jaar-structure-and-exposition

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

1. 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.

1. 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.

1. 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.

1. 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.

1. 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](../../resources/official-source-map.md) — article length range and structure expectations