In the case of a self-critical examination you will find that many of your sentences mean nothing concrete. This all you can cut and edit (which is actually the best way to stay within page limit).
(4) Scientific style is not based, in contrast to popular opinion, on the use of unusual words or phrases stilted in ordinary conversation and (a sentence with “those who …” has nothing more scientific about it than the one starting with “those who have…), but just on clarity and logic, targeted as a convenience of language.
In a dissertation proposal, scientific style is also not based on the uncritical acceptance of Anglicisms – http://www.a-mentor.co.uk/services/research-writing/dissertation-proposal/. Certainly there are some technical terms which are not an adequate choice of words in German, but are also beyond the use of abbreviations, which are based on English words in German texts, and can still be divided (as the usual “DNA” instead of “DNS”). There is absolutely no justification for it to take over the English grammar and spelling, which is often introduced in the amateur (re) translation of technical articles (e.g. “swine cells” instead of “pig cells” or even “piggish cells”). Such absurdities can make even a not completely jaded reviewers angry.
Sentences, describing or noting any fact or form, naturally, represents the majority of the text. In contrast to the statements of different concerned politicians, there must be such sentences is in the dissertation as to turn it into a scientific text. This is done either (in the Results and Discussion section) through your own test results (or their documentation, where you should provide the appropriate image point) or (often in the introduction or the discussion) by the quote (at least) of a publication saying that the very fact will be proven.
If you successively carry out several results of a working group that includes at least the end of this paragraph, with the accompanying citation, with the exception of any “declaratory” phrases without quotation marks, which sound implausible or presumptuous (because then it looks as though you yourself have determined the relevant fact).