TPS News

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 actor harrumphed, then he brayed at the actress and clomped off the stage and into his dressing room, while the audience sat transfixed by the naked display of petulance.”
那位男演員哼哼地火冒三丈，對著女演員如驢子般大吼大叫，接著踩著重重的腳步聲離開舞台回到更衣室，觀眾則目瞪口呆地看著這毫不掩飾的粗俗表現。

Donkeys “bray” and “clomp” and otherwise have a reputation for brash behavior and harsh guttural communication. They also are notably unwilling to act unhesitatingly. Despite these disagreeable impressions, donkeys are deemed to be unusually intelligent animals with long memories and agreeable social manners. Unfortunately, their outward characteristics have been caricatured for so long that to compare someone to a donkey generally is not intended as a compliment.
一般來說，驢子嘶聲大吼（bray），用力踏步（clomp），並因粗魯的行為與刺耳的喉音聞名，而總是不願意採取立即行動，做事不果斷的惡名也相當響亮。儘管世人對它的印象如此不佳，其實，驢子是非常聰明的動物，它記得很久以前的事情，而且對同類相當友善。只不過，驢子長久以來總因外在的特徵遭到打趣，也因此將一個人比喻成驢子通常不是什麼好話。

As used in a paper about drama and acting—“then he brayed… and clomped off the stage”—the allusion to the behavior of a donkey is not meant to be flattering. That the actor “brayed” and “clomped” meant that he spoke loudly and harshly at the actress who shared the stage and then exited noisily, his loud footfalls suggesting loss of personal control. “Bray” and “clomp” are both examples of onomatopoeia, which is a word that imitates the sound associated with it. A donkey braaays and walks, particularly on a wooden platform, with a clomp, clomp, clomp. Some upset actors do, too.
在這篇有關戲劇與表演的論文文章中，“then he brayed… and clomped off the stage” 使用原本用來形容驢子的特徵，可想而知，這並非在讚美他人。Brayed意指男演員對同在舞台上的女演員大聲斥責，clomped則形容他下台時的腳步聲沉重刺耳，暗指這位男演員的自我控制不佳。這兩個字都是擬聲用字，模擬與動作相關的聲音。驢子所發出的braaays叫聲，以及在木頭平台上發出clomp, clomp, clomp的腳步聲，皆暗指著某些情緒控制不佳的演員，行為就和驢子一樣。

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

“Sima Qian's grand work, Records of the Grand Historian, brought together approximately 2,000 years of Chinese history. He did it so well that Sima continues to earn plaudits as a historian, and modern scholars generally substantiate his accounts. He traveled widely on behalf of the emperor, verifying ancient records and compiling current information for historians of today. Sima’s writing and powers of description were powerful, so his legacy is both in how well he wrote and how many records he preserved.”

The principal weakness of the paragraph above is imprecise or inappropriate word choices. For example, “approximately 2,000 years…” is vague. Authority is given an inexact span of years by describing it as “more than...” or “nearly,” as the case may be. To write that the ancient historian still earns “plaudits” (applause) is to compare him to a stand-up comic. Furthermore, Sima Qian didn’t compile “current” data for “historians of today.” The latest information he could get in 100 BC was “contemporary.” And to say he was a “powerful” writer is, well, weak. What other vague writing do you see?
這段文章的主要癥結在於，使用不精確與不適當的用詞。舉例而言，“approximately 2,000 years…” 過於模糊，其它像是 “more than...” 或 “nearly”這類語詞修飾時間，將影響句子的堅定與權威。聲稱這位古代史學家仍然贏得plaudits（掌聲）亦不妥，似乎拿他當成脫口秀演員看待。除此之外，司馬遷並未替“今天的史學家”收集“current（當今）”的資料。他在紀元前一百年收集的資料應該以“contemporary（當時）”一詞修飾才對。另外，只以powerful來形容這位作家的寫作實力，只能說真不夠力。你是否還發現了其他用詞不當的地方呢？

Acceptable 認可的文章

“Sima Qian's Records of the Grand Historian catalogued more than 2,000 years of Chinese history in a manner that continues to earn him respect as a historian. Modern scholars generally corroborate his accounts. As a functionary of the Han emperor, Sima traveled the nation, verifying records and compiling contemporary information for future historians. His prose and powers of description are vivid, his legacy both literary and historiographic.”

Answer: Clearly, silencing the clamoring crowd’s most vocal spokesman would enhance the meeting’s effectiveness.

We believe the best revision is… “Clearly, silencing the clamoring crowd’s most vocal spokesman would enhance the meeting’s effectiveness.” This word choice and structure improves the sentence in several ways. First, it reduces the word count to 13 from 21 without diminishing the impact of the sentence or changing its meaning or tone. The statement remains impersonal—which usually is preferred in academic writing—but is invigorated through use of a gerund (“silencing”) instead of a full infinitive (“to rid”).
我們相信最佳寫法應為 “Clearly, silencing the clamoring crowd’s most vocal spokesman would enhance the meeting’s effectiveness.” 改寫後的句子在用字與句型上有幾個好處，包括字數從21個字縮減為13個字，而不影響句子意義與語氣；句子仍然保持客觀—這是學術寫作中較適當的語氣；而動名詞silencing取代了不定詞to rid，使句子更具活力。

Use of a full infinitive is appropriate in some instances—for example, to convey an abstract thought (“To be or not to be…”). However, as part of an impersonal sentence beginning with “It,” such infinitive usage nearly always produces a statement long on words and short on vigor. Just as enervating are sentences beginning with the impersonal “there,” as in “There is justification for testing it again.” Academic writers wanting to avoid either construction can follow this general guideline: The most active, direct, and compelling language is the surest way to connect writer and reader.
在某些情形下，使用不定詞並無不當—例如表達抽象想法時 (“To be or not to be…”)。但句子既無人稱，開頭又用了It，那麼不定詞會驅使句子呈現冗長，了無生意。there開頭的句型同樣有弱化句子語氣的影響，例如 “There is justification for testing it again.”。學術論文的作者若是想避免寫出這類句子，可以遵循下列準則：主動、直接、具說服力的用詞與用字，最能成為連結作者與讀者意見溝通的橋樑。

Some writers might wonder about using “silencing the clamoring crowd’s…” instead of the more derivative “ridding the clamoring crowd of its…” However, besides being more succinct, “silencing” refers directly to the issue of speech. While ridding an audience of a verbal person and silencing the verbal person produce the same result, “ridding” usually means removal from an audience. On the other hand, “silencing” mostly suggests a cessation of talk, which is the central issue. After all, a vocal person can be silenced through persuasion, shaming, or removal from the scene.
有些作者可能會疑惑，為什麼要用silencing the clamoring crowd’s取代較常見的“ridding the clamoring crowd of its…”。這樣的寫法除了較簡潔外，silencing與演講這項主題也較有關係。從聽眾當中除去一名發言者，以及，讓這名發言者無法出聲，儘管這兩種寫法目的都相同，但前者ridding通常意味著要這個人離開聽眾群。另一方面而言，silencing基本上意指停止說話，正是原句要表達的意思。畢竟要讓一個人靜下來有許多方法，例如說服、使其感到羞愧、或是請其直接離席都是可考慮的方法。


謝謝所有粉絲們參與本周的「簡潔準則：惜字如金」活動，將實用、有意義的知識和大家交流與分享。


TPS Editorial Team

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 # 2: Avoid “It” Sentences … A trained academic writer succeeds by communicating thoughts succinctly, and sentence construction is another key to success. In the sentence below, the writer elected to begin with the word “it” as the subject of an impersonal verb. How can the sentence best be written shorter and stronger while retaining the meaning?

十大簡潔英文準則二：避免 It 作為句首

訓練有素的學術文章作者，能簡明扼要表達句意，成功的另一關鍵是適切的句構。下列句子中，作者以it為句首，卻使用無人稱動詞。要如何修改才能有效地縮短句子，加強語氣，並且維持原本句意呢？

題目Contest Sentence:

“It became clear that to rid the clamoring crowd of its most vocal spokesman would be to enhance the meeting’s effectiveness.”

Answer: “ ; ” should be “ : ”

 

“Legions of officials, unsmiling and somberly arrayed, filed into the room and arranged themselves on the presidium: chairman, vice-chairmen, representatives, and legates.”

Error: In this example, the writer quite effectively describes the people who filled the public space, giving readers a sense of the expressions on their faces, how they dressed, how they moved, how numerous they were, and the titles they carried into the room. However, all of this able description is wasted when the writer inserts a semicolon after “presidium,” causing readers to stumble. Semicolons separate complete sentences that are closely related; in the example, the five words following the semicolon constitute a sentence fragment. Instead of a semicolon, a colon should have been used to separate the introductory sentence from the list it introduces.

在句子中，作者傳神地描繪在公眾面前出現的人物，讓讀者掌握他們的表情、穿著、動作、人數，還有出席者的身分。然而，這些敘述頓時失去目的與用途，因為作者在presidium之後加了分號，打斷了讀者閱讀邏輯與流暢。分號的作用是分隔緊密相關的完整句子，在此句中，分號後的五個字並不是完整句子結構，所以作者不應使用分號(；)，應該使用的是冒號(：)，用以分隔前面的背景說明，與後面帶出的人物介紹清單。

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:

“Legions of officials, unsmiling and somberly arrayed, filed into the room and arranged themselves on the presidium; chairman, vice-chairmen, representatives, and legates.”

 

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

“Chief astrologer Zhang Heng’s wonderful seismograph measured earthquakes and also gave scores on how well a government was working. Why was that? A common belief held that an earthquake was punishment of the gods for bad governing. Consequently, Zhang’s great job gave him lots of influence. His stock rose in the year 138 when he was the only one in the capital to discern a quake a long ways away. Days later, reports of a big earthquake were received.”

 

One of the weaknesses of the paragraph above is the use of vague adjectives, including “wonderful” and “great” and “big.” While the seismograph probably did elicit wonder in observers, that’s not the usual definition applied to “wonderful.” To say a job is “great” is mostly to exclaim about it without describing it. And is a “big” earthquake calibrated horizontally or vertically? That is, was it a mile-wide ripple or a narrow upheaval? Also, rhetorical questions can be effective; the one in this example is just wordy. The paragraph below is a better rendition.

本篇文章的缺點是使用空泛不明的形容詞，如wonderful、great、big等。測震儀的確能讓觀察員大為驚嘆，但wonderful通常不是用於形容這樣的情境。Great主要是用來抒發說話者心中的感嘆，也非具體明確的形容詞。用big形容地震，究竟是指水平影響範圍大還是垂直影響深度深？從文章中無法推斷這場地震究竟是震波長達一哩，或僅是小幅震盪。此外，使用疑問句法有時的確有助於行文流暢，但本文中的提問卻略顯多此一舉。這段文章改寫如下：

Acceptable 認可的文章

 

“Chief astrologer Zhang Heng’s seismograph measured earthquakes—and graded the quality of governance. This was possible because a quake was believed to be divine punishment for poor governing. The commingling of science, politics and religion gave Zhang outsized influence in public life. His standing increased in the year 138 when he reported a quake not felt in the capital. Reports filtered in days later confirming the magnitude and location of the tremor.” 

Answer: “ran all the way around” replace with “circled.”

“The baseball player circled the infield in the pouring rain after he hit the game-ending homer, failing to touch a single base.”
Answer: We believe the best word choice is “circled.” Because the hitter splashed around the diamond in the rain, a fun choice might be “circumnavigated,” which often refers to circling via water. Either choice is superior to the wordy “ran all the way around.” That phrase not only is commonplace, it suffers from having an unnecessary modifying phrase in its midst—“all the way.” Unless otherwise specified, running around something implies running “all the way” around it.
題目中，最能準確表達畫線部分意義的答案，應為circled。除此之外，因為打擊者是在雨中繞著內野奔跑，所以也可以使用較活潑的circumnavigated一字，常意指於水面上環航。這兩個選擇比冗長的ran all the way around好，因為它過於通俗且包括贅述的修飾語all the way。除非需特別說明，對著某物 run around 通常已包括all the way 繞行的意思。

Sometimes extra words are necessary to convey import or distinction. For instance, were bases on a baseball diamond one mile from each other, to run “all the way” would be a notable feat for someone other than a dedicated runner. Using the phrase in that instance emphasizes the distance involved. And sometimes a longer expression is acceptable because it maintains or interrupts a written cadence and, thus, more expressly conveys a mood or thought. While this is less a consideration in academic writing than in literary writing, it is not to be dismissed as a communication tool.
有時傳達重要或區分不同意義時，必須多用幾個字來強調。比方說在棒球場內，壘包如果相距長達一哩，用all the way加以修飾，表示對非職業長跑者而言，跑這段路相當不簡單，也就是說，all the way在例子裡的用途是強調距離。有時拉長修飾語，可藉以維持或打斷句子的韻律，更明確地傳達作者的心情與思緒。儘管學術論文不比文學作品，這方面的考量較少，這種技巧仍然是有效且不容忽視的溝通工具。

Selecting correct words is, of course, rooted in corollary assets of clear writing, such as vocabulary and knowledge (thorough research). Nevertheless, wordsmiths with copious word lists at their command sometimes fail to select the best word. Knowing many words and knowing how to use them are not the same credential. Choosing a word that most accurately, effectively, and succinctly expresses an intended meaning is a skill that is teachable. Any writer blessed with judgment and a good work ethic can master this technique of concise writing.
選擇正確的用詞當然是為了寫作能清楚的表達，所需技巧包括足夠的字彙量與知識（可由研究取得）。不過就算腦中隨時記住大量字彙，也未必能做出最好的決定，因為知道許多字與知道如何使用這些字是兩回事。選出最正確、最有力、最能簡潔表達作者本意的字是可以學會的技能。任何具備判斷力且認真嚴謹的作者皆能掌握簡潔寫作的要領。

謝謝所有粉絲們參與本周的「簡潔準則：惜字如金」活動，將實用、有意義的知識和大家交流與分享。


TPS Editorial Team

TPS 即日起推出全新學術專欄「Brevity: Valuing Each Word 簡潔準則：惜字如金」，歡迎粉絲們踴躍參加。

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 # 1: Select words carefully … A trained academic writer succeeds by communicating thoughts succinctly, and word selection is key to success. In the underlined phrase in the sentence below, the writer did not select his words with brevity in mind. What word / words expresses the same thought more concisely?
十大簡潔英文準則一：謹慎用字
訓練有素的學術文章作者，能簡明扼要表達句意，成功的關鍵是選用適切的字詞。下列句子的畫線部分，表達並不俐落簡潔。用什麼字/字組能更有效率地表達意思呢？


題目Contest Sentence:

“The baseball player ran all the way around the infield in the pouring rain after he hit the game-ending homer, failing to touch a single base.”

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 scientist gratefully slipped into Harvard’s full professorship and, as if the position were a glass slipper, transformed his itinerant career.”
這位科學家滿懷感激地接受了哈佛的全職教席，如同灰姑娘的玻璃鞋般，改變了他四處漂泊的職業生涯。

“Glass slipper” refers to the worldwide classic tale Cinderella, which some believe is rooted in an ancient Chinese story. It is about a lovely girl, her cruel stepmother and stepdaughters, and a handsome prince who finally finds his princess when Cinderella’s foot perfectly fits a left-behind ballroom slipper made of glass. The sequence has become a metaphor for anything of perfect fit and happy ending.
玻璃鞋(Glass slipper)來自於舉世聞名的童話故事「灰姑娘」，有些人認為這個故事起源於中國。故事中描述了美麗的少女、殘酷的後母與姐姐，還有英俊的王子。灰姑娘的腳恰好地套進遺留在皇宮大廳的玻璃鞋，於是王子終於找到了心目中的王妃。這個故事經常用來比喻完美合適的組合，以及帶來的快樂結局。

As used in a paper about an Asian scientist whose career had a prestigious conclusion, the allusion neatly summarizes a wedding of talent and opportunity. The academic chair offered to the scientist was the equivalent of the slipper offered Cinderella: It was only a fit for a certain individual whose unique talent and resume would qualify him or her. As an aside, whether the scientist can turn a pumpkin into a carriage is a whole other question.
本段論文探討某位亞裔科學家，最終獲得了崇高的職位。玻璃鞋的比喻巧妙地暗指這是天賦與機會的結合。出現在科學家面前的機會就像是灰姑娘面前的玻璃鞋，擁有獨特天賦與過人經歷的人士，才得以配得上這個職銜。順便一提，這位科學家有沒有可能將南瓜變成馬車，這又是另一個問題了！