Chapter 26. SUMMARY       Introduction   Basics   Advanced   Samples   Activities --- Advanced Methods of Summarizing --- Other Processes Additional Types of Papers     Rhetorical Modes --- Introduction These advanced ideas and/or applications can help you understand and use this paper's type of thinking better.  For additional information, check the chapter's Grammar Book Links in the right column.                          Other Processes in Summarizing Difficulty of Summarizing Non-Reading Persons, Places, and Events Well This chapter has primarily discussed how to write summaries of readings.  However, what does one do when there is a summary to make of an event, person, or place?  What kind of system should be used? Much of the answer depends on the context: who is the summary for (who is your audience), and what kind of situation or need is involved?  For example, a summary of business event or of a professional meeting is simply a set of minutes.  In minutes, the audience and purpose require that you write down enough of what happened that people who did not attend--or who later need to refer to the minutes as a reminder--can find a sufficiently accurate account of what was said and who did what.   Another kind of summary is an "observation."  Observations are required in many professional situations: e.g., science (a lab report), psychology (a psychological summary of interaction or of an individual's profile), or medicine (a physical summary of a patient's medical condition).  Each type of summary has its own set of standards or rubrics.  In this sense, a non-reading summary and what this Web site calls an "analysis" come very close to each other.  The difference, when there is one, is simply this: a summary attempts to reflect as accurately and fully as possible (more like minutes do) what happens or what a person or object is like, whereas an analysis chooses only certain elements to use in examining the event, person, or object.  The dirence is subtle but real.  If, for example, you were asked to summarize the interaction of a small group of people, you would take a form of minutes as accurately as possible.  If, however, you were asked to apply certain psychological principles of group dynamics to your observation of a small group of people (with questions asking how many interactions are there per minute by each person, would these interactions be characterized as pleasant or unpleasant, etc.), then you are being asked to look only for certain things.  This is different from taking minutes. The irony in this difference between summary and analysis, however, is that sometimes the analysis is what helps us see detail better.  For this reason, in non-reading summaries, using some kind of specific analytical system may help you see more detail in whatever you summarize.  Of course, once you have learned to apply this (and perhaps other) analytical systems to a person, place, or event, you then have more tools with which to create a truer, fuller, and thus more accurate summary of set of "minutes" of whatever you are observing.   So, this chapter now has come full circle.  The introduction claimed that a summary really is a somewhat sophisticated and complex type of paper to write well.  This section now claims that you may need to learn better methods of analytical observation before you are capable of truly and accurately summarizing something that is not a text.  You'll find this true in most professions and in much of professional life, too: one cannot state what is going on with complete accuracy until one learns the tools with which to fully observe. --- Return to top.             Additional Types of Summarizing Writing An Abstract An abstract usually is a summary of a paper you, yourself, have written.  It is not uncommon to see an abstract written at the beginning of a longer research paper, and especially in the scientific and business professions, a summary of this type is used to inform its readers of the contents of the paper so that readers do not have to read the entire paper themselves.  The purpose of this is to help those who want a quick understanding of the contents of the paper: they may want to know no more, or they may prefer an abstract to help them decide whether to read the entire paper.  An abstract most often is just one paragraph, but sometimes is it is several.  Most often, the introduction and conclusion consist of just one or two sentences tacked on to the beginning of the first paragraph and the end of the last.  Otherwise, the methods and skills needed in writing an abstract are much the same as in a standard summary.  In fact, if you have used good topic sentences at the beginnings of your body sections--and good paragraph topic sentences at the beginnings of your longer paragraphs--these can be copied, word for word, to form the first draft of your abstract.  For example, if you have only four main body sections, you may only need four sentences for your abstract, plus an opening and closing sentence, for a total of six.  The lengths of abstracts vary from field to field, so you should ask your instructor or workplace coordinator.   Looking at samples from your field may help, too.   See also "Abstract" in "12. Types of Papers" of OnlineGrammar.org.      Writing a Summary in a Critical Review or Literary Review Critical and literary reviews usually are evaluative reviews of books (and sometimes of plays or movies).  Critical reviews usually are of academic or other expository or nonliterary, nonfiction books.  Literary reviews are of literature.  In both, the work being reviewed must first be summarized.  Some reviewers like to mix their summarizing with their evaluations.  However, many start with a summary section.  For more about these, see the chapters on "Writing a Critical Review" and "Writing a Literary Review."      Writing an "Executive Summary": An "executive summary" is a quick, efficient summary of the main elements of a business or professional paper.  It is placed either at the very beginning of the paper or after a brief introduction.  It often can be simply composed using the topic sentence of each main body section, or of each main paragraph throughout the paper.  It's purpose is to save an executive the time of reading the entire document: this assumes that you have written the summary well enough that the most important points are clear, along with a clear initial premise or problem, and a clear conclusion or resolution.  Do not let an executive summary become too long.  If the reader wants to see more, he or she can look at parts of the paper itself.                     Writing "Minutes" or an "Observation"--See "Other Processes," above.       Writing a Thesis Synopsis--See "Thesis Synopsis" in the "Advanced" Section of the "Thesis" chapter.    Writing a Précis--See "Précis" in the "Organizing" section's "Types of Papers." --- Return to top.              Rhetorical Modes    Also see the Rhetorical Modes page in the "Starting" section. The Modes in Summary Writing If you are working with the rhetorical modes, a summary may use several of them.  Each of these modes has been defined and explained in the "Starting" section's "Rhetorical Modes" chapter.  In a summary, you need to determine for yourself  which modes are being used in the text (or person, place, or event) that you are summarizing; then you should try to reflect the the use of these modes in your summary, whether you do so obviously or subtly. For example, let us say that you are trying to summarize the following paper or speech. What is the primary type of rhetorical mode that it uses? Deceptive Political Labels       by R. Jewell             In the political process, we may find branding some people as conservatives and some as liberals an easy way of distinguishing sides. However, these labels can be deceiving.             Often the political positions of a Republican and a Democrat may be very similar, even though traditionally Republicans are considered conservatives and Democrats liberals. A person who considered himself or herself a moderate might join the Republican Party in one state or region, but in another state join the Democrats. In Congress, in fact, one can find Republicans who are more Liberal than Democrats, and some of our best Presidential candidates have not always known, when first considering running for the highest office, with which political party they would run.             Some critics suggest that the current labels of liberal and conservative do not adequately convey how our elected representatives vote. Rather, say these critics, we can describe politicians by whether they are followers of the status quo or are individualistic. Those who follow the status quo might be labeled as moderates. True individuals, whether they lean right or left politically, follow their conscience or blaze new trails.             In addition, some of the activities thought to be conservative or liberal are inaccurately associated with these two groups. Taxation, for example, however much Republicans campaign against it, tends to be as much or more a Republican activity than a Democratic one. Saving our farms and protecting the U.S. farmer seems to be an activity pursued more by so-called "urbanized" liberal Democrats.             As we can see, we must be careful with labels. This is especially true when using the labels "conservative" and "liberal." The primary rhetorical mode happens in this case to be argument--the making of an opinion or point. But what kind of pattern is used? Is it a debate between two opposing views? Is it a pros-and-cons discussion about differing ways of doing something? Or does it have one main point and then several supporting reasons? When you make your summary, you should use the same parts. In this case, the piece is an argument with a main point and three supporting reasons. Each of these must appear--in briefer form--in a summary of the piece: The thesis of "Deceptive Political Labels" by R. Jewell is that the labels conservative and liberal can deceive. Jewell provides three reasons.  First, Republicans and Democrats sometimes have nearly identical beliefs, though traditionally one is considered conservative and the other liberal.  Second, a more accurate set of labels for politicians might be "status quo follower" and "individualist." (3.) Third, historically some important conservative issues have been fought by Democrats, and vice versa. Jewell concludes that clearly, the conservative and liberal labels are not always accurately used. This principle--finding the basic rhetorical structure of an essay and using it to help summarize it--can be applied to any text.  The more accurately one knows the rhetorical modes, the more easily they can be recognized as permeating all texts, from the overall structure to short passages and even sentences within them. --- Return to top.