TPS News

Answer: We believe the best revision is… “The people filed peacefully into the room and, one by one, seated themselves on the floor, each person assuming the fatalistic posture reminiscent of Mohandas Gandhi.”
我們相信最佳寫法應為 “The people filed peacefully into the room and, one by one, seated themselves on the floor, each person assuming the fatalistic posture reminiscent of Mohandas Gandhi.”

This sentence reduces the word count to 26 from 31 by letting one individual—Gandhi—personify a host of people. As a legendary champion of peaceful resistance and an advocate of human rights, Gandhi’s influence extended worldwide in the middle of the 20th century. The name of this citizen of India became a shorthand reference to global acts of protest that were characterized by non-violence, civil disobedience, and peaceful resistance.
將人群比擬成甘地，字數頓時從31字減少到26字。甘地是印度人，因提倡和平抵抗與提倡人權而聞名，影響力早在二十世紀中已遍及全球。甘地的名字帶給人們既定的印象，代表各種抗議活動如非暴力、不合作主義與和平抵抗等的象徵。

There is nothing especially wrong with the wording of the original sentence, which refers generically to the world’s history of non-violent resistance. It does so by invoking an image of peaceful demonstrators being civilly disobedient and submitting themselves to the reaction of authorities. This general allusion also enlarges the conversation by resorting to imagery. However, the image is not as sharp as a Gandhi reference, and sharpness and specificity nearly always spark understanding.
原句中提到非暴力抗爭的歷史陳述，提及和平示威者發起不合作運動、面對當局鎮壓等意象，措辭乍看之下並無不妥。這只是一般比喻，可將陳述轉化為意象，但該意象卻不如用甘地的比喻來的清晰，而清晰、明確有助於讀者理解句子。

The reference to Gandhi is an arbitrary choice. Non-violent protest is a universal principle that has been expressed in the writings of nearly all major religions and philosophies, including Buddhism, Christianity and Taoism. An allusion to any advocate would have accomplished the same so long as the name of the selected person was familiar to the reader. The consequence of such an allusive reference is a shortened sentence, a sharpened image, and quickened understanding.
當然並非一定要使用甘地的名字，在各宗教與哲學典籍中，如佛教、基督教與道教等，幾乎都看得到非暴力抵抗的宣言與堅持。只要所選的人名為讀者所熟悉，任何擁護非暴力抵抗的人名都可以達到同樣的效果。善用暗喻可以縮短句子，使意象清晰、促進理解。

並非所有與學術議題相關的文章，就能稱之為「學術文章」。本篇專欄將節錄不同學術議題的內容，分析常見的寫作錯誤，並分享潤修與寫作的技巧。
Not all articles written on academic topics are written in proper academic English. In this "This is not academic writing" column we examine short excerpts from academic texts to illustrate common writing errors and explain how to correct them.

Unacceptable 不被認可的文章

“Labeling as a sociological theory is described by two principles; the first principle is that deviant behaviour is defined as deviant by those who witness and label it as such. The second principle is that the very act of labeling behavior “deviant” aggravates the perceived behavior by making the labeled person act out the behavior; generally speaking, then, the labeling theory says that society is responsible for deviant behavior, and for the societal problems that result from individuals acting outside of what is considered normal.”

Poor punctuation and word choices stand out here. In suggesting a theory is “described by two principles,” the writer misuses the idea of description. Principles don’t describe; they comprise. They are building blocks. Better to say the theory is “built upon” or “comprised of.” A semicolon joins the first and second sentences though the third sentence is just as closely related. A period was the better choice. The second sentence is padded; removing “principle,” “as deviant” and “as such” does not weaken it. The writer later declares a labeler is “making” a person react negatively. “Make” is an abused concept. While a person might be “influenced” or “persuaded” to react a certain way by the label, the person is not forced to do so. What other problems do you see?
這段文章在使用標點符號和選擇詞彙上應多斟 酌。作者誤用了說明 (description) 的意思，稱理論「由兩個原理描述」(described by two principles)，原理不會 「描述」(describe) 理論，但可以構成 (comprise) 理論的基石。第一句與第二句以分號相連，但第三句和這兩句其實密切相關，所以應該將分號換成句號。第二個句子太冗贅，刪去 “principle”、“as deviant” 與 “as such” 也無妨。接下來，作者說貼標籤會使 (making) 人有負面反應，make 一字用錯了，人在被貼標籤時，或許會受影響或被說服而表現出某種行為，但它不會逼迫你去做。你是否還發現其他問題？

Acceptable 被認可的文章

“Labeling as a theory of sociology is built upon two principles. The first is that deviant behaviour is defined by those who witness and label it. The second is that the very act of labeling behavior “deviant” aggravates the behavior by creating a hostile environment for the labeled person. Thus, the theory holds that society creates and affirms deviant behavior, and is responsible for any resultant societal problems associated with individuals whose behavior falls outside a prescribed norm.”

Answer: “were” should be “was.”

“The economy of the Byzantine Empires was dominant in Europe and the Mediterranean for hundreds of years, when Constantinople was the center of trading that reached across Eurasia.”

Error: The writer was lulled by the plural word “Empires” into believing that the plural verb “were” would be the correct choice. However, the subject of the sentence is not “Byzantine Empires;” the subject is the singular subject “economy,” which requires a singular verb to match. Prepositional phrases are clarifying and helpful, but when they separate a subject from its verb, they also can be confusing. The key to avoiding this error is always to correctly identify a sentence’s subject. Identifying a correct verb then becomes easy.
作者受到 “Empires” 一字複數形的誤導，以為應該用複數動詞 “were”。然而，本句主詞並非 “Byzantine Empires”，而是單數的 “economy”，應搭配單數動詞。介系詞片語能讓句子清楚易懂，但若介系詞片語隔開了主詞與動詞，便會造成混淆。關鍵就是辨認出句子正確的主詞，如此就不難找出正確的動詞了。

下列的句子中，包含了一個錯誤，可能是文法、拼法或是標點符號的錯誤。我們將提供統一超商/星巴克咖啡NTD200元的購物禮券，給予今天前三名挑出正確錯誤、寫出正確答案的粉絲。正確的解答與獲獎的粉絲姓名，將於明天公佈於本TPS的專頁。請將你的答案寫在下方，獲得免費購物禮券的幸運兒可能就是你哦!
The sentence below contains 1 grammatical, spelling and/or punctuation error. The first three (3) TPS Fans to respond with the corrected sentence will win a NTD200 7-11/Starbucks Gift Certificate. The corrected sentence and the names of the winners will be published tomorrow on this TPS Fans page. Please post your answers below. Good luck!

題目Contest Sentence:

“The economy of the Byzantine Empires were dominant in Europe and the Mediterranean for hundreds of years, when Constantinople was the center of trading that reached across Eurasia.”

很多字詞並非表面所見的意思，字詞的組合會產生不同的解釋。這樣的慣用法，我們稱之為「比喻」。一個成功的比喻，作者本身必須相當瞭解字詞的源起。以下的句子為讀者介紹一個比喻及其來源。
Imagery buries itself in language and takes on new meaning. The transplanted and transformed sets of words are called “figures of speech.” For a figure of speech to be effective, however, a writer must first understand the original meaning of the phrase. The following sentence contains a common figure of speech. Its original meaning is explained.

“The surface of the moon is cratered because it is unprotected by an atmosphere, and unchanging because it is swept by neither wind nor water, a victim of its nature.”
「月球表面沒有大氣層保護，沒有氣流與水分，所以佈滿凹凸不平的坑洞，無法改變，這是月球的宿命。」

Saying the moon is “a victim of its nature” is an allusion to the animal kingdom, wherein animals, including human beings, become entrapped in regrettable situations. Sometimes it is a result of instinct, the natural impulse that drives a thirsty gazelle to drink from a pool too close to a stalking crocodile. Sometimes it is a conscience misjudgment, the decision by a teenage driver to speed or otherwise take foolish risk. These are willful victims of “nature” who have chosen unwisely for one reason or another.
以月球的「宿命」來形容，令人聯想到人類等動物都會陷入困境，有時肇因於本能，像口渴的羚羊到池邊喝水，卻離虎視眈眈的鱷魚太近；有時肇因於無法明辨是非，像青少年會飆車或做出危險的傻事。明知後果，卻還是偏要去做，這就是動物的「宿命」。

To give the moon the attributes of instinct and will is animistic or anthropomorphic writing, attributing life to nonliving objects. The fact is, the moon is assaulted by asteroids because it has no choice. Nor does it have wind to tidy up its cratered face. As an inanimate part of the universe, the moon is always acted upon, never acting of its own accord. So why does the writer subtly make the moon a victim? It is an attempt to elicit empathy. Every writer must emotionally connect, so that a reader (i.e. professor) will care enough to embrace the author’s writing project.
月球沒有生命，是被賦予其本能或意志表現了萬物有靈或擬人化的寫作技巧。其實月球別無選擇，運行時必然會遭小行星撞擊，也沒有氣流可用以打磨被撞擊的坑洞。沒有生命的月球只能承受結果，無法自主行動。那麼何以作者巧妙地用「宿命」形容月球的處境呢？因為作者想引發讀者的同情心，讓讀者（也就是教授）投入感情，文章所言才會為讀者欣然接受。

Answer: We believe the best revision is… “The F-100, an aircraft flown by air force pilots in five countries, shared the flight characteristics of other small-winged jet fighters: It glided like an anvil.”
我們相信最佳寫法應為 “The F-100, an aircraft flown by air force pilots in five countries, shared the flight characteristics of other small-winged jet fighters: It glided like an anvil.”

This sentence reduces the word count to 26 from 32 by comparing a jet aircraft to an anvil. An anvil is a steel or iron block that is used for shaping metal, usually by hammering on the metal as it rests on the anvil. The shop tool is forged of dense material and, therefore, is heavy, which helps it stay in place during hammering. An anvil does not, of course, have wings. Consequently, if it were flung outward by a person of normal strength, gravity would quickly pull it to the earth. Such is the image.
若將噴射機比擬成鐵砧，可讓句子從 32 個字減少到 26 個字。鐵砧由鋼或鐵製成，鍛捶金屬時，通常將金屬放在鐵砧上捶打。鐵砧由緻密的金屬鍛造而成，因此非常沉重，如此捶打時才不會移動。鐵砧沒有翅膀，如果以人手擲出，很快會因重力墜地；鐵砧的意象就是如此。

To write that a fighter jet glides like an anvil imaginatively expresses the fact that the plane’s ability to stay in the air is largely dependent upon the thrust of the plane’s jet engine. The thrust propels the aircraft forward with the wings mostly helping to control the path of its flight. Unlike planes with larger wings and smaller mass, the F-100 did not derive much lift from its wings. Therefore, if the engine quit operating and thrusting ended, the plane would not glide any great distance.
形容戰鬥噴射機如鐵砧般滑翔，讓讀者明白飛機能停留在空中，主要是藉由噴射引擎的推動力，推動飛機向前，機翼主要控制飛行路徑。F-100戰鬥噴射機與其他機翼較大、質量較輕的飛機不同，機翼提供的飛行提升力不多。因此，若引擎熄止，不再推動飛機，機身便滑不了多遠。

It could have been written the plane glided “like a rock” or something similar. The point is, the image of an anvil quickly dropping to the ground clearly expresses the thought that the plane “was only capable of maintaining altitude for a short distance.” A reader quickly grasps the inability of a F-100 to glide. The next sentence should spell out more precisely just how far it might glide, but such explanation would be necessary whether or not imagery is employed.
飛機滑翔也可以用石頭或其他物體形容，不過由於鐵砧快速墜地的意象能清楚傳達飛機「只能在一小段距離內保持高度」，所以讀者很快能了解 F-100 不太能滑翔。不論是否用意象比喻，下一個句子應需進一步解釋F-100 究竟能滑翔多遠。

The best writing doesn’t waste words. It employs words efficiently. The first TPS Fan to complete the sentence below as we believe it should be completed will win a NTD200 7-11 / Starbucks Gift Certificate. Another Starbucks certificate will be awarded to the first Fan to complete it in an alternate way that, in our estimation, also is effective. The explanation and the names of the winners will be published tomorrow on this TPS Fans page. Each brevity rule is contained in 10 Ways to Shorten & Strengthen Your Academic Paper and will be posted on the TPS Fan page as introduced.
最佳的寫作，必須有效選用字句、惜字如金。TPS推出新專欄，請你寫出簡潔、流暢的詞彙/句子。題目刊登於下方，經TPS編輯教授評選為第1位最適解答的粉絲，可獲得統一超商/星巴克咖啡NTD200元的購物禮券；增設特別獎1名，獎項給予提出符合句意又別具創意之解答的粉絲。解答與獲獎的粉絲姓名，將於明天公佈於本TPS專頁。每一項簡潔準則，皆收錄於TPS新推出之「十大簡潔英文準則」，將定期刊登本專欄，敬請密切鎖定、先睹為快。

Rule # 5: Use imagery… An academic writer can tighten his paper, lower word count, and enable understanding by using universal images that communicate clearly and accurately. In the sentence below, the writer did not employ imagery where it was possible to do so. How can the sentence best be written shorter and stronger by use of imagery?
十大簡潔英文準則五：善用意象
學術文章引用眾所周知的意象能讓溝通更精確、文章更簡潔並減少字數，幫助讀者理解文章。下列句子並未在適當的地方善用意象，要如何使用意象，才能讓此句更精簡有力？

題目Contest Sentence:

“The F-100, an aircraft flown by air force pilots in five countries, shared the unpowered flight characteristics of other small-winged jet fighters: It was only capable of maintaining altitude for a short distance.”

並非所有與學術議題相關的文章，就能稱之為「學術文章」。本篇專欄將節錄不同學術議題的內容，分析常見的寫作錯誤，並分享潤修與寫作的技巧。
Not all articles written on academic topics are written in proper academic English. In this "This is not academic writing" column we examine short excerpts from academic texts to illustrate common writing errors and explain how to correct them.

Unacceptable 不被認可的文章

“The Danish study suggested that organic food is not better for consumers. Harvested fruit and vegetables didn’t vary very much in major and trace contents whether or not they were grown and cultivated using animal manure and no pesticides, or were grown with mineral fertilizers and pesticides. When the organically grown and conventionally grown produce was fed to animals, the animal’s retention of the elements differed very little regardless of how the crops were grown.”

This paragraph about food research isn’t unclear, but the writer of it was somewhat lazy. A critical rereading of it would have strengthened the paper considerably. For example, in saying organic food is “not better for consumers,” the writer is guilty of imprecision. It is “not better” in what way? And by “consumers,” does the writer mean eaters or buyers? That confusion is cleared away by saying the food is “not more healthful.” Further along, the alliterative “vary very” is an unfortunate and distracting combination of words. In the same sentence, the “whether or not” is wordy. In most instances, the conjunction “whether” will stand alone. And can you tell me what is wrong with the usage of the word “…animal’s…?” See below.
這段文章討論食品研究，意思還算清楚，但琢磨不夠仔細，若當初作者認真重讀文章，文章應該會更有力、更有可讀性。舉例來說，提到有機食物「對消費者沒有比較好」不夠精確。「沒有比較好」是哪裡不好？而「消費者」是指攝食者還是購買者？其實只要說有機食物「沒有比較健康」就能釐清文意。接下來，“vary very” 字首及語音相同，兩字連用會分散讀者注意力，不太恰當。同句 “whether or not” 也過於冗長，通常用連接詞 “whether” 即可。另外，“…animal’s…” 的用法也有問題，你發現了嗎? 請看潤修後的文章：

Acceptable 認可的文章

“The Danish study suggested that organic food is not more healthful. Harvested fruit and vegetables showed little variation in major and trace contents whether grown and cultivated using animal manure and no pesticides, or with mineral fertilizers and pesticides. When the organically grown and conventionally grown produce was fed to animals, the animals’ retention of the elements differed little regardless of the origin of the produce.”

Correct best answer: Replace “habit” with “habitat.”

“Logging has reduced the Giant Panda’s bamboo-rich habitat, increasing chances that the fascinating black-and-white bear will become extinguished.”

The writer falls asleep mid-word, writing “habit” when the intended word was “habitat.” This might have been intentional, the expression of a thought about the “Giant Panda’s habit of eating bamboo.” However, the rest of the sentence doesn’t support that interpretation or that phrasing. Logging doesn’t “reduce” a habit, though it might “change” one by forcing a panda to eat something besides bamboo. The logical inference from the rest of the sentence is that logging reduces the acreage of bamboo in the high forests; thus, it reduces the size of a panda’s natural “habitat” and threatens the bear’s existence in the wild.
作者大概是寫到一半睡著了，本來要寫「棲地」(habitat)，結果寫成「習慣」(habit)。或許作者想表達「熊貓吃竹子的習慣」，不過從句子其他部分看來這個說法並不成立。伐木不會「減少」習慣，但可能「改變」習慣，使熊貓不得不吃竹子以外的食物。從句中其他部分推斷，伐木減少了成熟樹林中的竹林面積，連帶使熊貓的天然「棲地」(habitat)面積下降，讓熊貓難以在野外生存。

撰寫學術文章時，每字每句都需要謹慎著墨。改變幾個字就會使完整的一句話變得令人摸不著頭緒。下列的句子中，為使這句話能完整且有意義的表達，請選出你認為會令人感到困惑的字，我們將提供統一超商/星巴克咖啡NTD200元禮券，給予挑出混淆字，並寫出最佳替代字的第1位粉絲，最適的解答與獲獎的粉絲姓名，將於明天公佈於本TPS的專頁。請將你的答案寫在下方，獲得免費購物禮券的幸運兒可能就是你哦!
Every word is important in a well-written academic paper. Changing just a word or two can turn a clear sentence into a confusing one. Tell us what word you would change in the following puzzling sentence to render it more meaningful. The first best answer will receive a NTD200 7-11/Starbucks Gift Certificate.

題目Contest Sentence:

“Logging has reduced the Giant Panda’s bamboo-rich habit, increasing chances that the fascinating black-and-white bear will become extinguished.”