:::
This is not academic writing 學術文章不是這麼寫的
【寫作技巧】
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
“The group of gorillas was made up of an old silverback, two blackback males, five women gorillas, and four little gorillas. The harmony of the little group was dependent upon the strength and dominion of the silverback. How he got along with the females was a big key to the troop’s unity. So long as the blackbacks paid their dues to the silverback, the troop functioned pretty well as an integrated family, community, and economy. It probably would continue to do so until the silverback died; that’s when the females would look for a new group and a new leader.”
This writer slips in and out of compliance with academic writing standards in the paragraph on gorillas. He writes lazily to some degree—redundantly calling a silverback “old,” calling female gorillas “women,” and referring to young gorillas as “little,” for instance. He incorrectly uses dominion, instead of dominance. It is a stretch to call a family an “economy,” though it is an economic unit. The writer goes colloquial with “paid their dues,” and drops in a contraction, “that’s.” What other evidence do you see that this draft shouldn’t be the final one?
本文談論大猩猩，寫作方面與學術標準時有出入，有點漫不經心，例如多此一舉地用 old 來形容 silverback（12 歲以上的大猩猩），稱雌猩猩 (female gorillas) 為 “women gorillas”，稱年幼的猩猩為 “little gorillas”，並把dominance 誤寫成 dominion。此外，儘管大猩猩家族確實會一起覓食謀生，稱之為 “economy”（經濟體）卻有點誇大了。部分用法也較口語，例如 “paid their dues”（苦熬），用縮寫 “that’s”。這篇文章只有草稿的水準，還稱不上定稿，你舉得出其他例子嗎？
Acceptable 認可的文章
“The troop of gorillas was comprised of an aging silverback, two blackbacks (or younger males), five females, and four offspring. The harmony of the group depended upon the strength and dominance of the silverback; his relationship with the females was the key to the troop’s unity. So long as the blackbacks remained subservient to the silverback, the troop functioned well as an integrated family, community, and subsistence unit. It would continue to do so, in all likelihood, till the silverback died, at which point the females would look for a new leader.”
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
“The group of gorillas was made up of an old silverback, two blackback males, five women gorillas, and four little gorillas. The harmony of the little group was dependent upon the strength and dominion of the silverback. How he got along with the females was a big key to the troop’s unity. So long as the blackbacks paid their dues to the silverback, the troop functioned pretty well as an integrated family, community, and economy. It probably would continue to do so until the silverback died; that’s when the females would look for a new group and a new leader.”
This writer slips in and out of compliance with academic writing standards in the paragraph on gorillas. He writes lazily to some degree—redundantly calling a silverback “old,” calling female gorillas “women,” and referring to young gorillas as “little,” for instance. He incorrectly uses dominion, instead of dominance. It is a stretch to call a family an “economy,” though it is an economic unit. The writer goes colloquial with “paid their dues,” and drops in a contraction, “that’s.” What other evidence do you see that this draft shouldn’t be the final one?
本文談論大猩猩，寫作方面與學術標準時有出入，有點漫不經心，例如多此一舉地用 old 來形容 silverback（12 歲以上的大猩猩），稱雌猩猩 (female gorillas) 為 “women gorillas”，稱年幼的猩猩為 “little gorillas”，並把dominance 誤寫成 dominion。此外，儘管大猩猩家族確實會一起覓食謀生，稱之為 “economy”（經濟體）卻有點誇大了。部分用法也較口語，例如 “paid their dues”（苦熬），用縮寫 “that’s”。這篇文章只有草稿的水準，還稱不上定稿，你舉得出其他例子嗎？
Acceptable 認可的文章
“The troop of gorillas was comprised of an aging silverback, two blackbacks (or younger males), five females, and four offspring. The harmony of the group depended upon the strength and dominance of the silverback; his relationship with the females was the key to the troop’s unity. So long as the blackbacks remained subservient to the silverback, the troop functioned well as an integrated family, community, and subsistence unit. It would continue to do so, in all likelihood, till the silverback died, at which point the females would look for a new leader.”
