I've been reading an excerpt from Clifford Siskin's The Historicity of Romantic Discourse*. It was published in 1988, which probably explains why Siskin uses such a convoluted and jargon-heavy writing style. Example: "I want now to take the opportunity to consolidate a position outside Romantic discourse by locating Wordsworth's lyric turn toward Imagination within it: the turn empowers the discourse by insisting on an exclusivity that denies the historicity of its own criteria for admission." I'm sorry, sir, but I'm going to have to fine you for excessive use of ambiguous antecedents.
Some days I think I should've just majored in Linguistics.
*Yes, the fact that it has the word "historicity" in the title should have been my first clue about what kind of writing it was.