What does that mean? 你真的瞭解這個慣用語嗎?
2011-06-16
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 laboratory team approached the project as if it were an onion, systematically exploring its multiple facets till their eyes were red with exhaustion.”
實驗室研究團隊處理問題就像是處理洋蔥，系統性地探討各個層面，直到眼睛疲憊發紅。
Onions are vegetables that are recognizably layered. Each layer lends itself to peeling away to expose another layer underneath. Because the onion cells, when cut, produce a lighter-than-air gas, the peeling off of the layers irritates the eyes. The irritation brings tears, which are produced to wash away the irritation. These two characteristics of most onions—multi-layered composition and irritation of the eyes of anyone handling them—are universally recognized.
洋蔥這種蔬菜最明顯的特質，就是具有許多層次，每撥開一層，就會看到下面一層。此外，切開洋蔥會產生一種比空氣輕的氣體，所以剝洋蔥會讓眼睛不舒服，產生淚液，以洗掉刺激物。一般人都很清楚洋蔥這兩種特質，也就是多層次的結構以及刺激眼睛的特性。
In saying scientists approached a project “as if it were an onion,” the writer used a simile to compare the methodical deconstruction of a complex object or compound to the peeling of the vegetable. Layer by layer, the scientists sorted and scrutinized the object or compound and recorded their findings. That they continued their quest till their “eyes were red” is an ancillary allusion to the onion and its capacity to stimulate tear glands in eyes. The laboratory experiment may not actually produce an irritating gas, but hours of squinting through microscopes can produce something similar, eyestrain.
用處理洋蔥(as if it were an onion)比喻處理問題，就是將處理複雜物質及化合物時抽絲剝繭的方法，用剝洋蔥來相比擬，如同科學家對事件的逐層處理、仔細檢視物質與化合物，並記錄研究發現。這裡提及科學家持續探索，直至「眼睛發紅」，同樣指涉洋蔥刺激淚腺的特點。研究室所進行的實驗可能未必真的產生刺激氣體，但對著顯微鏡連續看好幾小時的確會造成類似的結果，使眼睛疲勞。
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 laboratory team approached the project as if it were an onion, systematically exploring its multiple facets till their eyes were red with exhaustion.”
實驗室研究團隊處理問題就像是處理洋蔥，系統性地探討各個層面，直到眼睛疲憊發紅。
Onions are vegetables that are recognizably layered. Each layer lends itself to peeling away to expose another layer underneath. Because the onion cells, when cut, produce a lighter-than-air gas, the peeling off of the layers irritates the eyes. The irritation brings tears, which are produced to wash away the irritation. These two characteristics of most onions—multi-layered composition and irritation of the eyes of anyone handling them—are universally recognized.
洋蔥這種蔬菜最明顯的特質，就是具有許多層次，每撥開一層，就會看到下面一層。此外，切開洋蔥會產生一種比空氣輕的氣體，所以剝洋蔥會讓眼睛不舒服，產生淚液，以洗掉刺激物。一般人都很清楚洋蔥這兩種特質，也就是多層次的結構以及刺激眼睛的特性。
In saying scientists approached a project “as if it were an onion,” the writer used a simile to compare the methodical deconstruction of a complex object or compound to the peeling of the vegetable. Layer by layer, the scientists sorted and scrutinized the object or compound and recorded their findings. That they continued their quest till their “eyes were red” is an ancillary allusion to the onion and its capacity to stimulate tear glands in eyes. The laboratory experiment may not actually produce an irritating gas, but hours of squinting through microscopes can produce something similar, eyestrain.
用處理洋蔥(as if it were an onion)比喻處理問題，就是將處理複雜物質及化合物時抽絲剝繭的方法，用剝洋蔥來相比擬，如同科學家對事件的逐層處理、仔細檢視物質與化合物，並記錄研究發現。這裡提及科學家持續探索，直至「眼睛發紅」，同樣指涉洋蔥刺激淚腺的特點。研究室所進行的實驗可能未必真的產生刺激氣體，但對著顯微鏡連續看好幾小時的確會造成類似的結果，使眼睛疲勞。
Last Update at 2011-06-16 PM 2:51 | 0 Comments
Professor Pedantic 教授的考究學問
2011-06-15
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。
Last Update at 2011-06-15 PM 2:39 | 0 Comments
TPS 暑期英文潤稿優惠服務與免費贈書活動：想讓你的英文論文登上國際期刊嗎?
2011-06-14親愛的TPS粉絲們：
放暑假囉!
TPS為大家推出暑期活動，在歡樂假期之餘，也要繼續耕耘學術知識，請參閱活動DM：
http://hpcgm.com/publishedscholar/20110603/index.htm
TPS推出英文專業潤稿暑期優惠服務，並且開放免費致贈TPS總監親自編撰的「10 個導致退稿的常見寫作錯誤 10 Common Writing Errors that Can Spell “Rejection” for Your Manuscript」書冊，相信目前已有許多位粉絲獲得贈書、收穫滿滿。這一波的贈書活動，自即日起至7月15日止，只要點選「免費索取學術知識書冊」並填寫寄送資訊，就能獲得精心編著的實用寫作技巧書冊，僅限量150本，請把握機會!
TPS Team
Last Update at 2011-06-14 PM 2:35 | 0 Comments
0613 Brevity: Valuing Each Word－Answer and Explanation 簡潔準則：惜字如金 正確解答
2011-06-14
Answer: We believe the best revision is… “Fifty years ago, computers were large compared to today’s models, unreliable, difficult to operate, and considered a technology without a future.”
我們相信最佳寫法應為 “Fifty years ago, computers were large compared to today’s models, unreliable, difficult to operate, and considered a technology without a future.”
This sentence reduces the word count to 21 from 28, mostly by eliminating weasel words. What is weasel wording? It is phraseology that hedges rather than declares. In this case, the writer hedged by writing earlier computers were “quite large,” rather than flat-out saying they were large, especially when placed side by side with today’s hand-held units. Other weasel words are “pretty” and “very” and “almost.” While such modifiers have their legitimate uses, they are only fillers in this sentence.
剔除遁辭後，句子從28個字變成21個字。什麼是遁辭？使用遁辭就是用字閃爍其詞，不直接說明。例句裡，作者取巧地說，和今天的手提電腦相比，早期的電腦「相當大」(“quite large”) ，而非直截了當地說電腦很大。其他遁辭還有 “pretty”、“very” 與 “almost”。這些修飾語有其適切的用法，但在本例中只是濫竽充數。
The introductory phrase, “About a half century ago,” is unnecessarily vague. A quick check of computer history shows that it would have been accurate to say “Fifty years ago…,” or for that matter 55 years ago. Instead, the lazy writer opted to use tired and imprecise “about” phrasing. In another place, the writer used two passive words—“by comparison”—instead of “compared,” a more forceful expression. Not only does the passive construction slow down a reader, it lengthens the sentence without vivifying it.
開頭句 “About a half century ago” 很模糊，可以更精準的表達，稍微查證一下電腦的歷史，就知道用 50 年前 (“Fifty years ago…,”) 才正確，更精確點，應該說 55 年前。但是作者卻偷懶，用老套含糊的 “about” 表達；此外，作者還用了被動說法 “by comparison”，而非更有力的 “compared”。被動結構不僅讓人讀得慢，也拉長句子，難以讓句子更生動。
Writers make a mistake when they believe readers of academic papers—usually professors—are OK with trudging to a conclusion, rather than being propelled to the end by active, direct word choices. Writers also err in believing that dropping in modifiers and otherwise fudging instead of writing with exactness goes unnoticed by these same professors. This is a helpful rule of thumb for a writer of a paper: The heavier and more insipid the subject, the more direct and animated the writing must be. Content is gold, but gold is heavy; lift it with exact, robust language.
作者以為學術論文的讀者－通常是教授－願意自己費盡心力找出結論，而不需透過主動、直接的用字帶領，一路導向結論；也以為用字不精確、動不動就使用修飾語或是含糊其詞，能逃過教授的法眼。這些想法都錯了。寫作論文請把握一項大原則：主題愈枯燥乏味，用字就要愈直接生動。內容是金，金子重量可不輕，謹記用字要精確堅定，才能讓讀者立即捕捉你的重點。
我們相信最佳寫法應為 “Fifty years ago, computers were large compared to today’s models, unreliable, difficult to operate, and considered a technology without a future.”
This sentence reduces the word count to 21 from 28, mostly by eliminating weasel words. What is weasel wording? It is phraseology that hedges rather than declares. In this case, the writer hedged by writing earlier computers were “quite large,” rather than flat-out saying they were large, especially when placed side by side with today’s hand-held units. Other weasel words are “pretty” and “very” and “almost.” While such modifiers have their legitimate uses, they are only fillers in this sentence.
剔除遁辭後，句子從28個字變成21個字。什麼是遁辭？使用遁辭就是用字閃爍其詞，不直接說明。例句裡，作者取巧地說，和今天的手提電腦相比，早期的電腦「相當大」(“quite large”) ，而非直截了當地說電腦很大。其他遁辭還有 “pretty”、“very” 與 “almost”。這些修飾語有其適切的用法，但在本例中只是濫竽充數。
The introductory phrase, “About a half century ago,” is unnecessarily vague. A quick check of computer history shows that it would have been accurate to say “Fifty years ago…,” or for that matter 55 years ago. Instead, the lazy writer opted to use tired and imprecise “about” phrasing. In another place, the writer used two passive words—“by comparison”—instead of “compared,” a more forceful expression. Not only does the passive construction slow down a reader, it lengthens the sentence without vivifying it.
開頭句 “About a half century ago” 很模糊，可以更精準的表達，稍微查證一下電腦的歷史，就知道用 50 年前 (“Fifty years ago…,”) 才正確，更精確點，應該說 55 年前。但是作者卻偷懶，用老套含糊的 “about” 表達；此外，作者還用了被動說法 “by comparison”，而非更有力的 “compared”。被動結構不僅讓人讀得慢，也拉長句子，難以讓句子更生動。
Writers make a mistake when they believe readers of academic papers—usually professors—are OK with trudging to a conclusion, rather than being propelled to the end by active, direct word choices. Writers also err in believing that dropping in modifiers and otherwise fudging instead of writing with exactness goes unnoticed by these same professors. This is a helpful rule of thumb for a writer of a paper: The heavier and more insipid the subject, the more direct and animated the writing must be. Content is gold, but gold is heavy; lift it with exact, robust language.
作者以為學術論文的讀者－通常是教授－願意自己費盡心力找出結論，而不需透過主動、直接的用字帶領，一路導向結論；也以為用字不精確、動不動就使用修飾語或是含糊其詞，能逃過教授的法眼。這些想法都錯了。寫作論文請把握一項大原則：主題愈枯燥乏味，用字就要愈直接生動。內容是金，金子重量可不輕，謹記用字要精確堅定，才能讓讀者立即捕捉你的重點。
Last Update at 2011-06-14 PM 12:36 | 0 Comments
0613 Brevity: Valuing Each Word－Win Your NTD200 7-11/Starbucks Prize! 簡潔準則：惜字如金 有機會獲得價值200元統一超商/星巴克咖啡禮券!
2011-06-13The 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 # 3: Don’t write tentatively… If a trained academic writer knows his subject, his writing will reflect it. Tentative writing indicates thinking that is not fully developed, and generally results in wordiness. In the sentence below, the writer did not write assuredly. How can the sentence best be written shorter and stronger while retaining its meaning?
十大簡潔英文準則三：想清楚再下筆
訓練有素的學術作者會在作品中反映出對主題的認識。沒想清楚就動筆，表示想法尚未思考周延，而且文句通常較冗贅。以下這句話作者寫起來並沒有把握，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:
“About a half century ago, computers were quite large by comparison to today’s computers, pretty unreliable, very difficult to operate, and almost considered a technology without a future.”
Last Update at 2011-06-13 AM 11:03 | 0 Comments
This is not academic writing 學術文章不是這麼寫的
2011-06-09
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
“When King Ramses II died in about 1213 BC, tumult spread across the Mediterranean region. Some seafaring warriors plotted with Egyptian rivals and attacked Egypt to test the power of Ramses’ successor, King Merneptah. The new king was the winner. What was behind the attack? It was because of hungry people. Seizing the Egyptian grain-producing area seems to have been the reason for it; this is more evidence that, yes, war can be motivated by the pure need for conquest, but it also can be about meeting basic needs.”
The paragraph above contains both glaring and subtle flaws. An example: “…about 1213 BC” is a classic misuse of the word “about.” If the battle in question can be linked to a particular year in ancient history (1213 BC), there is no “about” about it. Also, “The new king was the winner” is an imprecise summation. Better wording is, “The new king’s forces prevailed”—which also gets away from the notion that wars have winners. To say the war was “because of hungry people” is sloppy expression. Soldiers did the fighting, after all, and they often were among the best fed citizens. A better formulation is to answer the rhetorical question in a single word—“Hunger.” And the “it” in the sentence that ends … “the reason for it” has no certain antecedent. In short, the paragraph has problems. See the improved version below.
這篇文章的錯誤有些很明顯，有些則不易察覺。例如：“…about 1213 BC” 這句就犯了 about 用法的典型錯誤。如果所提的戰爭發生在過去明確的年份 (1213 BC)，就不應該用 about。此外，“The new king was the winner” 也不精確，較佳的說法是 “The new king’s forces prevailed”，這樣的說法也避免了戰爭有無贏家的問題。提到戰爭是 “because of hungry people” 同樣有欠周延，畢竟打仗的是士兵，通常不會讓士兵餓肚子，所以回答該問句的理想答案可用一字以蔽之：“Hunger”。還有，以 “…the reason for it” 結尾，但it並沒有明確的先行詞。簡言之，這段文章有許多問題。以下是修改後的文章：
Acceptable 認可的文章
“When King Ramses II died in 1213 BC, tumult spread across the Mediterranean region. Soon, some seafaring warriors allied themselves with Egyptian rivals and attacked Egypt to test the mettle of Ramses’ successor, King Merneptah. The new king’s forces prevailed. What was behind the attack? Hunger. Seizing the Egyptian breadbasket seems to have been the strategic goal, which is additional evidence that war is as often about meeting basic needs as it is about pure conquest.”
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
“When King Ramses II died in about 1213 BC, tumult spread across the Mediterranean region. Some seafaring warriors plotted with Egyptian rivals and attacked Egypt to test the power of Ramses’ successor, King Merneptah. The new king was the winner. What was behind the attack? It was because of hungry people. Seizing the Egyptian grain-producing area seems to have been the reason for it; this is more evidence that, yes, war can be motivated by the pure need for conquest, but it also can be about meeting basic needs.”
The paragraph above contains both glaring and subtle flaws. An example: “…about 1213 BC” is a classic misuse of the word “about.” If the battle in question can be linked to a particular year in ancient history (1213 BC), there is no “about” about it. Also, “The new king was the winner” is an imprecise summation. Better wording is, “The new king’s forces prevailed”—which also gets away from the notion that wars have winners. To say the war was “because of hungry people” is sloppy expression. Soldiers did the fighting, after all, and they often were among the best fed citizens. A better formulation is to answer the rhetorical question in a single word—“Hunger.” And the “it” in the sentence that ends … “the reason for it” has no certain antecedent. In short, the paragraph has problems. See the improved version below.
這篇文章的錯誤有些很明顯，有些則不易察覺。例如：“…about 1213 BC” 這句就犯了 about 用法的典型錯誤。如果所提的戰爭發生在過去明確的年份 (1213 BC)，就不應該用 about。此外，“The new king was the winner” 也不精確，較佳的說法是 “The new king’s forces prevailed”，這樣的說法也避免了戰爭有無贏家的問題。提到戰爭是 “because of hungry people” 同樣有欠周延，畢竟打仗的是士兵，通常不會讓士兵餓肚子，所以回答該問句的理想答案可用一字以蔽之：“Hunger”。還有，以 “…the reason for it” 結尾，但it並沒有明確的先行詞。簡言之，這段文章有許多問題。以下是修改後的文章：
Acceptable 認可的文章
“When King Ramses II died in 1213 BC, tumult spread across the Mediterranean region. Soon, some seafaring warriors allied themselves with Egyptian rivals and attacked Egypt to test the mettle of Ramses’ successor, King Merneptah. The new king’s forces prevailed. What was behind the attack? Hunger. Seizing the Egyptian breadbasket seems to have been the strategic goal, which is additional evidence that war is as often about meeting basic needs as it is about pure conquest.”
Last Update at 2011-06-09 PM 6:23 | 0 Comments
12 Recommendations to Help you Submit a Conventional and Acceptable Paper Tip 12: Neatly duplicate and submit the completed paper 12個獲得學術認可的論文撰寫技巧之十二：列印乾淨整齊的論文並繳交
2011-06-08
教授學者們通常會規範寫作標準，制定如何撰寫碩博士論文與學術文章以及格式要求。學術界所評定的標準植基於以何種撰寫方式會被認可，何種撰寫方式則會被拒絕。本專欄提出「12個獲得學術認可的論文撰寫技巧」，幫助你寫出符合規範與認可標準的文章。
The community of scholars has rules that govern how dissertations, theses and other academic papers are composed and formatted. Academic convention has established what is acceptable and what is not. Following is one of 12 recommendations to help you submit a conventional and acceptable paper. Each tip in the series will appear on the TPS Fans page.
Tip # 12 – Neatly duplicate and submit the completed paper
技巧十二：列印乾淨整齊的論文並繳交
A completed academic paper is like any other printed communication: Until it is submitted to a publisher (or professor or agent), it is still a private document. It has no public standing. Until a professor actually sees a completed academic paper, it is only an expectation. So, handing it in (on time, by the way) is a meaningful threshold for a writer. It should be crossed thoughtfully.
完成並印出的學術論文就像一般的印刷品，在交給出版商（或教授、經紀人）之前，都只是私人文件，不具公眾地位。在教授真正看到完成的論文前，論文都只是個想法。所以別忘了，繳出論文後你才稱得上作者，而且最好準時交。繳出論文之前有許多事項要注意。
Look at the paper—literally the paper, the first visual impression a professor has of a completed assignment. It is true that a paper will immediately stand out if it is printed on pink stock with purple trim, but that usually is a mistake. A professor is interested in content, and a frivolous or unusual package only distracts from that essence. Plain packaging always is the safest choice.
仔細看看論文的紙張，感覺教授第一眼看到文章的印象。如果論文印在粉紅色的紙上，加上紫色的邊框，的確能立刻引人注目，但通常不會給人好印象。教授終究關注的還是文章內容，隨便或誇張的外觀只會讓人分心。謹慎起見，應保持外觀簡單。
Clean packaging also adds to the eye-appeal of a paper. While this should be obvious, earnest students sometimes lose perspective about such things. If a page of an academic paper is marked by white-out corrections, smudges, or fingerprints, it is not ready for submission. Re-print it. Professors like clean pages, in part so their own notations will not have to compete for attention.
顯而易見的，外觀乾淨會讓論文更吸引人，但再謹慎的學生也常忽略了這點。只要論文某處仍有白色修正液的痕跡、污漬或指紋，就不應該交出去，應該重新列印。保持頁面乾淨，不要讓污漬影響教授閱讀。
Computer-printed papers are the standard at this time, with laser printers creating crisp, standardized printed matter. Copiers produce facsimiles nearly as sharp. Academic writers should not settle for less than this in reproducing the pages of their papers. The goal is legible, inviting text that doesn’t impede the flow of content to the eyes of a serious, critical reader.
目前大多使用電腦列印，雷射印表機字體清晰、合乎標準，傳真印表機的品質略遜一籌，但也過得去，學術論文的列印品質不該低於這個標準。文字應該清晰易讀，讓仔細認真的讀者能流暢閱讀。
Finally, a loose bundle of papers plopped on the desk of an instructor probably is not going to be awarded a top grade. The pages should be stapled, paper-clipped, or bound between front and back covers—whichever method is requested by an assigning professor. Have faith that a paper is so compelling that it is going to be read… and re-read. Make it easy for a professor to do so.
最後，如果漫不經心地把一疊散亂的紙張扔到教授桌上，大概拿不到什麼理想的成績。論文應該根據教授要求，用釘書機裝訂、用夾子夾起，或以封面、封底夾訂。引人入勝的論文值得一讀再讀，完善的裝訂才能方便教授閱讀。
A writer who has followed the foregoing tips on topic-choosing, researching, writing, formatting, proofreading, and presenting an academic paper has now completed the project. By not taking shortcuts, the writer has arrived at this point better informed and more highly skilled than those who did not. The reward is a superior grade and confidence in moving forward. Congratulations.
循著之前描述的技巧，選擇題目、進行研究、寫作文章、遵循格式、仔細校對、注意論文外觀並繳交，論文寫作計畫至此大功告成。若作者循序漸進、不抄近路，現在應已知識豐富、技巧卓越，獲得理想的好成績，並能自信滿滿繼續前進。恭喜你!
The community of scholars has rules that govern how dissertations, theses and other academic papers are composed and formatted. Academic convention has established what is acceptable and what is not. Following is one of 12 recommendations to help you submit a conventional and acceptable paper. Each tip in the series will appear on the TPS Fans page.
Tip # 12 – Neatly duplicate and submit the completed paper
技巧十二：列印乾淨整齊的論文並繳交
A completed academic paper is like any other printed communication: Until it is submitted to a publisher (or professor or agent), it is still a private document. It has no public standing. Until a professor actually sees a completed academic paper, it is only an expectation. So, handing it in (on time, by the way) is a meaningful threshold for a writer. It should be crossed thoughtfully.
完成並印出的學術論文就像一般的印刷品，在交給出版商（或教授、經紀人）之前，都只是私人文件，不具公眾地位。在教授真正看到完成的論文前，論文都只是個想法。所以別忘了，繳出論文後你才稱得上作者，而且最好準時交。繳出論文之前有許多事項要注意。
Look at the paper—literally the paper, the first visual impression a professor has of a completed assignment. It is true that a paper will immediately stand out if it is printed on pink stock with purple trim, but that usually is a mistake. A professor is interested in content, and a frivolous or unusual package only distracts from that essence. Plain packaging always is the safest choice.
仔細看看論文的紙張，感覺教授第一眼看到文章的印象。如果論文印在粉紅色的紙上，加上紫色的邊框，的確能立刻引人注目，但通常不會給人好印象。教授終究關注的還是文章內容，隨便或誇張的外觀只會讓人分心。謹慎起見，應保持外觀簡單。
Clean packaging also adds to the eye-appeal of a paper. While this should be obvious, earnest students sometimes lose perspective about such things. If a page of an academic paper is marked by white-out corrections, smudges, or fingerprints, it is not ready for submission. Re-print it. Professors like clean pages, in part so their own notations will not have to compete for attention.
顯而易見的，外觀乾淨會讓論文更吸引人，但再謹慎的學生也常忽略了這點。只要論文某處仍有白色修正液的痕跡、污漬或指紋，就不應該交出去，應該重新列印。保持頁面乾淨，不要讓污漬影響教授閱讀。
Computer-printed papers are the standard at this time, with laser printers creating crisp, standardized printed matter. Copiers produce facsimiles nearly as sharp. Academic writers should not settle for less than this in reproducing the pages of their papers. The goal is legible, inviting text that doesn’t impede the flow of content to the eyes of a serious, critical reader.
目前大多使用電腦列印，雷射印表機字體清晰、合乎標準，傳真印表機的品質略遜一籌，但也過得去，學術論文的列印品質不該低於這個標準。文字應該清晰易讀，讓仔細認真的讀者能流暢閱讀。
Finally, a loose bundle of papers plopped on the desk of an instructor probably is not going to be awarded a top grade. The pages should be stapled, paper-clipped, or bound between front and back covers—whichever method is requested by an assigning professor. Have faith that a paper is so compelling that it is going to be read… and re-read. Make it easy for a professor to do so.
最後，如果漫不經心地把一疊散亂的紙張扔到教授桌上，大概拿不到什麼理想的成績。論文應該根據教授要求，用釘書機裝訂、用夾子夾起，或以封面、封底夾訂。引人入勝的論文值得一讀再讀，完善的裝訂才能方便教授閱讀。
A writer who has followed the foregoing tips on topic-choosing, researching, writing, formatting, proofreading, and presenting an academic paper has now completed the project. By not taking shortcuts, the writer has arrived at this point better informed and more highly skilled than those who did not. The reward is a superior grade and confidence in moving forward. Congratulations.
循著之前描述的技巧，選擇題目、進行研究、寫作文章、遵循格式、仔細校對、注意論文外觀並繳交，論文寫作計畫至此大功告成。若作者循序漸進、不抄近路，現在應已知識豐富、技巧卓越，獲得理想的好成績，並能自信滿滿繼續前進。恭喜你!
Last Update at 2011-06-08 PM 4:59 | 0 Comments
Dragon Boat Festival Return Announcement 歡迎TPS粉絲回來!
2011-06-07
Dear Fans,
How did you celebrate the Dragon Boat Festival? We aren’t telling how we celebrated, but it was fun! See you tomorrow, when we bring you the concluding tip in our series on how to write a superior academic paper.
TPS Team
How did you celebrate the Dragon Boat Festival? We aren’t telling how we celebrated, but it was fun! See you tomorrow, when we bring you the concluding tip in our series on how to write a superior academic paper.
TPS Team
Last Update at 2011-06-07 AM 11:10 | 0 Comments
Dragon Boat Festival Vacation Announcement! 給TPS粉絲的假期通知!
2011-06-03
Dear Fans,
Next Monday, June 6, we are going to take a short break from working with you, our TPS scholars, so we can enjoy the Dragon Boat Festival. We hope you enjoy it, too. We’ll be back June 7, with zongzi in our stomach and new questions to tease your brains. See you then.
The TPS Team
Next Monday, June 6, we are going to take a short break from working with you, our TPS scholars, so we can enjoy the Dragon Boat Festival. We hope you enjoy it, too. We’ll be back June 7, with zongzi in our stomach and new questions to tease your brains. See you then.
The TPS Team
Last Update at 2011-06-03 AM 10:52 | 0 Comments
What does that mean? 你真的瞭解這個慣用語嗎?
2011-06-02
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。
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。
Last Update at 2011-06-02 PM 2:46 | 0 Comments
最新回應