Professor Pedantic 教授的考究學問
TPS的編輯教授在此歡迎關於學術文章的所有詢問，當然，其實他並沒有足夠的時間給你。他擁有終身教職的教授身份，也是著名的學術巨作作者。即便如此，他仍大方地接受你們的詢問。將關於學術方面的詢問寫在下方，你將獲得教授的親自指導，陶冶對學術的探索與啟發。
The professor awaits your query on academic writing, though in all honesty, he doesn’t have a lot of time for you. He is a tenured full professor and working on yet another magnificent academic tome. Even so, he has graciously consented to entertain your question. Submit it and prepare to be edified.
QUESTION: Figures of speech seem to me to be out of place in an academic paper. Such a paper needs clarity and conciseness and figures of speech are neither, and may actually hamper readership of a paper. Am I wrong to believe this?
我認為學術論文不該使用比喻，因為學術論文應該簡潔明瞭，但比喻卻不是，可能妨礙閱讀。這樣說對嗎？
Yes. You are wrong. Next question… Oh, well, I guess we should explore it a little further. What you are expressing is a common misconception. Some in the upper reaches of academia are almost self-conscious in their professional sobriety and seriousness of purpose and believe research papers should be similarly devoid of anything leavening. All else being equal, they will weigh a paper according to its dullness, with the most sodden, uncolorful, and tedious writing tipping the scales of perceived academic “excellence.”
錯了。來看下個問題…好吧，我想我們應該討論一下這個問題。你提的誤解相當常見，有些學術界頂端的人執意讓學術專業看起來正經八百，認為研究報告不應該有任何調味劑。如果文章在其他方面表現相當，讀起來愈索然無味，分數就愈高。最詰屈聱牙、呆板無趣的文章，便認定為學術界極為「傑出」的文章。
But I ask you: When was the last time you entered a store and bought a pound of dullness? I suspect the answer is, never. Why then would you settle for anything less than liveliness and vigor in an academic paper? Your mistake is to equate spare and unadorned language with clarity and conciseness. In fact, bare language can obfuscate and clutter. Short is not necessarily succinct. Whereas a figure of speech not only can express a thought in fewer words than a direct statement, it can convey the thought more completely.
但是，換我請問你，你曾經去店裡花錢買無趣嗎？應該從來沒有吧。那為什麼你要忍受死氣沉沉的學術論文呢？用字貧乏無趣不等於簡潔明瞭，不假修飾的文字也可能意思模糊、雜亂失序，簡略未必就是簡潔。比起直接說明，比喻不僅用字更精簡，也能將想法傳達得更完整。
Dr. Karen Gocsik of Dartmouth College lists 7 principles of writing good sentences in academic papers and number 7 is “Write Beautifully.” She counsels writers wanting to improve their papers to explore such elements as balance, rhythm and… metaphor. I concur. Obviously, figures of speech should not take over a paper any more than anecdotes should substitute for verifiable substance. But employed adeptly, figures of speech can contribute to a paper’s brevity, clarity, narrative pace, and focus—and do it beautifully.
達特茅斯學院(Dartmouth College)的 Karen Gocsik 教授列出寫作學術論文佳句的七項原則，第七項是「寫作優美」。她建議，若想改善文章寫作，應注意平衡、節奏，以及善用隱喻。我同意她的看法。顯然地，軼事趣聞從未能取代論文中可驗證的事實據理，比喻自然也無須俯拾即是，不過若能巧妙善用比喻，文章則能更加簡練、清楚，敘事更有條理，焦點更清晰。
The professor awaits your query on academic writing, though in all honesty, he doesn’t have a lot of time for you. He is a tenured full professor and working on yet another magnificent academic tome. Even so, he has graciously consented to entertain your question. Submit it and prepare to be edified.
QUESTION: Figures of speech seem to me to be out of place in an academic paper. Such a paper needs clarity and conciseness and figures of speech are neither, and may actually hamper readership of a paper. Am I wrong to believe this?
我認為學術論文不該使用比喻，因為學術論文應該簡潔明瞭，但比喻卻不是，可能妨礙閱讀。這樣說對嗎？
Yes. You are wrong. Next question… Oh, well, I guess we should explore it a little further. What you are expressing is a common misconception. Some in the upper reaches of academia are almost self-conscious in their professional sobriety and seriousness of purpose and believe research papers should be similarly devoid of anything leavening. All else being equal, they will weigh a paper according to its dullness, with the most sodden, uncolorful, and tedious writing tipping the scales of perceived academic “excellence.”
錯了。來看下個問題…好吧，我想我們應該討論一下這個問題。你提的誤解相當常見，有些學術界頂端的人執意讓學術專業看起來正經八百，認為研究報告不應該有任何調味劑。如果文章在其他方面表現相當，讀起來愈索然無味，分數就愈高。最詰屈聱牙、呆板無趣的文章，便認定為學術界極為「傑出」的文章。
But I ask you: When was the last time you entered a store and bought a pound of dullness? I suspect the answer is, never. Why then would you settle for anything less than liveliness and vigor in an academic paper? Your mistake is to equate spare and unadorned language with clarity and conciseness. In fact, bare language can obfuscate and clutter. Short is not necessarily succinct. Whereas a figure of speech not only can express a thought in fewer words than a direct statement, it can convey the thought more completely.
但是，換我請問你，你曾經去店裡花錢買無趣嗎？應該從來沒有吧。那為什麼你要忍受死氣沉沉的學術論文呢？用字貧乏無趣不等於簡潔明瞭，不假修飾的文字也可能意思模糊、雜亂失序，簡略未必就是簡潔。比起直接說明，比喻不僅用字更精簡，也能將想法傳達得更完整。
Dr. Karen Gocsik of Dartmouth College lists 7 principles of writing good sentences in academic papers and number 7 is “Write Beautifully.” She counsels writers wanting to improve their papers to explore such elements as balance, rhythm and… metaphor. I concur. Obviously, figures of speech should not take over a paper any more than anecdotes should substitute for verifiable substance. But employed adeptly, figures of speech can contribute to a paper’s brevity, clarity, narrative pace, and focus—and do it beautifully.
達特茅斯學院(Dartmouth College)的 Karen Gocsik 教授列出寫作學術論文佳句的七項原則，第七項是「寫作優美」。她建議，若想改善文章寫作，應注意平衡、節奏，以及善用隱喻。我同意她的看法。顯然地，軼事趣聞從未能取代論文中可驗證的事實據理，比喻自然也無須俯拾即是，不過若能巧妙善用比喻，文章則能更加簡練、清楚，敘事更有條理，焦點更清晰。
Posted at 2011-06-15 14:39:10
最新回應