I was told that most articles in U.S. newspapers are written at the 8th grade reading level. I didnt believe that until I saw my sons writing; I knew then that I could never be a writer, neither in English nor in Chinese. What I am trying to say is my English writing is not difficult to understand. So, if you have trouble with a particular sentence I wrote, please let me know so that I can re-write it. When I write, I usually draft it and then revise it 2-3 times to make it as clear as possible before sending it off. If you cannot understand my Blog, I would like to try harder because I do want to communicate with you.
Please skip the first two paragraphs, if you have read Part one. I recently learned from a journal editor that 稿件的编辑加工是一个bottleneck. Since I have been involved in journal publication for more than 15 years, first as an author and now as an English editor, I would like to share some views based on my own limited experiences. To eliminate such a bottleneck, three steps are required: 1) good scientific writing skill, 2) good English editing assistance, and 3) professional copy-editing service (usually provided by the editorial office of the journal). Lets discuss Step two, English editing. I am afraid this is the most difficult issue for any English journals. There are some simple solutions. 1) For journals that have too many acceptable manuscripts (in terms of scientific merits), the editors can simply say: We will accept your manuscript, provided that you improve the English presentation. If the editors want to be helpful, they can provide a list of English editors or companies; this can also help to ensure the quality of editing. 2) If a journal needs to use manuscripts for an upcoming issue, it can take over the English editing responsibility by using its own English editors or other companies. I know at least two journals that pay $50-$60/paper for their English editors to put a final touch on accepted manuscripts and absorb the cost. If the journal is unable to absorb the cost, it can ask authors to pay for it, or raise page charge accordingly. One problem with this approach is some English editors are native speakers but do not have the science or research background. I also suspect that the low pay does not encourage thorough editing in some cases. Step three, professional copy-editing, is like putting make-up on before one steps into the spotlight. Its very important. Unlike Blog, I can always go correct my mistakes later though I try to avoid them at the first place; once a journal issue is published, it is permanent. I think each editorial office needs a few copy-editors. They can be trained on the job, as long as they are willing to work hard and have basic English knowledge. If the editorial office is overwhelmed, it can also contract out this service. These are what I can think of now. I can revise these two parts or add Part three, after I receive some constructive comments.
I recently learned from a journal editor that 稿件的编辑加工是一个bottleneck. Since I have been involved in journal publication for more than 15 years, first as an author and now as an English editor, I would like to share some views based on my own (limited) experiences. To eliminate such a bottleneck, three steps are required: 1) good scientific writing skill, 2) good English editing assistance, and 3) professional copy-editing service (usually provided by the editorial office of the journal). In U.S., most authors (at least in my field) are able to write research manuscripts on their own (Step one). They generally do not seek English editing services, but some do (Step two). In fact, my current school used to have a part-time editor, paid by the school (so there is no charge for authors who use this service). I am not sure what is available now. As for Step three, it depends on journal. One society called the AMS offers professional copy-editing at no additional charge. In fact, they are hiring another copy-editor right now. Another society called the AGU does not care how poor the English reads, in the title, the abstract, or the main text. Somewhere at its Web site, it states typos are authors responsibility. Its embarrassing, but no one seems to care. Since English journals in China tend to have many contributing authors with little English writing training, my suggestions for Step one are as follows. 1) The journal can provide a list of English editors and companies that have demonstrated their capability in scientific writing and editing in these specific fields covered by the journals scope. I want to recommend Liwenbianji ( 理文 编 辑 ; http://www.liwenbianji.cn/home ), but a managing editor told me some authors were not too satisfied by the outcome. I suspect that it depends; fair enough. 2) The journal contracts a service provider that is willing to offer bulk rate. The cost is charged to the authors, who need such a service, 3) Some journals, including Nature, have their associated but separated editing services, such as the Nature Publishing Group Language Editing ( http://languageediting.nature.com/ ). I think its a good idea. The editorial office can hire a staff to oversee this group, using Ph.D. candidates in the field whose English is already quite good, plus a managing English editor to ensure the quality of the final products. (I know some Chinese students who can write reasonably well, and their skills improve quickly after seeing tracked editing on their own work.) The cost should come from the authors who use this service, which should cover the staff, and provide income for the students and the managing English editor. I was told 99% of authors can afford to pay page charges, but I dont know what percentage can afford this additional service, which can be as high as RMB 0.40/word (or USD 0.06/word). (To be continued.)
The magnitude of the challenge of slowing the rate of biodiversity loss is demonstrated by the fact that most of the direct drivers of biodiversity loss are projected to either remain constant or to increase in the near future. (p. 14 of Ecosystems and Human Well-being: B i o d i v e r s i t y S y n t h e s i s) Better prediction of the impacts of drivers on biodiversity, ecosystem functioning, and ecosystem services, together with improved measures of biodiversity, would aid decision-making at all levels. (p. 16 of Ecosystems and Human Well-being: B i o d i v e r s i t y S y n t h e s i s) Note: These sample sentences are taken from A Report of the Millennium Ecosystem Assessment, which was produced by a group of scientists along with an Extended Writing Team and Review Editors.
Note: please skip these (#s) when you first read this Blog. This is probably one of the (#1) hardest questions for even the (#2) native speakers. To find out the (#3) rules, I once took a paragraph from a manuscript and visited three native speakers: a British researcher, an American professor who writes very well, and a newsletter editor who can turn a research abstract into an article for laymen. So, what were the (#4) answers I received? If there are obvious rules about where to include or not to include the, then these people should hand me the (#5) same answer. Well, to my delight, their answers were all different. So, what can we learn from this little experiment? Do not worry too much about the, if you are a non-native author. There are hard (meaning solid) rules, which you can learn from books. However, the (#6) reviewers are unlikely to reject your manuscript simply because you got the(m) wrong at too many places. Pay attention to the six the-s I marked above, and send me your comments if you think I am wrong, which is possible. Send me your abstract if you want to know how many extra the-s you have put in, and how many you might have missed. Happy Blogging! p.s. Here is a useful rule: Leave it out, whenever you can. This rule can also be applied to anything we write, in English or in Chinese. No need to add any feet to a snake :) (Revised on Oct. 13th, 2009)
一、先想先写最后做: 1. 做研究之前，必须想清楚：结果能不能发表？发表在哪里？ 2. 先把文章大框写好，空出数据，等做完实验填完空就可以发了；正所谓心中有沟壑！ 3. 在未搞清写什么、发哪里、自己研究与同类研究有何出色之处之前，就不要动手做！ 4. 继续去看文献，去想；想不清楚就做还不如不做！ 5. 要想这样做，就得先看文献！要知道如何把文章架起来、要知道别人是如何讨论的、要知道自己的数据是不是说明了与别人不同的东东或别人没有做过这个过程就是阅读文献及思考的过程，这些搞清楚了，写就简单了！ 6. 要是先做事，做完发现别人做过，或无法用理论来解释，岂不是冤大头？ 二、如何科学选题: 1. 课题选择和国际接轨。想在国际核心期刊发表文献，就必须了解国际研究动态，选择与国际学术研究合拍的课题。由于多方面因素的影响，我国科学研究选题与国际先进水平还有一定距离。我国一家权威科研机构不久前在国内挑选了许多前沿领域的研究课题，准备参与国际合作，但到美国后发现近三分之二的课题已经不属前沿，在美国很少有人研究。在高校，一些教师治学严谨、基础扎实，但科研成果不突出，重要原因就是不重视有关领域学术动态，不能选得合适的课题。 2. 课题要有可发展性。课题可发展性对高水平论文的持续产出具有极大作用。中国科技大学范洪义另辟蹊径，发展了诺贝尔奖得主狄拉克(Dirac)奠定的量子论的符号法，系统地建立了有序算符内的积分理论，1998年有24篇论文被SCI收录；他对自己论文高产的解释是，研究具有开创性，突破一点以后就可以向纵深发展，使研究工作自成系列、成面成片。我院被SCI收录论文最多的杨新民老师从事凸性理论研究，该理论兴起于 20世纪70年代，90年代进入高峰。作为新兴研究领域，该理论本身有许多尚待研究之处，同时该理论也可用来解决最优化方面的问题。反之，有人由于所接触的问题已处于该研究分支的末端，即使在该点上有所突破，也难持续发展。 3. 借助工具选题：①查阅有关领域的检索工具，这些工具各高校都有；②了解SCI收录期刊所反映的科技动态，ISI期刊信息可从http://www.isinet.com查获，也可从SCI印刷版每期Ａ、Ｄ分册的来源出版物目录(Lists of Source Publications)查找，还可从ISI引用期刊报告 (Journal Citation Reports，简称JCR)了解期刊信息，该文献有印刷版、网络版(JCR on the Web)和光盘版 (JCR on CD-ROM)；③利用ISI提供的选题工具帮助，例如，能对正在开展的工作进行量化分析以保证用户科学研究同科学发展趋向一致的(Essential Science Indicators)，介绍有关最杰出人物研究状况、有关领域研究热点和发展趋向的(ISI Highly Cited.com)；④利用网上数据库了解国际学术研究动态及有关资料。只要有心参与国际学术竞争，选择与国际学术研究接轨的课题并不存在难以克服的障碍。 三、如何获得好的idea 无论是临床还是基础科研，最关键的是idea，idea的出台决定了科研水平和档次。高水平的科学家一听你的科研课题和方向，就能判断你科研水平。因此，获得好的idea是至关重要的。 1. 优秀科学家要具备敏锐的科研嗅觉，而这种敏锐性是经过长期的思考和实践获得的。通过几天或半个月的苦思苦想得到了一个自以为很好的idea，很可能是别人十几年前就做过的工作。但新手上路时重复一些经典实验以获得经验是很正常的。此外，科研要注重质量，千万不要为单纯地追求数量而令懂行的人嘲笑。如何获得 idea呢？ A. 大量地、仔细地阅读文献，多听学术报告、多与同行探讨，从中获得启示，不能急于求成。 B. 总结感兴趣领域内尚未探讨过但很有意义的课题； C. 总结争论性很强的问题，反复比较研究方法和结论，从中发现切入点； D. 善于抓住科研过程中遇到的难以解释的问题，往往会成为思维的闪光点； E. 细致地拟定方案，论证可行性。 2. 获得idea的两种途径：传统途径就是先阅读大量科研论文，弄清目前的研究现状和要解决的问题等；非传统的途径是自己先冥思苦想一段时间，有了自己的 idea后再去查文献。这样不会让以往的研究限制你的思维，不失为一个很好的方法。别人没作过的东西，也许不是因为别人没想到，而是因为没有意义或者没有可能性。 3. 获得良好idea的基础前提： A. 在科研前必须弥补基础知识，这是看懂文献的基础。 B. 广泛阅读文献是支撑。硕士至少查阅600篇，粗看300篇，细看100篇，研读50篇。博士至少再多一倍，并始终关注国际动态。 C. 学会阅读文献，读懂文章。建议先review再article，先中后英；看10－20篇review后看研究性论文。拿到一篇研究性论文，先看标题，立即停住，问自己几个问题：(1)想想别人这文章是怎么做的(可参考材料方法)？会做哪些内容来说明其标题？(2)明白他为什么要做这个吗？(3)如文章是近半年内发表的，该文章解决了什么问题？引出了什么问题(结合你看的综述)？接下来仔细看摘要，就知道你的想法是否与别人吻合？(4)看完实验结果，再思考有什么地方不完善？有没有深入或拓展到底？一般来说，SCI-3分以下的文章只可能做了一部分机理，下面肯定有东西可做，关键是你自己要思考，去发现。 4. 长期作战持之以恒。做好上面所述要求肯定会有所谓idea，但过程艰辛，需长时间磨练，需要patience和passion。有天赋的人能考上海中科院生命科学院，北京中科院那几个所，北大、清华。耐心干5年，这些地方正为中国带来更多本土nature、science文章。 四、博士如何出牛文章？ 1. 几点忠告：多看paper没有坏处；多找非老板的其他人，如其他教授，postdoc，前辈师兄等讨论，借鸡下蛋；可以动手的东西容易上手，比如软件等；找机会去开会，认认牛人，不发paper，做做volunteer，或者参加phd symposium之类。五主动参加seminar，自己讲几次看过的paper，最好自己组织一个topic拉几个师兄弟和postdoc参加，注意找几本教科书看看，打好基础。 2. 如何获得IDEA: A. 需对研究的领域有一个全局性了解，按老板的话说是要有bird eye。 B. 要有bird eye，需比较全面地阅读本领域文章。读文章要其idea，总结成一句话，并用卡片记录好，分类整理。如果把别人文章的idea总结成一句话，就容易理解它的本质，也好作变化。 C. 读了很多文章后，可以写一个special study，将读过的本领域东西系统总结在一起，相当于你的综合理解，也就是bird eye看到的东西了。以后翻阅起来也相当方便。 D. 用心分析别人的idea，任何一个idea都有weakness；想办法解决它，那就成自己idea。最好的办法就是看大牛的paper，无论他有多牛，他的文章总是在说一个方面，总有其他东西没有包括进去，把他的文章认真精读了，总会发现漏洞和不足或不全面之处，然后你就知道怎么做了。记住：每篇文章几乎都有没有考虑完全的东西。 E. 时不时阅读更广泛领域的东西，扩大bird eye范围，对领域外的感兴趣的文章进行copy收藏，这个叫walk around a little bit，很多领域外的东西可以借鉴、学科交叉从而产生new idea。 F. 经常跟牛人、博士后或高年级博士等有思想的人(最好不是相同专业，而是相关专业或交叉学科)讨论，也容易出idea。再有就是，关注其他专业的书籍、杂志等信息，从中获取交叉创新idea 第二部分 SCI论文写作 一、写作框架和各部分要求 Title: Be short, accurate, and unambiguous; Give your paper a distinct personality; Begin with the subject of the study. Introduction: What is known; What is unknown; Why we did this study? Methods: Participants, subjects; Measurements; Outcomes and explanatory variables; Statistical methods. Results: Sample characteristics; Univariate analyses; Bivariate analyses; Multivariate analyses. Tables and figures: No more than six tables or figures; Use Table 1 for sample characteristics (no P values); Put most important findings in a figure. Discussion: State what you found; Outline the strengths and limitations of the study; Discuss the relevance to current literature; Outline your implications with a clear So what? and Where now? References: All citations must be accurate; Include only the most important, most rigorous, and most recent literature; Quote only published journal articles or books; Never quote second hand; Cite only 20-35 references. Formatting: Include the title, author, page numbers, etc. in headers and footers; Start each section on a new page; Format titles and subtitles consistently; Comply with Instructions to authors. 二、英文写作的语言技巧 1. Introduction： A. 如何指出当前研究的不足并有目的地引导出自己研究的重要性？在叙述前人成果之后，用However来引导不足，提出一种新方法或新方向。如：However, little information(little attention/little work/little data/little research)(or few studies/few investigations/few researchers/few attempts)(or no/none of these studies)has(have)been done on(focused on/attempted to/conducted/investigated/studied(with respect to))。如：Previous research (studies, records) has (have) failed to consider/ ignored/ misinterpreted/ neglected to/overestimated, underestimated/misleaded. thus, these previous results are inconclisive, misleading, unsatisfactory, questionable, controversial. Uncertainties (discrepancies) still exist研究方法和方向与前人一样时，可通过以下方式强调自己工作：However, data is still scarce(rare, less accurate)，We need to(aim to, have to) provide more documents(data, records, studies, increase the dataset). Further studies are still necessary(essential) 强调自己研究的重要性，一般还要在However之前介绍与自己研究问题相反或相关的问题。比如：(1)时间问题；(2)研究手段问题；(3)研究区域问题；(4)不确定性；(5)提出自己的假设来验证。如果你研究的问题在时间上比较新，你可大量提及时间较老问题的研究及重要性，然后(However)表明对时间尺度比较新的问题研究不足；如果你的是一种新的研究手段或研究方向，你可提出当前流行的方法及其物质性质，然后(However)说对你所研究的方向方法研究甚少；如果研究涉及区域问题，就先总结相邻区域或其它区域的研究，然后(However)强调这一区域的研究不足；虽然前人对某一问题研究很多，但目前有两种或更多种观点，这种uncertainties或 ambiguities值得进一步澄清；如果自己的研究是全是新的，没有前人的工作可对比，你就可以自信地说根据假设提出的过程，存在这种可能的结果，本文就是要证实这种结果等等。We aim to test the feasibility (reliability) of theIt is hoped that the question will be resolved (fall away) with our proposed method (approach). B. 提出自己的观点：We aim to//This paper reports on//This paper provides results//This paper extends the method//This paper focus onThe purpose of this paper is toFurthermore, Moreover, In addition, we will also discuss C. 圈定自己的研究范围：introduction的另一个作用就是告诉读者(包括reviewer)，你文章的主要研究内容。如果处理不好，reviewer会提出严厉的建议，比如你没有考虑某种可能性，某种研究手段等。为减少这种争论，在前言的结尾就必须明确提出本文研究的范围：(1) 时间尺度；(2) 研究区域等。如涉及较长的时序，你可明确提出本文只关心某一特定时间范围的问题，We preliminarily focus on the older (younger)如有两种时间尺度 (long-term and short term)，你可说两者都重要，但是本文只涉及其中一种。研究区域的问题，和时间问题一样，也需明确提出你只关心某一特定区域！ D. 最后的圆场：在前言的最后，还可以总结性地提出这一研究对其它研究有什么帮助；或者说further studies onwill be summarized in our next study (or elsewhere)。总之，其目的就是让读者把思路集中到你要讨论的问题上来。尽量减少不必要的争论(arguments)。 2. Discussion： A. 怎样提出观点：在提出自己的观点时，采取什么样的策略很重要，不合适的句子通常会遭到reviewer置疑。(1)如果观点不是这篇文章最新提出的，通常要用We confirm that(2)对于自己很自信的观点，可用We believe that(3)通常，由数据推断出一定的结论，用Results indicate, infer, suggest, imply that(4) 在极其特别时才可用We put forward(discover, observe)for the first time来强调自己的创新(5) 如果自己对所提出的观点不完全肯定，可用We tentatively put forward (interrprete this to)Or The results may be due to (caused by) attributed to resulted fromOr This is probably a consequence ofIt seems thatcan account for (interpret) thisOr It is posible that it stem from要注意这些结构要合理搭配。如果通篇是类型1)和5)，那这篇文章的意义就大打折扣。如果全是2)，肯定会遭到置疑。所以要仔细分析自己成果的创新性以及可信度。 B. 连接词与逻辑：写英文论文最常见的毛病是文章的逻辑不清楚，解决方法如下。 (1)注意句子上下连贯，不能让句子独立。常见的连接词有，However, also, in addition, consequently, afterwards, moreover, Furthermore, further, although, unlike, in contrast, Similarly, Unfortunately, alternatively, parallel results, In order to, despite, For example, Compared with, other results, thus, therefore用好连接词能使文章层次清楚，意思明确。比如，叙述有时间顺序的事件或文献，最早的文献可用AA advocated it for the first time.接下来可用Then BB further demonstrated that. 再接下来，可用Afterwards, CC如果还有，可用More recent studies by DD如果叙述两种观点，要把它们截然分开AA put forward thatIn contrast, BB believe or Unlike AA, BB suggest or On the contrary (表明前面观点错误)，如果只表明两种观点对立，用in contrast BB如果两种观点相近,可用AA suggestSimilarily, alternatively, BBOr Also, BB or BB allso does表示因果或者前后关系可用Consequently, therefore, as a result表明递进关系可用furthermore, further, moreover, in addition写完一段英文，最好首先检查是否较好地应用了这些连接词。 (2) 注意段落布局的整体逻辑：经常我们要叙述一个问题的几个方面。这种情况下，一定要注意逻辑结构。第一段要明确告诉读者你要讨论几个部份Therefore, there are three aspects of this problem have to be addressed. The first question involvesThe second problem relates toThe third aspect deals with清晰地把观点逐层叙述。也可以直接用First, Second, Third, Finally当然，Furthermore, in addition等可以用来补充说明。 (3) 讨论部份的整体结构：小标题是把问题分为几个片段的好方法。通常第一个片段指出文章最重要的数据或结果；补充说明部份放在最后一个片段。一定要明白，文章的读者分为多个档次；除了本专业的专业人士读懂以外，一定要想办法能让更多的外专业人读懂。所以可以把讨论部份分为两部份，一部份提出观点，另一部份详细介绍过程以及论述的依据。这样专业外的人士可以了解文章的主要观点，比较专业的讨论他可以把它当成黑箱子，而这一部份本专业人士可以进一步研究。 C. 讨论部分包括什么内容？(1)主要数据及其特征的总结；(2)主要结论及与前人观点的对比；(3) 本文的不足。对第三点，一般作者看来不可取，但事实上给出文章的不足恰恰是保护自己文章的重要手段。如果刻意隐藏文章的漏洞，觉得别人看不出来，是非常不明智的。所谓不足，包括以下内容：(1)研究的问题有点片面，讨论时一定要说，It should be noted that this study has examined onlyWe concentrate (focus) on onlyWe have to point out that we do notSome limitations of this study are(2)结论有些不足，The results do not implyThe results can not be used to determine(or be taken as evidence of)Unfortunately, we can not determine this from this dataOur results are lack of但指出这些不足之后，一定要马上再次加强本文的重要性以及可能采取的手段来解决这些不足，为别人或者自己的下一步研究打下伏笔。Not withstanding its limitation, this study does suggestHowever, these problems could be solved if we considerDespite its preliminary character, this study can clearly indicate用中文来说这是左右逢源，把审稿人想到的问题提前给一个交代，同时表明你已经在思考这些问题，但是由于文章长度，试验进度或者试验手段的制约，暂时不能回答这些问题。但通过你的一些建议，这些问题在将来的研究中有可能实现。 3. Others： A. 为使文章清楚，第一次提出概念时，最好以括弧给出较详细解释。如文章用了很多Abbreviation可用两种方法解决：(1) 在文章最后加上个Appendix，把所有Abbreviation列表；(2)在不同页面上不时地给出Abbreviation的含义，用来提醒读者。 B. 绝对不能全面否定前人的成果，即使在你看来前人的结论完全不对。这是对前人工作最起码的尊重，英文叫做给别人的工作credits.所以文章不要出现非常 negative的评价，比如Their results are wrong, very questionable, have no commensence, etc.遇到这类情况，可以婉转地提出：Their studies may be more reasonable if they hadconsidered this situation.Their results could be better convinced if theyOr Their conclusion may remain some uncertanties. 三、撰写外刊论文的体会 有人归纳了外刊论文撰写的五个基本要求，即5C：正确(correctness)、清楚(clarity)、简洁(concision)、完整(completion)和一致性(consistency) 。只有满足这5点，才算是一篇合格的外刊文章。 1. Introduction： Introduction 是外刊文章最难写的部分之一(另外就是Discussion)。中文文章的缺陷就在于Introduction没有内涵，过于简单，没有真正体现论文的研究起初和创新要素。外刊论文对于Introduction的要求是非常高的，一个好的Introduction相当于文章成功了一半。所以大家应该在 Introduction的撰写上下功夫。要写好Introduction，最重要的是要保持鲜明的层次感和极强的逻辑性，这两点是紧密结的，即在符合逻辑性的基础上建立层层递进的关系。 A. 阐述自己研究领域的基本内容。要尽量简洁明了，不罗嗦；须知看文章者都是该领域的专家，所以一些显而易见的知识要用概括性的而不是叙述性的语言来描述。 B. 文献总结回顾。是Introduction的重头戏之一，要特别着重笔墨来描写。一方面要把该领域内过去和现在的状况全面概括总结出来，不能有丝毫的遗漏，特别是最新的进展和过去经典文献的引用(这是两个最容易出问题的地方，要极力避免；一旦审稿人指出这两个毛病，很可能意味着表明你做的不够深入或全面，负面作用非常明显)。另一方面，文献引用和数据提供一定要准确，切记避免片面摘录部分结果而不反映文献的总体结果；引用的数据也要正确，特别是间接引用的数据(即不是从原文献中查到，而是从别人文献中发现的另一篇文献的数据)；数据出错会导致文章的印象特差！此外，引用文献时注意防止造成抄袭的印象，即不要原文抄录，要用自己的话进行总结描述。如果审稿人正好是文献的引用者的话，原文照抄的结果一定会很糟糕。 C. 分析过去研究的局限性并阐明自己研究的创新点。这是整个Introduction的高潮，因而要慎之又慎。阐述局限性时，需要客观公正评价别人的工作，不要把抬高自己研究的价值建立在贬低别人的工作之上(这是中文文章易犯的毛病)，外刊论文写作万万不可如此，一定要遵循实事求是的原则来分析。在阐述自己的创新点时，要紧紧围绕过去研究的缺陷性来描述，完整而清晰地描述自己的解决思路。需要注意文章的摊子不要铺的太大，要抓住一点进行深入的阐述。只要能够很好的解决一个问题，就是篇好文章；创新性描述的越多越大，越容易被审稿人抓住把柄。中文文章的特点是创新性要多要大，而英文文章的特点恰恰相反，深入系统的解决一到两个问题就算相当不错。 D. 总结性描述论文的研究内容，可以分为一二三四等几个方面来描述，为Introduction做最后的收尾工作。至此，Introduction的写作算是大功告成。但是写完之后，还是要慎之又慎的仔细修改，琢磨每一个句子是否表达得恰当准确，这对 Introduction的修改完善至关重要。 2. Methods： Methods 部分描述论文实验过程，这一过程的写作相对较为简单，但是需注意的问题不少，重要的在于完整和科学。完整就是实验当中的每一个环节都要注意到，不要顾此失彼，遗漏一些重要内容。Methods部分可按实验对象、实验设备、实验材料、实验记录、实验分析方法等来组织行文。只要能在以下4个方面做到完整和科学的描述，相信写好Methods不是主要问题。 A. 实验对象一般是人、动物或一些组织等，它们的基本信息要描述明确；此外要注意国外刊物大多对牵扯到人或动物的实验都有一些特定要求，有些是不允许在人或动物身上进行的实验操作，这需要认真阅读投稿刊物中关于实验的详细规定；如果违反这一规定，可能会不接受评审或发表。 B. 实验设备，要对仪器型号、生产厂家、实验过程中的用途等作详细说明；实验设备之间的连接要科学正确，不要给人混乱或操作错误的感觉。设备使用时一些必要的步骤不可或缺，尤其是可能对实验结果造成特定影响的操作更要详细说明。这样做的好处是为了在Discussion中能够进行对应的分析。比如，一些设备在使用前要校正(calibration)，有的要求每阶段实验之后都要重新校正，以保证结果的正确性；一定要详细说明你的操作步骤或校正过程，便于评审人分析你的结果。 C. 实验材料，不同学科有不同要求。总体上来说要注意说明材料选择的必要性，也就是对为什么要选择这种材料，最好有一定的说明。如果这点描述不清，可能会导致整个实验过程不成立。 D. 实验过程，就是清楚描述实验的整个操作流程，一般要附以实验流程图进行说明。流程图的画法很多，有文字式的，有文字和示意图结合的，不同实验有不同做法。一般来说，可能后者多一些(实验性学科尤其如此)，因为这样能使评审人对实验过程一目了然。如果示意图画得漂亮，还可以增加一些印象分。描述时要有鲜明的层次感，对每个步骤之间的顺序和关联要描述清楚，不要造成实验过程混乱不堪的印象，因为评审人最终判断你的实验是否合理，是从这个过程描述得来的。 3. Results： 有人把Results和Discussion放在一起写，但是大多数论文都是分开的。这两种做法取决于文章的类型。如果你的结果在分析的同时进行讨论更加合适，并不适合单独拿出来分析(或者是那样做很困难，导致Discussion成为鸡肋时)，合在一起是合适的；反之就应该分开写。 A. Results的要求是翔实准确。准确是结果必须是真实的，不能伪造和篡改。翔实是提供最全面的分析结果，把一切从实验中得到的结果都提供给读者，不要故意隐瞒或遗漏某些重要结果。从某种意义上来说，结果不够翔实并不导致论文直接被拒，但结果的真实性被怀疑文章就肯定被拒。 B. 结果提供一般是表和图。不同杂志对图表要求不完全一致，应根据杂志要求分别对待。表格能清晰展示论文获得的第一手结果，便于后人在研究时进行引用和对比。图示能将数据的变化趋势灵活的表现出来，更直接和富于感染力。图表结合，能取长补短，使结果展现更丰富。目前，大家越来越喜欢提供各种各样的图，但杂志却要尽量限制图的个数；因为会增加排版的困难，版面费和出版社的支出也就会增加。因此，建议大家在提供图时，尽量用最少的图提供最多的信息，最多不超过8 个。图片太多显得罗索和累赘，主编不会欣赏；必要时可用表格替代一些图。图片格式要求每个杂志不同，用tif格式较多，不推荐用bmp(jpg更不能用)。有人说用矢量图清楚些，其实和tif没什么区别，只要足够清晰就行。黑白图片可免费，彩色图片绝对要收费，而且价格不菲。 C. Results和Discussion分开写时，Results部分尽量不要涉及对结果的评论，最多是总结陈述结果就可以了。否则造成这两部分的内容重叠，显得累赘，从而对Discussion不利。结果的描述也要注意层次安排，要按照条理性要求分别描述，显得逻辑性较强。不要乱七八糟，降低论文的可读性。 D. Results中大多要提供统计结果。方差分析的结果形式要根据刊物的格式给出，有的要求对分析值、自由度和概率都要详细的给出，有的只要分析值和概率就可以了。概率可以用p=0.02或者p0.03等形式给出，自由度的表达也有特殊要求。这些细节问题虽然关系不大，但是注意格式统一，不要乱七八糟各自为战。统计分析结果过多时，可用表格给出，具体可参照SPSS软件分析之后的结果。如果论文结果部分通篇都是统计分析的数据，会显得凌乱不堪，表格可以避免这种情况。 4. Discussion： Introduction和Discussion是最难写的两部分。Discussion之所以难写，是因为这里面最能够显示一个作者研究问题的深度和广度。深度就是论文对于提出问题的研究到了一个什么样的程度，广度指是否能够从多个角度来分析解释实验结果。要写好Discussion，大概可以分为下面两个步骤： A. 选择要深入讨论的问题。Results中有的结果是重要的，有的则可一笔带过。选择合适的结果在Discussion部分进行深入讨论，是写好该部分首先要面临的问题。一般来说，可根据如下原则来判断：如果你的结果体现了实验的独特性，是其他研究中没有得到的，那这个结果就是要重点讨论的问题；有些结果和前人的研究一致，并没有显著性差异，就应该一笔带过而无需深入讨论。Discussion的一个重要作用就是要突出自己研究的创新性，并体现出显著区别于他人的特点，区别大和小是另外一个问题，重要的是要有区别、区别就是创新。 B. 对选中的问题按一定层次从多个角度进行讨论，说理要有根据、问题要讲清楚、讲透彻。选择的问题有时不只一个(多数情况是2个以上)，因此要按一定层次描述清楚。一般来说，把最重要的放在中间，次之的放开头和末尾。放在中间能将评审人的情绪带至高潮，前面是铺垫，后面是总结。这样的顺序似乎更合适。问题无论大小，是否重要，都要从多个角度展开深入讨论：(1)首先要有类似结果的对比，说明自己结论的独特性；(2)其次要系统阐述为什么会有这样的结果，方法有多种(从实验设计角度，从理论原理角度，从分析方法角度，或借鉴别人分析方法等等)。重要的是将这个问题深入阐述清楚，不能让人有意犹未尽之感(要做到这点的确很困难，因为评审人总会提出新的问题，我们只可能尽量做到这一点罢了)。 C. Discussion部分还要注意保持和Results的一致性！就是结果和讨论要一一对应。千万不要出现按讨论的内容可以推出与实验相反的结论这种情形，那证明你的讨论思路是彻底的失败或你的实验压根儿就是失败的。所以Discussion的文字描述和语言表达的精确性尤为重要。由于中英文表达的不同，在投稿之前要尽量避免出现表达上的误解，如果论文因此被拒是很冤枉的。 5. Acknowledge References： Acknowledge 主要分为两个：第一是表明研究的基金来源，中国一般都是Nature Science Foundation of China(NSFC，国家自然科学基金)，美国大多是National Institute of Health(NIH，美国国家卫生研究院)。写基金时一般要标注清楚基金号码(Grant Number)，只有这样才算是该项基金的研究成果，也可以算做实验室的研究成果。须知没有任何一项研究成果是在没有资金资助的情况下完成的，所以这一点非常必要。第二是对参与人员(没有列在作者中的研究人员)和单位表示感谢，如果通过一审和最终接受发表，还要添上对editor和anonymous reviewers的感谢，这是基本礼貌。 References重要在于格式。不同杂志对参考文献格式要求不一样，具体下来有所区别的可以分为：作者的写法，有的是简写在前，有的简写在后，有的简写有点，有的简写没有点；文章的名字，有的要加上引号，有的没有引号；期刊的写法，有的要简写，有的要全称，有的要斜体，有的则不需要；年和期卷号的顺序，有的是年在前，有的是年在后；期刊论文、书、学位论文、会议论文，四种引用的格式各不相同；文献的排列顺序，有的是按照字母的顺序，有的则是按照在论文中出现的顺序用阿拉伯数字排序。基本上就是这些问题，看来很是琐碎，但是如果你的参考文献排列的乱七八糟，那就会使得评审人对你论文的印象很差，认为你没有认知组织和撰写论文，造成一定的负面影响。所以，事情虽小，影响却大，还是要认真组织为好。 此外，论文在撰写时要自始至终都用英语写，千万不要先写中文再译成英文。这样写出来的文章肯定是中不中，英不英，而且极大浪费精力。宁可一开始写得语法差一些，慢慢修改都比这种写法好。如果有同专业英语比较好的人帮助的话，这样写还会更省事。写作时行文时态要注意，中文没有时态问题，英文有，而且要求还相当严格。一般来说，大多数情况下是过去时态，在Introduction文献回顾，Methods整个部分，Results结果总结，Discussion中的大部分，都用过去时态陈述。其他情况下可以用一般时态来描述。时态之间的界限是比较严格的，最好是仔细的通读国外的论文，好好分析一下，或者让有经验的人帮你把把关，这样比较好一些。 四、Writing Skills in English for Research Paper 写 paper注意九个环节：Preparation, Structure, Title, Abstracts, Introduction, Conclusion, Body of Paper, Recision, Acknowledgement。Preparation就是收集资料，找出灵感和方向，主要依靠的是journal in library。Structure是重点，paper的structure应该是两个triangle组成的：上面一个倒三角，下面一个正三角，意思就是选题要宽(wide)，研究方向要窄，然后最后的conclusion又发散开来。在paper的body前后都必须有declarative statement，用最少的字句表达出自己的观点，吸引读者。 Title必须清晰简短(clear，short)，表达出自己唯一的topic以提升读者的兴趣(promote the interest of reader)，然而title中切记不能出现abbreviation和自己的result。 Abstracts 是paper的一个缩写(miniature of whole paper)，一定要简明扼要(less than 200 words,one paragraph)，按照paper的顺序介绍主要研究对象(subject)、实验设计(design)、实验步骤(procedures)以及最后结果(results)，这种介绍必须让非专业的人员 (non-specialist) 能够看懂。 Introduction同样要保证简短，顺序是一般背景介绍、别人工作成果、自己的研究目的及工作简介，其中介绍别人工作时只需介绍和自己最相关的方面 (very relevant)，而对自己的工作介绍不用说明细节，因为这个要放到body中去。不要忘记在介绍自己工作之前要有一个declarative statement。 Body部分可以分为methods、result和discussion三个部分：①Methods，详尽的介绍自己的实验方案以便于他人能够重复自己的实验过程，对于通用的实验方案可以简略，重点要放到自己的独创方案上面(own procedures)，按照实验的先后顺序介绍，为了文章的阅读方便，不要使用过多层次的subheadings，比如 subsubsubsection等等。②Result，使用text、table、figure等手段表达出来，其中table不要使用过多，而 figure必须保证图线清楚、注解明确，必要的时候还要对于自己的result中的一些结论进行解释说明。③Discussion，这个部分是为了以后的study，在其中提出自己的problem或者是hypothesis，和别人的成果进行比较，暗示自己的主要收获，为后面的conclusion做准备。 Conclusion中不要包含body以外的information，保持brief、neat和concise，一定要舍得结束自己的paper；如果自己的paper只是project的一部分，稍做说明。Revison是在写完之后回头看看是否有逻辑上的错误，是否考虑到了读者兴趣，自己的 declarative statement是否令人满意，Brevity is the soul of literary construction。Acknowledgement，不要忘记，这个反应了一个人的个人品质。 五、撰写论文初稿(writing the first draft)： (1)材料和方法(methods and materials)：做了什么和怎样做？材料和方法是文章开始写作的最理想部分，这部分的内容作者最了解。写作要求：用过去时，尽可能按实验的先后顺序描述。 (2)结果(results)：发生了什么？基本写作要求：可用图、表或文字表达，三者间尽量减少重复。在正文部分叙述主要结果和意义，用图或表给出较详细的数据，用过去时。 (3) 讨论(discussion)：所得结果是否为前言提出的关键问题的答案？结果是如何支持答案的、如何证实假说的？基本写作要求：集中讨论与本结果有关的问题，突出本研究的创新及重要性，；与相关研究结果进行比较分析；给出结果所支持的结论；指出前景、不足和改进。用现在时叙述已知或被证明的事实，用过去时描述本研究结果。 (4)文献(references)：与本研究方法、结果、讨论有关的其它研究有哪些？准确完整规范著录。 (5)前言(introduction)本研究的背景和目的是什么？试图回答的关键问题是什么？基本写作要求：本研究之目的和重要性；简要复习文献。 致谢(acknowledgment)：除了作者，谁协助完成了本研究、分析结果并撰写论文？谁提供了基金和物质帮助？写作要求：仅列出对本工作提供特殊的实质性贡献者姓名；须得到被致谢者同意。 (7) 摘要(abstract)：论文告诉我们什么(通常250字)？摘要是论文要点的浓缩，应在文章各主要部分完成后再写，这样有利于文章要点的提炼。优秀的摘要能有效抓住读者兴趣。写作要求：用含有必要词汇的短的简单句，以使摘要清楚而简洁?避免使用缩写词和晦涩难懂的词句；用小标题叙述研究论文的各部分；用过去时(但问题的陈述和结论可用现在时)；强调研究的创新和重要方面。 文题(title)：本文关于什么？最佳文题的标准是用最少的必要术语准确描述论文的内容。写作要求：准确(accuracy)、简洁(brevity)、有效(effectiveness)和吸引人。 (9)作者(author list)：谁参与了本研究的设计、工作及论文的撰写？ (10) 准备论文最后一稿(preparing the final manuscript)：论文初稿完成以后，必须对内容及格式进行反复推敲和修改，达到投稿须知的一切要求。绝大多数有经验的编辑都认为：不认真准备的稿件绝不是高水平科学研究成果的良好载体(A poorly prepared manuscript is，almost without fail，the carrier vehicle of poor science. Day AR.)。如果希望论文发表，在准备投稿时必须做到打字整洁、无错、符合期刊格式、含有期刊要求的所有材料。该过程一般分三步：再次阅读拟投期刊的投稿须知；用投稿须知中提供的稿件对照检查表(manuscript checklist, author's checklist)与自己论文一一核对；根据期刊要求打印输出，完成最后一稿。 六、英语学术论文写作的几个细节 A. 时态：当提到本文、此图、此表等说明了、表达了什么时要用一般现在时，而不用一般过去时。This paper describes The focus of this paper is Figure 1 shows Most of the common condensation polymers are listed in Table 1-1. B. 数：在学术论文里，有时很难顾及数的逻辑。但一般不将逻辑上的问题视为语法错误。只须注意在一个句子中的数和谓语动词的统一即可。单、复数的选用有一些非定性、但可供参考的趋向： ◆◆ 当含意上强调复数时建议用复数。The catalyst concentrations for the different reactions are different.Our research focuses on the syntheses and characterizations of a series of polycarbonates with different chemical structures.The physical and chemical properties of this compound have been studied.The chain lengths of the oligomers with different molecular weights are different. ◆◆当含意上不强调复数时可用单数或复数。Our research focuses on the synthesis of polycarbonates.The property of the compounds in group 1 is different from the property of the compounds in group 2.The chain length of the oligomers increases with increasing reaction time. ◆◆在标题、小标题中或描述一类事物、现象等，提到具体物质时常用复数。【Polyesters】 Polymers are macromolecules built up by large numbers of small molecules. The small molecules which combine with each other to form polymer molecules are termed monomers.在标题、小标题或描述一类事物、现象等，提到抽象概念时可用单数、也可用复数。【Step Copolymerization】Newer Types of Step Polymerizations. This chapter will consider the characteristics of step polymerization in detail. ◆◆学术论文、有关学术的科普文章中的名词的可数或不可数特性的划分区别于非学术文章《非学术文章中的可数或不可数特性可从字典查到》。以下是在学术文章中通常视为可数名词的单词：《但在一般字典中它们或它们做某种含义解时可能被划归不可数名词》。 application development consideration composition concentration distribution structure length weight ◆◆ 当同时提及几个图、表、方程式时要用复数(分别单个地提及则不用)：The reaction rate constant can be calculated from Equations 2 and 3. The reaction rate constant can be calculated from Equation 2 and Equation 3. Figs. 4 and 5 show C. 冠词： ◆◆单数名词前一般要加冠词：a , the等； 但以下情况可不加：表示不特指的、较抽象的概念： This chapter will consider the characteristics of step polymerization in detail. An understanding of the relative ease of cyclization or linear polymerization comes from a variety of sources.Different polymers are synthesized to yield various mechanical behaviors by the appropriate combinations of crystallinity, crosslinking, Tg, and Tm..但需注意这些单词前加冠词也是经常见到的，这是由它在句中的含义决定的(如有一定的特指意义)：Polyisoprene is a typical elastomer it is amorphous, easily crossed, has a low Tg (-73C) and a high Tm (14C). ◆◆目录、标题中通常省略冠词： 1 Introduction 1-1 Types of Polymers and Polymerizations 1-4 Molecular Weight 1-5 Physical State 图、表的题目中有时可省略冠词：Fig. 2-2 Second order plot of the self-catalyzed polyesterification of adipic acid with diethylene glycol at 166 C.Fig. 8 Dependence of the ease of cyclization on the size of the ring.化学药品、化学物质前通常不加冠词：The polymerization is catalyzed by protonic or lewis acids although a wide variety of base catalysts such as calcium acetate and antimony trioxide can also be used.图中的横、纵坐标的名称前不加冠词。 D. 大小写：请注意以下结构的大、小写：当提及具体第几章、节；图、表；方程式时，首个字母通常要大写。As discussed in Chapter 2, In Section 1.2, we As shown in Figure 1, The results are listed in Table 3.当不指明是第几章、节；图、表；方程式时，首个字母如在句中通常用小写。In the previous chapter, As shown in this figure, E. 缩写：以下全名和缩写在文中通常视为同等，可以互换。 Figure Fig. Figures Figs. Table Tab. Chapter Chap. Section Sec. Equation Eq. Equations Eqs. F. 一些常用词汇用法 ◆◆research, study, investigate：research可做名词、动词，但通常做名词用，很少见到动词的用法。句中需要动词时常用study或investigate来表达。 ◆◆detail/detailed：The properties of this compound were studied in detail.//The detailed properties of this compound were studied.//The details of the properties of this compound were studied. ◆◆follows/following：The results are as follows: //We got following results: ◆◆increase, decrease：均可做名词和动词，We can observe an increase in the reaction rate.//The reaction rate increases. ◆◆focus, concentrate：focus: n. , v. The focus of this paper is This paper focuses on Our study focuses on We focus our study on Our study is focused on concentrate: v. We concentrate our study on Our study is concentrated on ◆◆effect, affect：effect: n. //affect: v. ◆◆compose, consist：A is composed of B and C.//A consists of B and C. ◆◆increase, improve：increase: 主要指数值上的增加。improve: 主要指性质的增加、改善。 G. 名词修饰：在学术文章中，很多时候会用到直接用名词做修饰，而不用s 或 of 的形式。常见的这类词有：reaction rate；reaction rate constant；reaction temperature；reaction condition molecular weight distribution H. 分词修饰：the reaction we studied；the temperature used；the nonlinearity observed。所有格：非人的所有格用of, 而不用s 。 第三部分 投稿 一、拟投期刊的选择: (1)选用SCI收录期刊。目前SCI收录核心刊 3000种，加上增补期刊约 5600种。研究者可事先将SCI中自己感兴趣的期刊找出来备用。 (2)利用SCI收录期刊的影响引子(Impact Factor)来选择期刊。期刊的影响因子是该刊前2年发表的文献在当前的平均被引次数。《科学》、《自然》影响因子很高，SCI收录中国期刊影响因子都在1.00以下。期刊影响因子愈大，有用信息愈多。作者可根据期刊的影响因子排名决定投稿方向。 (3)利用学科带头人的影响或国际学术交流的条件，物色最了解中国学术研究、信任中国学者的那部分期刊投稿。SCI选用的期刊中约 1 / 3为美国期刊，因而要注意选美国期刊。 二、如何准备投稿？ 选择适合刊物投稿：从杂志homepage下载Instruction for Author，按投稿要求，如投稿份数、论文体例、长度、图表、参考文献引法、配图说明(Figure legends)等，逐条遵循。Letter to editor-in-chief : ①声明文稿权转让；②未一稿多投，和在稿件未作出决定前不准备一稿多投；③所有列出作者均对文稿有确切贡献；④文稿内容真实，无作伪；⑤所有作者均已阅读文稿，且同意送稿；⑥通信作者地址、电话、Fax、e-mail；⑦通信作者签名。勿一稿多投。 Title page 的式样如下： Peroxisome Proliferation-Activated Receptor-g Ligands Ameliorate Experimental Autoimmune Myocarditis Zuyi Yuan, MD, PhD; Yan Liu, MD; Yu Liu, MD; Jijun Zhang, MD; Chiharu Kishimoto, MD, PhD*; Yanni Wang, MD; Aiqun Ma, MD, PhD; Zhiquan Liu, MD. Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, First Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710061, China; *Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, Graduate School of Medicine, Kyoto University, Kyoto 606-8501, Japan First author's surname: Yuan Running head: PPARg ligands ameliorate myocarditis Supported by Natural Science Foundation of China (30170371) Address correspondence to: Zuyi Yuan, MD, PhD Department of Cardiovascular Medicine, First Hospital of Xi'an Jiaotong University, No.1 Jiankang Road, Xi'an, Shaanxi 710061, China Tel: +86-29-532-4021 Fax: +86-29-5263190 E-mail: zuyiyuan@mail.xjtu.edu.cn 三、向国外生物医学期刊投稿需注意 A. 期刊选择： 英文生物医学期刊种类繁多，选择一本恰当的期刊并非一件易事，然而这是论文得以发表的一个重要环节。选择期刊应考虑的因素：论文主题是否在刊物征稿范围内？论文格式是否符合刊物要求？论文是否符合刊物的一贯口味？关于期刊的声望(prestige)问题：期刊学术水平高其声望就高；反之声望则低。生物医学工作者都希望科研成果发表在有声望的高质量生物医学期刊上。选择期刊的方法：如果论文主题在一个很窄的分支学科内，那么选择范围只能限制在几种刊物；如果论文信息交叉了几个研究领域，则可有许多种选择。无论是哪种情况，先列出一个简单拟选期刊表，然后逐一对进行比较筛选，作出最后抉择。 B. 阅读和使用投稿须知： (1)读刊头(masthead statement，通常放在期刊前面的文题页上)，以了解刊名、简单的办刊宗旨、编辑委员会组成、编辑部成员、出版商及其联系地址等。 (2)浏览目录(table of contents)，确定该刊物是否发表你研究领域的文章及发表的比例有多大。 (3)注意栏目设置，确定拟投稿件的栏目。 (4)看拟投栏目文章的范例，了解撰写要求及格式。 (5)某些期刊刊登投稿和接收日期(submitted and accepted dates)，可据此计算论文发表周期。 广告数量可间接判断期刊质量。因为广告公司都愿意将金钱投到质量高、影响大的期刊上。 (7)通过11或12月份出版的杂志最后几页上的所有权、管理和发行声明(statement of ownership，management，and circulation)查找期刊发行量。 核查有无北美和欧洲以外国家作者撰写的文章。 (9)有些期刊还刊登报道计划，作者可依此拟订自己的投稿计划。 C. 投稿注意事项： 当决定了论文主题，确定了读者群，并选定了拟投期刊后，论文文献检索工作即便完成。下一步是确定论文作者、查看期刊的投稿须知，并将研究结果的原始资料收集在一起开始撰写论文。论文撰写是一项艰苦的工作，并非一稿就能完成，往往需要反复易稿(修改)才能使文章达到投稿的要求，即5C正确 (correctness)、清楚(clarity)、简洁(concision)、完整(completion)和一致(consistency)。 D. 投稿：论文的最后一稿准备好后，就可向国外投稿。一般来说，投稿程序分以下三步。 (1)准备投稿信 (covering letter，submission letter)：生物医学期刊的编辑往往需要一些有关作者及其论文的信息，而作者也希望给编辑提供一些有助于其全文送审及决策的信息。这些信息都应该包括在投稿信中。投稿信应包括以下几方面的内容：文题和所有作者的姓名；稿件适宜的栏目；为什么此论文适合于在该刊而不是其它刊物上发表?关于重复或部分发表或已投它刊的说明；不能转让版权的说明(如美国联邦政府雇员)；建议审稿人及因存在竞争关系而不宜做审稿人的名单；通信作者(corresponding author)的姓名、详细地址、电话和传真号码、e-mail地址；能否付出版费(版面费、彩图费)的说明(如果该刊收取版面费和彩图费)；希望核校校样或稿件若不接收退回原稿的要求(有的期刊在投稿须知中约定，除非作者在投稿信中提出要求，否则原稿不退还给作者)。投稿信举例： Dear Dr．： Enclosed are three copies of a manuscript by Rose N ．Dipaola，Donna A．Gallo，and Tom N．Roberts titled Hepatitis C Virus Infection in Long-Term Transfusion Patients. It is submitted to be considered for publication as a Original Article in your journal．This paper is～?Neither the entire paper nor any part of its content has been published or has been accepted elsewhere. It is not being submitted to any other journal． We believe the paper may be of particular interest to the readers of your journal because the study it reports stated the HCV infection rate among long-term transfusion patients is higher than that of the general population and of short-term transfusion patients． Correspondence and phone calls about the paper should be directed to Rose N．Dipaola at the following address，phone and fax number，and e-mail address： Rose N ．Dipaola，MD Institute of Internal Medicine Cleveland Clinic Foundation 9500 Euclid Ave． Cleveland，OH44195，USA Tel：1-216-444-5360 Fax：1-216-444-9580 E-mail：dipao＠cesmtp ．ccf. Org Thanks very much for your attention to our paper． Sincerely yours， Rose N．Dipaola (2) 稿件包装：所谓稿件包装是指将稿件及其拟投期刊所需的伴随资料一并装人信封。一般应按以下顺序备齐资料：投稿信；刊物要求的稿件(包括文题页、文摘页、正文、致谢、参考文献、图注、表及图)拷贝份数，每份图单独装一个信封；版权转让声明；与稿件内容有关资料的拷贝(如学术会议报告论文或已发表的摘要等材料)；通知稿件收到的明信片或有作者地址并贴足邮资的信封(适用于不发收稿回执的期刊)；致谢和使用病人照片或引用私人通信的书面同意材料的复印件；有些期刊要求附稿件对照检查表。以上材料不要用订书钉固定，以免途中因订书钉移动而损坏稿件；但可以用大型曲别针固定，照片可以在信封中夹硬纸片保护。 (3) 稿件邮寄：邮寄稿件应注意：应至少自留一份打印底稿；信封要足够大，并足够结实；正确的投稿地址及收稿人(投稿须知中常有说明，多要求直接寄给主编)；照片不可过大，最大不超过8.5英寸x11英寸?贴足邮票；航空邮寄；以打印稿(hard copy)投稿。几乎所有的英文生物医学期刊均不接受传真(fax)投稿，某些期刊仅允许一些没有图表的短文或给编辑的信通过电子邮件(e- mail)投稿，长篇论著、研究报告等文章决定刊用后方接受软磁盘。以上信息可以从投稿须知中获得、有的期刊在投稿须知中特别指出投稿地址与订刊或订单行本地址不一样，以免造成时间耽搁 。 一、正确对待审稿意见和退稿: 国际核心刊物的审稿人大多是各领域权威学者，杂志出版社经常征询编委意见，选择最佳审稿队伍。审稿是无报酬的，审稿人的工作态度大多极其认真。因此，对审稿意见要十分尊重，对每一条批评和建议，都要认真分析，并据此修改论文。自己认为不正确的意见，要极其慎重和认真地回答，有理有据地与审稿人探讨。如何对待杂志拒文，是作者犯难的问题。这里必须分析被拒绝的理由。第一类拒绝是完全的拒绝，主编通常会表达个意见，对这类文章永远不愿再看到，再寄送这类文章是没有意义的；第二是文章包含某些有用数据和信息，主编拒绝是因数据或分析有严重缺陷，这类文章不妨先放一放，等找到更广泛的证据支持或有了更明晰的结论后，再将经过修改的新文章寄给同一杂志，主编通常会考虑重新受理该文。有审稿人抱怨，个别中国作者在论文被一家杂志拒绝后又原封不动地寄给另外一家杂志，而他们再次被邀请审稿并对此非常反感，论文理所当然地被拒绝。《宇宙物理学》(The，Astrophysical，Journal)的科学主编 Thomas提出：论文被一家杂志拒绝后不经修改，又寄给另一个杂志，这是很糟的错误。通常，审稿人做了很认真的工作指出论文的问题，并建议修改；如果作者忽视这些忠告，是对时间和努力的真正浪费；同时，寄一篇坏的文章，对作者的科学声望是严重的损害。影响因子不同的刊物接受论文的标准和要求差别很大。如果被拒论文不是由于文稿中的错误，而是重要性或创新性不够，作者仔细考虑审稿人意见并认真修改文稿后，可以寄给影响因子较低的刊物。值得注意的是，审稿人由于知识限制和某种成见，甚至学术观点不同，判断错误并建议退稿常会发生。如何处理情况？最近某青年的论文被杂志拒绝，经反复讨论检验，判断审稿人是错误的；为了论文及时发表，我们建议作者礼貌和认真地回信给主编并指出审稿人的错误，要求主编将意见转给审稿人，然后撤回论文再做必要改进，改寄影响因子更高的杂志；结果论文立即接受，并得到很好评价。另篇论文在某重要杂志经两年半才得以发表，主要原因是第一位审稿人对我国向量磁场测量的可靠性提出质疑，不同意发表。通过向权威同事请教和反复思考，我们确认所进行的研究及所采用测量都充分准确可靠；作者花了近两年时间与审稿人讨论，不但论文得以发表，还与审稿者和主编建立了良好关系，论文发表后得到良好的国际引述。 二、投稿后若干事宜： (1)稿件追踪(follow-up correspondence)。如果投稿2周仍无任何有关稿件收到的信息，也可打电话、发e－mail或写信给编辑部核实稿件是否收到。 (2) 稿件退修(revised manuscript)。几乎所有的经审查学术水平达到出版要求的自由来稿，在发表前都需要退给作者修改其表述及编辑格式，如压缩文章篇幅、重新设计表格、改善插图质量、限制不规则缩写词使用等。然而退给作者修改的稿件并不代表文章已经被接受，文章最终接受与否取决于作者对文章关键性重要内容和表述方式的修改能否达到审稿专家及编辑的要求。 通常退给作者修改的材料包括原稿、审稿专家意见、(reviewers' comments)和一封编辑的信(covering letter)。当作者收倒退修稿后，首先应该仔细地阅读退修信(modify letter)和审稿专家意见。然后应考虑能否或愿意接受审稿专家或编辑的意见，修改稿件。 (3)如何处理稿件修回？从主编回信和审稿人 (reviewer)修回意见可看出文章录用的可能性。主编的回信会特别提到你文章的科学先进性 (scientific priority)；审稿人对文章总的评价中会提到对文章是否感兴趣(interesting)等；修回不要仓促，反复阅读、理解审稿人的问题。对每位审稿人提出的意见要逐条回答(response to reviewer1，2，3)；对修回稿中已修改的地方要具体标明(page, lines)；给主编回信，感谢给文稿提出的修改意见，并指出按修改建议已作的修改，未作修改的地方要说明理由。 一、认识SCI论文 罗伯特?戴在其名著《如何撰写和发表科学论文》的序言中指出，对一个科学家的评价，从研究生开始，就主要不是看他在实验室操作的机敏，不是看他对或宽或窄的研究领域固有的知识，更不是看他的智能和魅力，而是看他的著述。他们因此而出名，或依然默默无闻。 A. 原创性和显著性是论文的生命: 在《再论科学道德问题》中指出，国际核心刊物发表的论文，原则上都应当是 在国际上首次描述的新的观测和实验事实，首次提出的概念和模型，首次建立的方程，也包括对已有的重大观测(实验)事实的新的概括和新的规律的提炼。与原创性相联系，任何期刊都不希望发表已见于其它杂志，或由其它语言发表、或以稍有不同的形式发表的论文。太阳物理学权威刊物《太空物理学》(Solar，physics)主编Harvey专门谈到，少数作者主要结果用中文发表后又寄给《太空物理学》，这在过去是可以容忍的，但现在不允许。公认的原则是：作者不能把已在经过审稿的杂志发表的主要结果以不同形式投寄给其它杂志再发表。国际核心刊物的论文，不仅应该是原创的，其结果还必须是显著的，并对学科发展有所推动。用Harvey的话来说，至少有一两个其他研究者会读这篇文章，并利用这些结果发表他们自己的工作。对成果显著性的检验是论文被引用的多寡。作者应当关心自己论文被引用的情况，注意国际学术界对自己工作的评价，包括肯定和批评的方面，特别是注意同行们对自己发表结果的不同的理解；这是提高自己研究水平的重要途径。 B. 充分评价已有工作，体现作者学术水平: 是否客观而充分地评价了以往的工作，常常是审稿人和读者衡量作者学术水准和学术风范的重要方面。部分作者引述国外知名学者的工作，往往有点言必称希腊 的味道，而对国内同行发表的工作重视不够。有时明明是中国学者首先做的工作，却没有得到自己国内同行的充分评价。应当提倡较多并适当地援引国内同行工作。但也不要学习少数日本作者，他们绝少引用日本学者之外的文章。部分同行在论文中引述相当数量公式，但却不列出公式的出处，让读者分不清是作者发展的，还是引自他人以往的工作。原则上：除了教科书上公认的方程和表达式外，对用于特定目的、特定条件和问题的推演，只要不是自己的工作，都要列出出处和适用条件；即便是作者以往的工作，也要列出相应文献，让读者在充分评价作者以往工作的基础上作必要参考，并清晰指出自己当前工作中独创性的贡献。这是作者对科学负责的表现，是一篇好的学术论文开宗明义必须写清楚的内容。 C. 特别重视论文题目、摘要、图表和结论: 每位作者都有阅读大量论文的经验。读者阅读论文的习惯一般是先浏览目录，对题目有兴趣才愿翻到有关论文；题目有兴趣的论文，读者又先读论文摘要；如果对摘要还有兴趣，接着会去看论文图表，因为图表往往最清楚地反映了论文结果。看过图表之后，如还有兴趣，会读论文的结论。通常只有少数读者会读论文的全文。作者应当清晰地知道，论文的题目将被数以千计的读者读到。对题目的每一个字都要审慎地选择，用最少的词语最确切反映论文的内容。 D. 花大力气提高英语写作水平: 英语不是我们的母语。我国SCI论文和引述偏少，除了基础研究水平的限制，语言的障碍不容忽视。每一位基础研究工作者必须把提高英语写作能力作为一个艰巨的任务。中国科技大学胡友秋教授总是把审稿人的英文修改和自己的原稿中被修改的部分单独抄在本子上一一对照，细心琢磨并背下来，一点一滴地提高英语写作水平；他寄往国际核心刊物的论文常被审稿人称为well-written。美国国家太阳天文台有一个内部审稿制度，目的是保证论文的正确性，对研究也有相互影响和砥砺的好处；未经内部审稿的论文不能寄给杂志。资深太阳物理学家 Sara，Martin建议找一些可作为范例的论文精读，学习怎样组织和写出好英语；她特别提到已故著名天体物理学家Zwaan的论文可作范文。论文初稿完后定要检查拼写，避免简单的拼写错误；对英文写作无把握者，请英文好的同事或国外同行把把英文关是必要的。为从根本上提高英语水平，建议对研究生开设英语写作课程。 二、论文进入SCI的影响因素 (Science Citation Index，简称SCI)是美国科技信息研究(Institute for Scientific Information，简称ISI)编辑出版，用来查询科技文献及其引用情况的检索工具，内容涉及科技领域150多个学科，分为数学、物理学、化学、生物学、微生物学、农业、分子生物学与遗传学、临床医学、神经学、药学、计算机科学、生态与环境等，以基础科学研究为主。SCI对其收录期刊采用了多种严格而科学的定量和定性筛选，所收载的均是集中了各学科高质量优秀论文精萃的期刊，全面覆盖了世界最重要、最有影响的研究成果。SCI的研究成果代表着世界基础学科研究的最高水准，科技论文被SCI收录和引用是评价其国际学术地位、基础科学研究水平、科技创新实力和科技论文质量的国际通用依据。 A. 原创性和影响力: 原创性也就是原始性和创造性。原创性不等同于新颖性，新颖性可以是别人研究的延续，而原创性意味着一个新事物、新领域、新问题的开创。原创性研究通常是指对新的观测和实验事实的描述，首次提出的概念和模型，首次建立的方程，以及对已有的重大观测 (实验)事实的新的概括和新的规律的提炼等。任何期刊都不希望发表已经见于其它杂志，或由其它语言发表、或以稍有不同的形式发表的论文，国际核心期刊更是如此。要想在国际核心期刊发表论文，原创性是最基本的要求；原创性课题通常来源于实践或对各种有关信息的研究，而不是来源于现成文献。 影响力以论文被引频率来衡量。引用频率已被科学界公认是衡量特定研究价值的最为客观公正的方法。在 1961-1971年间，SCI一般作者平均引用频率约 50次，而同期诺贝尔奖获得者的平均引用率为222次，并且SCI中某学科被引用次数最多的论文作者获该学科诺贝尔奖的情形也多次发生。高水平的论文不仅具有原创性，还具有影响力，必须对他人的研究有所帮助，并由此推动科学发展。 B. 论文撰写: (1)撰写英文论文。被SCI收录的我国期基本上为英文，英文文种优势是论文进入SCI期刊的重要因素。1997年SCI收录我国论文10033篇，其中 83%发表在国外刊物，国内发表17%。从语种上看，英语论文占总论文数99.78%，中文论文占 0.09%；法、德、俄、日文论文占 0.12%。东西方语言差异是中国科技工作者学术成果走向世界的一个很大障碍。 (2)英文摘要全面深入，反映研究要点，强调自己的独创。论文要进入SCI，除投SCI来源期刊处，另一途径是为国外读者引用。因此，英文摘要的撰写显得非常重要。许多作者的英文摘要较简略，没有注意将文章主要内容体现在文摘内，从而影响论文交流。例如综合多种检索技术优势的数据库检索功能设计的论文摘要，不仅说明采用了什么技术得出了设计方案？还应说明这些技术通过怎样的利用？达到了什么效果？体现实现最终目标的主要过程，这样可增加论文被引用机会。 (3)参考文献应用。论文应清楚地标注引用，完整给出参考文献。原则上，除了教科书上公认的方程和表达式外，特定的目的、特定条件和问题的推演，只要不是自己的工作，都要列出处，并完整给出相应文献。即使是作者自己以往的工作，也要列出相应文献。这样做既对他人研究有充分肯定、免去剽窃之嫌，又能说明自己的论述依据充分，也突出了自己在该研究中的独创内容。 三、如何投稿SCI杂志论文 为什么要鼓励向国外投稿？国内核心刊物版面有限，投稿人多，国内刊物SCI收录杂志发表更难；国内刊物影响因子都较低；大多数国际刊物不收版面费；国际刊物发表周期短。 如何准备稿件？选题新颖、idea好，讲究科学。Title page；Abstract；Text (Introduction； Methods； Results； Discussion)； References；Acknowledgements；Figure legends；Tables and Figures。使用清晰合理的语言，避免修饰词(如最好、第一)和社论性语言(如令人惊异地、令人感兴趣地等)。题目醒目，表达清楚而不含糊。介绍研究背景十分重要，说明为什么要进行研究，长度在1页内，引用文献15条内。方法学一定要做到：临床研究有病人知情同意，通过伦理委员会批准；动物实验符合本大学的动物管理与动物实验的章程等。特别注意方法是否合理，是否目前国际上通用。结果要清晰图、表格，合理的结果解释等；特别注意方法学和结果中可能的小的漏洞，最好请多位同行专家审阅。Discussion部分只对本文结果进行讨论，与同类研究结果进行比较，对结果涉及的可能机制不要展开太多，不要进行推理讨论；结论应客观，不要夸大。参考文献尽量最新；注意格式；如有可能，尽可能引用拟投刊物近2年的文章。成稿后请同行专家反复修改；可请语言专家纠正语法错误。 四、撰写SCI文章的经验 1.首先是大量阅读文献，如果要撰写高水平论文，基础是读很多高水平文献。建议多看影响因子高的国外文献，最好IF3以上。国内综述性杂志还是可以看，特别是刚刚接触陌生的研究领域时。 2.看文献的同时注意随时摘录，好记性不如烂笔头。英语论文的写作实际上有很多现成固定的模式和表达方法，将这些固定用法随时做笔记，并随时复习，加上不断阅读新文献，自己动手写时也就不会举步维艰。 3.课题设计的IDEA十分重要，观点的创新性决定了文章能否受editor和reviewer青睐。 4. 实验完成开写文章，或者自己写，实在不行，就找几篇与你的课题十分相近的文章阅读，有些表述方法可以直接借鉴，当然不可以直接照搬，必须进行适当的修改，如语序，近义词替换等等。最后进行通篇连贯的阅读，总体使其变得通顺。投稿前必须仔细修改，不可仓促投稿，可以先放几天，在回头来看，这样反复多次。最好的话是请英语高手帮你修一修。或者也可以请一般同学看看，从别人的角度来取长补短。 5.投递建议多投网上可以submission的杂志，快又省钱，投之前好好看看guideline for authors。严格按照上面的条例修改，象图片的分辨率等等细节都要十分注意。 6.修回的稿件一般是要求point to point的回复，必须一一进行回答，个人建议是所有问题最好都按要求去做，这样的accept可能性很高，当然审稿人的水平也有不同，有些明显错误的观点应当用详细的理由加以回复，有可能的话附上参考文献增加可信度。 7. 文章基本上accept了，有时审稿人会要求你把文章给专业领域离地英语专家修改，有些人可能未必找的到，那怎么办，呵呵，那就自己来，反复阅读，尽量减少一些低级错误比如拼写和语法，还有就是表述以简洁至上,simple is the best。再就是尽量多改一些地方(这是一滥招，高手就免了)，就算没什么错误的地方可改用别的表达方法，表面上看来编辑部会觉得你很严谨仔细，呵呵，反复多看看，多修，就能成功，我就是这么做的，你也可以。 五、SCI论文写作经验 要写好文章，思路创新性和数据可靠性是两个基本条件。思路创新有两种方法：(1) 如果你个人在某领域进行了多年研究，你觉得某些问题解决的关键应该在于某个方面的深入研究，如果很少有人注意此方面研究而你首先开始，那你的文章就创新。这种方法创新的前提是，你在该领域有多年研究；否则很有可能失败。因为你认为创新的东西可能是人家已经做过的(只是研究失败，所以没有报道)，或者你的思路本身就是错误的。(2) 二次创新。例如最近三年有不同作者发了两篇文章，一篇报道因素A对提高玉米抗逆性有很大影响，第二篇报道因素B对小麦抗逆性有很大影响。那么你就可以参考以上两法，研究因素A和因素B对水稻抗逆性的影响。这样做出来的文章一般也能发在和以上两篇文章档次差不多的杂志。要保证数据的可靠，首先你要选用你的领域中普遍采用的方法，可以找几篇和你的研究类似的SCI文章，参考他们的研究方法。 试验结束后，立即进行总结数据，写文章，主要步骤可参考： A. Result部分。将所有的试验结果整理成图和表，尽力挖掘图和表中的信息，越多越好。在这个过程中尽可能和不同的研究人员探讨你的试验结果，因为不同的人对同一张表和图有不同的看法。这样会给你写文章提供很好的思路。 B. 分析完图表后，寻找你这个试验结果的Key point，一定要保证这个Key point具有较大的新意，或者说一个到这个Key point 有一种振奋人心的感觉。然后从所有图表中找出能够论证你这个Key point 的图和表。合理安排你的图和表，如果可能的话尽可能用图。 C. Result以后是Discussion(一篇文章的精华)，可以将discussion分为若干段落，可以是并列关系或者递进关系。但要保证每一段都有一个主题，即每一段讨论一个主要话题。而且每一段中要说明以下几点：(1)你的研究结果说明什么?有什么意义?(2)你的研究结果和别人的类似研究有什么异同?如果不同，可以讨论一些产生差异的可能原因?(3)如果你在研究结果中出现非常新的东西，用以前别人的理论很难解释，那么你可以提出你的假设理论来解释试验中非常新的东西，一定要做到能自圆其说。在Discussion的最后要总结一下，告诉别人你这个研究的几个主要结果。 D. Materials Methods：你在试验中得到的数据，都要写出相应方法。写试验方法要尽可能详细，保证别人看了Materials and Methods 后能够参考你的方法进行相关研究。看一下你可能要投的刊物中的Materials and Methods是怎么写的，你可以参考。 E. Introduction：简介你这个研究领域的意义；介绍该研究领域的一些人所做的工作，指出它们存在的问题；说明你为什么要做这个试验；可在introduction 中提出你的hypothesis。 F. Reference：最好引用原始文献，不要二次引用；注意文献编排格式，与你要投的刊物要一致；不要漏和多参考文献。Acknowledge：帮助过你做试验，写文章的人；提供资金项目。Title要说明你的研究内容，要有一定吸引力；Abstract包括研究目的，主要研究结果，得出什么重要的结论。 G. 写好以后，最好找个搞相关研究的美国或者英国的科学家看一下，改一下英文，就可投出了。 六、写论文的技巧 优秀论文的要素：1、正确选题；2、合适的切入点；3、简洁明了；4、说清自己的贡献； 5、可靠的/可重现的结果；6、可重复的过程；7、好的文章结构和逻辑流程； 8、精选的参考文献 优秀论文的误区：1、Idea越多越好；2、一味追求革命性的，突破性的成果； 3、数学、理论和公式越复杂越好显示自己的聪明； 4、追求最好，史无前例；5、显示权威性，引文中大量引用自己的论文。 写文章的条件：1、与研究工作相关，确实有了好的想法，不是为了写而写； 2、取得了有价值的成果，对学术界有贡献； 3、实验成熟，经得起检验； 4、已经需要记录下来和其他人分享 写论文的要点：1、写出3~4层的纲要反复修改多次。 2、从Introduction开写，回顾已有的工作。 3、要声明文章结构，不要直接进入细节。 4、声明工作的动机和基本原理，提出潜在的问题，自己进行回答。 5、讲明自己工作与前人的不同，说明自己的贡献及其实际应用前景。 6、最后写Summary和Abstract，反复斟酌后确定标题。 Reviewer Check List: 1、论文是否提出了一个新的问题或者给出了已有问题的一个新的解决方案。 2、论文的主要结果是什么？3、实验结果是否充分？4、论文技术含量如何？ 5、论文是否对所提出的技术/结果的有效性和局限性进行了评价？ 6、论文写作是否清晰，从而令本行业内多数研究人员可读？ 7、论文是否适当地引用和介绍了与之相关的历史文献？ 8、论文是否应该给予嘉奖？ IEEE Transactions on CSVT Review form: 1、在多大的程度上满足本期刊读者的兴趣？ 2、论文所使用的方法的评价？3、结果是否具有新颖性？ 4、主要结果是否正确？5、论述是否清晰？ 6、是否具有一致性（前/后，论述/结果）？ 7、引文是否充足？ 8、 Reviewer的意见：(Accept / Accept after a minor revision / Reject / Reject but resubmit after a major revision / Submit to another journal)。 七、论文写作技巧： 1、宣传自己说明论文的重要性。 流程：a）问题X是重要的；b）前人的工作A、B曾经研究过这个问题；c）A、B有一些缺陷；d）我们提出了方法D；e）对D进行实验，和A、B进行比较；f）实验证明D比A、B优越；g）解释为什么D是更优的，而其他的思路（比如E）是不行的；h）阐述D的有效性和局限性；i）对D进一步发展的讨论。要点：j）简洁最重要；k）不犯粗心的错误，仔细验证结果和适当选择用词。 2、细心修改。 步骤：a）30%的时间细心思考，70%的时间认真写作初稿；b）把写好的论文放一段时间；c）逐字逐句地阅读论文；d）请其他人帮助阅读和修改；e）在修改的时候，从别人的角度来审视论文（Reviewer / boss / colleagues / proof-reader）；f）仔细修改的次数 3；修改的总次数 5。要点：g）自己读自己的论文很乏味，并且不易找到错误；h）为了论文的小的层次提升，要付出大量劳动。 3、优化英语。 步骤：a）自顶向下地组织论文（大纲/逻辑/流程）；b）用其他的优秀论文（尤其是同期刊/同系列的论文，优秀书籍）作为范例；c）请别人帮忙阅读和修改语法和用词；d）记录自己用词和语法的错误，进行积累。要点：e）用词和语法固然重要，但是结构和逻辑更加重要。 八、优秀论文结构范例： 1、Abstract 对自己工作及其贡献的总结：a）阐述问题；b）说明自己的解决方案和结果。 2、Introduction背景，以及文章的大纲：a）题X是重要的；b）前人的工作A、B曾经研究过这个问题；c）A、B有一些缺陷；d）我们提出了方法D；e）D的基本特征，和A、B进行比较；f）实验证明D比A、B优越；g）文章的基本结构，大纲。 3、 Previous Work说明自己与前人的不同：a）将历史上前人的工作分成类别；b）对每项重要的历史工作进行简短的回顾(一到几句)，注意要回顾正确，抓住要点，避免歧义；c）和自己提出的工作进行比较；d）不要忽略前人的重要工作，要公正评价前人的工作，不要过于苛刻；e）强调自己的工作和前人工作的不同，最好举出各自适用例子。 4、Our Work描述自己的工作，可分成多个部分：a）从读者角度阐明定义和表示法；b）提供算法的伪码，图解和相应解释；c）用设问的方式回答读者可能提出的潜在问题；d）复杂的冗长的证明和细节可以放在附录中，这里关键是把问题阐述清楚；e）特例和例外应该在脚注中给予说明。 5、Experiments验证提出的方法和思路：a）合理地设计实验（简洁的实验和详尽的实验步骤）；b）必要的比较，突出科学性；c）讨论，说明结果的意义；d）给出结论。 6、Conclusion总结、前景及结文：a）快速简短的总结；b）未来工作的展望；c）结束全文。 7、References对相关重要背景文献的全面引用：a）选择引文（众所周知的结论不必引用，其他人的工作要引用）；b）与前文保持一致。 8、Others致谢、附录、脚注。 处理被拒：1、理解被国际权威期刊拒稿是一件正常的事情(70%以上被拒)，保持良好心态。 2、感谢编辑和Reviewer的意见和工作。 3、询问副主编，自己可以怎样处理这篇论文最合适(重投/改投/撤回)。 4、继续新的研究或补充修改后改投其他杂志。 常见问题：1、是否可以一稿多投？千万不要！但是一篇会议论文经过修改以后可以再投期刊。 2、是否可以建议副主编如何处理自己的论文呢？不行，但可建议他别让某人评阅。 3、如4个月都未收到副主编回复怎么办？写一封友好的询问信，别催得太紧，别找主编。 4、如和副主编意见严重不和怎么办？可以找主编，但是别经常这样做。 5、如果和主编的最终决定严重不和怎么办？没有办法了。
This article is written for you, if you have been told recently by a journal editor that your manuscript needs to be edited by a “native speaker.” You don’t need to read further, if you understand that here a “native speaker” has its specific meaning: it means a native speaker of English who also has some expertise in what you do and CAN write. We are all Chinese. (Ok, some of us are Chinese xxx, with different nationalities.) Most of us speak fluent Chinese, likely with some regional accent. Does that mean we all can write Chinese articles well? The answer is clearly NO. Not only that, a research paper on life science, written in Chinese by a scientist who is a native speaker of Chinese, often reads like Greek to a layman. It’s true that all “normal” British people are native speakers of British English. Most of them, however, cannot help you with your manuscript even if they have Ph.D. degrees. What you need is someone who knows how to write research papers well, preferably someone who has a good publication record in your field. Most importantly, you can learn how to write well yourself, if you are determined to do so! Updates: I became an English editor of a journal whose chief editor had some concerns about hiring me. This Blog helped him to make his decision, and I was hired.
Follow these steps to refine your figures: Design each figure by highlighting the features you want to share with your readers; Keep only whats necessary (panels, shadings, contours, labels, and writings); Arrange all the figures in a logic way. Test: You should be able to give a 15-min talk using these figures alone. The four goals of an illustration are precise, clear, fluid and familiar. Being Precise: A common mistake is a figure is much more complex than the text. Everything should be as simple as it can be, yet no simpler. --Albert Einstein Being Clear: A good figure has a well-written caption, which begins with a title phrase. Test: A well-written caption should provide enough information to stand alone. Being Fluid and familiar: Match the information in the text with that in the illustration; Use familiar units; Use consistent layout. You may read something like this in a paper: Figure 5 clearly shows (a brief statement). And you look at the figure, and wonder what the heck the authors are referring to Yes, this happens, but make sure it does not happen to your next paper J Do not assume the readers can see through your eyes; describe what you want others to see in words, sentences, and paragraphs if needed. Also see 科技论文的一个关键 by 贾伟 and 任胜利的博客 on 科技论文写作与投稿--PPT Before you submit the manuscript, you should revise it many times . You may feel bored. You may feel you are wasting time. However, revising is the key to strong scientific writing. Follow these steps to refine your manuscript: You need to obtain some distance from the current version. (Go for a long walk, go have a drink) You have to become a good reader, if you want to become a successful reviser. You should solicit criticism of your writing. As for how to revise the manuscript AFTER you have seen reviewers comments, it is a different matter. I hope to discuss this in future. References: The craft of scientific writing by Michael Alley (1987, 1996) Zuojun: This concludes the series. I will write about the English language itself next. Stay tuned.
Conclusions generally include a list of the key results from the papers middle, a discussion and a future perspective on the work. Do not define abbreviations again; Do not bring in new results or new ideas; Do not end the paper with a negative statement about the work; Avoid being too long (about 5%-10% of the length of the main text). Exception exists. When you need to have a thorough discussion on an issue, consider devoting an independent section (before the concluding one) and write to your hearts content. Back matter includes appendices and a bibliography. An appendix is a good place to show detailed information for a more technical audience. For bibliography , make sure you list relevant publications, the latest as well as the seminal ones. For detailed information on how to write discussion and conclusions, please visit 任胜利的博客 on 科技论文写作与投稿--PPT. References: The craft of scientific writing by Michael Alley (1987, 1996)
When a reader has come this far, he must be very interested in your work. Now, its up to you to keep his interest alive. You should Choose an appropriate strategy to describe your research; Create sections and subsections to guide your readers. Considering parallelism Example: 3.1 Relationship between currents and surface wind 3.2 Surface temperature and surface wind interactionNote: If we write Interaction between A and B, then it is parallel to the title of section 3.1. Provide transition 1. Transition between sections: Map the sections by using a list at the end of introduction. Smooth the entrances into sections by avoiding three common beginnings, namely an empty beginning, a too general beginning, or a too specific beginning. 2. Transition between paragraphs: Do not waste the first sentence to repeat what is said in the previous paragraph. 3. Transition between sentences: Finish describing one thing before starting another. Do not go back and forth. Provide emphasis You can use repetition, wording, illustration, and placement. Repetition: mentioning a particular result in the abstract, result section, and conclusion. Wording: using dependent clauses and infinitive phrases. because, since, as, although, when to filter out the high-frequency signal Finally, avoid writing Our results here are supported by Smith (1998). Its the other way around: These results support (or confirm) those by Smith (1998). References: The craft of scientific writing by Michael Alley (1987, 1996)
Introduction is where the author reviews what has been published by himself as well as by other people on the same (or a closely related) topic. To many people, introduction is the most difficult part of the paper to write. Therefore, one may want to outline it first (including a list of papers to be cited) and write it last (after you finish other parts of your manuscript). An introduction should answer the following questions: What exactly is the study about? Why is the study important? What is needed to understand the (new) work? How will the (new) work be presented? Note: If you need an abbreviation, define it first. (The one defined in the abstract does not count.) It is very important to clearly state which result was obtained by whom and when . As a reviewer and English editor of many journal manuscripts, there is nothing more confusing (and sometimes upsetting) when I cannot tell who did what. Many colleagues I talk to share the same view. So, unless you want to confuse (and even upset) your reviewers and readers, please write explicitly and give credit to yourself as well as to your colleagues where credit is due . Avoid introducing too many new citations after the introduction. So, collect as many citations as appropriate in the introduction, and group them using an outline (to make sure the ideas flow smoothly). Before you start the research project, you should have read all is available on the topic (to avoid repeating what has been done). Since some project may take more than a year or two, you need to do another round of quick literature research before you finalize your manuscript for submission. As a reviewer or English editor, I actually check the reference list to see if there is a lack of new publications. For more information, please visit 任胜利的博客 on 科技论文写作与投稿--PPT References: The craft of scientific writing by Michael Alley (1987, 1996)
This article is written for you, if you have been told recently by a journal editor that your manuscript needs to be edited by a native speaker. If you think you are paying for editing one manuscript, then you are only half correct. Why? Please let me explain. You can read many books about how to write a research paper, but you cannot write well unless you write it yourself, revise it (many times), and have it edited (either by an experienced co-author or colleague, or by an English editor who has a strong science background in a field close to yours). If you wrote the manuscript yourself, you would benefit most (more than your co-authors who did little writing), if you go over the tracked changes carefully. You should feel the manuscript reads more smoothly after being edited, and as a result your ideas and reasoning are better expressed. (If not, then you should try a different English editor next time.) You should try to understand why the editor made each change. If you don't understand why, you should ask the editor to explain it. (If he refuses, then you should try another English editor next time.) In addition, you should share this edited manuscript with your co-authors so they can learn as well. If you have students, let them study the edited manuscript. If you follow my advice, you will get your moneys worth. Zuojun: This is something I have learned from and shared with my clients. When my clients improve their English, I will receive a much better manuscript next time. Then, I can improve the writing further because revising (including editing) is the key to good writing.
I have never given a true public speech myself; say standing in front of 5,000 people in an anti-Iraq war rally. However, I did have to face 40 undergraduate students (mostly juniors and seniors) in a dimmed classroom many times. Teaching non-major students at U. Hawaii on Global Environmental Change is not an easy task. The experience gained in that classroom helps me to be a serious Blogger, I think. I have two rules for my Blog: one is to do no harm, and the other is to respect my viewers. I see no reason for me to get into a fight with my viewers publicly, though I think public debates are much needed on many issues. I want to write things that may help people in some way, not matter how small, such as learning how to write research papers in English, or recommending a good (either fun or thought-provoking) movie. I try to keep each article short, and I revise it many times before posting it. I think Blogging is like giving a public speech. The counter tells me how many times viewers have stopped by to read (or glance at) a particular article of mine (ok, minus 5 or 10 times since I need to revise it a few times after I have posted it). What you see at my Blog site is what you would hear standing in front of me, except that my English carries some Chinese accent. Happy Blogging!
This article is written for you, if you have been told recently by a journal editor that your manuscript needs to be edited by a native speaker. You may ask: Who are you to write such an article? Its true that I have never used any English editing service myself. My background (including my education and publication records) can be easily checked out if you google my full name. In short, I am writing this article as an English editor (freelancer). I intend to offer unbiased views, and welcome your comments in Chinese or English (email: zuojun@zuojunyu.com). I started my own editing company more than two years ago. Naturally, I pay close attention to what is out there in order to stay competitive. When a journal editor mentioned Liwenbianji ( 理文 编 辑; http://www.liwenbianji.cn/home ), I immediately checked it out. I was quite impressed: What Liweibianji offers is exactly what I wanted to or wish to offer! (However, I am a freelancer, and I am happy doing what I have been doing: one client at a time, expanding my business through word of mouth.) What is so impressive about Liwenbianji ( 理文 编 辑 )? It uses established scientists in various fields (including meteorology and oceanography; so there is a bit of competition with my own business). It lists each editors background in both English and Chinese. I strongly recommend you to use its service, if you can identify an editor in your field. To be fair to my other competitors in the editing business, you should also google search scientific editing, and you will find more than one million links out there. For English editing, you get 45 times that! All you need to do is to check out the links on the first two pages, and you will find a few professional companies. Which one to use? I suggest that you follow these steps: 1) Does the company list its editors with their background information (education and other track records)? 2) What is the cost? 3) Does the company accept payment in RMB (if you have difficulty getting USD)? A friend brought to my attention a company that mainly serves Chinese, called PaperTalks.org ( http://papertalks.org/p/e/Default.aspx ). It uses oversea Chinese as its editors (and clients). Each manuscript is edited first by the International Scientist and Expert Team, and then copy-edited by the U.S. Professional Editor Team. I suspect PaperTalks will have more clients than Liwenbianji, because its Chinese editors can reach out to their classmates and colleagues in China through word of mouth. The weakness is some of its Chinese editors are not yet well established in their fields (since some of them are still students or post docs). In the mean time, take advantage of what these companies offer for free. Go to their websites and learn as much as you can! As for me, if your manuscript is not about meteorology, oceanography, or environmental sciences, I dont think I want to get involved, RMB or USD
How to choose a strong title? A strong title offers two things: 1) the topic of the research; 2) its unique identity that is different from all other papers in the field. Test: Does it stand out from a computer search, say using Web of Science? How to find a strong title for a paper? Being precise (using the right words and appropriate level of accuracy); Using no more than three or four details; Avoiding being too long; Avoiding unfamiliar abbreviations. The abstract is to help readers to decide whether or not they need to read this paper. When you cannot find a concise title to separate your work from others, you can use the abstract to do so. Rules for using abbreviations in the abstract: Define only those that you will use in the abstract, not those you will use in the main text. For example: The sea-surface temperature (SST) in the eastern Pacific Ocean becomes abnormally warm every 3-5 years, known as the El Nino. The authors use SST data derived by satellite to show another El Nino is on the way. Note that the purpose for defining abbreviations is for speedy writing and reading. Avoid using confusing abbreviations, such as AS (just-in-time definition for Arabian Sea), NC (North China), etc. Just-in-time definition is what I prefer; however, most journals in my fields (oceanography and meteorology) still do not accept just-in-time definition. (Its time for evolution.) For more information, please visit 任胜利的博客 on 科技论文写作与投稿--PPT References: The craft of scientific writing by Michael Alley (1987, 1996)
This I Believe is an international project engaging people in writing and sharing essays describing the core values that guide their daily lives . Over 60,000 of these essays, written by people from all walks of life , are archived here on our website, heard on public radio, chronicled through our books and television programming, and featured in weekly podcasts. The project is based on the popular 1950s radio series of the same name hosted by Edward R. Murrow. Source: This I Believe website. Zuojun: I have really enjoyed listening to many programs on the NPR (National Public Radio), where I first heard about this project. If you want to write an essay and submit it to the project, I will be glad to read it and offer my comments. My email is zuojun@zuojunyu.com.
If you know how to swim, you must have learned it in the water. The same is true for writing. You have to keep on writing in order to learn how to write well. If you are writing a paper of more than 3,000 words, you should consider putting together an outline first. An outline defines the logic flow of your paper. If you add titles for subsection, sub-subsection, and even sub-sub-subsection, you should see a well-paved path. If not, you need to revise it. Then, you can add bits and pieces to where they belong to. You may take out the sub-sub-subsection titles when you are ready to submit the manuscript. Here is an example (for a paper using a numerical ocean model and data assimilation technique): I. Introduction 1.0 Opening paragraph 1.1 Background (review publications) 1.1.1 Observational background 1.1.2 Theoretical background 1.1.3 Modeling background 1.2 Present research II. Methodology 2.1 Data 2.1.1 Atmospheric data 2.1.2 Air-sea flux data 2.1.3 Ocean data 2.1.3.1 Data used for assimilation 2.1.3.2 Data used for validation 2.2 Models 2.2.1 Model basics (equations, etc.) 2.2.2 Forcing field 2.2.3 Basin, resolution, and boundary conditions 2.2.4 Initial conditions 2.2.5 Output sampling and averaging III. Results 3.1 Main run 3.1.1 Mean state 3.1.2 Seasonal variability 3.1.3 Interannual variability 3.2 Sensitivity to winds 3.3 Sensitivity to mixing … IV. Summary and discussion 4.1 Summary 4.2 Discussion 4.2.1 Unresolved issues 4.2.2 Future work Remember: Scientific writing is hard work. Scientific writing is not science. Scientific writing is a craft. It is a skill that must be developed through practice, practice and more practice. References: The craft of scientific writing by Michael Alley (1987, 1996)
When you think you have obtained enough new results for a paper, you can do what I did using the following three steps. Step 1: Gathering a set of figures. Design these figures with great care so that they can help you to tell a story; say, using them to give an informal, 25-min talk to a small group. This process itself may take weeks, depending on your project. Since I am an ocean modeler, I may have to add a few numerical experiments to make my story more convincing. You put these figures in the order they would appear in your manuscript. Make sure you keep on revising them, namely, by refining existing ones, adding new ones and taking out some old ones. The goal is to bring out the important features that you want your readers to see in each figure clearly. Step 2: Writing detailed captions. Though a picture may be worth a thousand words, a detailed caption is often needed for a research paper. Some people like to use a detailed caption (for a good reason as discussed next) so detailed that a reader can simply look at the figure and read the caption to understand what the author is trying to convey. Other people may prefer to use a brief caption and leave the detail in the main text, which is fine, too. If you prefer a brief caption, you should still try to write as much as you can about each figure at the initial stage of manuscript preparation. You can always move much of the “caption” to the main text later on. The good thing about this practice is when you are done with figures and captions, half of the paper is written! (You may go to Step 3 now, if you prefer a brief caption.) Why should one give sufficient details in the caption? I am sure that I am not the only scientist who reads a new paper in this order: title and abstract, followed by figures and captions (so detailed captions would benefit readers like me, and I am not alone), and finally the discussion and conclusions. After that, I may or may not read the rest of the paper. (Yes, it’s possible that I may not read beyond the abstract, not necessarily because the paper is poorly written, but because I’m simply not interested in the topic at the time.) Step 3: Giving an informal talk (in English, if you can). Though it may take a lot of time for you to put together a ppt presentation, it is worth it. The preparation process itself forces you to think hard about how to convince your audience (and later on your reviewers when you submit the manuscript) that your results are new and worth publishing. You should keep on thinking about how to tell a good story, to the point that you are able to flip through these slides in your mind. Do talk to yourself (in English, if you can), or to a colleague who is willing to listen. It does not matter if this colleague understands you or not; if he does, that is even better. (Some of my colleagues call this practice, the Janitor's Syndrome. I know this works for me when I am really stuck during my research, and I may suddenly get a new idea if I start to tell a friend about my difficulty, who may not even be a scientist.) Talking requires brain power, and may even stimulate one’s brain unexpectedly! (Revised on April 11, 2016) from http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:20090211_thousand_words-01.jpg Go back to: “科学网大学”英文服务中心: 英文写作小贴士 http://blog.sciencenet.cn/home.php?mod=spaceuid=306792do=blogid=432195
English is not my mother tongue. Today, people say to me:”How did you learn to write so well?” I learned basic English in China, where I had the best English teacher of the whole school (Shangdong College of Oceanography, now Ocean University of China) and graduate school (Zhongshan University). Still, I could barely write (or talk) when I came to US in 1986. Now, I can write research papers with confidence, I have clients from Japan and Korea as well as China. If you are a beginner and want to publish research papers in English journals, please follow me chapter by chapter. I will help you so some day you can write research papers in English with confidence. In order to write (English) well, one must read, read and read. If you don’t have time for novels written in English, read publications in English on the topics you are most familiar with. It is other people’s writing you are reading now, but soon the words, phrases and sentences will become your own. This is how you acquire basic knowledge of English for writing. Remember: Rome was not built in one day, nor is one’s ability to write well in English. (Revised on April 11, 2016)
A Few Points on Scientific Writing Editors are a low form of life inferior to the viruses and only slightly above academic deans (R.A. Day, 1975) Who am I to pretend to give advice on writing to young researchers? After 10 years working with scientific journals as Associate Editor ( Bulletin de Minralogie , Geochimica et Cosmochimica Acta, Chemical Geology ), I became Editor of Earth and Planetary Science Letters (1993-2000) dealing with ~140 manuscripts per year and then Editor-in-Chief of the Journal of Geophysical Research Solid Earth from 2001-2004 (650 manuscripts per year). I have put this page on the web because I have the impression that some things simply do not change. The kinds of errors that I made as a PhD student and the types of problems that I have had with reviewers and editors with my own articles keep repeating themselves after 30 years I find myself making the same comments to young authors that drove me up the wall at 25 years of age. As an Editor, and especially as a French Editor, it is a terrible feeling to have to reject a manuscript by a young scientist because the ideas are not expressed clearly, when other criteria indicate that the author is capable of making important contributions. Some easily irritable reviewers will readily reject a poorly written manuscript by a first-time author, even when the manuscript may contain great ideas that the author is simply not capable of expressing. Dont forget that a reviewer irritated by writing faults or by the style will probably lose some of her/his initial goodwill towards the science being presented. Although I had initially listed a number of typical problems for manuscripts written by young and less young French authors, most of these points actually appear in manuscripts written by scientists of all walks of life regardless of their country of origin: In bold , red and underlined : one paper, one point! One idea, one article. Dont write an article containing a number of different overlapping or parallel ideas. If you have two ideas, write two articles and do not write your magnum opus that no one will understand. Papers of the type Part 1, 2, 3, etc. are very unpopular and perceived as arrogant because they are based on the assumption that all of the parts will be accepted in the format decided by the author (in defense, an author purportedly said, why not, Beethoven wrote 9 symphonies, didn't he?) . Put yourself in the position of the potential reader of your paper and ask yourself two questions: is it worth my time to read this paper, and what will I get out of it? Most readers of your papers (who themselves represent a tiny fraction of the scientific community) will perhaps read the abstract and conclusions, look at a couple of figures (without reading the captions) and verify that they have been cited or not. All of this takes about 45 seconds. If you want to be read by more than the five colleagues around the world who work on exactly the same topic as you, make it short and make it readable to a broad readership. English is often a scapegoat: 4 times out of 5, an incomprehensible sentence in English is not translatable in your own language because the basic formulation of the idea is wrong, not the words. In other words, dont blame the language. If you feel that you cant find the proper word to express your idea, try: (1) leave this word out and see whether the sentence reads well anyway, and (2) use an alternate word with almost the same meaning and use a thesaurus to zero on the right term. Spell-checkers and grammar-checkers are part of all word processors (even LaTeX). There is nothing that ticks off a reviewer more than dealing with a large number of errors when a single check can catch them all. Not using a spell-checker or grammar-checker is essentially the same as dropping candy wrappers on the street and expecting someone to pick them up for you. Title: it may look prestigious to be general in the title, but turgid headlines tend to make people shrug. Avoid A model of the world: example of my backyard. Dont write an article entitled A global model for the seismicity of the Earth: example of the Santa Monica event, but rather The moment tensor of the Santa Monica earthquake. Avoid two-part titles that are separated by a colon, they are pompous. Names: Napolon Bonaparte and not Bonaparte Napolon. Even in French, one says pr-nom for first name but nobody listens: North American telephone books are full of Dr Philippe, Pr Jean-Paul, and Mme Georgette, etc. who confused the first name (prnom) and the last name (nom de famille). Putting the last name in capital letters is a waste of time. The Abstract provides a summary of the paper. It needs to be concise, because if it is not, the reader will become discouraged and will go to the next article in the journal. The abstract needs to be informative: writing a theory has been presented and the implications discussed is simply a waste of time for everyone involved. Get straight to the facts! The Introduction introduces the paper: ask the correct scientific question, discuss the current state of the problem in the literature, and explain the reason why you have the key to the problem that others do not. The Results section describes the data, quickly reviews expected regularities and highlights oddities. Use a reasonable number of plots to show how the new results fit with existing knowledge and what makes them distinctive. The section provides a context for comparing the new results with literature data. Save trees, though! As Al Hofmann correctly points out, writing that 87 Sr/ 86 Sr ratios in samples 5 to 9 vary from 0.702985 to 0.703117, whereas, quite to the contrary, they do vary from 0.703017 to 0.703315 in samples 1 to 4, which most normal people can get from the table, is a total waste of space and time and immensely boring. Telling that Ba increases from sample 1 to 10 while Rb decreases in sample 8 to 15 is uninteresting. The Results and Discussion sections are rigorously distinct. The reader must have all of the available data by the beginning of the discussion. Dont pull out new results or data from your sleeve in the middle of the discussion to support an idea. The verdict on a marble cake of results or discussions is rejection. Presentation style (Part I): go for the algorithmic method and not the Agatha Christie (or Sherlock Holmes) method. Avoid building suspense, because if you succeed in hiding your arguments for too long, the white knight will arrive a few seconds too late to rescue the prospective mother of his children from the villain, your paper will pass away before the end, and your story will fall into undeserved oblivion. The first sentence in a paragraph always describes the motivation of the paragraph dont take the reader down a hidden path. Its better to be understood in 30 seconds than to lose the reader after 15 minutes. Presentation style (Part II): use sub-headers with moderation, they each betray a non-sequitur. The ideal article could have none. My high-school teachers enjoyed the sight of a full table of contents, but a segmented structure rarely serves a strong scientific discussion. Rather that breaking your work into separate pieces, try to streamline the sequence of ideas. Show causal or temporal relationships by rephrasing consecutive sentences to this effect. Words like indeed or in fact do not connect anything, certainly not adjacent ideas, and look like meaningless objects casually dumped in the crack between two unrelated statements. The paragraph! Avoid woolly style, with no memorable beginning, no foreseeable end, and endless sidetracking. Follow the thread of your idea in the most possible linear way. Although a new step in the development of an idea calls for a new paragraph, you should work hard to keep the transition smooth. Samba, two steps forward, one step backward, may help communicate your feelings but not your ideas, and particularly in science. If you develop your idea in the first part of a sentence, do not ruin it in the second part. Such a trick can reassure you when you are not ready to commit, but it will certainly leave the reader confused about what you really meant to say. If a confrontation between ideas is really needed, leave the reader on the idea that you think you should support. Compare the impression left by I like beer, but I really need to watch my waistline versus I know it is not great for my diet, but I could have a cold beer now and make up your mind about which message you wish to send! Dont think that if you explain things clearly, that you will be considered mentally deficient. Obviously you do not want to take the reader for an idiot, but take the time to clearly and simply state your ideas, without embellishments, without insinuations, and without pontificating. The worst thing that could happen to you is that you will be understood. A very common related problem is whether potential readers should be assumed to be on top of the literature, even in their own field. I was taken aback many times by reviewers who considered that their ignorance of papers published 5, 10, or 25 years ago was essentially not their responsibility. Although such an attitude is morally and intellectually flawed, I recommend that you act defensively and do not hesitate repeating --with due referencing-- what you think is common knowledge. Of course, doing this for trendy concepts will be perceived as a lack of taste. Complexity is rarely a virtue: demonstrating that a problem is complex ( i.e., more than one degree of freedom) is the best way to chase away a reader and in any event is not sufficient reason to write a paper. Find a thread (a simple idea) that allows you to unravel the problem so that the author, the reviewer, and the reader remain interested. Occams razor (principle of parsimony), though, is a good topic for parties but has little scientific merit. Dont make smart innuendos to the reader who probably will not understand them. The archetypical example of this kind of behavior is summarizing a particular theory by simply adding the term classic. The notion of the classical dynamo theory is translated by the average reader as I will not waste my time explaining the trivial details of the dynamo that this stupid reader should know and anyhow I dont know what the original references are. This is very, very unprofessional and editorially risky. Dont use empty words (e.g. done, performed, carried out, etc.) and instead use words that have meaning: The Sr isotope compositions of these samples have been measured is always preferred to The measurement of Sr isotope compositions has been performed on these samples. Dont use insults, even unintentional ones: when a reviewer comes across it is obvious that or it is clear that at the beginning of an incomprehensible sentence, he/she will be made to feel like an idiot. And then the reviewer will make you pay for your condescending attitude and lack of communication skills. Avoid using personal pronouns I or we when there is no actual action carried out by the author. We mixed the residual solutions in a 10 ml beaker is OK, but We can see that the points form a linear array is at best is a little absurd, and at worst an insult (see point 18). The solution is simple; just cross-out We can see that! Use you spell checker to hound the unnecessary we. Avoid unnecessary problems related to debatable meaning: quantitatively for completely, to evidence for to attest to, complimentary for complementary, paper for article. Also avoid and/or and split infinitives ( e.g. , to boldly go). The Conclusion section is an essential (and required) part of a paper: it represents what remains after the dust of the discussion has settled. No new ideas can be introduced in the Conclusions. The Acknowledgements should be dignified and include the reviewers, all the reviewers, who have spent time on your work, even if you dont really appreciate their comments. References . Dropping a significant article from your reference list to minimize its importance with respect to your own manuscript is a sure strategy for triggering a hostile reaction from the reviewers. Good Editors pick the reviewers among the most competent scientists in the field but they all unfortunately come with a strong ego. Be a scholar, if only to minimize trouble. Otherwise, the first paper where an idea is introduced should always be cited and a recent review article can also be useful. The absence of old references can indicate a lack of perspective, but too many citations of old papers is pedantic. Fonts. Do not use more than two fonts for the text and avoid non-proportional fonts (Geneva, Courrier) as they are difficult to read in the form of long paragraphs. Use serif fonts (with embellishments, as Time) for the text, and sanserif fonts (Helvetica, Arial) for headings and titles. Be stingy on bold, underlined, and italic style: the human brain does not handle well too many levels of coding. Right justification is pretty but makes the paragraph bulky and unpleasant to read (the eye looses its marks). Hyphenate your text. Never forget to produce a triple-spaced (at least double-spaced) manuscript with wide margins, which will let the reviewer scribble annotations when he/she takes the manuscript on the plane. Pre-formatting a manuscript in the journal print style anticipates acceptance and boasts perfection: this will, most of the time, irritate both the Editor and the reviewers. Figures . Limit their number, but a text with no figures is often unattractive. Limit the number of symbols and colors (5 of each is a good maximum). Use sanserif fonts (Helvetica, Arial) for labels and your figures will have more muscle. Likewise, limit the number of font sizes. It is good policy before submitting a manuscript to print the figures reduced to the size expected from the particular journal and check their readability. Manuscript revisions. Good words break no bones. When a reviewer indicates that he (she) has not understood something that appears obvious to you, seriously consider the possibility that he is sincere. Dont try to reprimand him for his apparent ineptness, but instead work on better expressing your ideas (and test them out on your non-specialist colleagues). When an English-speaking reviewer takes time to correct your errors in English, dont just ignore the suggestions as you wont get a second chance to benefit from this help. Now, please dont check my own papers in too much detail and do not ask how often my own manuscripts get rejected for breaking these ground rules. It so much easier to play the wise guy than to improve ones own behavior!
标签: writing
