2

I understand that in mathematical writing, it is standard to use "we" regardless of how many authors there are because it includes the reader(s). In the acknowledgements, however, it seems to me that "I" should also be acceptable for a single author but someone whose advice I generally trust said that I should use 'we' even for a single author. I am looking for a second opinion because I disagree with this.

My two objections:

  1. I have certainly seen papers where the authors write "we thank" or "we would like to thank" in the acknowledgements.
  2. While I could write "the author thanks" instead of "I thank," I do not believe that the acknowledgements section needs to be so formal necessarily.

I suppose there could be journals whose editorial styles prefer "the author" to "I" but maybe that does not have to dictate what style I use when posting to the arXiv or in my thesis.

David White
  • 29,779
Trevor Gunn
  • 376
  • 2
  • 12
  • 10
    I tend to use I in the acknowledgements, but really there is no "right" answer and either choice is fine. This is not something I would stress out about if I were you. – Andy Putman Nov 02 '22 at 18:52
  • 25
    There is no rule to use only "we" in mathematics writing. The prohibition against first-person pronoun is a ludicrous practice that has somehow got stuck in certain circles of mathematics, a leftover piece of bad advice from someone's 7th grade English teacher. Please write naturally and clearly, using "I" and "me" and "myself" when indeed you intend to refer to yourself. – Joel David Hamkins Nov 02 '22 at 18:57
  • 38
    Halmos:

    "There is nothing wrong with the editorial “we”, but if you like it, do not misuse it. Let “we” mean “the author and the reader” (or “the lecturer and the audience”). Thus, it is fine to say “Using Lemma 2 we can generalize Theorem 1”, or “Lemma 3 gives us a technique for proving Theorem 4”. It is not good to say “Our work on this result was done in 1969” (unless the voice is that of two authors, or more, speaking in unison), and “We thank our wife for her help with the typing” is always bad."

     – mme Nov 02 '22 at 18:57
  • 13
    We think you should ask instead on academia stack exchange. – mathworker21 Nov 02 '22 at 19:14
  • 1
    @mathworker21 That better be the plural “you”! – Carl-Fredrik Nyberg Brodda Nov 02 '22 at 23:10
  • 6
    @JoelDavidHamkins, I think you mean “the prohibition against first-personal singular pronouns is a ludicrous practice”… –  Nov 03 '22 at 08:50
  • 2
    @mme’s reference is Paul Halmos, “How to Write Mathematics”, sec. 13, now online and originally at L'Enseignement Mathématique (2) 16 (1970), 123–152. –  Nov 03 '22 at 09:05
  • 2
    The "We" vs "I" debate transcends the English language. I was taught to use "we" when I first wrote proofs in my mother's tongue (Romanian). In Latin rooted language, the "I" sounds a bit too personal and conceited. I suspect that Bourbaki played a role in spreading the impersonal "We". Check some of the best math writers (Weil, Serre, Weyl, Siegel, Hardy, Hirzebruch, Dieudonne Milnor, Atiyah, Grothendieck, Feller, Arnold, Kolmogorov,....) , see which style clicks with you and stick with it. On the other hand an acknowledgment is personal and I would use "I" unless I have co-authors. – Liviu Nicolaescu Nov 03 '22 at 10:49
  • 1
    How is item 1 in your list an objection? It uses “we”. – KConrad Nov 03 '22 at 11:36
  • @MattF. Yes, .... – Joel David Hamkins Nov 03 '22 at 12:46
  • @KConrad The objection is that if "we" is acceptable for multiple authors, then "I" is acceptable for a single author (in place of "the author"). – Trevor Gunn Nov 03 '22 at 12:58
  • 2
    @TrevorGunn I see, but keep in mind that writing style is not a matter of pure logic. After all, when giving definitions in math we traditionally write if, not if and only if, e.g., "A group is called abelian if...". I have seen people ask elsewhere online why in math we don't use "if and only if" in definitions, since logically it's an equivalence. The answer is "By tradition that's not done, so you just get used to it". – KConrad Nov 03 '22 at 17:57
  • 1
    I tend to use "we" in the writing ("let us prove...") to involve the reader in the writing. This doesn't apply to acknowledgement, where I prefer "I". However, I remember at least once the published forced me to change to "we" because of this purported rule. [By the way in French we have "On" and "Nous" which is a useful distinction, "on" being more neutral than "nous" (although "on" often replaces "nous" in casual conversation). "On prouve que" is more neutral than "Nous prouvons que".] – YCor Mar 14 '24 at 14:01
  • @YCor, The French "On" isn't much different from the English "One" though it seems to be used more frequently in French than in English, and also has a connotation of slightly closer to "we" than in English (as you point out). – Mikhail Katz Mar 14 '24 at 15:04
  • 2
    Another place where I would use "I" is in admissions of ignorance or in statements of opinion: "I don't know if the converse holds." – bof Mar 14 '24 at 16:32

1 Answers1

10

This question was asked some time ago, but never received an answer. It has several highly upvoted comments, but there is also disagreement in the comments. I think the question is reasonable, given that writing Acknowledgements sections is part of the research process. This question probably could have been asked at academia.SE or MSE, but other fields do tend to use "we" a lot less than math.

First, there are zillions of writing guides online for math. Most agree that "we" is more common than "I" in the main body of your paper (see 1, 2, 3, 4). Reasons given include:

  1. History/culture in math
  2. The author is guiding the reader on a journey, like giving them a tour. The use of "we" brings the reader into the story and makes them an active participant. After all, the reader should be actively following along, checking that things make sense, etc.
  3. "We" is more humble than "I" - if an author says "I have now proven Theorem 2" it makes it look like the author did it all by him/herself, from the axioms. But remember that we all stand on the shoulders of giants. Using "we" emphasizes that math is a collective endeavor.
  4. Relatedly, using "we" emphasizes the results not the person who proved them. Again, that's relevant for readers in the distant future. The idea is that we're building up mathematics as a collective endeavor.

Note that this is not mandated. There are plenty of times when "I" (or another singular like "the author") is appropriate or even preferred. A great example is when you failed to do something, e.g., "The author believes it should be possible to drop the hypothesis that ... but has been unable to prove the result in this generality." This is related to point (3) above. With any writing, the golden rule is think about your reader and do what's best for the reader.

All that said, for Acknowledgements in a single-author paper, "I" is definitely the norm (see 1, 2, 3). The reasoning is that the Acknowledgements section of your paper is personal to you. It's not about the journey with the reader. The point of acknowledging the help you got is:

  1. It's the ethical thing to do.
  2. It's the polite thing to do, like sending a "thank you" note.
  3. Someone who helped you might expect it, and might feel snubbed if they see your paper without it. Relatedly, acknowledging someone's help might deepen your relationship with them, make them more likely to help you again, potentially lead to a collaboration someday, etc. Just like with "thank you" notes.
  4. A culture of acknowledgements helps make our field more cooperative and less competitive.

Since the Acknowledgements section is the main section that's really personal to you, I think it's a great time to show the reader your humanity. Showing our humanity helps combat the idea that math can only be done by a few geniuses who are born with that innate ability. It's encouraging for young people to understand that everyone struggles, that it's normal to ask for help, etc. Acknowledging a helpful interaction with a junior mathematician can also be encouraging for them, make them feel like they are part of the math community, and help them get their name out there at the start of their career. Plus, it can deepen your relationship with that person as mentioned above.

In general, when faced with these kinds of questions, it's a good idea to ask your advisor and to check out what the norms are in the main papers you build on. In my experience, most single-author papers use "I" in the Acknowledgements, or sometimes "the author." Even with multi-author papers you sometimes see "The first author would like to acknowledge..." which makes sense because both of the authors are humans who have different people they want to thank.

Steven Stadnicki
  • 1,785
David White
  • 29,779
  • 3
    At least one journal changed all of my we's to I's, so the practice seems to vary from journal to journal. – Mikhail Katz Mar 14 '24 at 13:58
  • @MikhailKatz Thanks, that's helpful context! Most of my papers are not solo-authored so this kind of issue hasn't come up much for me. – David White Mar 14 '24 at 14:01