: “the fall was attributed to the new levy”. Reports somebody else’s explanation, not yours.

Studies have proven that

Costs you marks

Research does not prove; it shows, suggests, indicates. “Proven” overstates what any study can do, and examiners read it as a memorised phrase.

Watch two · then do three

See the word doing its job in a real sentence

Worked example · According to

According to labour economists, automation displaces routine tasks rather than whole occupations.

Why it works: One phrase, and the reader knows this is a reported finding rather than the writer’s hunch. The main clause is left free to carry the claim itself.

Worked example · argue … counter

Supporters of the scheme argue that it funds public transport; critics counter that it charges the poorest drivers most.

Why it works: Two attributed positions in one sentence, and the writer has taken neither. That is what the opening of a discussion essay is supposed to do.

What goes wrong

The mistakes this function produces

Most are collocation errors, not grammar errors — which is why no spell-checker will ever flag them.

According to me, private cars should be banned from city centres.

“According to” reports somebody else’s view. For your own position the phrase is “in my view” — or, better, just state it: the essay is already yours.

Repaired: In my view, private cars should be banned from city centres.

Recent researches have proven that remote work increases productivity.

Two errors in three words. “Research” is uncountable in this sense, and studies do not prove — they indicate, suggest or show.

Repaired: Recent research indicates that remote work increases productivity.

Now you try · with the scaffolding on

Build it one step at a time

Report it so a reader can weigh it — and so nobody mistakes it for yours.

The material

You are about to answer a view you reject: that congestion charging penalises poorer drivers.

Step 1Decide who holds this view

Not “some people”. Who specifically would argue this? Naming them is what makes it weighable.

Your version0 words · minimum 6

6 more words before you can compare. Writing it yourself first is the whole exercise.

Step 2Choose the reporting verb

Step 3Write the sentence

Exercises · step 1, recognition

Before you learn the words, learn the job

A word list memorised before you can see what it is for is a word list that gets used in the wrong place.

Step 1 · the job

Which sentence attributes the view clearly without adopting it?

The situation: You want to report a view you disagree with, before answering it.

All three are grammatical English. Only one of them does the job this function exists for.

Exercises · step 2, production

Choose the item that does the job and takes the right pattern

Every wrong option is wrong for its own reason, and it says so. Nothing here is scored automatically.

______ labour economists, automation displaces routine tasks rather than whole occupations.

Choose an option first

Recent research ______ that remote workers report higher job satisfaction.

Choose an option first

You are about to answer a view you reject. Which opening reports it without adopting it?

Choose an option first

The other functions

Seven more jobs for words to do

Hedging

It lowers the temperature of a claim, so you only have to defend what you actually said.

6 items · 3 exercises Asserting

It raises the temperature of a claim, so the reader knows which points you are prepared to stand behind.

6 items · 3 exercises Quantifying

It says how many or how much, at a level of precision you can actually defend.

6 items · 3 exercises Causing

It names which way the arrow points between two things.

6 items · 3 exercises Evaluating

It says whether something is good or bad, and in what specific respect.

6 items · 3 exercises Proposing

It names what should be done, precisely enough that a reader could picture it happening.

6 items · 3 exercises Register

It keeps every sentence at the formality the task expects.

6 items · 3 exercises