:::
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
“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.”
