Is the use of dependent clauses undesirable? (in scientific writing)?

Question

I tend to use dependent clauses frequently in scientific writing. This is especially true when discussing a problem-solving process where the result from one step leads into the next. Here's a made-up example, with the dependent clauses in **bold**. > **To overcome the issue of noise,** we performed a Fast Fourier transform on the resultant time series. **Although the output represented only half of the observations,** we temporally interpolated the remaining observations based on historical trends archived previously. **Moreover,** the use of temporal interpolation allows us to fill data gaps when the detector failed to make observations. When I try to integrate the dependent clause into the independent clause, the paragraph loses the logical flow of problem-then-solution sentence construction and the sentences feels disjointed: > We performed a Fast Fourier transform on the resultant time series **to overcome the issue of noise**. We temporally interpolated the remaining observations based on historical trends archived previously **because the output represented only half of the observations**. The use of temporal interpolation **also** allows us to fill data gaps when the detector failed to make observations. While I do prefer the first version, is it stylistically and technically undesirable to use dependent clauses in successive sentences? Or am I just being paranoid?

Answer 1

I have not found any information or suggestion that dependent clause use is undesirable in research writing. In fact, many of my resource sites have dedicated entire sections of grammar to the dependent clause and their importance. Many of your examples show how the dependent clause offers extra information that the reader needs to know, and in a research setting, that is crucial. The other importance of the dependent clause in that, when used correctly, form complex sentences which show a higher level thinking, because they connect dots otherwise left dangling.

While the use of the dependent clause in either the beginning or end of the sentence is completely up to the writer's comfort and can show the importance they place on the conditional idea, I often weigh each dependent individually and place it according to value. For example:

**To overcome the issue of noise,** we performed a Fast Fourier transform on the resultant time series. - Which was more important? the fact that you had a noise issue? or the fact that you found a way around the noise by performing the FF transform? To me (this is completely opinion) I would leave this statement as it is because it places significance on the noise issue, which was a "cause" for an additional step; thus, the FF transform became the resulting action of the cause. That keeps clarity in the explanation and keeps the reader from having to hunt for the reason you did the FF transform if they happen to be skimming through for information.

I hope this helps you understand the value of the dependent clause, and makes you feel more comfortable in your writing skills. :)