Agent Skills
› brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills
› jaar-structure-and-exposition
jaar-structure-and-exposition
GitHub用于组织宗教研究期刊（JAAR）文章的架构与论述，确保在8000-12000字范围内清晰呈现以论题为核心的论证。该技能仅设计文章结构，不生成内容，旨在优化引言、分析与结论的逻辑流，避免常见误区。
Trigger Scenarios
规划文章大纲或重构散乱的草稿
论证有力但读者难以跟随章节逻辑
篇幅超标需精简而不损论点
引言或结论未能有效发挥作用
Install
npx skills add brycewang-stanford/Awesome-Journal-Skills --skill jaar-structure-and-exposition -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "jaar-structure-and-exposition",
"description": "Use when organizing a Journal of the American Academy of Religion (JAAR) article so a method-conscious argument unfolds clearly within the ~8,000-12,000-word range (including references and footnotes). Builds the essay's architecture; it does not generate content."
}
Structure & Exposition (jaar-structure-and-exposition)
A JAAR article is a humanities essay, not an IMRaD report: it has no fixed Methods/Results sections. Its architecture must carry a thesis-driven argument and make the broad significance visible, all inside roughly 8,000–12,000 words including references and footnotes. This skill designs that build.
When to trigger
- Outlining the article or restructuring a sprawling draft
- The argument is sound but readers get lost in the sections
- Over the length budget and needing to cut without losing the argument
- The introduction or conclusion isn't doing its job
A structure that works at JAAR
- Introduction that frames the field-level problem. Open with the broad question (the reframing
from
jaar-topic-selection), state the thesis early, and signal the method. By the end of the intro a non-specialist knows the stakes and the claim. - Situate, then argue. Position the intervention (briefly — not a survey), then move into the analysis. Avoid a long detached "literature review" section; weave scholarship into the argument.
- Analytical sections that advance the thesis. Each section does work; use signposting so the reader tracks how evidence and method build toward the claim. Keep the throughline visible.
- Conclusion that delivers the payoff. Return to the field-level stakes: what the argument establishes for the study of religion, and what it opens up — not a summary.
- Budget the length. ~8,000–12,000 words counts references and footnotes; reserve footnotes for
substantive points (citations go in-text — see
jaar-citation-and-style), and prune block quotations.
Exposition for two audiences
- Define specialist terms and transliterations on first use so generalists can follow.
- Give just enough context on the tradition/sources for a non-specialist, without lecturing specialists.
- Keep the argument, not the material, in the driver's seat.
Anti-patterns
- An IMRaD skeleton imposed on a humanities essay
- A detached literature-review section that stalls the argument
- Sections that describe without advancing the thesis
- A conclusion that merely recaps ("In this article I discussed…")
- Footnote sprawl or block-quote bloat that busts the word budget
Output format
【Intro】field-level problem + thesis + method signaled early? [Y/N]
【Positioning】woven in, not a detached survey? [Y/N]
【Sections】each advances the thesis; signposted?
【Conclusion】delivers field-level payoff (not a recap)? [Y/N]
【Length】within ~8,000-12,000 words incl. refs + footnotes?
【Next】jaar-writing-style
Section-by-section job sheet
A JAAR essay has no IMRaD scaffold, so each section earns its place by the work it does for the argument. The shape below is common at the AAR/Oxford University Press flagship — adapt it; do not impose it mechanically.
| Section | Its one job | Failure mode |
|---|---|---|
| Introduction | Pose the field-level problem; state the thesis; signal method | Case minutiae before any stake |
| Positioning | Locate the intervention briefly | A detached survey |
| Analytical core (2–4 sections) | Each advances the thesis with evidence + method | A section that only describes |
| Methodological reflection | Make the method visible where it produces the reading | Method invisible after the intro |
| Conclusion | Deliver the payoff for the study of religion | "In this article I discussed…" |
Worked vignette: rescuing a sprawling draft
A 14,000-word draft on "Sacred Geography in Two Andean Pilgrimages" buries its thesis on page nine behind a standalone literature review. Restructuring against JAAR's norms:
- Hoist the thesis. The field-level claim — that the cases pressure the category "sacred space" — moves to the first two pages, so a non-specialist meets the stakes immediately.
- Dissolve the survey. The detached review is cut to a tight positioning passage; the rest is woven into the analytical sections at the point of use.
- Make each section work. Two sections that merely narrated the routes are merged and rewritten so each advances the recategorization claim, signposted.
- Hit the budget. Trimming the survey, pruning block quotations, and converting citation-only
notes (via
jaar-citation-and-style) brings the essay under the ceiling — references and footnotes count toward the word total.
Length and shape pushback → the fix
- "I lost the thread by §3" → add section-opening claims that name the move.
- "Over length, notes bloated" → prune notes and block quotes; weave positioning in.
Hedged calibration: the ~8,000–12,000-word range (including references and footnotes) and the absence of a fixed section template reflect the journal's humanities-essay norm; treat the word ceiling and any abstract or heading requirements as volatile and confirm them against the journal's current submission guidelines.
Supplementary resources
../../resources/official-source-map.md— article length range and structure expectations
Version History
- 1839142 Current 2026-07-05 13:59
