ylj-thesis-and-contribution

Thesis & Contribution (ylj-thesis-and-contribution)

A YLJ piece lives or dies on a single, sharp claim that a generalist reader can restate. Student editors (and faculty advisors they consult) reject pieces whose "thesis" is really a topic or a survey. This skill nails the claim and labels the contribution; it does not yet prove novelty (ylj-preemption-check) or sequence the argument (ylj-argument-structure).

When to trigger

• You can name the area but cannot state the claim in one sentence
• A reader asks "so what's the argument?" and you give a paragraph, not a sentence
• The introduction promises several things and the reader cannot tell which is the point
• You are unsure whether the contribution is descriptive, doctrinal, theoretical, or normative

The one-sentence thesis test

Write: "This [Article/Essay] argues that ____, and therefore ____." It must be:

• Contestable — a smart reader could disagree; if no one would dispute it, it is not a thesis.
• Generalist — legible to a reader outside the subfield (see ylj-topic-selection).
• Load-bearing — every Part of the piece exists to establish or apply this claim.
• Yours — it is the move you make, not a restatement of existing scholarship.

If you need "and" three times, you have three theses; pick the one the piece is actually about.

Name the contribution (most YLJ pieces blend two)

Type	What it adds	Tell
Descriptive	A pattern no one has named (a doctrine is incoherent, a practice is widespread)	"Courts/agencies are actually doing X."
Doctrinal	A better reading of authority (statute, precedent, constitutional text)	"The correct rule is X, not Y."
Theoretical	A framework that reorganizes how we understand a field	"X is best understood as Y."
Normative	A reform: what the law should be and who should change it	"Congress/the Court should do X."
Critical	An immanent critique exposing a hidden assumption	"The standard account rests on an untenable Z."

State which type(s) you are making — and to whom the normative payoff is addressed (court, Congress, agency, bar), because YLJ readers include all of them.

Stress-test the contribution

• The "we already knew that" test — if a knowledgeable reader says it, the descriptive layer is thin; deepen or drop it.
• The "so what" test — articulate the consequence if you are right; a claim with no stakes is not YLJ-worthy.
• The "compared to what" test — name the prevailing view your claim displaces (this previews ylj-preemption-check).

Checklist

• Thesis fits the one-sentence template and is contestable
• A generalist reader can restate it without your jargon
• Contribution type(s) named; normative addressee identified
• The prevailing view the claim displaces is named
• Every planned Part maps to establishing or applying the claim

Anti-patterns

• A "thesis" that is a topic ("This Article examines X") rather than a claim
• Three theses stitched with "and" — the piece reads as unfocused to a student editor
• A purely descriptive contribution dressed as theory (no framework actually emerges)
• A normative payoff with no named decision-maker who could act on it
• Overclaiming novelty before running ylj-preemption-check

Output format

【Thesis】"This [Article/Essay] argues that ___, and therefore ___."
【Contribution】descriptive / doctrinal / theoretical / normative / critical (+ blend)
【Displaces】the prevailing view this claim challenges
【Addressee】who should act on the normative payoff
【Next】ylj-preemption-check to confirm the claim is genuinely new

Supplementary resources

• ../../resources/worked-examples/01-introduction.md — a before→after YLJ introduction built around one claim
• ../../resources/exemplars/library.md — YLJ pieces grouped by contribution type