There's not just one kind of literacy though. I have no problem reading books or blog posts on HN, but someone handed me a research article and I realised I struggled to understand it at all and had to re read and concentrate hard. Almost like there was some kind of performative obtuseness to the writing to appeal to an in group of other researchers.
> I have no problem reading books or blog posts on HN, but someone handed me a research article and I realised I struggled to understand it at all and had to re read and concentrate hard. Almost like there was some kind of performative obtuseness to the writing to appeal to an in group of other researchers.
I read all the time, research papers included. What I discovered is that when I arm tired in the afternoons I can read and reread a paper and not really understand much, but if I read a paper first thing in the morning I never have to reread it for understanding.
language is one of the basic mechanisms for social differentiation and status. in academia specialized language is how different disciplines are differentiated and abstruse literary references are how people demonstrate their knowledge and status in the field.
knowing how to read ("knowing your letters") is not literacy. from an academic perspective the majority of the population is illiterate.
Knowing how to read is partial literacy and the first step toward literacy, regardless of anyone's lust for pretense. From an academic perspective most academics are illiterate.
Ordinary language is highly ambiguous, so specific domains have to use words that have been disambiguated for the domain so that people inside the domain can clearly communicate with each other.
Two chemist aren't doing performance art talking to each other because I am uneducated in chemistry so can't follow the conversation.