Anatomical Jargon: Modest or Arrogant?

Anatomical Jargon: Modest or Arrogant?

Jenna Huntley

This paper is a discourse analysis of anatomical jargon in the sphere of forensic anthropology public engagement, including interviews, expert witness testimony in a court of law, and blog postings. The focus of this paper is the usage of standard and common terms for the human body (clavicle vs collar bone) using academic articles from similar disciplines of criminal justice and anatomy, as well as forensic anthropologists work from Tim White and Dawnie Steadman’s student textbooks. Research was also done on public engagement aspects such as podcasts (Ologies with Alie Ward, AnthroBiology, and The Forensic Anthropology Companion Podcast), public blogs (Powered by Osteons, These Bones of Mine, National Geographic, and MAPA) as well as popular True Crime television shows like Bones and Forensic Files to see how the professionals use jargon. This paper delves into public opinions of anatomical jargon to see if the standard is informative and easy to follow or if it seen as boring, off-putting, and arrogant. Based on the lack of academic writing specifically for this topic, a general consensus can be made that the terminology forensic anthropologists use is based on two things: how they were taught and by whom, and personal preference to keep it simple.