Professor Pedantic 教授的考究學問
2011-04-20
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 writing an argumentative essay objectively, is it acceptable to cite the opinions of unspecified experts?
撰寫客觀的議論文時，能否引用不具名的專家意見？
Let me say at the outset that writing an essay of opinion “objectively” is like whitewashing a fence with black paint. It is, to say the least, difficult. An argument is a clash of opinions. Any writer who tries to be “objective” in entering such an argument can count on losing. Argumentative writing is a subjective task. The goal is to marshal salient, favorable points of argument and to mitigate damaging, unfavorable ones.
讓我先指出一點，「客觀地」撰寫用以表達意見的文章，就像是欲用黑色油漆把籬笆塗白，若想要成功，可以預見是非常困難的。所謂的論述，就是意見的碰撞與衝突，任何人若是想以「客觀」態度撰寫議論文，獲得的結果必定會大失所望。寫作議論文是非常主觀的課題，必須強化論述中有利的重點，淡化不利或具傷害性的論點。
Can a writer accomplish this by citing “unspecified experts?” Rarely. An anonymous “expert” has little standing in an argument, so little in fact that the very term “expert” tends to be ridiculed. Even a generic “expert” whose authority is virtually unassailable in other settings (“A mother knows these things…”) lacks convincing credentials as a source in a paper. Anonymous experts are the human equivalent of hearsay evidence and should not be counted on to carry an argument.
引用「不具名的專家」 是否能達成上述的效果呢？--難上加難。無名的「專家」在論述中立場薄弱之至，甚至連稱之為「專家」都顯得不恰當。就算一般常被指稱，在一些情況下不會遭致質疑的專家（如『當媽媽的一定都知道…』），在學術論文裡的說服力也不夠。不具名專家的意見，猶如道聽塗說，不適宜引用於學術嚴謹的證明論述。
It is a matter of persuasion. Facts persuade. Facts from the mouths of identifiable authorities persuade convincingly. It is the difference between asserting that “people love cream puffs” and declaring that “9 of 10 surveyed chefs in Taipei vote cream puffs the No. 1 dessert.” The assertion can be easily dismissed as fanciful, whereas if the survey is disputed, the onus to disprove it is on the disputant. Successful authors of argumentative papers know their sources – and identify them.
問題完全出在於能否說服讀者。正確的事實有說服力，而具名的專家所提出的事實更具有舉足輕重的說服成效，其中的差別就像是「大家都喜歡泡芙」與「針對台北主廚所進行的調查結果顯示，十位主廚中有九位認為泡芙是第一名的甜點。」前者口說無憑，易被誤認為作者的無稽之談；而後者的調查結果即便遭受質疑，推翻調查也是讀者的責任。想要成功撰寫一篇議論文章，作者必須瞭解所引用的是那些材料，並且在文章裡清楚的具名與說明。
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 writing an argumentative essay objectively, is it acceptable to cite the opinions of unspecified experts?
撰寫客觀的議論文時，能否引用不具名的專家意見？
Let me say at the outset that writing an essay of opinion “objectively” is like whitewashing a fence with black paint. It is, to say the least, difficult. An argument is a clash of opinions. Any writer who tries to be “objective” in entering such an argument can count on losing. Argumentative writing is a subjective task. The goal is to marshal salient, favorable points of argument and to mitigate damaging, unfavorable ones.
讓我先指出一點，「客觀地」撰寫用以表達意見的文章，就像是欲用黑色油漆把籬笆塗白，若想要成功，可以預見是非常困難的。所謂的論述，就是意見的碰撞與衝突，任何人若是想以「客觀」態度撰寫議論文，獲得的結果必定會大失所望。寫作議論文是非常主觀的課題，必須強化論述中有利的重點，淡化不利或具傷害性的論點。
Can a writer accomplish this by citing “unspecified experts?” Rarely. An anonymous “expert” has little standing in an argument, so little in fact that the very term “expert” tends to be ridiculed. Even a generic “expert” whose authority is virtually unassailable in other settings (“A mother knows these things…”) lacks convincing credentials as a source in a paper. Anonymous experts are the human equivalent of hearsay evidence and should not be counted on to carry an argument.
引用「不具名的專家」 是否能達成上述的效果呢？--難上加難。無名的「專家」在論述中立場薄弱之至，甚至連稱之為「專家」都顯得不恰當。就算一般常被指稱，在一些情況下不會遭致質疑的專家（如『當媽媽的一定都知道…』），在學術論文裡的說服力也不夠。不具名專家的意見，猶如道聽塗說，不適宜引用於學術嚴謹的證明論述。
It is a matter of persuasion. Facts persuade. Facts from the mouths of identifiable authorities persuade convincingly. It is the difference between asserting that “people love cream puffs” and declaring that “9 of 10 surveyed chefs in Taipei vote cream puffs the No. 1 dessert.” The assertion can be easily dismissed as fanciful, whereas if the survey is disputed, the onus to disprove it is on the disputant. Successful authors of argumentative papers know their sources – and identify them.
問題完全出在於能否說服讀者。正確的事實有說服力，而具名的專家所提出的事實更具有舉足輕重的說服成效，其中的差別就像是「大家都喜歡泡芙」與「針對台北主廚所進行的調查結果顯示，十位主廚中有九位認為泡芙是第一名的甜點。」前者口說無憑，易被誤認為作者的無稽之談；而後者的調查結果即便遭受質疑，推翻調查也是讀者的責任。想要成功撰寫一篇議論文章，作者必須瞭解所引用的是那些材料，並且在文章裡清楚的具名與說明。
Last Update at 2011-04-28 PM 2:51 | 0 Comments
This is not academic writing 學術文章不是這麼寫的
2011-04-14
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
“To have the voices singing in counterpoint in "Eleanor Rigby" was the bright idea of George Martin, who also wrote music for the two violas, two cellos and four violins that played behind the singers. Martin was more responsible than anyone else for creating the song’s unique sound. The music producer also decided to place the recording microphones right next to the instruments so that the instruments’ harshness wouldn’t be filtered out. In another bold move, he had the musicians play their stringed instruments without vibrating the strings.”
Sloppy wording can convey the gist of a subject, but it cannot communicate with exactness. The foregoing paragraph, which analyzes the recording of a popular song, is an example of poor word choices. “The bright idea,” for example, is an inexcusably colloquial expression. “Wrote music for” is a wordy equivalent of the more concise “composed.” The listing of eight instruments can be expressed economically as an octet. To say the song has a “unique” sound seriously diminishes the restrictive nature of unique. And playing a stringed instrument “without vibrating the strings” is to not make a sound at all—surely not what a writer intends to convey. A more succinct and precise version of the paragraph appears below.
鬆散、模糊的用詞儘管仍能傳達想法，卻無法精準地與讀者溝通。本段文章討論流行歌曲的錄製，其中用詞選字有多處明顯失當。舉例而言，the bright idea太口語，實在不應出現；wrote music for太累贅，不如以精簡的composed呈現；洋洋灑灑列出八樣樂器，不如寫出八重奏octet來的簡潔；告訴讀者曲子具有獨特的聲音，詮釋的方式不當，反而無法凸顯unique本身獨一無二的意義與價值；最後，作者聲稱演奏絃樂器時，不需震動琴絃—顯然表示一聲未出—作者想傳達的本意應非如此。更簡潔、準確的寫法，刊登如下。
Acceptable 認可的文章
“The contrapuntal play of voices in "Eleanor Rigby" is attributed to George Martin, who also composed a score for the string octet that backed the singers. Martin essentially was responsible for the song’s signature sound. The gifted producer captured the raw feed of the instrumentation by placing recording microphones unusually close to the instruments and by having the musicians play their stringed instruments without undulating vibrato.”
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
“To have the voices singing in counterpoint in "Eleanor Rigby" was the bright idea of George Martin, who also wrote music for the two violas, two cellos and four violins that played behind the singers. Martin was more responsible than anyone else for creating the song’s unique sound. The music producer also decided to place the recording microphones right next to the instruments so that the instruments’ harshness wouldn’t be filtered out. In another bold move, he had the musicians play their stringed instruments without vibrating the strings.”
Sloppy wording can convey the gist of a subject, but it cannot communicate with exactness. The foregoing paragraph, which analyzes the recording of a popular song, is an example of poor word choices. “The bright idea,” for example, is an inexcusably colloquial expression. “Wrote music for” is a wordy equivalent of the more concise “composed.” The listing of eight instruments can be expressed economically as an octet. To say the song has a “unique” sound seriously diminishes the restrictive nature of unique. And playing a stringed instrument “without vibrating the strings” is to not make a sound at all—surely not what a writer intends to convey. A more succinct and precise version of the paragraph appears below.
鬆散、模糊的用詞儘管仍能傳達想法，卻無法精準地與讀者溝通。本段文章討論流行歌曲的錄製，其中用詞選字有多處明顯失當。舉例而言，the bright idea太口語，實在不應出現；wrote music for太累贅，不如以精簡的composed呈現；洋洋灑灑列出八樣樂器，不如寫出八重奏octet來的簡潔；告訴讀者曲子具有獨特的聲音，詮釋的方式不當，反而無法凸顯unique本身獨一無二的意義與價值；最後，作者聲稱演奏絃樂器時，不需震動琴絃—顯然表示一聲未出—作者想傳達的本意應非如此。更簡潔、準確的寫法，刊登如下。
Acceptable 認可的文章
“The contrapuntal play of voices in "Eleanor Rigby" is attributed to George Martin, who also composed a score for the string octet that backed the singers. Martin essentially was responsible for the song’s signature sound. The gifted producer captured the raw feed of the instrumentation by placing recording microphones unusually close to the instruments and by having the musicians play their stringed instruments without undulating vibrato.”
Last Update at 2011-04-28 PM 2:51 | 0 Comments
12 Recommendations to Help you Submit a Conventional and Acceptable Paper Tip 8: The three structural parts of a well-constructed paper 12個獲得學術認可的論文撰寫技巧之八：完整文章結構三段式
2011-04-13
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.
Tip 8–The three structural parts of a well-constructed paper
技巧八：完整文章結構三段式
Having researched a subject and obtained some mastery of the language, an academic writer can begin to write. The writer’s pre-writing activities are the foundation and the framework for the paper. Without the advance work, a paper will be rickety in its presentation and weak in its material content. No successful academic writer ever writes a paper based on shaky knowledge.
研究好論文主題，掌握好該如何運用適當語言來寫作的要領之後，作者即可準備大展身手。寫作前的準備是撰寫整篇文章的基礎與框架，少了這些工夫，文章結構將變得鬆散，內容也無法經得起學界的考驗。想成為一位傑出的學術論文作者，絕不容許光憑粗略的知識便輕易動筆。
Academic papers share a three-part structure with other conventional written media. Essentially, the paper should have a beginning, a middle, and an end, which usually are referred to as introduction, body, and conclusion. These are fundamental to any attempt at communication. Literature sometimes departs from this model, but academic literature has no such license.
學術論文與許多傳統寫作方式相似，皆主張三段式的文章結構。文章基本上可切分成三個區塊，即起頭、中間與結尾，也就是現今所通稱的前言、正文與結論三個部分。三段式結構是所有意見表達的基本形式。文學作品有時能隨意跳脫這樣的框架，但學術論文則沒有這種隨性與自由。
The introduction should accomplish two tasks: (1) Present the paper’s general subject and (2) present the writer’s distinguishing proposition or thesis on the subject. An example: Were the subject William Shakespeare, the Bard would be introduced with enough detail to fully identify his work. This would be followed by the proposition that Shakespeare was, let’s say, a fraud.
前言所肩負的兩項任務，包括：1. 提出論文大致主題方向。2. 提出對主題獨特見解或論點。舉例來說，若論文主題為莎士比亞，則應準備充足的細節資料完整帶出這位詩人的重要，以便讓讀者充分理解與認識莎士比亞的各部經典作品，接者再提出作者自己的主張，例如可以說，莎士比亞其實是個騙子。
At once, the reader knows where the paper is headed. Its longitude and latitude are yet to be revealed, but its direction is set. In the body of the paper that follows, the writer then presents the rich lode of material supporting the thesis. This main content should flow naturally from a rough outline developed during the research process, in which both mind and materials are organized.
如此，讀者便能得知文章方向，儘管還無法掌握其深度與廣度，大方向已抵定，在接下來的正文中，作者即可提出支持論點的有力佐證。正文大綱應在研究過程中已勾勒出大致方向，而作者的想法與蒐集資訊也已組織完備，正文內容便可呼之欲出，自然而然地呈現出來。
Having effectively presented in the body of the paper the researched and original material, the writer then must conclude. This is not an insignificant section of the paper. It brings together the paper’s key elements in a few sentences, giving the reader a capsule account. This summary and restatement should affirm all that went before and impart confidence in the integrity of the paper.
經過正文的撰寫，有效提出原創研究的結果之後，接著，引導作者進入撰寫結論的階段。結論的撰寫，在整篇論文的地位不容小覷，因為整篇文章的論點與論據，必須巧妙應用幾句話以完整、簡潔地說出重點，讀者也能在此掌握濃縮後的論文精華。結論必須再次闡明前述內容，有力地說服讀者支持與相信文章所述之真實性與價值。
The structure of an academic paper is progressive, yet it is circular, too. After reading the conclusion, a reader should be able to look back to the introduction and consider the paper a promise kept. While each section has a separate function, the three sections are interconnected in their purpose and conviction. An irresolute paper is a failure of scholarship and of structure.
學術論文的結構，看似逐步推展，也是前後呼應。作者應致力於在讀者閱讀完結論並再度回到前言時，依然保持前後文論述與風格一致，使文章合乎一開始讀者閱讀時的理解與期待。儘管三段式內容各有其功能，相互的目的與論證是環環相扣的。作者行文時若立場搖擺不定，所招致的瑕疵與失敗，將足以影響學術文章的重要性與結構性。
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.
Tip 8–The three structural parts of a well-constructed paper
技巧八：完整文章結構三段式
Having researched a subject and obtained some mastery of the language, an academic writer can begin to write. The writer’s pre-writing activities are the foundation and the framework for the paper. Without the advance work, a paper will be rickety in its presentation and weak in its material content. No successful academic writer ever writes a paper based on shaky knowledge.
研究好論文主題，掌握好該如何運用適當語言來寫作的要領之後，作者即可準備大展身手。寫作前的準備是撰寫整篇文章的基礎與框架，少了這些工夫，文章結構將變得鬆散，內容也無法經得起學界的考驗。想成為一位傑出的學術論文作者，絕不容許光憑粗略的知識便輕易動筆。
Academic papers share a three-part structure with other conventional written media. Essentially, the paper should have a beginning, a middle, and an end, which usually are referred to as introduction, body, and conclusion. These are fundamental to any attempt at communication. Literature sometimes departs from this model, but academic literature has no such license.
學術論文與許多傳統寫作方式相似，皆主張三段式的文章結構。文章基本上可切分成三個區塊，即起頭、中間與結尾，也就是現今所通稱的前言、正文與結論三個部分。三段式結構是所有意見表達的基本形式。文學作品有時能隨意跳脫這樣的框架，但學術論文則沒有這種隨性與自由。
The introduction should accomplish two tasks: (1) Present the paper’s general subject and (2) present the writer’s distinguishing proposition or thesis on the subject. An example: Were the subject William Shakespeare, the Bard would be introduced with enough detail to fully identify his work. This would be followed by the proposition that Shakespeare was, let’s say, a fraud.
前言所肩負的兩項任務，包括：1. 提出論文大致主題方向。2. 提出對主題獨特見解或論點。舉例來說，若論文主題為莎士比亞，則應準備充足的細節資料完整帶出這位詩人的重要，以便讓讀者充分理解與認識莎士比亞的各部經典作品，接者再提出作者自己的主張，例如可以說，莎士比亞其實是個騙子。
At once, the reader knows where the paper is headed. Its longitude and latitude are yet to be revealed, but its direction is set. In the body of the paper that follows, the writer then presents the rich lode of material supporting the thesis. This main content should flow naturally from a rough outline developed during the research process, in which both mind and materials are organized.
如此，讀者便能得知文章方向，儘管還無法掌握其深度與廣度，大方向已抵定，在接下來的正文中，作者即可提出支持論點的有力佐證。正文大綱應在研究過程中已勾勒出大致方向，而作者的想法與蒐集資訊也已組織完備，正文內容便可呼之欲出，自然而然地呈現出來。
Having effectively presented in the body of the paper the researched and original material, the writer then must conclude. This is not an insignificant section of the paper. It brings together the paper’s key elements in a few sentences, giving the reader a capsule account. This summary and restatement should affirm all that went before and impart confidence in the integrity of the paper.
經過正文的撰寫，有效提出原創研究的結果之後，接著，引導作者進入撰寫結論的階段。結論的撰寫，在整篇論文的地位不容小覷，因為整篇文章的論點與論據，必須巧妙應用幾句話以完整、簡潔地說出重點，讀者也能在此掌握濃縮後的論文精華。結論必須再次闡明前述內容，有力地說服讀者支持與相信文章所述之真實性與價值。
The structure of an academic paper is progressive, yet it is circular, too. After reading the conclusion, a reader should be able to look back to the introduction and consider the paper a promise kept. While each section has a separate function, the three sections are interconnected in their purpose and conviction. An irresolute paper is a failure of scholarship and of structure.
學術論文的結構，看似逐步推展，也是前後呼應。作者應致力於在讀者閱讀完結論並再度回到前言時，依然保持前後文論述與風格一致，使文章合乎一開始讀者閱讀時的理解與期待。儘管三段式內容各有其功能，相互的目的與論證是環環相扣的。作者行文時若立場搖擺不定，所招致的瑕疵與失敗，將足以影響學術文章的重要性與結構性。
Last Update at 2011-04-28 PM 2:51 | 0 Comments
0411 TPS Spot the Error Contest－Answer and Explanation 你是挑錯的高手嗎? 正確解答
2011-04-12
Answer: “is” should be “are.”
“Neither the commanding centurion, nor the Roman soldiers, are treated unsympathetically by historians of the period.”
Error: The mix of subjects confused the writer of this sentence. The compound subjects “soldiers” and “centurion” are paired unequally, in a sense, because the first is plural and the second singular. The pairing is grammatical, however, and the applicable rule is that the plural subject should be placed next to the verb, with which it should agree. Therefore, the sentence should read, “Neither the commanding centurion, nor his Roman soldiers, are treated…” This writing mistake is No. 4 of 10 Common Writing Errors That Can Spell “Rejection” for Your Manuscript, which are posted elsewhere on The Published Scholar site.
這句話的作者混淆了兩個不同的主詞。Soldiers和centurion並非對等的主詞，因為一個是複數，另一個是單數。但此處這樣列舉兩個主詞並未違反文法規則，正確的寫法應該是讓動詞接在複數主詞之後，以達成正確的主動詞一致。正確的句法為“Neither the commanding centurion, nor the Roman soldiers, are(were) treated…” 這樣的寫作錯誤可參照本專頁所張貼之「10 個導致退稿的常見寫作錯誤之四：Avoid Error of Agreement When Using Correlative Conjunctions」。
“Neither the commanding centurion, nor the Roman soldiers, are treated unsympathetically by historians of the period.”
Error: The mix of subjects confused the writer of this sentence. The compound subjects “soldiers” and “centurion” are paired unequally, in a sense, because the first is plural and the second singular. The pairing is grammatical, however, and the applicable rule is that the plural subject should be placed next to the verb, with which it should agree. Therefore, the sentence should read, “Neither the commanding centurion, nor his Roman soldiers, are treated…” This writing mistake is No. 4 of 10 Common Writing Errors That Can Spell “Rejection” for Your Manuscript, which are posted elsewhere on The Published Scholar site.
這句話的作者混淆了兩個不同的主詞。Soldiers和centurion並非對等的主詞，因為一個是複數，另一個是單數。但此處這樣列舉兩個主詞並未違反文法規則，正確的寫法應該是讓動詞接在複數主詞之後，以達成正確的主動詞一致。正確的句法為“Neither the commanding centurion, nor the Roman soldiers, are(were) treated…” 這樣的寫作錯誤可參照本專頁所張貼之「10 個導致退稿的常見寫作錯誤之四：Avoid Error of Agreement When Using Correlative Conjunctions」。
Last Update at 2011-04-28 PM 2:51 | 0 Comments
TPS Spot the Error Contest－Win Your NTD200 7-11/Starbucks Prize! 你是挑錯的高手嗎? 有機會獲得200元統一超商/星巴克咖啡禮券!
2011-04-11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:
“Neither the commanding centurion, nor the Roman soldiers, is treated unsympathetically by historians of the period.”
Last Update at 2011-04-28 PM 2:52 | 0 Comments
What does that mean? 你真的瞭解這個慣用語嗎?
2011-04-07
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.
“A study of 150 mothers revealed that 25 percent of the women exclusively breastfed their babies and genuinely enjoyed, like clover by a beehive, the sweet maternal connection.”
一項針對150名讓寶寶純喝母奶的母親所進行的研究顯示，百分之二十五的受試者，就像守候在蜂巢旁的幸運草一般，真誠地滿足於奉獻母愛的甜美。
“Like clover by a beehive” is an allusion to the pollination activity of bees in fields of the legume called clover. The interaction of plant and insect helps the plant to bear fruit or establish itself and the bee to collect nectar necessary to make honey. The mutually beneficial natural activity has several derivative benefits for people, including regeneration of soil-renewing stands of clover and widespread availability of sweet, sweet honey.
「蜂巢旁的幸運草」一詞，意指蜜蜂會在幸運草這類豆科植物所生長的地區，進行授粉活動，植物與昆蟲的互動，不但能讓植物本身得以結實累累，也能讓蜜蜂採集足夠的花蜜以製造蜂蜜。這種彼此互益的自然行為也給予人類許多額外的獲益，像是翻新土壤使幸運草得以綿延生長，而滋味甜美的蜂蜜可遍佈各地。
As used in an academic paper about a study of satisfied breast-feeding mothers, the simile denotes the natural synergism of mother and child. Like a clover plant, a breast-feeding mother naturally offers her child the nectar that produces growth and induces further bonding. The writer additionally expressed the character of the relationship using the clover-bee analogy by calling breastfeeding “the sweet maternal connection.”
在學術文章中，討論到身為母親心滿意足的餵哺母乳，暗喻母親與寶寶之間與生俱來的自然連繫；就像幸運草一樣，餵哺母乳的母親，本能性地提供子女所需的養分，使子女得以成長、茁壯，並增進彼此的關係，為之更加緊密。作者油然而生一句用以形容這樣的親密關係，那就是將餵哺母乳的行為，稱之為「母愛的甜美」。
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.
“A study of 150 mothers revealed that 25 percent of the women exclusively breastfed their babies and genuinely enjoyed, like clover by a beehive, the sweet maternal connection.”
一項針對150名讓寶寶純喝母奶的母親所進行的研究顯示，百分之二十五的受試者，就像守候在蜂巢旁的幸運草一般，真誠地滿足於奉獻母愛的甜美。
“Like clover by a beehive” is an allusion to the pollination activity of bees in fields of the legume called clover. The interaction of plant and insect helps the plant to bear fruit or establish itself and the bee to collect nectar necessary to make honey. The mutually beneficial natural activity has several derivative benefits for people, including regeneration of soil-renewing stands of clover and widespread availability of sweet, sweet honey.
「蜂巢旁的幸運草」一詞，意指蜜蜂會在幸運草這類豆科植物所生長的地區，進行授粉活動，植物與昆蟲的互動，不但能讓植物本身得以結實累累，也能讓蜜蜂採集足夠的花蜜以製造蜂蜜。這種彼此互益的自然行為也給予人類許多額外的獲益，像是翻新土壤使幸運草得以綿延生長，而滋味甜美的蜂蜜可遍佈各地。
As used in an academic paper about a study of satisfied breast-feeding mothers, the simile denotes the natural synergism of mother and child. Like a clover plant, a breast-feeding mother naturally offers her child the nectar that produces growth and induces further bonding. The writer additionally expressed the character of the relationship using the clover-bee analogy by calling breastfeeding “the sweet maternal connection.”
在學術文章中，討論到身為母親心滿意足的餵哺母乳，暗喻母親與寶寶之間與生俱來的自然連繫；就像幸運草一樣，餵哺母乳的母親，本能性地提供子女所需的養分，使子女得以成長、茁壯，並增進彼此的關係，為之更加緊密。作者油然而生一句用以形容這樣的親密關係，那就是將餵哺母乳的行為，稱之為「母愛的甜美」。
Last Update at 2011-04-28 PM 2:52 | 0 Comments
This month only! TPS offers FREE EDITING to the first 20 fans to apply! 免費潤稿服務—開放前20位粉絲報名!
2011-04-06
Dear TPS Fans,
親愛的TPS粉絲們：
Need another pair of eyes for your essay?
Dearly hoping for another brain to evaluate your writing?
Willing to sacrifice an arm and a leg for professional feedback on your paper?
你是否渴望有雙雪亮的雙眼能審視自己的英文論文與文章?
你是否希望有個聰明的腦袋能對自己的英文論文與文章提出衷心的忠告?
你是否願意不顧一切尋求英文論文與文章的專業回饋建議?
Spare those limbs!
這裡有更好的辦法!
For a short period of time, The Published Scholar is offering FREE professional editing of up to 300 words. The first 20 TPS fans who contact us between now and the end of April with an editing request will have their electronically transmitted papers professionally reviewed and edited—and it won’t cost you a dollar, pataca, or pound. You may be thinking, "How do I take advantage of this great offer?" It's simplicity itself! 1) Leave a message here on our Facebook Page confirming your interest. 2) Send an email to info@publishedscholar.com with your paper attached (please do not post any personal information on our Facebook Page.) It's that easy! So come on, be the first to take advantage of this LIMITED offer. Apply now!
即日起至四月底止，英文學術發表專家將提供300字免費專業潤稿服務，開放給前20名幸運的TPS粉絲報名體驗。只要在此訊息下方留言，提出潤稿需求取得優先名額，再將你的英文論文/文章與姓名，E-mail到 info@publishedscholar.com，我們會安排美籍編輯顧問立即審閱並編輯你的作品，保證，完全不花你一毛錢。名額有限(Limited offer)，歡迎立即報名。
The Published Scholar makes it its business to review and edit all compositions we receive with care and speed, while still respecting your ideas and deadlines. It’s our mission, our interest, and our field of expertise.
英文學術發表專家編輯團隊，將仔細審閱你的作品，謹慎編修字詞句意，並盡速回覆你的文章截稿需求。這是我們的專業，也是我們最擅長的服務。
Try us. For FREE!
想體驗專業潤稿服務—請把握機會，保證免費!
TPS Team
親愛的TPS粉絲們：
Need another pair of eyes for your essay?
Dearly hoping for another brain to evaluate your writing?
Willing to sacrifice an arm and a leg for professional feedback on your paper?
你是否渴望有雙雪亮的雙眼能審視自己的英文論文與文章?
你是否希望有個聰明的腦袋能對自己的英文論文與文章提出衷心的忠告?
你是否願意不顧一切尋求英文論文與文章的專業回饋建議?
Spare those limbs!
這裡有更好的辦法!
For a short period of time, The Published Scholar is offering FREE professional editing of up to 300 words. The first 20 TPS fans who contact us between now and the end of April with an editing request will have their electronically transmitted papers professionally reviewed and edited—and it won’t cost you a dollar, pataca, or pound. You may be thinking, "How do I take advantage of this great offer?" It's simplicity itself! 1) Leave a message here on our Facebook Page confirming your interest. 2) Send an email to info@publishedscholar.com with your paper attached (please do not post any personal information on our Facebook Page.) It's that easy! So come on, be the first to take advantage of this LIMITED offer. Apply now!
即日起至四月底止，英文學術發表專家將提供300字免費專業潤稿服務，開放給前20名幸運的TPS粉絲報名體驗。只要在此訊息下方留言，提出潤稿需求取得優先名額，再將你的英文論文/文章與姓名，E-mail到 info@publishedscholar.com，我們會安排美籍編輯顧問立即審閱並編輯你的作品，保證，完全不花你一毛錢。名額有限(Limited offer)，歡迎立即報名。
The Published Scholar makes it its business to review and edit all compositions we receive with care and speed, while still respecting your ideas and deadlines. It’s our mission, our interest, and our field of expertise.
英文學術發表專家編輯團隊，將仔細審閱你的作品，謹慎編修字詞句意，並盡速回覆你的文章截稿需求。這是我們的專業，也是我們最擅長的服務。
Try us. For FREE!
想體驗專業潤稿服務—請把握機會，保證免費!
TPS Team
Last Update at 2011-04-28 PM 2:52 | 0 Comments
This is not academic writing 學術文章不是這麼寫的
2011-03-31
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
“Over-fishing of coastal waters brings lots of tragic consequences. The environmental impacts are extraordinary, including a dramatic reduction in the kinds and types of fishes in areas where commercial fishermen used to count on catching them. Natural development of species can be altered when only the biggest specimens are pulled from the sea. The environment in the water isn’t helped either when imbalances are created that gum up the natural order of things.”
This writing is marked by imprecision. The impact of over-fishing is couched in such vague terms as “lots of” and “extraordinary” and “dramatic reduction.” Rounded expressions of scale are dangerous because one man’s “lots of” is another man’s “few,” particularly without supporting data. The results of over-fishing are called “tragic,” but beware of universal assertions. A vegetarian in the Tibetan mountains might think over-fishing an interesting topic, but would he see it as tragedy? Do you see other glaring examples of poor academic writing?
這篇文章充滿許多模糊的字詞表達。過度捕撈所造成的影響，在lots of、extraordinary、dramatic reduction這些含糊的字眼下反而顯得柔弱無力。這類描述程度的籠統字眼非常危險，尤其在沒有數據佐證下， 一個人認定的lots of對另一個人而言可能不過是few而以。作者以 “tragic(悲劇性)” 形容過度捕撈的結果，但千萬小心這類在世界上普遍存在的宣言。居住於西藏山區的素食主義者也許會認為過度捕撈是個有趣的主題，所以在他眼裡這不見得是悲劇一件。大家不妨仔細觀察，你是否也找得出其他明顯的不恰當字眼呢？
Acceptable 認可的文章
“Over-fishing of coastal waters brings significant consequences. The environmental impact is evident, including a measurable reduction in fish variety and population in formerly reliable commercial fishing grounds. Natural development of species is retarded when selective netting culls only the biggest specimens from schools. Undersea ecology is altered as well when imbalances are artificially created that interrupt systemic and interconnected processes.”
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
“Over-fishing of coastal waters brings lots of tragic consequences. The environmental impacts are extraordinary, including a dramatic reduction in the kinds and types of fishes in areas where commercial fishermen used to count on catching them. Natural development of species can be altered when only the biggest specimens are pulled from the sea. The environment in the water isn’t helped either when imbalances are created that gum up the natural order of things.”
This writing is marked by imprecision. The impact of over-fishing is couched in such vague terms as “lots of” and “extraordinary” and “dramatic reduction.” Rounded expressions of scale are dangerous because one man’s “lots of” is another man’s “few,” particularly without supporting data. The results of over-fishing are called “tragic,” but beware of universal assertions. A vegetarian in the Tibetan mountains might think over-fishing an interesting topic, but would he see it as tragedy? Do you see other glaring examples of poor academic writing?
這篇文章充滿許多模糊的字詞表達。過度捕撈所造成的影響，在lots of、extraordinary、dramatic reduction這些含糊的字眼下反而顯得柔弱無力。這類描述程度的籠統字眼非常危險，尤其在沒有數據佐證下， 一個人認定的lots of對另一個人而言可能不過是few而以。作者以 “tragic(悲劇性)” 形容過度捕撈的結果，但千萬小心這類在世界上普遍存在的宣言。居住於西藏山區的素食主義者也許會認為過度捕撈是個有趣的主題，所以在他眼裡這不見得是悲劇一件。大家不妨仔細觀察，你是否也找得出其他明顯的不恰當字眼呢？
Acceptable 認可的文章
“Over-fishing of coastal waters brings significant consequences. The environmental impact is evident, including a measurable reduction in fish variety and population in formerly reliable commercial fishing grounds. Natural development of species is retarded when selective netting culls only the biggest specimens from schools. Undersea ecology is altered as well when imbalances are artificially created that interrupt systemic and interconnected processes.”
Last Update at 2011-04-28 PM 2:52 | 0 Comments
12 Recommendations to Help you Submit a Conventional and Acceptable Paper Tip 7: Wanted: Formal, unambiguous expression 12個獲得學術認可的論文撰寫技巧之七：寫作要求－正式、明確的表達
2011-03-30
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.
Tip 7 –Wanted: Formal, unambiguous expression
技巧七：寫作要求－正式、明確的表達
This is the third tip devoted to language. To “precise word choice” and “appropriate voice” is added another writing consideration: tone. The word refers to the type or manner of expression required in academic papers. In a word, the tone is to be “formal.” Another word for it might be “professional,” in the sense that a writer conforms to a standard of the academic profession.
學術寫作注意事項中的第三點，除了技巧五「準確的遣詞用字」與技巧六「適當的第三人稱與主動」外，應該注意的下一個原則就是語調。所謂的語調就是學術論文所要求的表達風格。簡言之，寫作時應該使用「正式」的語調，換個詞來解釋，那就是「專業感」。寫作必須合乎學術界的專業要求。
“Formal writing” does not imply the use of pretentious language, which can be characterized as stilted or pompous or stiff. Rather, formal writing acknowledges a paper’s seriousness of subject and gravity of purpose. Formal language does not pretend to do anything beyond communicate clearly. Adjectives that merely adorn are unwelcome; florid prose is particularly inappropriate.
「正式寫作」並不意味著使用矯揉造作的用詞，因為這樣會讓文章顯得生硬、浮誇且僵化。正式寫作透露出，作者清楚瞭解到文章主題的嚴肅，撰寫目的之慎重。除了清楚表達旨意外，正式寫作不需無謂的矯飾：具裝飾目的的形容詞不受歡迎，華麗的行文更是格格不入。
Informal writing violates these principles because its purpose is entirely different. Informal language entertains, or casually conveys a message. It exaggerates for literary or humorous effect and otherwise embellishes a central thought with whimsical flourishes. All of this is laudable when in character. However, it is entirely out of character for a purposeful academic paper.
非正式寫作違反這些原則，主要原因在於寫作目的完全不同。非正式的寫作文章，目的是娛樂讀者，或以隨性表現來傳達訊息。為展現文學、幽默的口吻，非正式寫作的作者隨時可誇飾或以滑稽、華麗的詞藻修飾論文的中心論點。只要寫作得當，這些手法固然值得嘉獎；然而，對嚴謹的學術論文而言，這類風格顯然極不適當。
Nor is scholarly writing marked by emotional intrusions. Scholarship, after all, is an intellectual exercise. Academic papers are dedicated to ideas, not feelings. Thinking, not emoting, should drive a serious academic writer. The language employed in the paper should have the tensile strength of a tempered thought, rather than the ductile strength of an emotional appeal.
學術寫作也不應摻雜個人情緒。學術作品畢竟是智識的結晶，而論文的重心是論點，不該是情感。促使寫作者的動力應該是來自創新思考而非個人情緒。論文的論據應該是歷經千錘百鍊所獲的堅定實證，而非訴諸情感的柔弱論點。
As a rule, shorthand expression is not acceptable in an academic paper. Therefore, contractions are out. Abbreviations should be avoided. Jargon is inappropriate, whether elevated, as in specialized technical language, or demeaning, as in a pejorative gibe. Any truncated or colloquial expression invites ambiguity. For a paper to endure, it must be expressed in enduring language.
一般來說，「簡寫」難登大雅之堂。其中包括，縮寫不宜出現；長字不可被縮短；技術行話，不論多專業或是多富含技術性，此類意含嘲諷的寫法皆不宜使用。任何縮寫或口語的用法只會模糊句意。文章若想名垂不朽，就必須用經得起時間考驗的字詞寫作文章。
All of this should come naturally for a writer whose sole purpose is to honestly share insight and discovered truth. The substance of a paper should be enough to induce in a reader the hoped-for sense of pleasure and revelation. Attempts to artificially convey such sensations through artful word choice usually boomerang. Clear, unadorned writing lets a reader see a paper’s real worth.
學術論文作者的中心目的，只要忠實表達獨特洞見與發現新的實證論據，那麼他的寫作自然而然會合乎上述一切原則，單憑文章表述的內容就足以使讀者如獲至寶般的喜悅與受到啟發。倘若試圖以華麗造作的言詞來追求這種喜悅與成就，通常是自曝其短、行不通的。清楚、樸實的寫作手法，便足以讓讀者感受論文的真正價值。
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.
Tip 7 –Wanted: Formal, unambiguous expression
技巧七：寫作要求－正式、明確的表達
This is the third tip devoted to language. To “precise word choice” and “appropriate voice” is added another writing consideration: tone. The word refers to the type or manner of expression required in academic papers. In a word, the tone is to be “formal.” Another word for it might be “professional,” in the sense that a writer conforms to a standard of the academic profession.
學術寫作注意事項中的第三點，除了技巧五「準確的遣詞用字」與技巧六「適當的第三人稱與主動」外，應該注意的下一個原則就是語調。所謂的語調就是學術論文所要求的表達風格。簡言之，寫作時應該使用「正式」的語調，換個詞來解釋，那就是「專業感」。寫作必須合乎學術界的專業要求。
“Formal writing” does not imply the use of pretentious language, which can be characterized as stilted or pompous or stiff. Rather, formal writing acknowledges a paper’s seriousness of subject and gravity of purpose. Formal language does not pretend to do anything beyond communicate clearly. Adjectives that merely adorn are unwelcome; florid prose is particularly inappropriate.
「正式寫作」並不意味著使用矯揉造作的用詞，因為這樣會讓文章顯得生硬、浮誇且僵化。正式寫作透露出，作者清楚瞭解到文章主題的嚴肅，撰寫目的之慎重。除了清楚表達旨意外，正式寫作不需無謂的矯飾：具裝飾目的的形容詞不受歡迎，華麗的行文更是格格不入。
Informal writing violates these principles because its purpose is entirely different. Informal language entertains, or casually conveys a message. It exaggerates for literary or humorous effect and otherwise embellishes a central thought with whimsical flourishes. All of this is laudable when in character. However, it is entirely out of character for a purposeful academic paper.
非正式寫作違反這些原則，主要原因在於寫作目的完全不同。非正式的寫作文章，目的是娛樂讀者，或以隨性表現來傳達訊息。為展現文學、幽默的口吻，非正式寫作的作者隨時可誇飾或以滑稽、華麗的詞藻修飾論文的中心論點。只要寫作得當，這些手法固然值得嘉獎；然而，對嚴謹的學術論文而言，這類風格顯然極不適當。
Nor is scholarly writing marked by emotional intrusions. Scholarship, after all, is an intellectual exercise. Academic papers are dedicated to ideas, not feelings. Thinking, not emoting, should drive a serious academic writer. The language employed in the paper should have the tensile strength of a tempered thought, rather than the ductile strength of an emotional appeal.
學術寫作也不應摻雜個人情緒。學術作品畢竟是智識的結晶，而論文的重心是論點，不該是情感。促使寫作者的動力應該是來自創新思考而非個人情緒。論文的論據應該是歷經千錘百鍊所獲的堅定實證，而非訴諸情感的柔弱論點。
As a rule, shorthand expression is not acceptable in an academic paper. Therefore, contractions are out. Abbreviations should be avoided. Jargon is inappropriate, whether elevated, as in specialized technical language, or demeaning, as in a pejorative gibe. Any truncated or colloquial expression invites ambiguity. For a paper to endure, it must be expressed in enduring language.
一般來說，「簡寫」難登大雅之堂。其中包括，縮寫不宜出現；長字不可被縮短；技術行話，不論多專業或是多富含技術性，此類意含嘲諷的寫法皆不宜使用。任何縮寫或口語的用法只會模糊句意。文章若想名垂不朽，就必須用經得起時間考驗的字詞寫作文章。
All of this should come naturally for a writer whose sole purpose is to honestly share insight and discovered truth. The substance of a paper should be enough to induce in a reader the hoped-for sense of pleasure and revelation. Attempts to artificially convey such sensations through artful word choice usually boomerang. Clear, unadorned writing lets a reader see a paper’s real worth.
學術論文作者的中心目的，只要忠實表達獨特洞見與發現新的實證論據，那麼他的寫作自然而然會合乎上述一切原則，單憑文章表述的內容就足以使讀者如獲至寶般的喜悅與受到啟發。倘若試圖以華麗造作的言詞來追求這種喜悅與成就，通常是自曝其短、行不通的。清楚、樸實的寫作手法，便足以讓讀者感受論文的真正價值。
Last Update at 2011-04-28 PM 2:52 | 0 Comments
0328 TPS One Word Away From Confusion Contest－Answer and Explanation你能找出混淆字嗎? 正確解答!
2011-03-29
Correct Best Answer: Replace “versatile” with “variable.”
“Successful classrooms are so variable that it is difficult for researchers to distinguish crucial factors separating learning students from failing ones.”
Words that look alike, sometimes even sound alike, can pop into the mind while composing a paper. Conveyed from the mind to the computer screen, a word can continue to look correct, but, in fact, turns meaning on its head. In this instance, successful classrooms may be “versatile,” but versatility does not obscure truth. Whereas successful classrooms being “variable” in their make-up does cloud the issue for researchers, who are trying to sort out what does and does not contribute to learning environments.
有些字拼法相似，甚至連讀音都相近，很容易在寫作時一起從腦海裡冒出來。從腦中的印象到電腦螢幕上打字出來，一個字看起來可能依然言之有理，但其實已扭曲了文章的意思。以這個例子而言，成功的課堂學習方式也許可以用“versatile(易變的、反覆無常的)” 來形容，但這個詞並不會模糊對事物的理解。如果說要達到成功的課堂學習，其方法各有不同 “variable”，就可以意會到研究者的困惑，那就是不同的因素太多，難以分辨哪些對促進學習環境真的有貢獻。
“Successful classrooms are so variable that it is difficult for researchers to distinguish crucial factors separating learning students from failing ones.”
Words that look alike, sometimes even sound alike, can pop into the mind while composing a paper. Conveyed from the mind to the computer screen, a word can continue to look correct, but, in fact, turns meaning on its head. In this instance, successful classrooms may be “versatile,” but versatility does not obscure truth. Whereas successful classrooms being “variable” in their make-up does cloud the issue for researchers, who are trying to sort out what does and does not contribute to learning environments.
有些字拼法相似，甚至連讀音都相近，很容易在寫作時一起從腦海裡冒出來。從腦中的印象到電腦螢幕上打字出來，一個字看起來可能依然言之有理，但其實已扭曲了文章的意思。以這個例子而言，成功的課堂學習方式也許可以用“versatile(易變的、反覆無常的)” 來形容，但這個詞並不會模糊對事物的理解。如果說要達到成功的課堂學習，其方法各有不同 “variable”，就可以意會到研究者的困惑，那就是不同的因素太多，難以分辨哪些對促進學習環境真的有貢獻。
Last Update at 2011-04-28 PM 2:53 | 0 Comments
最新回應