TPS News

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: In introducing a new subject in my paper, I wrote, “The dictionary defines…” My professor objected to the general dictionary citation. Is it better to give the name of the dictionary?
我在論文裡介紹新的主題時，寫道：「根據字典定義…」；但我的教授對這樣籠統地引用字典並不贊同。寫出字典的名稱是不是比較好？

Giving the name of a dictionary sourced for a particular citation is not a bad idea because being specific usually is better than being general. Such details give a paper weight and credibility. This rule would hold true for other citations, including encyclopedias and other reference materials. On the other hand, if a source is one of meager standing in academia—such as Wikipedia—it might be better to generalize and hope the professor doesn’t notice. In conversation or writing, dropping a name always is done to impress, so choose names carefully.
為某句引用寫出字典名稱也不壞，因為具體一般勝過籠統，有了字典名稱一類的細節，可以賦予論文份量與可信度，這項規則也適用百科全書等其他參考資料的引用。話說回來，如果資料來源的學術性較低－例如維基百科，或許還是籠統一點，然後希望教授不要注意到比較好。無論談話或寫作，提到名稱多半是為了讓人留下印象，所以要精心挑選。

That said, introducing a new element in a paper with the phrase, “The Cambridge (or Webster’s or whatever) dictionary defines…” often is no more than a cliché. In such cases, it is inserted not to substantiate what follows, but to help pad a paper. The writer is not as interested in establishing the legitimacy of a fact as he is in reaching a minimum level of words in a paper. A professor who reads such a padded paper is apt to have a quite opposite complaint—that identifying the source of a citation is another example of writing extra words to say nothing.
儘管如此，在論文中介紹新的內容時，如果寫：「根據劍橋字典（或韋氏字典等隨便一本字典）的定義…」，多半只是陳腔濫調，不會讓接下來的內容更具體，只能用來充版面。作者這樣寫不像是要讓論證更合理，比較像要湊論文字數。教授讀到這樣濫竽充數的文章，抱怨的可能剛好相反－在論文裡寫出這種引用文獻的來源，看起來就是要充篇幅。

So, unless the subject being introduced is especially esoteric and some extra authority is needed to properly establish its meaning, the best way for a writer to define a new element in a paper is to do so in his own words. Rather than use a dictionary as a crutch, use it as a foundation for a definition of one’s own creation. Original expression—imagine that! Academic writers sometimes forget that they are writing rather than transcribing. As writers, they are asked to put their thoughts and findings on paper using their own vocabularies and individual writing skills.
所以，除非你介紹的主題特別深奧，需要其他權威適當定義，否則寫論文時，定義新主題最好的方式就是用自己的話來表達。不要把字典當拐杖依靠，應該把它當作基礎，從中創造自己的定義。表達應該充滿原創力，多用點想像力！我們寫作學術文章時，有時候會忘記自己是在創作，而不是抄寫。寫作時，應該用自己的用語及寫作技巧，在論文裡闡述自己的想法與發現。

Corrected sentence:
“Something in the way the instructor stared at the rostrum told the class that he was bringing bad news; the testing obviously hadn’t gone well.”

These two sentences contain three punctuation errors. Placing a comma after “rostrum” is a case of a writer feeling a pause in his thinking and his writing, which usually indicates a change of direction or a parenthetical phrase (such as this one). In fact, there was no change of direction and no need for the comma. The period after “news” is incorrect, because the second sentence is closely related to the first one. A semicolon is the correct punctuation mark. The obvious clue to this error was the uncapitalized “the” at the beginning of the second sentence. Finally, the second declarative sentence is missing a period at the end. Reading the sentences is much easier when they are correctly punctuated.
這兩個句子包含三個標點符號錯誤。在 “rostrum” 後加逗號是因為作者覺得思慮或寫作產生停頓，通常表示句子方向改變，或接了在括號內的片語（就像這句）。但實際上，句子方向並沒有改變，也不需要逗號。“News” 後也不需要句號，因為第二句和第一句密切相關；分號才是正確的標點，第二句句首沒有大寫的 “the” 是很明顯的線索。最後，第二個陳述句結尾顯然少了句號。句子的標點正確，讀起來就容易多了。

Words, like motor vehicles, need signposts and signals to keep them from running together. Punctuation frees words to move readers, to instruct and inspire them. The following example of writing either contains inappropriate punctuation or lacks marks that are needed. Note: The example may contain more than one punctuation error. The first TPS Fan to correct the writing sample as we believe it should be corrected will win a NTD200 eslite bookstore and shopping mall Gift Certificate.
文字就像汽車，需要交通標誌與燈號才不會打結，標點符號可以釋放文字，讓字句能打動、指引、啟發讀者。以下範例可能標點符號不正確，或少了必需的標點符號。注意，句中可能不只有一個標點符號錯誤。最先改正錯誤，並寫出最佳解答的一位 TPS 粉絲，將能贏得兩百元誠品圖書商場購物禮卷。

題目Contest Sentence:

“Something in the way the instructor stared at the rostrum, told the class that he was bringing bad news. the testing obviously hadn’t gone well”

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

“Liaoning Province delivered up the remains of birds that flew around its skies more than a hundred million years ago. The birds were suffocated when ash filled the skies as area volcanoes erupted and their fallen bodies then were covered by the accumulating ash. The scientific findings in northeastern China were absolutely crucial to showing that birds and dinosaurs were related. Ornithologists had long speculated about there being a relationship, but never could prove it. The discoveries in Liaoning led the way to scientific acceptance of the relationship, and more bodies found later confirmed it.”

This piece of writing on the evolution of birds is loosely written. That is, it plays loosely with facts and with formal language. Consider one phrase: “… birds that flew around its skies more than a hundred million years ago.” Does that mean the birds avoided the ashy, sulfuric skies—flying “around” it—and, if so, why were they killed? Furthermore, how many “more” years than 100 million did they fly? Exactness is preferred, when possible. Why single out ornithologists more than, say, paleontologists? And scientists of any stripe don’t “speculate,” they study. All in all, the writing verges on glibness. A formal rewriting might save it.
這段文章討論鳥類的演化，寫作鬆散、事例舉證不夠嚴謹，遣詞用語不夠正式。例如下面這句：“… birds that flew around its skies more than a hundred million years ago”（一百多萬年以前，鳥類繞著天空飛翔），這句話的意思是，鳥類可以避開充滿塵埃與硫化物的天空嗎（「繞著」飛）？如果可以避開，牠們怎麼會因此而死？此外，一百「多」萬年前究竟是「多」幾年？訊息應該盡可能寫得精確。此外，為什麼特別強調鳥類學家的意見，而非其他學者的意見，例如古生物學家的意見？另外，不管是哪個領域的科學家，他們都不會只是 “speculate”「猜測」，他們會「研究」。整體而言，這段文章不夠嚴謹，需要改寫得更正式。

Acceptable 認可的文章

“Liaoning Province produced the remains of birds that flew its skies 125 million years ago. The birds apparently were first suffocated by ash during volcanic eruptions and then covered and preserved by the accumulating ash. The findings in northeastern China were crucial to establishing a link between birds and dinosaurs, which long was theorized but routinely was dismissed because of evidentiary weaknesses in the claim. The discoveries in Liaoning were the beginning of scientific acceptance of the relationship, with later evidence affirming it.”

投稿學術期刊若不僅能獲得進步的動力，甚至還能發展為個人嗜好，就能讓學者在學術生涯提早創造高峰。發表文章不只是需求，更該是一種渴望。如果您缺乏投稿動力，或不確定自己是否該投稿，接下來的新專欄可讓您重振精力，蓄勢待發。本專欄將詳細介紹發表論文的五大效益，讓您重拾寫作動力，拓展自身實力。Scholars reach a point early in their careers when publication of their scholarly work becomes not only a key to advancement but a personal desire. The impulse to seek publication moves from need to want. For those not yet motivated to publish or who might be second-guessing a decision to do so, the following series might help refocus their energies. Each of the 5 benefits will be presented and explained on the TPS Fan page before being compiled as a series.

Benefit # 4 – Professional growth is spurred
效益四：促進學術事業成長

The decision to write a paper for publication sparks a scholar’s personal development as a writer because the requirements for publication in academic journals are stringent and rather inflexible. It cannot be accomplished without commensurate effort and the brunt of the effort is internal—writing, responding to editing critiques, etc. Once a paper is accepted and published, however, external forces begin to shape a career. Acceptance brings collegial alliances and challenges.
寫論文投稿，可以點燃火花，激勵學者培養寫作能力，因為要在學術期刊發表論文，必須遵守嚴謹的硬性規定，沒有充分努力便無法成功；個人本身必須付出心力寫作、回應編輯的批評等等，一旦論文獲得接受並發表，來自學術同儕的贊同與挑戰等外在的力量，便會影響學術事業。

Peer review leading up to publishing is like the laying of logs on kindling, the final preparation for an academic bonfire. When the scholarly paper is published, the fire is ignited and both heat and light are produced. The heat comes in the form of professional criticism and other challenging feedback. The light is the professional esteem expressed by peers of the realm. Each type of response to a published piece shapes and steels the author for additional career growth.
論文發表前的同儕審查，就像在引火柴裡添加木頭，是點燃學術營火的最後一步。論文發表後，火堆點燃，同時散發光與熱，熱力的來源是專業批評與其他挑戰意見，光芒的來源則是同領域學者表達的專業認可。每一種對發表論文的回應都能形塑、鍛鍊作者，有助作者進一步發展學術能力。

Additional professional development ensues in post-publication in the form of new opportunities. A published scholar is a credentialed scholar and one of the privileges of the credential is professional standing to review other work. In reviewing the submitted papers of peers, a scholar raises his profile in the academic community and begins to build networks. These are the fruits of an author’s painstaking research, writing, and submission of a paper—and sweet they are.
論文發表後，隨之而來的新機會也能促進學術能力發展。學者發表文章能贏得聲譽，這份聲譽有個好處，就是賦予學者專業地位，能審查其他人的論文。審查其他學者投稿的論文，有助提振自己在學術圈的資歷，並能建立人脈。這些都是潛心研究、寫作、投稿論文帶來的甜美果實。

親愛的TPS Facebook粉絲與電子報的訂閱讀者，您們好：

在您的論文創作過程中，總能行雲流水、揮灑自如嗎？還是偶爾會不小心「卡住」呢？文字就像汽車，需要交通標誌與燈號才不會打結，標點符號可以釋放文字，讓字句能打動、指引、啟發讀者。只要您善用標點符號，便可在論文上發揮畫龍點睛的效果！

好消息！自6月11日起，TPS即將推出新競賽「你是善用標點符號的高手嗎？」，期待您一同加入，與我們一起學習，並自我挑戰喔！最先改正錯誤，並寫出最佳解答的一位TPS粉絲，將能贏得兩百元誠品圖書商場購物禮卷。歡迎各位粉絲把握每周一參與競賽的機會。

更多內容，請參閱TPS電子報、Facebook與 Blog的最新資訊。


TPS Team

Correct best answer: Replace “fiend” with “friend”

“The faithful Saint Bernard raised its head till its soulful eyes rested on me and I immediately knew I would not be able to euthanize this old friend.”

“Fiend” often is used ironically. Basically, a fiend is someone or something that is obsessed. The obsession can be either healthy or unhealthy, but always is immoderate. The devil can be said to be a fiend, but so can a golfer who hits the links every day. While it is possible the dog in this sentence was troublesome by fiendishly bounding after children who fell, wanting to rescue them, it is more likely the “faithful” animal with the “soulful” eyes was an old “friend.” The two words give the sentence two different feelings, one gently chiding, the other saddening.
“Fiend”（惡魔、著魔者、成癮者）經常用來表達諷刺之意，基本上是指著了迷或成癮的人或事物。癮頭可能健康、可能不健康，但必定放縱無節制。惡魔可以說是 “fiend”，每天揮桿的高爾夫球手也可以說是 “fiend”。雖然句子裡的狗可能愛惹麻煩，著魔似的跟在跌倒的孩子後面想要保護他們，但這隻有著 “soulful”（深情）雙眼、“faithful”（忠實）的動物比較像是 “friend”（朋友）。這兩個字給句子兩種不同的感覺，一種略帶斥責，一種哀痛悲傷。

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7-11/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:
“The faithful Saint Bernard raised its head till its soulful eyes rested on me and I immediately knew I would not be able to euthanize this old fiend.”

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 bicyclist crossed through the chaotic traffic, weaving among the hurtling cars and trucks like a seamstress in search of a seam.”
「騎腳踏車的人穿越混亂的交通，穿梭在疾駛的汽車與卡車間，就像裁縫尋找接縫。」

The chaos of a busy street or a main artery during rush hours is a dangerous place for a person on two-wheel pedaler. The dangers are exacerbated when the biker is impatient. The peril comes at two critical times—when the bicyclist first enters a flow of traffic, forcing a motorist to yield and give up a lane, and when the biker is embedded in moving traffic and wishes to change lanes. The darting two-wheeled “vehicle” is no match for the heavy machines surrounding it. Ironically, the heavier the traffic, the safer for the biker because heavy traffic is slower.
在繁忙的街道或主要幹道上，尖峰時刻忙亂的交通，對腳踏雙輪的腳踏車騎士來說是很危險的，若騎腳踏車的是個急性子，就會更加危險。在兩個關鍵時刻最是危險，一是腳踏車剛騎進馬路，汽車不得不讓道時；一是腳踏車在車流中，想要變換車道時。雙輪的腳踏車騎得再快，也敵不過四周擁擠的車輛。諷刺的是，交通愈繁忙，車速就愈慢，腳踏車反而愈安全。

In comparing a bicyclist in traffic with a seamstress, the writer plays off the description of the biker “weaving” among cars. The image is of the bicycle changing lanes, establishing a pattern of movement across the traffic lanes, a thread of movement that the person pedaling has envisioned will connect point A and point B. In the same way, a seamstress envisions a path for her needle to join two pieces of cloth, a joining called a seam. The writer plays on the word “seam,” which also can mean a gap, something a biker loves to find in heavy traffic.
本句將騎腳踏車的人比擬為裁縫，刻意將腳踏車騎士的行為描述為在車陣中 “weaving”（穿梭），呈現出騎士變換車道，穿越車陣的固定行動模式，循著騎士眼中連結A點與B點的動線前進。同樣地，裁縫眼中也有一條途徑，針線依循途徑就能縫合兩片布料，縫合處就稱為接縫。作者刻意用 “seam”（接縫） 玩文字遊戲，這個字也有縫隙的意思，騎腳踏車的人在繁忙交通中，想找的就是縫隙。

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: How often should I restate my premise as I work my way through my paper?
寫論文時，請問我應該多久重申一次論文的立論前提？

Restating a premise is not necessary, per se. That is, while a thesis introduced at the front of a paper should be revisited in the paper’s conclusion, the central proposition of a paper generally doesn’t have to appear again and again verbatim throughout a paper. Unless the structure of a paper lends itself to such repeated use of a particular declaratory sentence, subtle allusions are sufficient. They will keep the point of a paper in front of a reader. They will serve as guideposts as a reader moves though the paper, reminders of where reader and writer are headed together.
立論前提本身無須一再重申，雖然假設應該在論文開頭提及，並在結論時重新敘述，但論文中心前提不必在整篇文章中一字不漏地反覆陳述。除非論文結構本身適合重複使用某一句陳述句，否則略微暗示就夠了。這樣就能夠將論點呈現在讀者眼前，像路標一樣在整篇文章中引導讀者，提醒讀者何時應與作者取得共識。

Some repetition of the central purpose of a paper is a good idea, because it gives a paper coherence, pulling it together like a drawstring, capturing and holding a reader’s interest. Without such a common thread running through it, a paper is apt to wander into interesting but largely irrelevant tangents. Such detours do not contribute significantly to understanding. Quite the contrary: The further a writer strays from a core subject, the more difficulty the writer will have smoothly transitioning back. Abrupt jogs in exposition leave readers nonplussed.
重複幾次論文的中心論點是好事，能讓文章連貫，像束繩一樣將文章組織在一起，抓住讀者的興趣。論文若沒有這條共通的主旨，就很容易走偏方向，文章段落也許有趣但彼此缺乏關連。這樣曲折迂迴的寫法對理解沒有什麼幫助，作者偏離核心主題愈遠，愈難流暢地轉回正題。要是突然重提中心論點，會讓讀者覺得摸不著頭緒。

So at key points, allude to the premise using synonyms, or describe it anew in the course of giving anecdotal or clinical examples. If a premise has a key word, drop it in (in proper context) throughout the body of the paper. This subliminal referencing to the premise ensures that a reader remains focused throughout his reading without explicitly being asked to do so. In the end, the logical development of a subject and systematic revelation of new information should reinforce a premise at every step without additional aids, but it is wise to use every tool.
所以，在關鍵的地方可以用同義詞暗示前提，或是在描述軼事或臨床範例時，用另一種方式重複前提。若前提有個關鍵字，可適時於通篇論文中提點。以不引人注意的方式重申前提，能讓讀者在閱讀整篇文章時保持專注，但又不必明確要求讀者照做。最後，若主題發展合理、提出新訊息時有條不紊，每一步都在強化論文的前提，無須額外輔助；不過，善用所有輔助方式也是聰明的做法。