《“英语科技论文写作“讲义要点.doc》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《“英语科技论文写作“讲义要点.doc（13页珍藏版）》请在taowenge.com淘文阁网|工程机械CAD图纸|机械工程制图|CAD装配图下载|SolidWorks_CaTia_CAD_UG_PROE_设计图分享下载上搜索。
1、“英语科技论文写作”讲义要点Lecture Notes onEnglish Writing of Scientific Papers(As Reprinted from Published Sources in English)魏高原by Gaoyuan Wei2003-12-13北京大学化学学院内容简介“英语科技论文的写作与发表”（简称“英语科技论文写作”）课面向中石化北京化工研究院的研究生与科研人员，共安排12周，每周2小时。课堂教学采用“原理-实例”教学法，并有课外写作练习。本课程旨在让学生掌握用英语写作科技论文的基本技巧，以及如何在英文期刊上发表所写论文的有效方法。主要围绕以下20余个
2、与论文有关的教学内容展开教学：论文题目、作者署名、通讯地址、论文摘要、引言、实验材料和方法、论文结论、讨论、致谢、参考文献、数据列表、制图、文字处理、投稿、审稿意见处理、出版环节、订购论文抽印本、综述论文、会议论文、学位论文等。教学进度安排（Course Outline） “英语科技论文写作”课 (English Writing of Scientific Papers)Nov. 18, 2003 Dec 25, 2003 （主办：中石化北京化工研究院）Lecture Room & Room 252, Experimental Building Tuesday and Thursday, 18
3、:00-20:00by Professor Gaoyuan Wei College of Chemistry & Molecular Engineering, Peking UniversityDay 01 - Nov. 18 Lecture 01 Introduction on Scientific Writing 1.1 About This Short Course 1.2 What Is a Scientific Paper Day 02 - Nov. 20 Lecture 02 Components of a Paper 2.1 How to Prepare the Title 2.
4、2 How to List the AuthorsDay 03 - Nov. 25 2.3 How to List the Addresses 2.4 How to Prepare the Abstract2.5 How to Write the Introduction 2.6 How to Write the Materials and Methods SectionDay 04 - Nov. 27 2.7 How to Write the Results 2.8 How to Write the Discussion 2.9 How to Cite AcknowledgmentsDay
5、05 - Dec. 02 2.10 How to Prepare the Literature Cited 2.11 How to Design Effective TablesDay 06 - Dec. 04 2.12 How to Prepare Effective Illustrations 2.13 How to Type the ManuscriptDay 07 - Dec. 09 Lecture 03 Publication of a Paper3.1 Where and How to Submit the Manuscript 3.2 How to Deal with Edito
6、rs (The Review Process)Day 08 - Dec. 11 3.3 How to Deal with Printers (The Publishing Process)3.4 How to Order and Use Reprints Day 09 - Dec. 16 Lecture 04 Writing of Other Types of Scientific Literature 4.1 How to Write a Review Paper 4.2 How to Write a Conference Report 4.3 How to Write a ThesisDa
7、y 10- Dec. 18 Lecture 05 Ethics, Rights, and Permissions5.1 Importance of Originality 5.2 Copyright Considerations Lecture 06 Writing Styles6.1 Use and Misuse of English Day 11- Dec. 236.2 Avoiding Jargon 6.3 How and When to Use AbbreviationsDay 12- Dec. 25 Lecture 07 Summary and Discussion on Scien
8、tific Writing 7.1 A Personalized Summary 7.2 Discussion with the ParticipantsLecture 01 Introduction on Scientific Writing 1.1 About This Short Course 1.1.1 The Importance of PublicationThe Man of Science appears to be the only man who has something to say just now and theonly man who does not know
9、how to say it.“科学之人”看似唯一欲言之人 却也为难以为之之人。 SIR JAMES BARRIE詹姆斯巴里爵士We in science, of necessity, must contribute to the glut of information. But let us do it with love, especially love of the English language, which is the cornerstone of the intellectual heritage of the western world;also do it with ener
10、gy, the energy we need to put into the scientific paper so that the reader will not need to use much energy to get the information out of the paper;husband our materials, especially our words, so that we do not waste inordinate quantities of paper and ink (or bits) in trying to tell the world more t
11、han we know. 运转寰球的四大件：关爱（LOVE） 能量（ENERGY）材料（MATERIALS） 信息（INFORMATION）Publish or Perish?Whether or not one wholly subscribes to the “publish or perish” adage, there is no question but that the goal of scientific research is publication. And scientisits are measured, and become known (or remain unkno
12、wn), by their publication.The publication of research results is an essential part of the research process.A scientific experiment, no matter how spectacular the result, is not completed until the results are published. In fact, the cornerstone of the philosophy of science is based on the fundamenta
13、l assumption that original research must be published; only this can new scientific knowledge be authenticated and then added to the existing data base that we call science.The research scientist, perhaps uniquely among the trades and professions, must provide a written document showing what he did,
14、 why he did it, how he did it, and what he learned from it.Thus the scientist must not only “do” science; he must “write” science. Although good writing does not lead to the publication of bad science, bad writing can and often does prevent or delay the publication of good science.1.1.2 The Purpose
15、of This Short Course By presenting certain basic principles that are accepted in most scientific disciplines, it is hoped that this course will help scientist and students to prepare manuscripts that will have a high probability of being accepted for publication and of being completely understood wh
16、en they are published.1. Define a Scientific PaperTo write a scientific paper, the writer must know exactly what it is he is doing and why he is doing it.To be guilty of dual publication, or to use the work of others without appropriate attribution, is the type of breach in scientific ethics that is
17、 regarded as unforgivable by ones peers. Therefore, exact definition of what my go into a scientific paper, and what may not, is of prime importance.2. Parts Analysis of a Scientific Paper Each individual element of the scientific paper is analyzed, item by item.Fortunately, there are certain common
18、ly accepted rules regarding the construction of the title, the Abstract, the Introduction, etc., so that this parts analysis, once mastered, should serve the scientist throughout his research career.3.Associated Information Either Technical or Related to the Post Writing StagesTechnical information:
19、 e.g., how to prepare illustrative material;Information Related to the Post Writing Stages: e.g., submission, review, and publication processes.4. Rules Relating to Primary Scientific Papers Are Adjusted to Fit Different CircumstancesThese circumstances include the writing of review papers, conferen
20、ce reports, and theses.5. Additional TopicsSome of the rules of English as applied to scientific writing;A sermon against jargon;A discussion of abbreviationsA sermon against sin.1.2 What Is a Scientific Paper 1.2.1 Inexact and Exact Definitions Inexact Definitions:Perhaps the best answer to the que
21、stion “What is a scientific paper” was provided by the wag who described a drug as “any substance which, when injected into a laboratory rat, produces a scientific paper.”It was once said that a scientific paper is not designed to be read. It is designed to be published. Although this was said in je
22、st, there is much truth to it. And, actually, if the paper is designed to be published, it will also be in a prescribed form that can be read, or at least its contents can be grasped quickly and easily by the reader.A scientific paper is (i) the first publication of original research results, (ii) i
23、n a form whereby peers of the author can repeat the experiments and test the conclusions, and (iii) in a journal or other source document which is readily available within the scientific community. Or as Debakey (1976) said it, “the contents of an article shall be new, true, important, and comprehen
24、sibleExact Definitions:In 1968, the Council of Biology Editors (CBE) arrived at the following definition:An acceptable primary scientific publication must be the first disclosure (N.B. Now entry into a computer data base) containing sufficient information to enable peers (1) to assess observations,
25、(2) to repeat experiments, and (3) to evaluate intellectual processes; moreover, it must be susceptible to sensory perception, essentially permanent, available to the scientific community without restriction, and available for regular screening by one or more of the major recognized secondary servic
26、es (e.g., currently, Biological Abstracts, Chemical Abstracts, etc., in the United States and similar facilities in other countries).N.B. This definition excludes publication such as newsletters and house organs.1.2.2 Organization and Language of a Scientific Paper A scientific paper is, or should b
27、e, highly stylized, with distinctive and dearly evident component parts. Each scientific paper should have, in proper order, its Introduction, Materials and Methods, Results, and Discussion.“Good organization is the key to good writing” by M S Peterson (1961)(i) What was the problem? the Introductio
28、n;(ii) How did you study the problem? the Materials and Methods;(iii) What did you find? the Results;(iv) What do these findings mean? the Discussion.Some people think that the preparation of a scientific paper has almost nothing todo with writing, per se. it is a question of organization.In additio
29、n to organization, the second principal ingredient of a scientific paper should be appropriate language within that organization. We keep emphasizing proper use of English, because it is in this area that most scientists have trouble.David B Truman said it well: ”In the complexities of contemporary
30、existence the specialist who is trained but uneducated, technically skilled but actually incompetent, is a menace.”Language need not be difficult. In scientific writing, we say: “The best English is that which gives the sense in the fewest short words.” Literary tricks, metaphors and the like, diver
31、t attention from the message to the style. They should be used rarely, if at all, in scientific writing.1.2.3 Other DefinitionsOriginal research report scientific paper;Research report that are not original, or not scientific, or somehow fail to qualify as scientific papers a review paper, a confere
32、nce report, a meeting abstract, etc. A review paper may review almost anything, most typically the recent work in a defined subject area or the work of a particular individual or group. Thus, the review paper is designed to summarize, analyze, or synthesize information that has already been publishe
33、d (research reports in primary journals). Although much or all of the material in a review paper has previously been published, the spectre of dual publication does not normally arise because the review nature of the work is usually obvious (often in the title of the publication, such as Microbiolog
34、ical Reviews, Annual Review of Biochemistry, etc.).A conference report is a paper published in a book or journal as part of the proceedings of a symposium, national or international congress, workshop, round table, or the like. Rarely, such conferences are designed for the presentation of original d
35、ata, and the resultant proceeding (book or journal) qualifies as primary publication. More often, such conference presentations are basically review papers, presenting reviews of recent work of particular scientists or recent work in particular laboratories. Some of the material reported at some con
36、ferences (especially the exciting ones) is mainly in the form of preliminary reports, in which new, original data are reported, often accompanied by interesting speculation. But, usually, these preliminary reports do not qualify, nor are they intended to qualify, as scientific papers. Later, often m
37、uch later, such work is validly published in a primary journal; by this time, the loose ends have been tied down, all essential experimental details are recorded (so that a competent worker could repeat the experiments), and the speculations are now recorded as conclusions.Therefore, the vast confer
38、ence literature that appears in print normally is not primary. If original data are presented in such contributions, the data can and should be published (or republished) in an archival (primary) journal. Otherwise, the information may be effectively lost. If publication in a primary journal follows
39、 publication in a conference report, there may be copyright and permission problems affecting portions of the work (see later discussion on this subject), but the more fundamental problem of dual publication normally does not and should not arise.Meeting abstracts, like conference proceedings, are o
40、f several widely varying types. Conceptually, however, they are similar to conference reports in that they can and often do contain original information. They are not primary publications, nor should publication of an abstract be considered as a bar to later publication of the full report.In the pas
41、t, there has been little confusion regarding the typical one-paragraph abstracts published as part of the program or distributed along with the program of a national meeting or international congress. It was usually understood that the papers presented at these meetings would later be submitted for
42、publication in primary journals. More recently, however, there has been a strong trend towards extended abstracts (or “synoptics”). Because it is very expensive to publish all of the full papers presented at a large meeting, such as a major international congress, and because such publication is sti
43、ll not a substitute for the valid publication offered by the primary journal, the movement to extended abstract makes a great deal of sense. The extended abstract can supply virtually as much information as a full paper; basically, what it lacks is the experimental detail. However, precisely because
44、 it lacks experimental detail, it cannot qualify as a scientific paper.Conclusion： General acceptance of such definition will greatly clarify both primary and secondary communication of scientific information.Lecture 07 Summary and Discussion on Scientific Writing 7.1 A Personalized SummaryThrough t
45、he years, I have had many occasions to visit various scientific laboratories. Almost always, I have been impressed, sometimes awed, by the obvious quality of the laboratories themselves and of the equipment and supplies contained therein. Judging by appearances, one could only believe that the newes
46、t and best (and most expensive) instruments and reagents were used in these laboratories.During those same years, I have seen thousands of the products of those same laboratories. Some of these products (scientific papers) properly reflected the quality and expense that went into their generation. B
47、ut many did not.I want to talk about the many that did not. I ask you, as I have often asked myself, why it is that so many scientists, while capable of brilliant performance in the laboratory, write papers that would be given failing marks in a seventh-grade composition class. I ask you why it is that some scientists will demand the newest ultracentrifuge, even if it costs $40,000, and then refuse to pay $20 to a commercial artist to draw a proper graph of the results obtained with the ultracentri