Jia 1

Fanqi Jia
Roberta Wolfson
Writing 2
2 June 2016
Getting to Know Earthquakes
Earthquake, one of the most common disasters nowadays, influences humans life a lot.
As the faster development of the society, the effect of the damages is larger and more serious,
including huge loss of natural and cultural treasures. Therefore, more and more scholars start to
explore earthquakes and publish various academic works in different disciplines, such as history,
geology, and so on. Though all disciplines discuss the same topic, earthquakes, they still have
obviously different emphasis in their works. For example, in history articles, the author focuses
more on the important and serious earthquakes happened in history, and introduce the origin of
famous theories from early time. On the other hand, in geology articles, the author usually tires
to announce a new discovery of phenomena or theory to advance studies in earthquakes. The
different emphasis in different disciplines results in different conventions of composing
academic works, reflecting on the selection of evidences, the format of the academic woks, and
stylistic techniques. The comparisons of these convention in representative works in history and
geology demonstrate that geology can help people learn more about earthquakes professionally
to contribute and promote scientific researches further, which can result in preventing disasters of
earthquake to benefit all human beings, whereas history is more aim to record and collect, so that
geology is more effective at talking about earthquakes than history.

Jia 2
The first point to show geology is more effective at talking about earthquakes than
history is due to their different strategies in the selection of evidence, which refers to deductive
evidence in geology articles and curt evidence in history articles. Evidence is the most important
part to prove the authors ideas powerfully and persuade audiences. In an academic work with a
topic of earthquakes, picture evidence is necessary to analyze the physical situation of the
ground, but different selections in pictures can reach different achievements. In a geology article,
which is aim to introduce a new idea, most picture evidences consist of graphs and charts with
specific data. For example, In Wienss journal, Seismological Constraints on the Mechanism of
Deep Earthquakes Temperature Dependence of Deep Earthquake Source Properties, he uses bar
charts, histograms, line charts, and tables to show the relationship between the depth and the
frequency of the earthquake and the relationship between the temperature and the deep
earthquake b-value to illustrate the mutuality among these three important variables in studying
earthquakes, in order to prove his idea that deep earthquake significantly rely on the temperature.
Also, there are long words to explain the principle of pictures with numbers and formulas. For
instance, table 1 presents a synthesis of the best estimates of the rupture parameters of all deep
earthquakes of Mw = 7.5 and greater since 1960 (Wiens). Such professional evidences and
analysis not only clarify Wienss idea in earthquakes to convince audience of his new theory by
listing data and formulas, but also show readers methods in studying earthquakes. In contrast, in
the history book, most pictures used are photographs of landscapes. For example, in the book
Earthquake Storms: The Fascinating History and Volatile Future of the San Andreas Fault,
there are two photographs of one same location on Sacramento Street, San Francisco. The first
picture was taken on April 18, 1906 right after a big earthquake, where walls collapsed. The
second one was daily common view taken in 2006 (Dvorak 126). These two pictures compose a

Jia 3
contrary, especially the contrast of complete buildings and collapsed walls, which show that
earthquake in 1906 was an unexpected and serious disaster to human beings. Such records in
pictures just state such a reality, with seldom professional explanations to better understand the
reason for this earthquake so that the audience cannot study earthquakes further from an expert
view. These pictures cannot make readers understand the essence of the earthquake, and less
contribute to study the principle of the earthquakes. However, the data evidence in geology
article are shown with deductions, which is a complete lesson of professional instruction. In this
way, geology works help audiences to learn more new theories. These theories could improve
and promote further studying in earthquakes, and might make predictions of earthquakes to
benefit all human beings life instead of dissemination of basic knowledge. Therefore, geology is
more effective in earthquake topic than history due to more persuasive evidence.
The other obvious difference in strategy to make geology more effective at talking about
earthquakes is the format of the work. Compared with magazine article or newspaper articles
which are only 1-2 pages, academic works are longer for they usually use many references and
and the complete proving progress to explain ideas. An academic work will either be at least 5page length or a whole book to talk about one topic. Therefore, the format is important to
organize an academic work to be more neat and audience can also read more efficiently to find
the part in their need. Different disciplines have their own formats, such as the unique style of the
subtitle, the fittest sequence of stating ideas, and these differences apply to geology and history
as well. For example, in geology works, the subtitle is usually representing as the topic or
function of the whole part. Take Wienss journal as an example. In his journal, the subtitles are
like Comparison of deep and shallow earthquakes, Rupture characteristics, Magnitude
frequency relations and so on (Wiens). These subtitles are brief but clear to show what will be

Jia 4
discussed in a while. In this way, audience can have previews and anticipations for the statement
later, which make each part of work more easily understandable. In addition, in a geology work,
the order is organized in logical deductions. The author tries to explain each theory step by step,
and finally come up with the conclusion of a new theory. Just like Wiens journal, the first part is
the review of the basic seismological observations concerning deep earthquakes, and discuss
their implications for our understanding of the mechanism of deep earthquakes and the
geodynamics of subducting slabs. The final part, which discusses the temperature, is based on
the seismological observations. Such order of explaining makes the deduction more reasonable,
especially in introducing and teaching a new theory to other scholars.
On the contrary, the format of history article is less effective than geology articles to
organize its idea, which also applies on the style of the subtitle and the order of statement. In the
history works, the subtitle is more narrative and vague to make readers fully understand. Instead
of summarizing an event, the subtitles are more creative to state one period of events or theories
in each part. For instance, in Dvoraks book, the subtitles are like To Quake or Not to Quake,
Of Patrol and Pinnacles, A Tumult of Motions and Noises and so on. These subtitles are
absorbing, but they are unclear to state the incoming contents. Audiences cannot predict what to
happen later, though they are attractive to read continuously. Also, the history events in this book
are ordered in time. Dvorak orders the past realities and according theories as the sequence of
occurring from early to now, and one earthquakes come up with several geologists experience
and progress of researches. Such order is neat enough to state many issues at the same time,
which is less disarray. Both disciplines use the suitable formats for themselves, but the geological
work is still more effective because its efficient subtitles and the logical order truly teach
audiences something new in earthquake, which will help scholars to study further in earthquakes

Jia 5
in the future according to know such a theory. Therefore, geology is more effective in earthquake
topic than history because of accurate formatting.
Stylistic technique is another significant convention to demonstrate that geology is more
effective at talking about earthquakes between these two disciplines. The stylistic technique,
such as the use of tone, is the method to characterize the academic work by sentence. This
technique addresses on all statements and subconsciously influence audiences minds. In geology
works, whose purpose is to convey correct information, almost all sentences in the work are in
confirmative tone. In Wienss journal, for instance, these results indicate that deep earthquakes
must represent largely shear motion along a planar surface; any volumetric component resulting
from a phase transformation must be much smaller than the shear slip. Because this article is a
process to persuade others to agree with his own ideas, Wiens should not use any doubtful or
personalized language in a formal and serious academic work. Words like must, resulting
from are necessary to show the confidence and reliability of his claim in deep earthquakes and
the phase transformation. On the other hand, in history works, the author will use a casual tone,
such as the structure of the question and answer, to introduce a feature. For example, in an
introduction of a female botanist who experienced the big earthquake in 1906, Dvorak says that
Is this the same woman who, just weeks before, twice scaled a broken staircase to the sixth
floor of the academy building? [] Yes, it is (62). Dvorak uses a casual tone to describe the
experience and the contribution of a botanist, which is informal and also less relative to the study
of earthquake. In such casual tone, the author omits a lot of expertise, which is not professional
enough and cannot make audience truly understand the principle and theory of earthquake, so
that there will be less contribution to the study of earthquake for all human beings, such as
preventing and predicting such disaster. In addition, missing professional keywords will be less

Jia 6
useful for scholars and experts in earthquake area to study earthquakes. Comparatively, geology
articles include more expertise and professional knowledge in earthquake than history article,
which will make more people study earthquake deeply and expertly, so that more contribution in
earthquake to all human beings might come out. Hence, geology is more effective in earthquake
topic than history in appropriate stylistic technique.
In conclusion, geology is more effective in talking about earthquakes than history due to
persuasive evidences, briefly accurate format, and serious stylistic techniques. For scholar in
earthquakes, the main purpose is still to discover new aspects to develop a more mature system
to study it. To achieve this, an effective work should not just state some well-known events, but
better to explain what to get from these past events in the modern time from an expert view. Such
achievement are the goals of geology works, which is aim to convey a new discovery and theory
to contribute more in seismology, and the contribution of the geology works benefits all other
disciplines to learn more about the earthquakes, while history work is more aim to collect past
events and theories in order. Every kind of discipline has its own function to contribute to the
academy and will be the effective in certain areas. All academic works in different topics should
be appreciated and encouraged, but the best choice of a discipline to finish an academic work
should still be considered carefully about which one will be more effective at talking about the
topic.

Jia 7
Work Cited
Dvorak, John. Earthquake Storms: The Fascinating History and Volatile Future of the San
Andreas Fault. New York: Pegasus Books, 2014. Print.
Wiens, Douglas A. Seismological Constraints on the Mechanism of Deep Earthquakes:
Temperature Dependence of Deep Earthquake Source Properties. Physics of the Earth
and Planetary Interiors 127.1-4 (December 2001): 145-163. GeoRef. Web. 25 Apr. 2016.