What are you trying to do?
Click a function to see the right verbs for the job
State a fact neutrally
Introduce what a source says without taking a position on it
Explain or show something
When a source illustrates, clarifies, or reveals something
Introduce an argument or position
When a source takes a stance or makes a contestable claim
Suggest something tentatively
When the claim is partial, possible, or not fully proven
Report a finding or conclusion
When a source reports the result of a study or experiment
Show two sources agreeing
When one source supports, confirms, or echoes another
Show a source challenging another
When a source disputes, complicates, or counters a claim
Build on or extend a source
When a source adds to, develops, or goes further than another
Acknowledge a limitation
When a source admits a weakness or concedes a point
Tense Guide
The tense of your reporting verb signals the status of the claim
Present simple (default)
Use this for most citations. When the claim is still considered valid and relevant today. APA7 default.
Ohata (2004) argues that Japanese learners face distinct phonological challenges.
Past simple
Use when referring to a specific completed study or experiment. When the finding was at a particular moment in time.
Asakuma (2018) found that /r/ and /l/ were particularly difficult to distinguish.
Present perfect
Use to link a past finding to the present situation. When describing a trend that began in the past and continues.
Researchers have shown that pragmatic failure often results from cultural transfer rather than grammatical error.
Avoid: past tense for general claims
Do not use past tense simply because the source is old. If the claim is still accepted, use present tense.
Wells (1982) described rhoticity...
Wells (1982) describes rhoticity as a key marker of American English.
APA7 convention: Present tense is the default for most reporting verbs. Use past tense only when describing a specific study as a completed event. Use present perfect to connect a past finding to a current discussion.
Strength and Stance
Your verb choice signals how certain the claim is and how much you endorse it
Integral vs Non-integral Citation
Two ways to introduce a source. Each sends a different signal to the reader.
Integral citation
The author's name appears as part of the sentence. Use when the author's identity matters, when you are engaging directly with their position, or when naming them adds credibility.
Thomas (1983) argues that pragmatic failure is caused by mismatched cultural expectations rather than grammatical errors.
Non-integral citation
The author appears in brackets at the end. Use when the information matters more than who said it, or when synthesising across several sources.
Pragmatic failure is caused by mismatched cultural expectations rather than grammatical errors (Thomas, 1983).
Same source, different emphasis
Integral: author prominent
Ohata (2004) explains that the difference in vowel inventory between Japanese and English causes persistent perceptual difficulties for Japanese learners.
Non-integral: idea prominent
The difference in vowel inventory between Japanese and English causes persistent perceptual difficulties for Japanese learners (Ohata, 2004).
Synthesis Patterns
How to bring two or more sources into conversation using reporting verbs
Pattern 1
Two sources agree
Both Thomas (1983) and Economidou-Kogetsidis (2011) argue that grammatical accuracy does not guarantee communicative success in cross-cultural contexts.
Pattern 2
One source extends another
Building on Thomas's (1983) foundational account of pragmatic failure, Nicholas (2023) shows how this phenomenon manifests specifically in Japanese learners' email writing.
Pattern 3
Two sources contrast
While Thomas (1983) defines pragmatic failure broadly as a mismatch in expectations, Economidou-Kogetsidis (2011) focuses more narrowly on the specific features of email requests that trigger negative perception.
Pattern 4 (most advanced)
You add your own reading
Thomas (1983) argues that pragmatic failure is rooted in cultural difference rather than grammatical error. This distinction is important for the present argument because it shifts responsibility from language ability to cultural knowledge.
Pattern 4 is the most powerful. Your voice enters the paragraph not as an opinion but as a reasoned reading of the source. This is what synthesis looks like at its best.
Common Mistakes
The errors that appear most often in academic writing at this level
Using "says" or "talks about"
These are too vague and too informal for academic writing. Every source "says" something. Use a verb that tells the reader what kind of move is being made: argues, explains, finds, suggests.
Overusing "argues"
Not every source is making an argument. A dictionary definition does not argue. A statistical finding does not argue. Use explains, notes, defines, or finds where these are more accurate.
Using "proves" for every strong claim
Almost nothing in linguistics or social science is proven in the scientific sense. Using proves makes you sound unaware of how knowledge works in your field. Argues, demonstrates, or shows is almost always more appropriate.
Wrong tense
Do not write "Thomas (1983) argued..." as if the framework is now obsolete. If the claim is still relevant, use present tense: Thomas (1983) argues. Reserve past tense for describing specific completed experiments.
Using the same verb throughout
If every sentence uses "argues," the reader cannot tell the difference between a strong position and a tentative suggestion, between a finding and an interpretation. Vary your verbs deliberately.