This is not academic writing 學術文章不是這麼寫的
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
“Figuring out the value of objects required that some system of value first be set by someone. This occurred when “value” began to be represented by objects besides the items being valued. In other words, a representation of value—coins and paper money—began to be subbed for actual valued property—a cow, a house, a cloak. In this way did “monetary systems” come into being, replacing the bartering of trade goods like tea and the swapping of prized possessions. Jurisdictions began to give monetary values to things and to make metal and paper money that could be exchanged the same everywhere. This fixed value let people accumulate wealth in money alone.”
While this excerpt about the beginning of monetary systems is interesting, it also illustrates failure to polish a first or second draft. By settling for this version, the writer fell short of producing a finished paper. The flaws begin with the first two words—“figuring out”—which are a colloquial expression of the more erudite “determining.” The entire first sentence is awkwardly constructed, inexact, and wordy. The writer also puts quotation marks around words for no apparent reason; no one is being quoted and the words do not need setting apart. Toward the end of the excerpt, the writer writes about monetary value being given to “things.” Beware: “Thing” is a catch-all word, which is by definition imprecise. Use it carefully, if at all.
本段文章討論貨幣制度的源起，內容有趣，但品質介於初稿或第二版草稿，必須多加修改才能定稿。一開始的兩個字 “figuring out”（搞清楚）就有問題，這種說法較為口語，不如較為正式的 “determining”（確定）。第一個句子整體結構不理想、敘述不精確，而且用字冗贅。在 “value” 兩字加上引號也不明所以，此處並未引述他人說法，也沒有必要特別區隔。本段最後一句描述 “things”（東西）有了價格，請注意，“thing” 是個泛稱，本身含意就不精確，如果使用就必須多加留心。
Acceptable 認可的文章
“Determining the value of objects first required invention of a value system. This occurred when value itself began to be represented by objects other than the items being valued. In other words, a representation of value—coins and paper money—began to be substituted for actual valued property—a cow, a house, a cloak. Thus, monetary systems came into being, supplanting bartering of trade goods and swapping of individual pieces of property. Cities and states began to establish uniform monetary values and to produce metal and paper money for exchange at a fixed rate. These assigned values permitted the accumulation of wealth in money alone.”
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
“Figuring out the value of objects required that some system of value first be set by someone. This occurred when “value” began to be represented by objects besides the items being valued. In other words, a representation of value—coins and paper money—began to be subbed for actual valued property—a cow, a house, a cloak. In this way did “monetary systems” come into being, replacing the bartering of trade goods like tea and the swapping of prized possessions. Jurisdictions began to give monetary values to things and to make metal and paper money that could be exchanged the same everywhere. This fixed value let people accumulate wealth in money alone.”
While this excerpt about the beginning of monetary systems is interesting, it also illustrates failure to polish a first or second draft. By settling for this version, the writer fell short of producing a finished paper. The flaws begin with the first two words—“figuring out”—which are a colloquial expression of the more erudite “determining.” The entire first sentence is awkwardly constructed, inexact, and wordy. The writer also puts quotation marks around words for no apparent reason; no one is being quoted and the words do not need setting apart. Toward the end of the excerpt, the writer writes about monetary value being given to “things.” Beware: “Thing” is a catch-all word, which is by definition imprecise. Use it carefully, if at all.
本段文章討論貨幣制度的源起，內容有趣，但品質介於初稿或第二版草稿，必須多加修改才能定稿。一開始的兩個字 “figuring out”（搞清楚）就有問題，這種說法較為口語，不如較為正式的 “determining”（確定）。第一個句子整體結構不理想、敘述不精確，而且用字冗贅。在 “value” 兩字加上引號也不明所以，此處並未引述他人說法，也沒有必要特別區隔。本段最後一句描述 “things”（東西）有了價格，請注意，“thing” 是個泛稱，本身含意就不精確，如果使用就必須多加留心。
Acceptable 認可的文章
“Determining the value of objects first required invention of a value system. This occurred when value itself began to be represented by objects other than the items being valued. In other words, a representation of value—coins and paper money—began to be substituted for actual valued property—a cow, a house, a cloak. Thus, monetary systems came into being, supplanting bartering of trade goods and swapping of individual pieces of property. Cities and states began to establish uniform monetary values and to produce metal and paper money for exchange at a fixed rate. These assigned values permitted the accumulation of wealth in money alone.”
Posted at 2011-11-24 10:09:42
最新回應