如何实现文化与经济、政治、社会、生态的协同发展? 作者:邹晓辉,邹顺鹏 中国地质大学(北京)马克思主义学院 中美塞尔研究中心 摘要 :本文旨在以融智的方法从三个角度来阐述文化与经济、政治、社会、生态的协同如何实现。其方法是以蓝图、模型、样板三部曲的方式,通过“纸上谈兵、沙盘演练、典型范例”三个步骤,做到严格地预演、实训、实操的过程。其结果是近期未来智慧城乡在五个文明建设及其协同发展上可达到真正地“谋定而动、未雨绸缪、一锤定音”的有益效果。其意义是采用融智的观点和方法,有益于以最低的代价和最优的效果实现文化与经济、政治、社会、生态的协同发展,具体表现为近期未来绿色智慧城乡一体化示范系统工程在文化生态的几个关键点上得以创造性地呈现。 关键词 :融智方法,协同发展,战略目标,智慧城乡,系统工程,文化基因 How to Achieve Coordinated Development Culture,Economy, Politics, Society, and Ecology by ZOU Xiaohui and ZOU Shunpeng China University of Geosciences Abstract: This paper aims to elaborate the way of coordinated developmentculture, economy, politics, society, and ecology from three perspectives. Itsbackground involves: the three fundamental phenomena of matter, consciousnessand culture, which can be generally called broad text; corresponding truenature, also called true information, which can be divided into: scientificprinciples, meaning and grammar or law (being simplified as Tao). It uses theway of blueprint, model and template to realize the strict rehearse, practicaltraining and practical operation through three steps of “engaging in idletheorizing, exercising on the sand-table and setting a typical example”. Thefive civilizations include: people’s well-being and friendly etiquette; liberalmind and appropriate behavior; beautiful environment and smart urban-ruralareas. Its meaning lies in using the wise view and way to realize coordinateddevelopment culture, economy, politics, society, and ecology with the lowestprice and the best result. More specifically, for the demonstration systemproject of environment smart urban-rural integration, several key-points of culturalecology can be creatively presented. 全文: 8 如何实现文化与经济、政治、社会、生态的协同发展.pdf
Keywords as Technology and as Business Model. The entire search industry has relied on keywords as money-making machines. What are the limitations of keywords as technology? What are the limitations of keywords as business model? What are prospects beyond keywords? These are issues discussed in this blog and the next (in progress). 信息爆炸的时代,IT 领域风云多变,群雄争霸,此伏彼起。其中最精彩的故事之一就是搜索巨头的崛起。他们的谋生本领从技术和商业模式两方面看,都是所谓关键词(keywords)。于是关键词有了两个含义,一个是关键词的技术,另一个是作为广告基点的可以卖钱的关键词。 作为技术的关键词,从原理上看是再简单不过的了,就是给海量文本做个索引,以便检索。建索引是个相当古老的传统,严肃一点的教科书、手册和科技书籍,差不多都会在书前的目录之外,再建一个术语索引附于书后,以备读者查询。从满足信息需求的角度看,目录与索引的区别在方便随意浏览还是临时查询。一般人两种需求都有,譬如,每天查看新闻是很多人的习惯,那么进入新闻目录去分类浏览就是自然而然的了(这个需求的延伸就是如今手机上各类新闻推送,个性化服务,送货上门了)。一般而言,这个需求的特点是事先没有一个明确的问题需要解答,浏览看上去有点漫无目的,至少没有一个焦点,就是了解个动态。因此预制的目录和分类可以比较好的适应这种需求。第二个需求不同,信息需求者有个具体的焦点,或者疑问,他需要寻求答案。譬如家里抽水马桶坏了,查一查怎么修理抽水马桶。这类具体的需求千差万别,每个人每个不同的时间点,都可能产生一个特定的问题需要答案。因此,要想事先给这无限的开放的信息需求及其答案做目录式分类,是不可能的,因为有限的分类无法应付无限的问题。为了以不变应万变,关键词索引和检索应运而生,满足了这种需要。因为所有的具体问题或信息焦点,说到底都是由关键词组成的。前述抽水马桶的问题,心里的问题大概是“我的抽水马桶坏了,怎么修理呢”,电脑不懂人话,只好抽出表达主要概念的词(不抽的是所谓 stop words,就是”我“、“的”、“了、”呢“、”怎么“ 之类, 多是高频小词),其关键词就是:抽水马桶,坏,修理。关键词是语言表达的基本单位,因此从信息海洋中检索出来的网页只要按照这些关键词出现的密度(keyword density)排序,要寻找的答案应该就在里面了。(关键词密度排序是最基础的搜索技术,后来改进版的排序算法 Page Rank 更加注重网页本身的信誉度。) 互联网发展伊始,很快迎来了网页的爆发性增长,网人在信息的海洋中找不着北了。于是给网页做目录分类的雅虎兴盛了,门户网站门庭若市。人多了就好做生意,于是门户网站开始了网络时代的广告生意,各种闪烁的广告条让人眼花缭乱。后来人们发现,信息需求靠有限的目录和分类是无法满足的,需要一个工具来帮助搜索。谷歌百度等搜索引擎为支撑的公司遇到了历史的机遇。不过,刚开始的时候,他们也不知道怎样才能挣钱,他们不过是研制了这么一个搜索工具供网人自由使用,他们没有门户网站分门别类的丰富内容,对用户没有粘性,用户拿来就用,用完就走,很可能是回到了内容丰富规整的雅虎去浏览新闻去了。于是,他们就到各大网站去推销这套引擎,凡是大一点的门户或网站,都有一个支持网站内搜索的需求,也就需要搜索引擎,他们于是收取 license fee,这是典型的 B2B(企业对企业) 商业模式,卖的是技术(工具)本身。可这么做难以做大,不过是网站门户的补充而已。 直到有一天,新的 B2C (企业对消费者) 模式出来了,这才开启了搜索引擎大佬财源滚滚的时代。这个模式的基础就是发现了,关键词不仅仅是技术,是索引和查询的元件,而且关键词本身也可以卖大钱。卖给谁?当然是广告商,谁出钱多,就卖给谁,而且关键词数量巨大,加上关键词之间的组合( 可以对关键词做与、或、非等操作),这个盘子可以做得很大,定期竞标,实现利润最大化(百度的所谓竞价排名:顺便说一下,比起谷歌的广告不得影响搜索排序结果的做法,百度有时太没品了,让人无语)。这一切的一切都基于关键词是最简单而且最容易掌控的语言表达的形式,广告商需要借助它与信息搜取者(潜在的用户)匹配上,这样就大大提高了广告的效益,因为广告从传统的被动轰炸客户(如传统媒体譬如电视)一下子提升到主动迎合客户的信息需求,因为在搜索过程中遇到的广告都是与所搜索的关键词密切相关的内容。这个关键词卖钱的商业模式是迄今互联网最成功的模式,经久不衰。 说到这里,我们可以问一下:用关键词来表达信息需求(譬如问题)、满足信息需求(譬如根据密度信誉度返回相关网页)以及代表广告内容,靠谱么?答案是 yes and no。从用户体验来看也是如此。很多时候似乎用关键词,再花点时间阅读反馈回来的前几个网页,就找到了问题的答案。也有的时候发现找不到答案,于是把自己的问题变换一下,抽取不同的关键词,譬如变成 “抽水马桶”,“不工作” 再去查询,答案就出来了,就在新返回的网页里。反正电脑检索是立等可取的,变换几次虽然要多费点儿劲儿尝试(trial and error),满足了需求也还是可以接受的。也确实有些时候,关键词怎么也玩不转,费了九牛二虎之力,尝试不同关键词的组合,可就是找不到答案。有的是心中的问题难以用关键词抽取来表达,譬如你想寻找产品发布的信息,就很难用关键词表达,第一,产品这个概念是一个开放集,没法用关键词去枚举。第二,“发布” 这个关键词是多义的,政治新闻的发布就与产品没有一毛钱的关系,没有动宾关系的制约,硬拿它做关键词去搜索,得到的就是信息巨多,太多杂音。总之,关键词作为语言的元件,表达信息不可能完整准确,它的好处是简单、鲁棒(robust)和查全率(recall)好,作为语言表达,关键词不过是一个最简单的近似,一个无奈的选择。 总结一下,关键词只是表象,它的价值植根于对信息的表达(载体)。是这种信息载体的身份使得它把用户的需求、网页的相关以及广告商的目标这三者联合起来,成为互联网经济的三大基石之一(电商交易和游戏服务是另外的两大互联网产业)。然而,关键词只是信息表达的最原始粗糙的元件,它没有抽象度,无法应对不可枚举的概念(譬如“产品”),它没有语词结构,最多只能用逻辑“与或非”操作关键词(术语叫 boolean query),而无法表达文法关系(譬如表达 “发布”的对象必须是产品)。所有这一切都是根子上的局限。因此,关键词不可能是信息时代的终点。关键词技术和关键词模式都面临而且需要一场颠覆式的革新。 下一讲预告 《立委科普:关键词革新》 ,谈关键词的三面都面临怎样的颠覆式改革。 【后记】 这篇是地地道道的科普,太浅显、白话、常识了,老妪能解了吧,只是结论部分从天下大势和技术基础的角度指出了关键词技术和关键词模式的根本局限,算是夹带了私货:关键词面临革命(或者叫颠覆式革新更易让人接受,也更妥帖,因为不可能杀掉关键词,只是要剥夺它的信息唯一载体的地位)。 【相关博文】 《立委科普:关键词革新》 2015-10-17 《泥沙龙笔记:铿锵众人行,parsing 可以颠覆关键词吗?》 2015-10-10 《泥沙龙笔记:铿锵三人行》 2015-10-08 泥沙龙笔记:漫谈语言形式 2015-10-03 泥沙龙笔记:parsing 是引擎的核武器,再论NLP与搜索 【研发笔记:没有语言结构可以解析语义么?浅论 LSA】 【立委科普:基于关键词的舆情分类系统面临挑战】 【置顶:立委科学网博客NLP博文一览(定期更新版)】
文章的摘要十分关键,因为很多研究人员只读摘要而不读全文。因此,摘要提供准确而详尽的研究总结十分重要:它可以帮助研究人员了解你所开展的工作、你的研究目的和研究发现以及研究结果的益处和重要性。摘要必须能够独立成文,具备研究概要的功能,使人不看全文就能读懂。在阅读摘要后对文章细节感兴趣的读者自然会继续阅读全文。因此摘要不必太面面俱到,例如,可不必列举方法细节。 尽管摘要是论文的第一部分,但事实上应最后撰写。在完成其他部分后应尽快写摘要,因为这些内容依然清晰地印在你的脑海中,使你能够对自己的工作进行简明而全面的总结,而不至于忽略任何重要的内容。不同期刊对摘要的撰写要求有所不同,因此应参照目标杂志的《稿约》了解具体要求。尽管杂志要求不同,但依然存在一些普遍应遵守的惯例: • 应注意对字数的限制。通常来讲摘要的字数限制平均为250个词,但许多杂志要求更短些(如《Nature》和《BBRC》对摘要的篇幅限制为150个字),而许多杂志(如《BioMed Central》)允许摘要篇幅稍长些。这充分说明了为什么应在写文章之前确定目标杂志。 • 应避免使用技术行话,从而使摘要更易懂,更具可读性。不同目标期刊的“技术行话”取决于杂志的读者情况(可以通过期刊网站查询)。例如:“焦虑测试”一词通常比“高架十字迷宫实验”更容易理解,除非该杂志专门针对行为研究人员。通常摘要因受篇幅所限不能对技术术语进行定义和解释。如果术语使用不可避免,应在首次提到时用简单的措辞加以定义。 • 如同技术术语一样,应尽量不使用缩略语,其可用性也取决于不同的目标期刊。例如,大多数杂志接受HIV的使用。相比之下,RT-PCR对于分子生物学技术的杂志是可以接受的,但绝大多数杂志要求在首次使用时给出完整拼写(reverse transcriptase polymerase chainreaction)。许多杂志在网页上列出可使用的缩略语。反复使用三次或以上的必要的缩略语应在首次使用时给出完整拼写。只使用一次或两次的缩略语应使用全称,除非这样做超出了字数要求。摘要中已给出全称的缩略语在正文中首次使用时也应给出全称。 • 尽管一些杂志允许在摘要中引用文献,但绝大多数杂志不允许引用文献。因此,除非你要投稿的杂志允许这样做,否则不应在摘要中引用文献。 以下是BBRC杂志作者须知给出的指导性意见: • 摘要应放在第2页,即标题页之后 • 摘要应采用一段式,总结文章的主要发现,篇幅不超过150字 • 摘要后应列出10个用于收录和检索的关键词 一些杂志要求采用结构式摘要,分为背景、目的、方法、结果和结论。临床期刊可能要求额外或不同段落,如“patients”。因此,再次强调,在动笔之前应查阅目标杂志的《稿约》,确定杂志的具体版式或格式要求。 摘要后经常需要列出由作者选择的关键词。《稿约》会指出要求列出多少个关键词,甚至提供可供参考的关键词清单。选择合适的关键词很重要,因为他们可作检索之用。选择合适的关键词可以使你的文章更容易被发现和引用。因此,关键词越切合你的文章内容越好,应避免选择多数研究所适用的一般性术语。 实例:让为这个题目选择合适的关键词: “Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration” 好的关键词:okadoic acid、hippocampus、neuronal degeneration、MAP kinase signaling以及mouse (或是rat或其他实验动物)。 差的关键词:neuron、brain、OA (简写)、regional-specific neuronal degeneration以及signaling。这些词过于笼统。 英文原文 The snapshot: abstract and keywords Yourpaper’s abstract is critical because many researchers will read thatpart only, rather than reading the entire paper. Therefore, it iscritical that it provides an accurate and sufficiently detailed summaryof your work so that those researchers can understand what you did, whyyou did it, what your findings are, and why your findings are usefuland important. Your abstract must be able to stand alone, that is, tofunction as an overview of your study that can be understood withoutreading the entire text. Readers who become interested in learning moredetails than can be included in the abstract will inevitably proceed tothe full text. Therefore, the abstract does not need to be overlydetailed; for example, it does not need to include a detailed methodssection. Even though the abstract is one of the first parts ofyour paper, it should actually be written last. You should write itsoon after finishing the other sections, while the rest of themanuscript is fresh in your mind, enabling you to write a concise butcomprehensive summary of your study without overlooking anythingimportant. Requirements for abstracts differ among journals, so thetarget journal’s instructions for authors should be consulted forspecific details. Despite differences among journals, there are a fewgeneral rules that should be obeyed when writing an abstract: • The word limit should be observed; 250 words is probably about averageand commonly adopted as a word limit for the abstract, but manyjournals request shorter abstracts (for example, Nature Articles andBBRC both have a 150-word limit) while many others (for example, BioMedCentral journals) allow longer ones. This is one good reason why thetarget journal should be identified before you write your paper. • Technical jargon should be avoided so that the abstract isunderstandable for a broad readership, although what is considered“technical” may vary depending on the target journal’s audience (checkthe journal’s website for details of their readership). For example, “atest of anxiety” would generally be clearer than “elevated plus-mazetest” in an abstract unless the journal was specifically targeted tobehavioral researchers. Usually, there simply isn’t enough space in theabstract to define and explain technical terminology. If suchterminology is unavoidable, it should be defined in simple terms whereit is first used. • Like technical jargon, abbreviations shouldbe limited as much as possible, although their acceptability may againdepend on the target journal. For example, HIV is likely to beacceptable in abbreviated form by most journals. By contrast, RT-PCRmight be considered acceptable by a journal reporting molecular biologytechniques, but would it need to be spelt in full (reversetranscriptase polymerase chain reaction) in most journals at first use.Many journals provide a list of acceptable abbreviations on theirwebsites. Necessary abbreviations used three or more times should bedefined at first use; however, abbreviations used only once or twiceshould be spelled out in full unless doing so causes the word limit tobe exceeded. Abbreviations that are defined in the abstract will needto be defined again at first use in the main text. • Althoughsome journals do allow references to be cited in the abstract, the vastmajority do not. Therefore, unless you plan to submit to a journal thatallows it, you should not cite references in your abstract. If we look at the instructions to authors for BBRC, we can see the following guidelines: • The Abstract should be on page 2, i.e., after the title page • The Abstract must be a single paragraph that summarizes the main findings of the paper in fewer than 150 words. • A list of up to 10 keywords useful for indexing or searching should be included after the Abstract. Somejournals request structured abstracts divided into sections such asbackground, objectives, methods, results, and conclusions. Clinicaljournals may require additional or alternative sections, such as‘patients’. Therefore, it is again necessary to check the targetjournal’s instructions for authors to determine the particularformatting/outline requirements prior to writing. Abstracts arefrequently followed by a list of keywords selected by the authors. Theinstructions for authors will state how many keywords are required andmay even provide a list of recommended keywords. Choosing appropriatekeywords is important, because these are used for indexing purposes.Well chosen keywords enable your manuscript to be more easilyidentified and cited. Thus, the keywords should be as specific to yourmanuscript as possible, and general terms, which could apply to anenormous number of studies, should be avoided. Examples: Let’sconsider some appropriate keywords for the following title:“Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acidadministration”. Good keywords would be: okadaic acid,hippocampus, neuronal degeneration, MAP kinase signaling, and possiblymouse (or rat or whatever experimental animal was used). Poorkeywords would be: neuron, brain, OA (as an abbreviation),regional-specific neuronal degeneration, and signaling. These terms aresimply too general. Dr Daniel McGowan 分子神经学博士 理文编辑学术总监
文章的摘要十分关键,因为很多研究人员只读摘要而不读全文。因此,摘要提供准确而详尽的研究总结十分重要:它可以帮助研究人员了解你所开展的工作、你的研究目的和研究发现以及研究结果的益处和重要性。摘要必须能够独立成文,具备研究概要的功能,使人不看全文就能读懂。在阅读摘要后对文章细节感兴趣的读者自然会继续阅读全文。因此摘要不必太面面俱到,例如,可不必列举方法细节。 尽管摘要是论文的第一部分,但事实上应最后撰写。在完成其他部分后应尽快写摘要,因为这些内容依然清晰地印在你的脑海中,使你能够对自己的工作进行简明而全面的总结,而不至于忽略任何重要的内容。不同期刊对摘要的撰写要求有所不同,因此应参照目标杂志的《稿约》了解具体要求。尽管杂志要求不同,但依然存在一些普遍应遵守的惯例: • 应注意对字数的限制。通常来讲摘要的字数限制平均为250个词,但许多杂志要求更短些(如《Nature》和《BBRC》对摘要的篇幅限制为150个字),而许多杂志(如《BioMed Central》)允许摘要篇幅稍长些。这充分说明了为什么应在写文章之前确定目标杂志。 • 应避免使用技术行话,从而使摘要更易懂,更具可读性。不同目标期刊的“技术行话”取决于杂志的读者情况(可以通过期刊网站查询)。例如:“焦虑测试”一词通常比“高架十字迷宫实验”更容易理解,除非该杂志专门针对行为研究人员。通常摘要因受篇幅所限不能对技术术语进行定义和解释。如果术语使用不可避免,应在首次提到时用简单的措辞加以定义。 • 如同技术术语一样,应尽量不使用缩略语,其可用性也取决于不同的目标期刊。例如,大多数杂志接受HIV的使用。相比之下,RT-PCR对于分子生物学技术的杂志是可以接受的,但绝大多数杂志要求在首次使用时给出完整拼写(reverse transcriptase polymerase chainreaction)。许多杂志在网页上列出可使用的缩略语。反复使用三次或以上的必要的缩略语应在首次使用时给出完整拼写。只使用一次或两次的缩略语应使用全称,除非这样做超出了字数要求。摘要中已给出全称的缩略语在正文中首次使用时也应给出全称。 • 尽管一些杂志允许在摘要中引用文献,但绝大多数杂志不允许引用文献。因此,除非你要投稿的杂志允许这样做,否则不应在摘要中引用文献。 以下是BBRC杂志作者须知给出的指导性意见: • 摘要应放在第2页,即标题页之后 • 摘要应采用一段式,总结文章的主要发现,篇幅不超过150字 • 摘要后应列出10个用于收录和检索的关键词 一些杂志要求采用结构式摘要,分为背景、目的、方法、结果和结论。临床期刊可能要求额外或不同段落,如“patients”。因此,再次强调,在动笔之前应查阅目标杂志的《稿约》,确定杂志的具体版式或格式要求。 摘要后经常需要列出由作者选择的关键词。《稿约》会指出要求列出多少个关键词,甚至提供可供参考的关键词清单。选择合适的关键词很重要,因为他们可作检索之用。选择合适的关键词可以使你的文章更容易被发现和引用。因此,关键词越切合你的文章内容越好,应避免选择多数研究所适用的一般性术语。 实例:让为这个题目选择合适的关键词: “Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration” 好的关键词:okadoic acid、hippocampus、neuronal degeneration、MAP kinase signaling以及mouse (或是rat或其他实验动物)。 差的关键词:neuron、brain、OA (简写)、regional-specific neuronal degeneration以及signaling。这些词过于笼统。 英文原文 The snapshot: abstract and keywords Yourpaper’s abstract is critical because many researchers will read thatpart only, rather than reading the entire paper. Therefore, it iscritical that it provides an accurate and sufficiently detailed summaryof your work so that those researchers can understand what you did, whyyou did it, what your findings are, and why your findings are usefuland important. Your abstract must be able to stand alone, that is, tofunction as an overview of your study that can be understood withoutreading the entire text. Readers who become interested in learning moredetails than can be included in the abstract will inevitably proceed tothe full text. Therefore, the abstract does not need to be overlydetailed; for example, it does not need to include a detailed methodssection. Even though the abstract is one of the first parts ofyour paper, it should actually be written last. You should write itsoon after finishing the other sections, while the rest of themanuscript is fresh in your mind, enabling you to write a concise butcomprehensive summary of your study without overlooking anythingimportant. Requirements for abstracts differ among journals, so thetarget journal’s instructions for authors should be consulted forspecific details. Despite differences among journals, there are a fewgeneral rules that should be obeyed when writing an abstract: • The word limit should be observed; 250 words is probably about averageand commonly adopted as a word limit for the abstract, but manyjournals request shorter abstracts (for example, Nature Articles andBBRC both have a 150-word limit) while many others (for example, BioMedCentral journals) allow longer ones. This is one good reason why thetarget journal should be identified before you write your paper. • Technical jargon should be avoided so that the abstract isunderstandable for a broad readership, although what is considered“technical” may vary depending on the target journal’s audience (checkthe journal’s website for details of their readership). For example, “atest of anxiety” would generally be clearer than “elevated plus-mazetest” in an abstract unless the journal was specifically targeted tobehavioral researchers. Usually, there simply isn’t enough space in theabstract to define and explain technical terminology. If suchterminology is unavoidable, it should be defined in simple terms whereit is first used. • Like technical jargon, abbreviations shouldbe limited as much as possible, although their acceptability may againdepend on the target journal. For example, HIV is likely to beacceptable in abbreviated form by most journals. By contrast, RT-PCRmight be considered acceptable by a journal reporting molecular biologytechniques, but would it need to be spelt in full (reversetranscriptase polymerase chain reaction) in most journals at first use.Many journals provide a list of acceptable abbreviations on theirwebsites. Necessary abbreviations used three or more times should bedefined at first use; however, abbreviations used only once or twiceshould be spelled out in full unless doing so causes the word limit tobe exceeded. Abbreviations that are defined in the abstract will needto be defined again at first use in the main text. • Althoughsome journals do allow references to be cited in the abstract, the vastmajority do not. Therefore, unless you plan to submit to a journal thatallows it, you should not cite references in your abstract. If we look at the instructions to authors for BBRC, we can see the following guidelines: • The Abstract should be on page 2, i.e., after the title page • The Abstract must be a single paragraph that summarizes the main findings of the paper in fewer than 150 words. • A list of up to 10 keywords useful for indexing or searching should be included after the Abstract. Somejournals request structured abstracts divided into sections such asbackground, objectives, methods, results, and conclusions. Clinicaljournals may require additional or alternative sections, such as‘patients’. Therefore, it is again necessary to check the targetjournal’s instructions for authors to determine the particularformatting/outline requirements prior to writing. Abstracts arefrequently followed by a list of keywords selected by the authors. Theinstructions for authors will state how many keywords are required andmay even provide a list of recommended keywords. Choosing appropriatekeywords is important, because these are used for indexing purposes.Well chosen keywords enable your manuscript to be more easilyidentified and cited. Thus, the keywords should be as specific to yourmanuscript as possible, and general terms, which could apply to anenormous number of studies, should be avoided. Examples: Let’sconsider some appropriate keywords for the following title:“Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acidadministration”. Good keywords would be: okadaic acid,hippocampus, neuronal degeneration, MAP kinase signaling, and possiblymouse (or rat or whatever experimental animal was used). Poorkeywords would be: neuron, brain, OA (as an abbreviation),regional-specific neuronal degeneration, and signaling. These terms aresimply too general. Dr Daniel McGowan 分子神经学博士 理文编辑学术总监
自从上篇博文后尚未收到任何问题,那么今天就来谈谈研究论文里最基本也最重要的东西——论文题目。定论文题目看似简单,但是事实上需要缜密的思考。读者搜寻资料库和论文的参考文献时看到的就是论文题目,他们会根据题目来判断论文内容及跟自己在搜寻的主题相关性,显而易见的,论文题目是左右论文阅读率的决定性因素。 好的论文题目可以 : ● 用简单几个字浓缩论文内容 ● 吸引读者的目光 ● 将之与同领域的其他论文区隔出来 以下是在定论文题目时应该谨记在心的 3 个简单技巧: 1. 简洁有力 :论文题目最主要的功能是提供论文大意,应概要简单清楚——使用主动语态,避免名词字句及其他不必要的信息。一个好的题目通常介于10到12个字之间,太长的标题会模糊焦点。 避免 : Drug XYZ has an effect of muscular contraction for an hour in snails of Achatina fulcia species 较好的方式 : Drug XYZ induces muscular contraction in Achatina fulcia snails 2. 选用适当的描述词 :论文题目应包含论文里使用的关键词,并且定义研究性质。想想人们会用什么词进行搜索,将这些词用在题目。 避免 : Effects of drug A on schizophrenia patients: study of a multicenter mixed group 较好的方式 : Psychosocial effects of drug A on schizophrenia patients: a multicenter randomized controlled trial 3. 避免使用缩写和术语 :一些常见的缩写如AIDS、NATO可以放在题目里,但是,避免使用其他读者可能没法立刻意会的一些不怎么有名或是学科专有名词及缩写。 避免 : MMP expression profiles cannot distinguish between normal and early osteoarthritic synovial fluid 较好的方式 : Matrix metalloproteinase expression profiles cannot distinguish between normal and early osteoarthritic synovial fluid 根据研究假设来发想论文题目,结合以上的 3 个技巧,定出最好的研究论文题目! ∷ Eddy 博士国际期刊发表支持中心内容由 意得 辑 英文修改 专家 团队 支持提供 ∷ 【意得辑提供专业 英文论文编校 、 学术论文翻译 、 英文期刊发表一站式服务 www.editage.cn 】 ____________________________________________________________________________________________ 此文同步刊载于 意得辑专家视点 频道: http://www.editage.cn/insights/3个基本功造就对的论文题目
Jack Sien Chen 6938 Portola Dr., El Cerrito CA, 94530, USA China Cell: 138-2333-7216(中国); USA Cell: 001(408) 810-2104 email: chensien@yahoo.com Profile Statistical expert with 13 years of data mining experience in healthcare and biotech, looking for business and career opportunities in biostatistics, bioinformatics, diagnostic and personalized/translational medicine arena . 关键词 临床实验 资深生物统计家 海外经验 FDA 海量数据挖掘分析 SAS 流行病学 13年美国工作经验 UC Berkeley 伯克利加州大学 美国硕士 CRO 生物信息 Machine Learning 系统架构师 流感疫苗 艾滋病疫苗 Experience Clinical Biostatistician; Emphusion (San Francisco, CA); July 2011 – present • Developed study reports for medical device and pharmaceutical companies in FDA clinical trials. • Wrote statistical analysis plans (SAP) and created critical variable list with SAS procedures. • Created final top line efficacy tables/statistics using lifetest, mixed models, tables, listings figures. • Created QC treatment emergent adverse event primary efficacy tables. • Performed double programming to match p-values via a different statistical package such as R and SAS. • Created QC tables, listing and figures in SAS for various clients; • Analyzed Advance BioHealing phase III stem cell dermagraft implants for leg ulcers in diabetic patients; • Analyzed data from Bayhill Therapeutics phase II type 1 diabetics auto-immune disorder DNA vaccine; • Cleaned up Medivation Alzheimer data with crossover study for patients with multiple population flags; • Analyzed data from RadioRx phase I oncology, multiple dose escalation with PK/PD; • Performed ANOVA analysis on Dempomed phase III hotflash data. Sr. Biostatistician/RD; Quantros (Milpitas, CA); March 2004 - July 2011 • Technical lead, managed seven software engineers for 2200 American hospital data; • Developed statistical enterprise server on client reports, benchmarking activities in healthcare systems. • Performed data mining, turning hospital big data into knowledge; • Assisted in decision-making, performance improvement and outcomes management. • Participated in technical sale activities proof of concepts by designing R analytics. • Forecasted hospital admissions data using time series model such as ARIMA; • Developed automate model selection with minimum AIC method; • Applied statistical rigor to salvage a client from canceling million dollar contract. • Developed automate web-based tools, created reports for 2200 US hospitals. • Incorporate AHRQ SAS patient safety indicators using 3.8 million discharge records into SRM application. • Applied machine learning on predicting high alert patients for medication errors and safety events. • Assisted software engineers in design and automation of batch processes of composite dashboard. • Analyzed hospital longitudinal data, performed comparisons with p-value driven alerts. • Completed seven peer-reviewed publications on data analysis with experts from medical centers; • Participated in product white papers, marketing, consultative, and data mining projects. • Designed and utilized control charts to highlight special causes, with six-sigma rules and TJC standards. • Developed web based application tools such as graphlets and statistic server. • Managed enterprise server with big data storage, handling out of memory pipe-line architecture. • Feed XML streams to update benchmark scores with Java graphlets. • Utilized Oracle database to store and retrieve 2 GB of 11,000 complete patient medical flat file records. • Analyzed 20-year longitudinal diabetes records in UK insulin delay study. • Distinguished control verses not well control among diabetics by defining baselines and seasonality factors. • Designed analytic prototype for Pharma phase IV surveillance using multiple G-Charts; • Performed Kaplan-Meier survival curves; statistical modeling of multivariate predictors Biostatistician/Bioinformatician; VaxGen Genetech (Brisbane, CA); Oct 2003 - Mar 2004 • Conducted multiple comparison tests on trend towards efficacy among minorities and high risk subgroups. • Developed 3-D visualization of HIV env protein gp120 using Chime package; • Discovered significant differences between placebo and treatment groups by analyzing sequence data. • Validated AIDSVAX’s bi-variates power analysis using Monte Carlo simulation and Weilbull test. • Characterized antibody titer immuno-assays performance; • Applied cluster analysis using covariates (age, gender, race, risk, treatment etc) in efficacy analyses. Biostatistician/Bioinformatician; MedImmune Astra Zeneca (Milpitas, CA); July 2002 - Dec 2004 • Studied Influenza cross-reactivity on hemagglutinin using regression and 3-D protein visualization • Implemented data management, statistical analysis for Immunologists and epidemiologists. • Conducted in-vitro assay semi-automation development analysis on FluMist, a live attenuated vaccine. • Supported FDA biologics license application (BLA). • Performed graphical analysis of fluorescent immunoassays data from QA/QC labs for bridging studies. • Assay stability analytics with variance component, permutation, combination, bootstraps, linear model, simulation, mixed model and ANOVA. • Setup and tested various database connections on non-clinical datasets. • Designed experiments with scientists in various departments and labs; reviewed and edited SOPs; Software Engineer; Applied Biosystem of Invitrogen (Foster City, CA) Jan 2002 - July 2002 • Designed and refined GeneMapper software, identified bugs, improved speed and accuracy; • Integrated product design to provide automation for SNPs, linkage mapping and human identifications. • Wrote Splus and Matlab codes to validate genome quality ratings; • Optimized heuristic signal processing algorithm, specifically design for microsatelite fragment data. Algorithm Developer; BD Bioscience (Milpitas, CA); June 1999 - Dec 2001 • Developed algorithm in Splus to automate the calibration process; • Performed cluster analysis for Flow Cytometer by regression testing. • Ported codes from numerical recipes in C into Java software. • Performed data simulations and failure analysis to assist hardware engineers to create calibration beads. • Improved gain/PMT convergence by 50% with modified regular false by regression testing. • Analyzed Java numerical library to invert matrices for fluorescents’ overlapping wavelength compensation. • Generated Kappa statistics for marketing purposes of the laser’s consistency. Educations Master of Bioinformatics; Silicon Valley University; 2002 Advisors: Dr. Hsu (Director of Proteinomics, UC Santa Cruz) and Dr. Wang (Biostat. Director of VaxGen) SQL, ORACLE database; experimental design with nQuery, multiple comparisons, Partek microarray; • “Diagnostics study of Topoisomerase 2 Alpha in metastatic breast cancer, an up-regulator of HER2.” Microarray analysis with Bioconductor LOWESS normalization: M vs A log ratio signal on Stanford microarray data. This biomarker was later confirmed by Genentech’s cancer drug Herceptin. Wrote simulation using Westfall Young to correct false discover rate (FDR); found twenty extra genes associated with cancer. The data were used in Genomic Health to calculate recurrences score for breast cancer diagnostics and personalized treatment plan. Bachelor of Statistics; University of California, Berkeley; 1999 Including one year of graduate study on statistical computing with Profs Spector and Nolan during senior year; Graduate course works with advanced statistical modeling including model-free estimation on 3D visual graphical tools and advanced statistical computing series: Gauss-Newton nonlinear regression, scant method, K-means, clustering large applications, power method, factor analysis. Dean’s honor list; GPA: 3.8/4.0 Bachelor of Public Health; University of California, Berkeley; 1999 Double major with Public Health Prof Tartar, courses in MCB, genetics, biostatistics in public health; Relevant Skills • LAMP: Linux+Apache+MySQL+Python/Perl/PHP; SAS, R, Matlab, C, Java, SPSS, StatView; • Next Generation Sequencing (NGS), Q-PCR, immunoassay, microarray normalization; • Good clinical practice certified; experimental design in clinical and non-clinical settings; FDA submission • Chime Rasmol scripting for 3-D visualization, Yamaguchi histograms; • Quality control expert with six sigma method; Designed and automated big data collection; • Statistical reports via Web 2.0 for health care systems using in-house developed R server. • Actuary Exams 1 2; Open tennis player; Tri-lingual in Cantonese, Mandarin and English Publications 8 Peer reviewed Bioinformatics, Biotechnology and Healthcare Journals. • "Voluntary Electronic Reporting of Laboratory Errors: An Analysis of 37 532 Laboratory Event Reports From 30 Health Care Organizations. ” Snydman LK, Harubin B, Kumar S, Chen J, Lopez RE, Salem DN. Am J Med Qual. 2011 Sep 14. • “Epidemiology and Impact of Patient Falls in Healthcare Facilities. ” Juliana Hart, BSN, MPH, CPHQ; Jack Chen, MS; Ali H. Rashidee, MD, MS; Sanjaya Kumar, MD, MPH; March/April 2009 Patient Safety Quality Healthcare Data Trends. • “High Resolution Detection of Crossover Breakpoints with High Density SNP Markers in Three Generation Tri-Trio Pedigrees.” Allen Chen, Janet Luo, Jack Chen, Cao-An Wang, Norris Hung, Lior Pachter, Johnson Poh, Lynn Hlatky, Hua Chen, Rainer Sachs; 13th Annual International Conference, RECOMB 2009, Tucson, AZ. • “Does error and adverse event reporting by physicians and nurses differ? “Rowin EJ, Lucier D, Pauker SG, Kumar S, Chen J, Salem DN. Jt Comm J Qual Patient Saf. 2008 Sep;34(9):537-45. • “Human X Chromosome Reveals Pronounced Early Population Subdivisions and Recent Bottlenecks”; Allen Chen, Jack Chen, Lynn Hlatky, Caoan Wang, Dan Levy, Mariel Vazquez, Rainer Sachs;11th Annual International Conference, RECOMB 2007, Oakland, CA • “Voluntary electronic reporting of medical errors and adverse events. An analysis of 92,547 reports from 26 acute care hospitals”. Milch CE, Salem DN, Pauker SG, Lundquist TG, Kumar S, Chen J. J Gen Intern Med. 2006 Feb;21(2):165-70. • “Prevalence of inadequate glycemic control among patients with type 2 diabetes in the United Kingdom general practice research database: A series of retrospective analyses of data from 1998 through 2002.” PhD Kathleen M. Fox, MA Robert A. Gerber PharmD BA Bjorn Bolinder, CBM Jack Chen, MD MPH Sanjaya Kumar; Clin Ther. 2006 Mar;28(3):388-95. • “Identifying potential immunodominant positions and predicting antigenic variants of influenza A/H3N2 viruses.” Min-Shi Lee and Jack S. Chen, Emerging Infectious Diseases Vol 10, No. 8 Aug 2004. • “National Study Evaluates Electronic Reporting of Medical Errors and Adverse Events.” Dr. Thomas G. Lundquist, Dr. Sanjaya Kumar, and Mr. Jack Chen; The Journal of General Internal Medicine; Feb, 2006 • “High-Alert Medications: Error Prevalence and Severity.”Ali Rashidee, MD, MS; Juliana Hart, BSN, MPH, CPHQ; Jack Chen, MS; Sanjaya Kumar, MD, MSc, MPH; Data Trends, July / August 2009.
已有 58 次阅读 2013-1-28 18:51 | 系统分类: 观点评述 | 关键词:的 今天 scientific 科学研究 主题 来自: http://blog.sciencenet.cn/blog-41174-657325.html 一、前言 我今天想讲的主题是过去主题的延续。几年前我曾经谈过诚信的问题。科学研究的诚信问题现在越来越重要。媒体上常有关于科学不端行为的报导,但事实上明目张胆的科学不端行为(scientific misconducts),所谓伪造、篡改和剽窃(Fabrication,Falsification,Plagiarism,简称FFP),是极少见的。现在最严重的问题不是明显的FFP,而是灰色地带的诚信问题,就是那些不容易被发现、标准不容易确定的问题。我们每一个从事科学研究的人都会遇到这些问题,都应该认真考虑,当遇到这些问题时,怎么做才符合诚信的要求。 二、数据分析和表述时的灰色地带行为 今天我首先想讲的就是数据分析和表述时的不当行为。首先,较严重的就是选择数据。只选择自己喜欢的结果,不喜欢的就不要。忽略不计对自己的结论有威胁性的数据。第二,在发表文章或口头表述结果时不当地夸大表述。前者比较容易判断是非,后者则是较困难判断的灰色地带问题。 1. 数据选择或排除的理由必须清楚地说明 实验得到的数据是不是可以进行选择?根据什么样的原则来决定哪些数据保留,哪些数据可以舍去?我们每个人都会遇到类似情况,下面说说我个人的看法。如果你刚刚开始做实验,还在慢慢地摸索各种实验条件,可能得到的结果不可靠。逐渐地你把各个实验条件都摸索清楚了,得到的结果越来越可靠、重复性高。比如说,初期手术操作慢,生物体损伤大,实验结果差,到操作熟练后,结果就大不相同了。生物材料确实存在这类问题。当你的实验越来越熟练的时候,得到的结果往往是更可靠的,而早期学习过程中获得的结果往往不可靠。这个时候你可以做数据选择,但是一定要非常明确地说明,从何时、使用何种参数的实验开始的数据都算,之前的全部都不算。你不能把先前“好的”数据选出来与后来的数据一起统计。这种“好的”要,“不好的”不要就是不当行为。在表述研究结果的时候,最好把所有的参数以及由于操作慢得不到好结果的情况也说出来。因为如果你在报导的时候不讲,别人就可能无法重复出你的结果。虽然他是因为操作不熟练而做不出预期的结果,他很有可能认为你得到的结论是错的。为了维护你研究数据的可靠性,让别人能够重复你的工作,你一定要把数据选择的过程都讲清楚。所以,实验数据是可以进行“限制性的选择”的,但选择的方式必须是合理的,在报导时也必须将选择过程有明确的交代。 2. 如何避免无意识的数据选择 但当我们在做数据采集或分析的时候,常常还会有无意识地选择数据的倾向。你知道分析的标本是什么,在无意识的情况下你可能会选择了你所期望得到的数据。比如说,你采集了40 个数据,得到的结果总的来说是合乎你的期望,你就觉得数据足够了,停止采集。但有可能当你采集了80 个数据的时候,这种现象就消失了。这种无意识的数据选择常常影响了实验的结论。现在大家做实验常常会出现这样的情况,课题是你个人的,实验自己做,取样自己取,标本自己分析,这种工作方式很不好。最好是通过合作的方式来采集或分析数据。比如你得到了实验样品后,可以请你的同学对你的样品进行编码,做盲实验(blindexperiment)。目的就是你自己做数据采集或分析时,不知道样品是哪一种。盲实验有单盲和双盲实验,我们就以单盲实验为例,简单来说就是数据采集或分析者不知道标本是实验组还是对照组。这一点很容易做到,如果是两个人合作,一人负责实验,另一人负责数据分析,彼此不知道样品的具体情况。即使是你一个人的课题,你既做实验又做分析,你也可以请同学帮忙,让他帮你把样品重新编码,然后你再来分析,得到结果后再解码。这么做的好处在于你对自己得到的结果会更有信心。尤其是当你得到了很惊人的结果时,一般人的第一反应是会怀疑你的数据的可靠性。如果你的论文中有描述:“我这些结果都是在blind experiment 的情况下得到的”,你的结论就会更有说服力。现在很少人在文章中能写出这句话,因为大部分人都没有做到数据采集分析是盲实验这一点。所以我建议以后在做采集分析数据时,采用盲实验的方法。 3. 不符合所期望的数据可能是有意义的,甚至是更重要的数据 我们常常希望看到想要的结果。如果实验结果符合你的假说,你会很高兴。但是那些不符合你所期望的数据,其实可能是有意义的,甚至可能是更重要的。为什么这么说呢?当我问一位同学:你现在正在做什么?得到的回答常常是:我在证实我的一个假说。其实这种说法其实是不正确的,因为我是永远不可能证实我的假说。我只可能做有限数量的实验,最多只能说是在有限条件下得到结果符合我的假说。因为谁也不可能去检测所有的条件,所以从逻辑上讲,没有一个假说是可以真正被证实的。我们在口语中常说:“I want to prove my hypothesis”。虽然口语说说无伤大雅,但这种说法可能无意识地造成一种偏见,认为实验工作的目的就是为了找到符合或“证实”自己假说的结果。比较正确的说法是:“我的实验是为了检测(test)我的假说”。因为在得到结果前,并不知道我的假说是对是错,所以假说只是帮助目前工作的假说(working hypothesis),工作结果最多只能是支持或推翻我的假说(My data support or refute my hypothesis),而并不能证实(prove)我的假说。直到有一天,别人做了其它的实验,可能在不同的条件下发现我的假说根本不对。到那时候就得修正我的假说。所以,没有一个假说是可以永远成立的,即使牛顿定律也一样。鉴于此,当你被问到你在做什么时,真正最好的说法是:我在找推翻我的假说的证据(“I want to refute my hypothesis”)。这才是你真正应该做的事情。 如果你的实验结果并不符合你的假说,这可能是对科学更有意义的贡献。为什么这么说呢?我们先看看假说是怎么被提出来的。一般你都是根据目前大家的想法,再根据已有的实验结果,经过你的思考整合后提出的。也就是说,在目前已知的现象和概念下,这个假说可能是最合适的。如果你的实验结果并不符合这个假说,说明我们目前对自然现象的理解是不对的,需要进一步修正,这就是科学的进展。因此,推动科学进展的结果常常不是符合大家认为是合理的假说的证据,而是不合假说的证据。从这个角度讲,推翻你自己的或是别人的假说,应该才是实验工作的最好目标。如果你的实验数据不符合你现在的假说,这不是坏的实验数据,也不是实验不成功,事实上实验是真的成功了。当然你的实验数据必须可靠、有重复性,有时正有时负的数据是不可靠的,能重复得到的负结果和正结果一样是重要的结果,甚至更重要。总之,假说存在的价值就是可以作为推进科学进展的一个工具。假说是用来给人推翻的,而不是给人证实的(Hypothesis isthere to be refuted, not to be proved)。 4. 数据的重复性 我们说不符合你假说的数据,可能是最好的结果。因此在这种情况下,你要比较客观地来看待你的数据,这就不得不提一下数据的重复性。重复性是指,可靠的实验结果一定要能够被你自己或别人重复。在各位的实验室中,如果某一位同学得到了很重要的结果,我认为最好请实验室的另一位同学重复再做一次这个实验。如果结果能重复,那么对这个结果的信心就会大大增强。这也是我们要求合作的原因之一。合作研究不见得一定要做不同的实验,可以做同样的实验。如果得到一样的结果,大家都更有信心,写文章的时候就信心十足。数据的重复性是非常重要的,少数的例子是不可靠的,格外突出的结论需要格外有力的证据(Extraordinary claim demands extraordinary evidence)。尤其是关键性的重要实验,最好有格外强有力的证据, 重复性要高,与对照组有差别要大,误差(error bar)要小。这种证据下得到的结论才能让别人信服。 5. 什么是统计上有意义的结果 什么是统计上有意义的结果?举例说,我们得到了两组数据,它们的差别用t 检验法得到的p 值为0.045。我们一般认为p 值小于0.05,差别就是有意义的。你在报道结果时写成“Two groups are significantly different”,读者或者听众就会认为你的两组数据有非常显著的差别,但是实际上你的所谓“显著差别”只是在统计上达到了某种程度的意义(statistical significance at a particular level)。现在很多期刊都规定要把p 值明确写出来,不能仅仅写p 值小于多少。正确的写法应该是:“Two groups are different with statistical significance at a level ofp = 0.045”。你告诉读者这两组数据在统计学上达到了某种程度的差别,让读者自己去判断这种差别有多大的意义。你自己也要知道得到的p 值的意思,简单来说t 检验法得到的p 值若等于0.05,就是说有95%的可能性你的两组数据是有差别的,有5%的可能性是没有差别的,所以你一定要明确说出p 值的具体数值。生物学家常把p = 0.05 作为差别是否有意义的标准,有些物理学家认为这个标准很可笑,他们认为有意义的差别p 值应小于0.01 甚至0.001,标准是因人而异的。我们的两组数据差别如果p 值是0.055,我们就说结果没有意义。但是0.055和0.045 的差别到底有多大不同呢?也许你多做两次实验,你的p 值就从0.055变成了0.045,因为p 值与样本数(n 值)有关。也可能多做着两次实验要花费你很多时间精力,因此你不想做了。但是我认为,如果这是一个格外重要的结论,你的证据一定要非常充分,你的p 值标准应降到远低于0.05,不能只满足于0.05。如果你的两组数据p 值是0.055,你得到的结论“Two groups are not significantlydifferent”。我认为这样表达也不对,正确的表述应该是:“The difference between the two groups are not statistically significant at a level of p = 0.05)”或者说“Two groups are different with statistical significance at a level of p = 0.055”。如果P 值是0.055,我也可以说两组数据有差别。我猜测0.055 的原因可能就是样本数不够,也许多做两次实验P 值就降到0.05 以下了。但是我不能说我的两组数据有显著差别,我只能告诉大家这两组数据的差别在p = 0.055 的水平,这就是如实地表述你得到的结果。所以“Two groups are different with statistical significanceat a level of p = 0.055”这句话是没有错的;它和前面的那句话“Two groups are different with statistical significance at a level of p = 0.045”并没有什么差别,差别就是p 值的数值而已。你得到的数据p 值有差别,而两组数据差别的本质是没有太大的不同,所以两句话的叙述方式应该是一样的。 6.为什么不当的数据选择行为十分普遍 不合诚信的数据选择行为十分普遍,我认为主要有以下的原因。首先,不诚信的数据选择是很难被发现的。假设你独自一人做实验,没有选取某个数据,除了你自己没有其他人知道。但是我认为这么做的恶果是自己或别人被引导到错误的方向。因为你的结论是基于数据选择而得到的,事实上你就把自己绑在这个结论上。等到有一天别人得到了相反的结果,你就必须承认错误了。即使没有其他人发现,但也许相反的结果更加重要,而你已经被牢牢地限制在你的错误结论上。当有一天相反的结果被发现,你也只能承认过去的错误或者承认数据不充分。如果是被别人指出你的数据是错误的话,后果就更严重了。而且越是重要的发现,后果越严重。 有的人认为,发表自己知道不可靠的结果,似乎没有什么风险。很多论文都不能重复,我的论文不能重复又有什么关系。反正我的论文已经发表在顶尖的期刊上了,名声也已经建立了,顶尖期刊的很多其他论文也不能重复,所以有人愿意冒这个风险。这是为了短期的利益而冒的风险,因为不可靠的结论很快就会被发现,尤其是那些重要的结论(无关紧要的结论,也许没有人关心,不会被发现)。如果你从事的研究大家都很感兴趣,而你的科研事业就依赖于这项发现,那么发表不可靠结果的风险马上就会出现。感兴趣的研究一定会有人去重复,现在从事科研的人那么多,迟早是会被发现的。所以我认为相对于个人长期的科研事业,不当数据选择获得的利益是短期的,存在着很大的风险。如果你要在科学界长期生存,成为一位声誉好的科学家,你就不能不坚守诚信的标准。 三、实验记录的规范 1. 个人实验记录本的规范 下面我再谈谈实验记录本的问题,虽然我过去强调过一定要认真完成实验记录,但是我今天要有系统地再谈一下这个问题。 首先要强调实验记录本不是你个人的,它属于你所在的实验室,而且是实验室必需保存的重要资料。当你离开实验室时,所有的原始实验记录本都必须保留在实验室,你可以带走影印的副本,原件必须保留在实验室。实验记录本要保留在实验室,实验记录也必须非常仔细地完成。为什么要仔细记录呢?我不知道是否同学们认真思考过这个问题?我认为实验记录的目的包括:(1) 整理自己的思路,(2)实验的历史记录,(3)帮助自己回忆实验过程,(4)有助于他人重复你的实验,(5)在有不端行为控诉时,有为自己辩护的材料。 实验记录本是一件能够帮助整理自己思路的,很重要的工具。实验记录本上应该有做实验的目的,也应该能够反映出你整个实验的过程。你做实验记录的过程实际上也是你整理自己思路的过程。实验的历史记录。实验记录本上的内容也是你实验的历史,它能够帮助你回忆自己过去的实验过程。有可能实验完成若干年以后,你已经忘记了实验的内容和实验的目的,这个时候实验记录本可以帮助你回忆实验的过程。实验记录本不单单帮助你自己回忆,也能够帮助别人重复你的实验,这一点更加重要。几年以后,也许你的师弟师妹要开展下一步的工作,必须重复你的实验,你的实验记录本就是他(她)的“经典”资料,他必须根据你的实验记录来重复实验。如果实验结果出了问题(过去我们所发生过类似的事件),我们就必须详细地审查过去的实验记录本,查看当初到底是怎么回事。所以当有控诉不端行为的时候,实验记录本也是为自己辩护的材料。假如是有很好的记录,你就有很好的资料来为自己辩护。 实验记录本上应该有5 项内容,请大家一定要记住,别的内容可以不记录,这5 项内容必须齐全。(1)日期 (记录本必需是装订好有印好页数的本子,不能是活页本),(2)实验的名称, (3)实验目的的简短说明, (4)实验的叙述, (5)结果的总结(和解释)。 几年前我就要求所里的研究生在做年度进展报告的时候要提供实验记录本,我参加的时候都会翻阅一下。虽然没有仔细去看,但还是看到很多问题,这5项一般都不全。第一项日期都是有的。必需强调一点,实验记录本必须是装订好的,不能是活页的本子(神经所有统一制作的实验记录本,所有记录本均有编号和领用记录),这是所有实验记录本的规矩,尤其是在工业界。将来无论你从事哪一行,科学研究也好,工业界也好,这个规矩是通用的。你现在养成良好的习惯,对你将来的事业是很有帮助的。 实验的名称大家都没写。实验名称要写明是做什么实验,比如今天是“测量cAMP 的水平”或者“测量在XX 条件变化下XX 基因的表达水平”等等,一般来说简单一句话即可。名称下面,应该用简短的一段话说明实验的目的,即为什么要做这个实验,比如“之前得到了XXX 结果,所以今天要做XXX 实验”。之后就要叙述实验的过程,写清楚这个实验是怎么做的。比如今天做的是麻醉动物的电生理记录,那么至少要写清楚“什么时候开始麻醉,如何麻醉,多少剂量,什么内容等等”,总之要把实验的详细内容叙述清楚。我经常看到同学的实验记录本上大部分是数字、剂量,缺少详细的描述过程,有些数字只有实验者本人知道代表的意思,外人或者其他需要重复你实验的人很难理解。实验叙述完以后,还应该有对结果的总结或解释。按照实验的类别不同,有的结果需要分析后得出,但是有的结果当场就可以分析(解释)。即使当时分析不出来,我也建议你分析好以后补充进去。比如“今天得到的数据,发现麻醉剂量过度,因此得到的数据数量有限,造成实验可能不成功,下次实验应该改变什么样的剂量”。 实验记录的5 项内容,一般花个十分钟就可以完成了。既然你已经做了一天的实验,为什么不能再花十分钟把实验记录做完整呢?我希望大家做完实验马上写实验记录,写完实验记录才算完成了一天的实验任务。养成良好的实验记录习惯,将来受惠无穷。如果将来你去做博士后,你的导师翻开你的实验记录本,这5 项内容都有,他将会印象深刻。假如看到的是我们现在的实验记录本,就会觉得离标准实在太远了。 2. 必须保存原始数据资料 现在很多数据资料不是记录在实验记录本上的,数字化的数据是保存在磁盘或者计算机中的。这类原始数据资料必须妥善保存。几年前美国显微镜学会(Microscopy Society of America)制定了有关数字化图像的处理规定,他们定义了符合科研道德的处理数字化图片的方式(Ethical digital image processing,Microscopy Today, Nov/Dec 2003, p. 61)。他们认为,图片资料存档如保存在CD-R光盘上,该图片资料必须是未经压缩或其他操作处理的原始图片资料。这么做的目的是什么呢?假如你在CD 上保存的是处理过的图片,将来写论文的时候,如果需要改变图片的某一个参数(如对比度),你在CD 上的图片已经经过处理,再也无法找到原始的图片。所以保存在CD 上的必须是最原始的资料,即使你要保存处理过的资料,你必须另外存一份原始资料。图像文件资料的处理和生成的所有参数,随后的处理步骤等,都必须存档并记录,以保证资料能够被重新处理组成。你在实验记录本上,必须详细地记录你未处理过的资料保存在什么地方,处理过的资料保存在什么地方,这样别人才能通过实验记录最终找到原始的资料。电生理的数据也是一样。比如,你应该保存所有原始的膜电位或脉冲数据,而不是经过分析后的图表。 实验室组长要监督这些事情。在写论文之前,实验室组长必须要检查过所有的原始数据。虽然这很困难,但却是不可避免的工作。实验室组长要注意实验的细节和原始数据资料,不要只看最后组成的图表。实验室组长还应该培育良好的实验室文化,尊重实验操作符合伦理的态度,强调规范地做好实验记录。希望各位组长能够一起努力做到这一点。 四、挂名为共同作者的要求和责任 另外一个灰色地带的问题涉及到共同作者的问题。现在很多论文都有一大批共同作者,所以科学界应该对共同作者有一个共识,各位也应该对共同作者有一个正确的理解。我们对第一作者的要求比较清楚,但目前有很多共同作者的署名是不合理的。现在很多期刊都要求写清楚作者的贡献,即使某些期刊不需要撰写作者贡献,你也可以自己在文中提供这些资料。这么做的好处就是帮助你排除不应该挂名作者的人,有时候别人想挂名,你把贡献内容列出来,没有实质贡献的人就知道自己不应该作为共同作者。以网络期刊Neural Development 为例,它对作者贡献的要求最详尽,内容篇幅很长,比如:“PIT designed the study, wrotethe manuscript, and performed and participated in all experiments. HHK, YTL andSRY participated in the electrophysiological experiments and analysis. CG andRHP designed, manufactured, and supplied the Fak56 point mutation and Fak56RNAiconstructs, performed dpERK embryonic staining, and contributed to manuscriptrevisions. AG and DVV helped to characterize the NMJ phenotype of Fak56CG1.TTL and KPP helped to analyze the synaptic markers at NMJ of Fak56 mutants. RHChelped revise the manuscript and provided suggestions with regard to signaltransduction and intellectual input for the study. CTC participated in theoverall design and coordination of the study and helped to write the manuscript. Allauthors have read and approved the final manuscript”(Neural Develop 3: 26)。” 大家特别要注意提供材料的人的挂名问题,所提供的材料必须是本人制作的(manufactured),不能是他人制作的再转送给你。这两者是有本质区别的,现在有很多不合理的挂名行为,比如提供了一个鼠,而这个鼠又不是他本人制作的,也要求挂名。过去论文只有一两个作者的时候,文章的贡献比较容易鉴别,现在很多作者的情况下,作者的贡献必须写清楚。如果不写清楚,也许同行的人,熟悉该项工作的人是知道每个作者的具体贡献。但是不了解情况的人,也许会认为某些挂名的人为论文做了相当大的贡献。现在甚至有些人明明没有什么贡献,别人只提供了部分材料(如小鼠),也要求担任共同通讯作者。如果按照下述的作者贡献的要求,这是极不合理的。 那么究竟谁可以被列为作者呢?国际医学期刊主编委员会(InternationalCommittee of Medical Journal Editors)曾经讨论并制订出了以下的标准:“作者必须对本文章在以下各方面有过相当的贡献:研究的初始想法和设计,数据的采集、分析、和解释,文章书写或修订时有实质内容的贡献,并同意最终所发表文章的内容”。新英格兰医学杂志(New England Journal of Medicine)的编辑ArnoldRelman 也曾经明确地列出了共同作者的责任:“(1)任何同意列名为作者的人都担起主要的责任, 应能随时公开为该文辩护,因此必须对该文的可靠性应有信心。(2)给予或接受共同作者的原因不能只是为了报偿该作者提供了资源或资助了一位主要完成工作的人员。(3)只要是共同作者,必须对所有的内容负责,不可以只对部分内容负责。”因此,如果论文出现了错误,不可以推托自己只参与了部分研究工作,是别人的实验出现错误。共同作者应共享论文带来的荣耀,同时也共同承担错误的责任。共同作者也必须对论文有信心。曾经出现过有外面的人员到神经所的实验室做实验,使用了实验室的设备,愿意将实验室的几位研究人员挂名为作者,这些人没有拒绝。结果论文最后被人指出有造假行为,神经所的研究人员受到牵连。所以今后如果有人在你的实验室做实验,如果你对他的数据没有信心,你没有参与工作,你就不应该挂名为共同作者。另外,你不能因为提供了设备甚至资助了完成工作的人员就挂名,更不能把挂名作为一个“礼物”。所有的医学期刊都认为共同作者的署名应该遵守上述的原则,其实生物学期刊也是一样。虽然他们没有讨论制定统一的标准,但是如果你去问他们,他们会叫你遵循相同的规则。 五.怎样算是剽窃? 抄袭别人的成果作为自己的工作发表是最严重的剽窃行为。这种情况很容易被发现。很多论文的撤回(retraction),重大的学术不端行为都是这种情况。另一种剽窃是一字不差地(整句或整段)复制别人的文字而没有注明出处。这种文字剽窃的程度不尽相同,有的情节很严重,有的相对不严重,但依然被认定为剽窃。比如一字不差的抄袭别人的实验方法(methods)或者引言(introduction)。有的学生解释说因为英文的写作能力差,想学习别人的写作。我认为学习是可以,但是要改写(paraphrase),可以用类似的词或者类似的语法来学习别人的写作方法。千万不能一字不差的抄袭,特别是实验方法,这会被认定为文字剽窃。除了剽窃别人的,还有自我剽窃。有些发表的论文,重复使用实验室已经发表过的实验方法文字,或者把已经发表过的文字穿插在新的论文中。甚至还有数据的自我剽窃,比如以前的论文已经发表了的数据里加入新的数据,作为新的结果来发表。总结一下文字剽窃的规则,如果你的论文中有超过整段的文字,包括引言、材料、方法等等,已经在其他论文中出现过,那么将会被定义为剽窃。更严格的标准是超过7 个字一模一样的连续出现,就被认定为剽窃。如果你必需再次使用自己已发表文章中相当长的一部分(如实验方法),你必须清楚地写明你是在引用以前的文章。有些期刊已设有筛检剽窃的工具(如Crosscheck)可迅速筛检已发表论文与送审论文之间的相同文句(http://www.crossref.org/crosscheck.html)。使用Crosscheck 的期刊,编辑在收到网上投稿的论文以后,在送审之前先会发送到Crosscheck 进行在线筛选,看是否已有类似的文字发表过。所以在文章撰写中一定要注意文字剽窃的问题,避免收到无谓的指责。 最后,我要谈谈我认为科学界最严重的灰色地带剽窃行为,就是偷取别人的想法、方法、结果,或复制别人的实验或发现,作为自己的成果发表而没有适当地提到别人的工作。比如有位来访的同行学者,参加了实验室的组会或通过与实验室人员的交谈,了解到了某些研究结果的信息,回去以后从事相同的工作,而且完全不告知被访的实验室,并抢在该实验室之前先发表了同样的结果。你控诉他不诚信时,他还可振振有词的说:“我一直有同样的想法,也在做同样的工作,只是没先说出来而已”。你自己愿意告诉他你的研究结果,没有法定约束他一定得告诉你他在做什么。虽然他可以为自己辩护,但在科学上这就是一种不诚信。有的人认为只要别人没有发表,就是在进行科学竞争。如果科学研究都沦落到必需使用不诚信的手段进行竞争,这将是科学走下坡路的征兆。 六、科学交流与科学竞争 下面我要特别来讲和科研诚信直接有关的科学交流与科学竞争的问题。我会列举几种观点,做一个简单的民意调查,然后再谈谈我的看法。 1. 明知别人的工作结果,只要他们还没有发表,我可以抢先发表?(少数听众同意此观点) 除了上述的同行来访的例子。通过交流听到别人未发表的信息,回去后靠所得到的讯息做出同样的结果,并抢先发表。为什么在未发表前人家愿意告诉你呢?一方面是为了要与你交流听听你的意见,另一方面也是告诉你,他已经首先有了这个发现。你如果得到了信息后,在短时间内抢先发表,这种做法就是灰色地带的不端行为。说是灰色地带,因为你可以说我原来就在做这个工作,是独立的发现,没有人有确切的证据说你在说谎。还有人认为这就是科学竞争。没有发表的成果就没有优先发现的正式认可,但是我不同意这种观点。科学界对公平竞争还是有不成文的规矩的,对科学家的诚信标准还是有共识的。刚才我们投票的结果就说明我们大多数在座的是认为如果明知别人已得到的结果,自己照着做,抢先发表是不对的。假如一个科学家不断地做这种事情,那么科学界终将判定他是一个没有诚信的科学家,他是不会受人尊敬的,他在这个科学领域也是不会有发展的,这是他得到的恶果。当然还是会有人为了出一两篇重要论文,完全不顾这种后果。 2. 为了科学竞争,没有发表的结果不要告诉别人?(更多的听众赞成此观点,但赞同的人未过半数) 目前科学界已经出现了科学交流与科学竞争之间的矛盾。但是科学世界中最有可贵的内容就是科学交流,做科学家的乐趣很大成分是源于科学交流。什么是交流?你把没有发表的内容,不成熟的想法告诉别人,别人给你反馈,然后你再进一步改善自己的想法。反过来说,你也从别人那里得知最新的未发表的讯息。交流已发表的成果这种效果就小得多。交流未发表的结果,有可能成果被人抢走,上面我已举了例子。我认为一个态度开放,愿意同别人交流自己没有发表结果的学者,虽然偶尔可能被别人抢了研究成果,但是他长远上的收获是大于他偶然遇到几次的损失。我从事了40 年的研究,我也曾遇到自己的成果被别人抢走,但我还是愿意告诉别人我的想法,未发表的成果。我坚信作为一个长期在科学界工作的人,开放交流的态度可能会让你偶尔吃些小亏(也许偶尔吃次大亏),但从长远来讲,利大于弊。 再举例来说,为什么我们要去参加美国的神经科学年会?成千上万个墙报都是没有发表的工作。很多墙报前都聚集了一群感兴趣的同行,给你建议或批评,你能得到很多反馈,可以在未发表前提高你的工作水平。当然也可能有人偷偷地看了你的墙报,回去做实验抢你的成果,但是给你建议的同行远远要比只偷看你墙报的人多。正因为交流未发表的研究工作有好处,所以才会有上万人愿意展示他们未发表的工作。 从另一个角度讲,公开介绍未发表的工作也是告诉大家,我已经先有此发现,请不用再做同样的工作了。但是大部分学者知道了以后,会认为这方面工作已经有人做了,不会去花功夫重复你的工作。但如果你的发现是极为重要的,一定会有些人赶着去重复。一方面,他们不一定相信你的结果,另一方面他们也想捷足先登。这也没有什么不对的,但有诚信的做法是他应该告诉你,他对此问题也有兴趣,已经在或者将会去研究这个问题。如果双方大致在同时完成工作,可一起发表论文。我们常常在同一期杂志上看到唱双簧的两篇back-to-back 的文章,多半是这么来的,而不是碰巧两个实验室同时独立完成同样的工作。这种有交流又有竞争的科研是件好事,因为两个实验室的做法不见得完全一样,总体结果的可信度也更高。总体上来说,科学交流与科学竞争并不一定是有矛盾的,只要大家以诚信的态度交流,以公平的方式竞争。 3. 为了知识产权,不要把自己的好想法告诉别人(有许多听众赞成此观点,赞同的人近半数) 有人说我有一个很特好的想法,想到了一个特妙的实验,不能告诉别人,因为我有知识产权(intellectual property),要先保密。虽然科学史上有牛顿和莱布尼茨关于谁发明微积分之争,但是知识产权不是科学界的概念。所有的科学想法都不是凭空而来,即使是爱因斯坦的时空不变性理论,李政道和杨振宁的弱作用中宇称不守恒理论。这些有创新性的想法,其实也是建立在别人的基础之上。比如时空不变性理论是建筑在Lorentz 和 Maxwell 的场论之上;宇称不守恒的可能性也曾经有其他人提过,只不过没有人像李杨那样完整地描述这个概念并提出可检测的实验。所以我认为,所谓的科学想法,不是凭空出现的,而是被别人的想法或知识触发的,根本不应该有什么知识产权的概念。知识产权是科学商业化、工程产品商业化所衍生的产物。如果我们在科学界把科学想法也赋予知识产权,科学家终将沦为商人,科学界将沦为全球商业世界的一部分。 七、 科学工作者对社会的责任 科学的目标就是追求真理,而诚信是追求真理的必要条件。这种诚信不单单是黑白分明的诚信,还包括灰色地带的诚信。科学界应最不能容忍各种不诚信行为,包括浮夸、欺骗行为。为什么要特别注意灰色地带的问题?就是因为在灰色地带的不诚信行为,最终将累积而成极端的恶果。再举一例,似是而非地浮夸自己的科技成果或浮夸自己将要获得的成果,不能仅仅看作是获取科研支助时不可避免的公关手段。有位认识干细胞造假事件主角黄禹锡的韩国同行朋友曾经告诉我,大家都知道黄禹锡一向喜欢夸张报导他的成果,大家都也一直容忍他的做法,以为这只是他的个人作风,是为他自己甚至为大家争取科研经费的公关行为。但是黄禹锡从浮夸到实际造假,不过一步之差。我们发表了一篇高档期刊的论文,就向媒体宣称在某领域有重大突破,为治疗某某疾病找到了治疗靶点。这种长期对社会大众的浮夸,已造成社会是对科学家信心的下降。科学工作者应是维护社会诚信的主力。如果连科学界都不讲诚信,怎能要求社会大众讲诚信?为建立诚信的社会,科学工作者必需从自己做起,从小事做起。是非分明,实事求是,严守诚信的标准。自己讲诚信,再进一步影响别人。 八、中国科学家对世界的贡献 我从事了四十多年的科学研究工作,遇见过海内外各式各样的“科学家”,也看到了海内外科学界的各种现象。我一直在思考中国科学家、在座各位科研工作者将来对世界会有什么贡献?今天在座的同学很多人将来都要出国,有好几位马上就要离去。你们出去学什么?如果出去以后只是学到一套不诚信的做法,学会了不公平的竞争方式,那就不合学科学的初衷了。 1. 比较西方科学家和中国知识份子的传统 谈到中国科学家对科学界可能有的贡献,我想先比较一下西方科学家的传统和中国知识分子的传统。我们现在看到的西方科学家,都是以自我为中心,追求个人的科学兴趣和个人的成就,这是西方科学家的传统。而中国知识分子的传统是完全不同的。传统的中国知识分子不是以自我为中心的,更常见的是一种忘我精神和对社会的关怀。西方的科学家努力的最高的目标常常就是获得诺贝尔奖,因为那是科学成就的最高体现。但是,科学家对社会的贡献不是只从个人成就来判定的,只顾个人成就甚至有很多负面的影响。我所知的有个别诺贝尔奖得主是在不公平竞争下,甚至于是践踏其他科学家的基础上获奖的。我们的社会并不需要这样的科学家。西方科学家的传统和中国知识分子的传统似乎是不相容的,社会目前需要的是在追求个人兴趣和成就的西方个人主义之中注入中国知识分子的关怀社会的精神。 2. 什么是科学界的大师? 媒体经常会提到“钱学森之问”,最近也有记者在采访时问我,现在中国科学界为什么缺少大师?我们怎样才可以培养出新一代的大师?我反问他,你说的的大师是什么样的大师?是个人成就很高,发表高档论文无数,得过国际大奖的科学家?但是我们中国曾经出现过的大师,比如教育界的蔡元培,建筑学的梁思成,气象学的竺可桢等等可不是这样的。以竺可桢的能力,他完全可以做出世界一流的学术成就,但他却在学术生命最旺盛的时候,奔波中国各地用最简单的仪器设备建设气象站,后来觉得办教育比建气象站重要,就到浙江大学去做校长。像这样的大师们是个人学术成就最高,发表的顶尖论文最多吗?我认为不是。更近一辈的还有数学家华罗庚、力学家钱学森、生理学家张香桐、生化学家王应睐等等,他们是当之无愧的大师,但不是因为他们个人的学术成就最高,而是因为他们影响了一大批科学家,带领了一批从事科研工作的人,做出了重要的成果,这才是我们心中大师的标准。他们所做的科学事业的是对社会最有用的,这才是我们社会需要的大师。我想,只有先明白什么样的人算是大师,才有可能培养出我们需要的大师。 3. 什么是科学界的大牛? 除了大师以外,近十年来还出现了“大牛”一词。我经常会听到学生说,“XXX来做报告,他是大牛,一定要去听他的报告”。我每次听到“大牛”这个词,脑海中就会浮现出牛的画面。我脑海中出现的大牛形象有西方斗牛场中那种横冲直撞、伤人为上的公牛(bull),还有我小时候在南方水田里看见的水牛(buffalo),那些在田里举步维艰的拖着耕犁,勤恳耕耘的水牛。我们现在科学界有太多像公牛一样的所谓“大牛”,许多横行霸道的bully,为了达到目的而不择手段的大牛。我希望各位同学不要去学那些以自我为中心的横行霸道的公牛,要学“俯首甘为孺子牛”的水牛。 4. 现代社会需要的科学家 现在世界上的迫切需要解决的问题太多了―― 环境问题,健康问题,粮食问题,人口问题等等,都需要科学家去帮助解决。我们现在的社会已经允许有追求个人兴趣和个人成就的科学家,但是我们更需要的是有忘我精神和关怀社会的科学家。我们神经所也是如此,可以允许自由探索,追求个人成就,但是我们更需要在此基础之上,有继承和发扬中国传统知识分子精神的科研工作者。中国科学界可能对世界科学的贡献,不只是有大批科学家在国际刊物上发表大批论文,得多少个诺贝尔奖,而是能把中国传统知识分子的忘我精神和社会关怀注入科学界,及早解决世界上各种迫切需要解决的问题,这将是中国科学家对世界科学界独特的贡献。 我今天就讲到这里,谢谢大家! 蒲慕明博士,1970年毕业于台湾清华大学物理系,1974年于美国Johns Hopkins大学生物物理系获博士学位,1974-1976先后在美国Woods Hole海洋生物研究所、美国Purdue大学生命科学系从事博士后研究,1976-1985在美国加州大学Irvine分校生物物理系任助理教授、副教授、教授,1985-1988任美国耶鲁大学医学院分子神经生物学系教授,1988-1995任美国哥伦比亚大学生命科学系教授,1995-2000任美国加州大学圣地亚哥分校Stephen Kuffler讲座教授,2001-2006年任美国加州大学伯克利分校分子与细胞生物学系神经生物学部主任,现任该校Paul Licht生物科学杰出讲座教授,2009年当选为美国科学院院士。1999年11月27日起任中国科学院上海生命科学研究院神经科学研究所首任及现任所长、神经可塑性研究组组长、高级研究员、博士生导师。 蒲慕明博士是一位国际著名的神经生物学家和生物物理学家。他在细胞膜生物物理、神经轴突导向机制、神经营养因子与神经突触可塑性的关系、突触可塑性的机制、神经环路功能等领域取得一系列重要研究成果。获得奖项及荣誉称号包括:美国NIH Javitz Neuroscience Investigator Award (1998)、台湾中央研究院院士(2000)、美国AAAS Fellow(2001)、美国Ameritec Prize(2001)、吴瑞学会奖(2002)、法国Ecole Normale Geperieure荣誉博士学位(2003)、中华人民共和国国际科学技术合作奖(2005)等。曾任Journal of Cell Biology、Journal of Neuroscience、Neuron、Current Opinion in Neurobiology、Progress in Neurobiology、Developmental Neurobiology、Journal of Physiology、Journal of Experimental Neurology、 NeuroSignals、Biochemical Biophysical Research Communications等学术期刊的编委。现任日本RIKEN脑研究所、瑞士Friedrich Miescher 研究所、印度国立生物科学中心、台湾中央研究院分子生物研究所和语言学研究所、台湾清华大学、阳明大学等国际顾问委员会委员。
在“摘要”一节的注意事项中我提到不少读者只读摘要,所以摘要必须能独立成文,并能说明所有主要结果及其意义。有的读者会随后再看一下图表来核实一下摘要中提到的结果,但仍然不读全文。所以,跟摘要一样,论文的图表(外加其标注)也必须能独立成文,不用读正文就能看懂。 图 表用于形象地表示正文所述结果。简而言之,他们是表达结果最有效的方式。好的图表可以把获得的结果迅速、准确地传达给读者(远比读正文为快)。对于研究人 员来说,一方面他们所处的领域飞速进展,另一方面他们又缺乏足够的时间追踪研究进展,因此,如果你能迅速地把自己的研究结果传递给他们,他们自然感激不 尽。期刊编辑和审稿人当然也喜欢简洁明了的论文。所以制作高质量的图表来清楚传达研究结果还是很有必要的。 和其他部分一样,制作图表也有 一些“规则”。首先要了解目标期刊允许多少图表,不要超过这个限制。如果限定的图表数目不足以表达你的结果,可以把有些放在“补充信息” (Supplementary Information)部分,或者在正文中叙述并加个说明“(data not shown)”。不过,只有不重要的附属性结果才能这样叙述,而那些支持你假设的结果则必须展现出来。如果你的首选期刊不足以展现你的所有重要数据,你可 能需要考虑换个期刊。反之,如果期刊允许的图表数目超过你的需要,也不要加上多余或不必要的图表来凑数。每个图表必须要有明确、必要的目的。 其 次,图表中的数据要易于解读。考虑好让每个图表显示多少数据,以及数据如何组织来传递重要信息。所以,与其把各种参数或治疗方法都合并在一个图中,不如考 虑分别用一个简单子图表示然后拼成一个组图。图的坐标、表的行列、以及示意图的各部分都要标记清楚。如有趋势线、标尺和统计检验结果,均应予以标明;比如 用星号表示显著性,或不同的符号来表示不同的显著性水准。对于大样本,除了报告绝对数值之外还要有变化或差异的百分比。 第三,图表的标注 也应该独立成文,并且无需阅读全文就能完全理解。因此,缩写要么不用,要么先定义后才用,同时应该避免使用技术术语。标注应清楚说明做了什么、观察到了什 么;也应简述使用了什么统计检验,给出P值,并对所用的符号进行定义。除了其中描述方法的语句,标注和图表标题都应采用现在时。比如,应该 写:“Western blot showing an increase in the levels of p53 after…”而不是“Western blotting showed that the levels of p53 increased after…”。 最后,与“结果“部分的注意现项一样,图表和正文之间不应有重复叙述。所以,容易用文字简要描述的就不要用图表,而且图 表之间也不应有所重复,例如,图中已有的信息就不要又用表再显示一次。图表和标注不要嵌在正文中间。出版单位会把你的正文和图表合并成一个目标杂志特有格 式的“校样”。他们通常要求作者提供单独的图表文件(偶尔可以放在稿件末尾)和单独的正文文件(其中包含图表标注的列表,通常在”参考文献”之后)。参照 目标期刊的《稿约》以确定其具体要求。 先制作清楚、高质量的图表,随后就可以轻易地撰写“结果”部分。图表可以按逻辑排列组合来一步步推进你的论 证,或巩固你的假设。给每个主要结果分配一个图表和一个小节;小节的标题应和相应的标注相似;小节内的正文简要叙述其相应图表内含结果,其中统计分析结果 要叙述完整,需要展示更多细节时告知读者参见图表。 表 格最适合用很少的叙述展现大量数据。上表节选自《The Journal of Clinical Investigation》上的一篇论文(doi:10.1172/JCI37622; 经同意转载)。表中数据非常清楚简练,如果用正文叙述这些数据需要大量文字,用表格则大大节省了文字。正文中只需提一下“患者和肿瘤样本的临床特征见表 1”即可。下图来自同一论文,其中包括了本文提及的优秀图表的多项要素,具体请见下面的清单。 清单 1. 图表标注要“独立成文”。 2. 遵守图表数目限制。 3. 图表之间以及图表和正文之间均无重复叙述。 4. 各个参数的数据分别用组图中的一个子图表示。 5. 标出标尺、趋势线和标记;显示统计检验结果。 6. 符号和缩写要么不用,要么先定义再用。 7. 对于大样本,给出绝对数和变化/差异的百分比。 8. 图放在单独的文件中或放在稿件末尾;不要嵌在正文中间。 9. 参照《稿约》确定图表格式、大小、颜色、数目和其他要求。 Display items: a picture tells a thousand words In the chapter on abstracts I mentioned that many readers will only read the abstract of your paper, and so the abstract needed to be self-contained, describing all of the important findings and their significance. Some readers will go further than just the abstract and look at the display items to validate the findings described in the abstract, but still not read the entire paper. Thus, like the abstract, the display items in your paper (along with their associated legends) need to be able to stand alone and be understood without the need to refer to the text of the paper. Display items include figures and tables, which are essentially graphical representations of the results described in the text. Simply put, they are the most effective and efficient way to present your results. With good figures and tables you will be able to impart to the reader exactly what you found in your study in a relatively short period of time (that is, much faster than it would take the reader to read the entire paper). Researchers in rapidly moving fields or with limited time to keep up to date with advances in their field will appreciate the rapidity with which they can be informed of your findings; journals editors and peer reviewers will appreciate the clarity. Therefore, it is worthwhile devoting some thought and attention to developing good quality figures and tables that clearly convey your results. As with the other sections of scientific manuscripts, there are certain ‘rules’ that should be followed when generating display items. First, if you have a target journal in mind already, consider how many display items they allow and ensure that you do not exceed that limit. If you have more results to describe than can be simply shown in the allowable number of display items, some may need to be included in a Supplementary Information section, or described in the text with the statement “(data not shown)”. However, only the least important or peripheral findings should be described in this way, and all findings that support your hypothesis need to be shown. Thus, you may need to consider an alternative journal if your first choice will not allow you to present all of your important data. By contrast, if a journal allows more display items than is necessary to show your findings, do not add redundant or unnecessary display items simply because you can. All display items must have a clear and necessary purpose. Second, the data shown in figures and tables needs to be easy to interpret. Consider how much data you wish to show in a given display item and how it can be organized to convey the important message. Therefore, rather than combining multiple parameters or treatments into a single graphic, consider splitting the data across multiple simpler graphics that can be grouped together in a single figure. Remember to clearly label any graph axes, table columns and rows, and components of diagrams if appropriate. Trendlines, scale bars and the results of any statistical tests should be also shown, where relevant, for example by using an asterisk to indicate significance, or a variety of symbols to indicate different levels of significance. With large samples, report the % change or % difference as well as absolute values. Third, the legends accompanying display items need to be able to stand alone such that the display items are entirely understandable without the need to read the entire manuscript. That means abbreviations should not be used or need to be defined, and technical terms should be avoided. It should be clear exactly what was done and what was seen. Statistical tests should be briefly described in the legends, with p values given and any symbols used defined. Legends, including their headings, should be written in the present tense with the exception of any methods described within them. For example, use “Western blot showing an increase in the levels of p53 after…” rather than “Western blotting showed that the levels of p53 increased after…”. Finally, as mentioned in the chapter on writing the results section, there should be no redundancies between the display items and the text. Therefore, do not produce a display item to show information that can easily and briefly be stated in the text, and do not duplicate information among tables and figures, for example, by making a table to show the same information already conveyed in a figure. Do not embed figures and their legends within the text of the manuscript you plan to submit. The publisher will put your text and display items into a template ‘proof’ that will be specific to the target journal. What they usually require from authors is a separate file containing display items (occasionally these can be placed at the end of a manuscript files) and a text file that includes figure and table legends listed together at the end (usually following the references). Check the instructions for authors of your intended target journal for their specific requirements. By preparing good quality, clear display items before writing the results section, this section will practically write itself. The display items can be grouped in a logical order that progresses your argument or progressively strengthens your hypothesis. With one subsection and one display item for each of the major findings, the subsection headings will be similar to the relevant legend headings, and the text in each subsection will provide a brief description of the findings shown in each display item, complete with the results of statistical analyses, with the reader being referred to the display items for more detail. Examples Tables are a great way to present large amounts of necessary data with minimal description required. The table shown above is a truncated version of a table in a paper published in The Journal of Clinical Investigation (doi:10.1172/JCI37622; reproduced with permission). The data presented clearly and economically in this table would have required a considerable amount of word space to describe in the text, but the use of a table makes the information available without the need for a wordy description. All that was required to describe this in the main text was the following statement: “Clinical characteristics of all patients and tumor samples are summarized in Table 1”. The figure below, taken from the same paper, contains many of the elements of a successful display item described in this chapter and listed in the checklist below. Checklist 1. ‘Stand alone’ legends 2. Comply with the allowable number of display items 3. Avoid redundancy among display items or between display items and text 4. Divide data showing different effects or parameters among different panels within the same display item 5. Use scale bars, trend lines and clear labels, and show the results of statistical tests 6. Avoid or define all symbols and abbreviations 7. With large samples, show % changes/differences as well as absolute values 8. Submit figures in a separate file or at the end of the manuscript file rather than embedded in the main text 9. Check the instructions for authors for any specific requirements regarding format, size, color, number of items and any other parameters Dr Daniel McGowan 分子神经学博士 理文编辑学术总监
文章的摘要十分关键,因为很多研究人员只读摘要而不读全文。因此,摘要提供准确 而详尽的研究总结十分重要:它可以帮助研究人员了解你所开展的工作、你的研究目的和研究发现以及研究结果的益处和重要性。摘要必须能够独立成文,具备研究 概要的功能,使人不看全文就能读懂。在阅读摘要后对文章细节感兴趣的读者自然会继续阅读全文。因此摘要不必太面面俱到,例如,可不必列举方法细节。 尽 管摘要是论文的第一部分,但事实上应最后撰写。在完成其他部分后应尽快写摘要,因为这些内容依然清晰地印在你的脑海中,使你能够对自己的工作进行简明而全 面的总结,而不至于忽略任何重要的内容。不同期刊对摘要的撰写要求有所不同,因此应参照目标杂志的《稿约》了解具体要求。尽管杂志要求不同,但依然存在一 些普遍应遵守的惯例: • 应注意对字数的限制。通常来讲摘要的字数限制平均为250个词,但许多杂志要求更短些(如《Nature》和《BBRC》对摘要的篇幅限制为150个 字),而许多杂志(如《BioMed Central》)允许摘要篇幅稍长些。这充分说明了为什么应在写文章之前确定目标杂志。 • 应避免使用技术行话,从而使摘要更易懂,更具可读性。不同目标期刊的“技术行话”取决于杂志的读者情况(可以通过期刊网站查询)。例如:“焦虑测试”一词 通常比“高架十字迷宫实验”更容易理解,除非该杂志专门针对行为研究人员。通常摘要因受篇幅所限不能对技术术语进行定义和解释。如果术语使用不可避免,应 在首次提到时用简单的措辞加以定义。 • 如同技术术语一样,应尽量不使用缩略语,其可用性也取决于不同的目标期刊。例如,大多数杂志接受HIV的使用。相比之下,RT-PCR对于分子生物学技术 的杂志是可以接受的,但绝大多数杂志要求在首次使用时给出完整拼写(reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction)。许多杂志在网页上列出可使用的缩略语。反复使用三次或以上的必要的缩略语应在首次使用时给出完整拼写。只使用一次或两次的缩略语应使 用全称,除非这样做超出了字数要求。摘要中已给出全称的缩略语在正文中首次使用时也应给出全称。 • 尽管一些杂志允许在摘要中引用文献,但绝大多数杂志不允许引用文献。因此,除非你要投稿的杂志允许这样做,否则不应在摘要中引用文献。 以下是BBRC杂志作者须知给出的指导性意见: • 摘要应放在第2页,即标题页之后 • 摘要应采用一段式,总结文章的主要发现,篇幅不超过150字 • 摘要后应列出10个用于收录和检索的关键词 一些杂志要求采用结构式摘要,分为背景、目的、方法、结果和结论。临床期刊可能要求额外或不同段落,如“patients”。因此,再次强调,在动笔之前应查阅目标杂志的《稿约》,确定杂志的具体版式或格式要求。 摘 要后经常需要列出由作者选择的关键词。《稿约》会指出要求列出多少个关键词,甚至提供可供参考的关键词清单。选择合适的关键词很重要,因为他们可作检索之 用。选择合适的关键词可以使你的文章更容易被发现和引用。因此,关键词越切合你的文章内容越好,应避免选择多数研究所适用的一般性术语。 实例:让为这个题目选择合适的关键词: “Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration” 好的关键词:okadoic acid、hippocampus、neuronal degeneration、MAP kinase signaling以及mouse (或是rat或其他实验动物)。 差的关键词:neuron、brain、OA (简写)、regional-specific neuronal degeneration以及signaling。这些词过于笼统。 英文原文 The snapshot: abstract and keywords Your paper’s abstract is critical because many researchers will read that part only, rather than reading the entire paper. Therefore, it is critical that it provides an accurate and sufficiently detailed summary of your work so that those researchers can understand what you did, why you did it, what your findings are, and why your findings are useful and important. Your abstract must be able to stand alone, that is, to function as an overview of your study that can be understood without reading the entire text. Readers who become interested in learning more details than can be included in the abstract will inevitably proceed to the full text. Therefore, the abstract does not need to be overly detailed; for example, it does not need to include a detailed methods section. Even though the abstract is one of the first parts of your paper, it should actually be written last. You should write it soon after finishing the other sections, while the rest of the manuscript is fresh in your mind, enabling you to write a concise but comprehensive summary of your study without overlooking anything important. Requirements for abstracts differ among journals, so the target journal’s instructions for authors should be consulted for specific details. Despite differences among journals, there are a few general rules that should be obeyed when writing an abstract: • The word limit should be observed; 250 words is probably about average and commonly adopted as a word limit for the abstract, but many journals request shorter abstracts (for example, Nature Articles and BBRC both have a 150-word limit) while many others (for example, BioMed Central journals) allow longer ones. This is one good reason why the target journal should be identified before you write your paper. • Technical jargon should be avoided so that the abstract is understandable for a broad readership, although what is considered “technical” may vary depending on the target journal’s audience (check the journal’s website for details of their readership). For example, “a test of anxiety” would generally be clearer than “elevated plus-maze test” in an abstract unless the journal was specifically targeted to behavioral researchers. Usually, there simply isn’t enough space in the abstract to define and explain technical terminology. If such terminology is unavoidable, it should be defined in simple terms where it is first used. • Like technical jargon, abbreviations should be limited as much as possible, although their acceptability may again depend on the target journal. For example, HIV is likely to be acceptable in abbreviated form by most journals. By contrast, RT-PCR might be considered acceptable by a journal reporting molecular biology techniques, but would it need to be spelt in full (reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction) in most journals at first use. Many journals provide a list of acceptable abbreviations on their websites. Necessary abbreviations used three or more times should be defined at first use; however, abbreviations used only once or twice should be spelled out in full unless doing so causes the word limit to be exceeded. Abbreviations that are defined in the abstract will need to be defined again at first use in the main text. • Although some journals do allow references to be cited in the abstract, the vast majority do not. Therefore, unless you plan to submit to a journal that allows it, you should not cite references in your abstract. If we look at the instructions to authors for BBRC, we can see the following guidelines: • The Abstract should be on page 2, i.e., after the title page • The Abstract must be a single paragraph that summarizes the main findings of the paper in fewer than 150 words. • A list of up to 10 keywords useful for indexing or searching should be included after the Abstract. Some journals request structured abstracts divided into sections such as background, objectives, methods, results, and conclusions. Clinical journals may require additional or alternative sections, such as ‘patients’. Therefore, it is again necessary to check the target journal’s instructions for authors to determine the particular formatting/outline requirements prior to writing. Abstracts are frequently followed by a list of keywords selected by the authors. The instructions for authors will state how many keywords are required and may even provide a list of recommended keywords. Choosing appropriate keywords is important, because these are used for indexing purposes. Well chosen keywords enable your manuscript to be more easily identified and cited. Thus, the keywords should be as specific to your manuscript as possible, and general terms, which could apply to an enormous number of studies, should be avoided. Examples: Let’s consider some appropriate keywords for the following title: “Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration”. Good keywords would be: okadaic acid, hippocampus, neuronal degeneration, MAP kinase signaling, and possibly mouse (or rat or whatever experimental animal was used). Poor keywords would be: neuron, brain, OA (as an abbreviation), regional-specific neuronal degeneration, and signaling. These terms are simply too general. Dr Daniel McGowan 分子神经学博士 理文编辑学术总监
今已没有几个行业可以完全不涉及统计学思维的,绝大多数学科都多少需要使用统计学….. 统计学已经从我们日常思维的一个方面发展为无处不在的系统性研究工具….统计学思维承认: 我们对世界的观察总存在某些不确定性,永不可能完全准确。 Rowntree D (1981). Statistics without tears. A primer for non-mathematicians. Penguin Books Ltd., London, England. 统计是指收集、处理和解释数据的方法。由于统计方法是科学探索的固有内容,因此我们的博客已经在研究设计、方法、结果、图表等数处提及统计。但考虑到统计在多数科学研究中的重要性,有必要专门讲解其使用和表达。 在开始研究之前,在初步的研究设计中就应该考虑统计。首先,要考虑你需要收集哪些信息来检验你的假设或解答你的研究问题。研究有个正确的开始非常重要;虽然数据检验错误相对容易弥补,要用另外的样本组重新收集数据或者从同一样本中追加获取变量可就费时费力得多。如果你想检验某种疗法对普通人群的效果,你的样本要能够代表这个群体。如果比较的是分别有两种疾病或行为的两个群体,那这两个群体的其他变量如年龄、性别、种族需要尽可能一致。这些涉及的都是数据收集;如果在这一步就犯了错,你就有可能遇到严重的问题,甚至可能会在数个月后在同行审稿阶段遭到严重质疑而推翻重来。 其次,你要考虑要采用何种统计检验才能从数据中提炼出有意义的结论。这取决于数据类型。是用来表达某种标志物存在与否的分类数据吗?还是有具体数值的定量数据?如果是定量数据,是连续数据(测量所得)还是离散数据(计数所得)?例如,年龄、体重、时间和温度都是连续数据因为他们的值是在连续,无限可分的尺度上测量出来的;相反,人和细胞的数目都是离散数据,他们不是无限可分的,他们的值是通过计数得到的。你也需要知道你数据的分布:是正态(高斯)分布还是偏态分布?这也关系到你该采取何种检验。你一定要知道你收集的是何种类型的数据,这样才能用适宜的统计检验来分析和恰当的方式来表示。下面这个网址提供了选择适宜检验方法的指南,可能会有所帮助:http://www.graphpad.com/www/Book/Choose.htm 最后,需要知道如何解读统计检验的结果。P值(或 t、 χ2 等)代表什么意思?这是统计检验的关键:确定结果到底意味着什么,你能下什么结论?统计能告诉我们某一数据集的集中趋势(如平均值和中位数)和离散趋势 (标准差、标准误和百分位间距),从而明确该数据集的分布情况。统计学可以比较(如用t检验、方差分析和χ2检验)两个或多个样本组之间是否有非偶然的系统性差别。如果检验表明无效假设可能性很小,则差别具有显著性。一定要记住,用概率简化差别的“真实性”造成了两种风险,两种都取决于所选取显著性的阈值。第一个是第1类错误,是指本没有显著性差异之处检出了显著性差异。另一个是第2类错误,是指本有显著性差异但由于差别不够大而不能捡出。降低第1类错误的风险就会增加第2类错误的风险;不过这也比下不存在的结论要好。统计学也能给出关联的强度,从而允许从样本组中推断出适用于更广群体的结论。统计学赋予了本身价值有限的结果更多意义,并允许我们用概率下结论,虽然总是存在错误的可能。 实例 节选自《The Journal of Clinical Investigation》 (doi:10.1172/JCI38289; 经同意转载)。 清单 1. 在列举数据时,说明使用的是何种参数,如“均值±标准差”。 2. 说明数据分析所采用的统计检验方法。 3. 百分比给出分子分母,如“40% (100/250)”。 4. 正态分布数据用均值和标准差表示。 5. 非正态分布数据用中位数和 百分位数表示。 6. 给出具体的P 值, 如 写出 “P=0.0035”,而不要只写 “P0.05”。 7. “significant’ 这个词仅用于描述统计学上的显著差异。 英文原文 Statistics: what can we say about our findings? Today, few professional activities are untouched by statistical thinking, and most academic disciplines use it to a greater or lesser degree… Statistics has developed out of an aspect of our everyday thinking to be a ubiquitous tool of systematic research… Statistical thinking is a way of recognizing that our observations of the world can never be totally accurate; they are always somewhat uncertain. Rowntree D (1981). Statistics without tears. A primer for non-mathematicians. Penguin Books Ltd., London, England. The term ‘statistics’ refers to the methods used to collect, process and interpret data. Because these methods are so inherent in the process of scientific inquiry, there have been multiple references to statistics throughout our blog, namely, in the posts on study design, methods, results and display items. However, given the importance of statistics in most scientific studies, it is worthwhile having a separate post on how they should be used and presented. Statistics should first be considered long before the commencement of any research, during the initial study design. First, consider what information you need to collect in order to test your hypothesis or address your research question. It is important to get this right from the outset because, while data can be reanalyzed relatively easily if the wrong tests were used, it is far more difficult and time-consuming to repeat data collection with a different sample group or obtain additional variables from the same sample. If you wish to test the efficacy of a treatment for use in the general population, then your sample needs to be representative of the general population. If you wish to test its efficacy in a given ethnicity or age group, then your sample needs to be representative of that group. If comparing two groups of subjects separated on the basis of a particular disease or behavior, then other variables, such as age, sex and ethnicity, need to be matched as closely as possible between the two groups. This aspect of statistics relates to the collection of data; get it wrong and you could face major problems, potentially the need to start the research all over again, at the peer review stage many months later. Second, you need to consider what statistical tests should be applied so that you can make meaningful statements about your data. This depends on the type of data you have collected: do you have categorical data, perhaps describing the presence or absence of a particular marker, or quantitative data with numerical values? If your data is quantitative, is it continuous (that is, can it be measured) or discrete (counts)? For example, age, weight, time and temperature are all examples of continuous data because they are measured on continuous scales with units that are infinitely sub-divisible. By contrast, the number of people in a given group and the number of cells with apoptotic features are examples of discrete data that need to be counted and are not sub-divisible. You also need to know how your data is distributed: is it normally distributed (Gaussian) or skewed? This also affects the type of test that should be used. It is important that you know what type of data you are collecting so that you apply the appropriate statistical tests to analyze the data and so you present them in an appropriate manner. The following useful website provides a guide to choosing the appropriate statistical test: http://www.graphpad.com/www/Book/Choose.htm Finally, you need to know how to interpret the results of the statistical tests you have selected. What exactly does the p (or t or χ2 or other) value mean? That, after all is the point of statistical analysis: to determine what you can say about your findings; what they really mean. Statistics enable us to determine the central tendency (for example, mean and median) and dispersion (for example, standard deviation, standard error, and interpercentile range) of a dataset, giving us an idea of its distribution. Also using statistics, values from two or more different sample groups can be compared (for example, by t-test, analysis of variance, or χ2 test) to determine if a difference between or among groups could have arisen by chance. If this hypothesis, known as the null hypothesis, can be shown to be highly unlikely (usually less than 5% chance), then the difference is said to be significant. It is important to keep in mind that there are two risks associated with reducing a decision about the ‘reality’ of a difference to probabilities, and both depend on the threshold set to determine significance: the first, known as type I error, is the possibility that a difference is accepted as significant when it is not; the opposite risk, known as type II error, refers to the possibility that a significant difference is considered not to be significant because we demand a larger difference between groups to be certain. Reducing the risk of type I errors increases the risk of type II errors, but this is infinitely more preferable than reaching a conclusion that isn’t justified. Statistics also provides a measure of the strengths of correlations and enables inferences about a much larger population to be drawn on the basis of findings in a sample group. In this way, statistics puts meaning into findings that would otherwise be of limited value, and allows us to draw conclusions based on probabilities, even when the possibility of error remains. Example Extracts from The Journal of Clinical Investigation (doi:10.1172/JCI38289; reproduced with permission). Checklist 1. Indicate what parameters are described when listing data; for example, “means±S.D.” 2. Indicate the statistical tests used to analyze data 3. Give the numerator and denominator with percentages; for example “40% (100/250)” 4. Use means and standard deviations to report normally distributed data 5. Use medians and interpercentile ranges to report data with a skewed distribution 6. Report p values; for example, use “p=0.0035” rather than “p0.05” 7. Only use the word “significant’ when describing statistically significant differences. Choosing a statistical test FAQ# 1790 This is chapter 37 of the first edition of Intuitive Biostatistics by Harvey Motulsky. Copyright 1995 by Oxford University Press Inc. Chapter 45 of the second edition of Intuitive Biostatistics is an expanded version of this material. REVIEW OF AVAILABLE STATISTICAL TESTS This book has discussed many different statistical tests. To select the right test, ask yourself two questions: What kind of data have you collected? What is your goal? Then refer to Table 37.1. Type of Data Goal Measurement (from Gaussian Population) Rank, Score, or Measurement (from Non- Gaussian Population) Binomial (Two Possible Outcomes) Survival Time Describe one group Mean, SD Median, interquartile range Proportion Kaplan Meier survival curve Compare one group to a hypothetical value One-sample t test Wilcoxon test Chi-square or Binomial test ** Compare two unpaired groups Unpaired t test Mann-Whitney test Fisher's test (chi-square for large samples) Log-rank test or Mantel-Haenszel* Compare two paired groups Paired t test Wilcoxon test McNemar's test Conditional proportional hazards regression* Compare three or more unmatched groups One-way ANOVA Kruskal-Wallis test Chi-square test Cox proportional hazard regression** Compare three or more matched groups Repeated-measures ANOVA Friedman test Cochrane Q** Conditional proportional hazards regression** Quantify association between two variables Pearson correlation Spearman correlation Contingency coefficients** Predict value from another measured variable Simple linear regression or Nonlinear regression Nonparametric regression** Simple logistic regression* Cox proportional hazard regression* Predict value from several measured or binomial variables Multiple linear regression* or Multiple nonlinear regression** Multiple logistic regression* Cox proportional hazard regression* REVIEW OF NONPARAMETRIC TESTS Choosing the right test to compare measurements is a bit tricky, as you must choose between two families of tests: parametric and nonparametric. Many -statistical test are based upon the assumption that the data are sampled from a Gaussian distribution. These tests are referred to as parametric tests. Commonly used parametric tests are listed in the first column of the table and include the t test and analysis of variance. Tests that do not make assumptions about the population distribution are referred to as nonparametric- tests. You've already learned a bit about nonparametric tests in previous chapters. All commonly used nonparametric tests rank the outcome variable from low to high and then analyze the ranks. These tests are listed in the second column of the table and include the Wilcoxon, Mann-Whitney test, and Kruskal-Wallis tests. These tests are also called distribution-free tests. CHOOSING BETWEEN PARAMETRIC AND NONPARAMETRIC TESTS: THE EASY CASES Choosing between parametric and nonparametric tests is sometimes easy. You should definitely choose a parametric test if you are sure that your data are sampled from a population that follows a Gaussian distribution (at least approximately). You should definitely select a nonparametric test in three situations: The outcome is a rank or a score and the population is clearly not Gaussian. Examples include class ranking of students, the Apgar score for the health of newborn babies (measured on a scale of 0 to IO and where all scores are integers), the visual analogue score for pain (measured on a continuous scale where 0 is no pain and 10 is unbearable pain), and the star scale commonly used by movie and restaurant critics (* is OK, ***** is fantastic). Some values are "off the scale," that is, too high or too low to measure. Even if the population is Gaussian, it is impossible to analyze such data with a parametric test since you don't know all of the values. Using a nonparametric test with these data is simple. Assign values too low to measure an arbitrary very low value and assign values too high to measure an arbitrary very high value. Then perform a nonparametric test. Since the nonparametric test only knows about the relative ranks of the values, it won't matter that you didn't know all the values exactly. The data ire measurements, and you are sure that the population is not distributed in a Gaussian manner. If the data are not sampled from a Gaussian distribution, consider whether you can transformed the values to make the distribution become Gaussian. For example, you might take the logarithm or reciprocal of all values. There are often biological or chemical reasons (as well as statistical ones) for performing a particular transform. CHOOSING BETWEEN PARAMETRIC AND NONPARAMETRIC TESTS: THE HARD CASES It is not always easy to decide whether a sample comes from a Gaussian population. Consider these points: If you collect many data points (over a hundred or so), you can look at the distribution of data and it will be fairly obvious whether the distribution is approximately bell shaped. A formal statistical test (Kolmogorov-Smirnoff test, not explained in this book) can be used to test whether the distribution of the data differs significantly from a Gaussian distribution. With few data points, it is difficult to tell whether the data are Gaussian by inspection, and the formal test has little power to discriminate between Gaussian and non-Gaussian distributions. You should look at previous data as well. Remember, what matters is the distribution of the overall population, not the distribution of your sample. In deciding whether a population is Gaussian, look at all available data, not just data in the current experiment. Consider the source of scatter. When the scatter comes from the sum of numerous sources (with no one source contributing most of the scatter), you expect to find a roughly Gaussian distribution. When in doubt, some people choose a parametric test (because they aren't sure the Gaussian assumption is violated), and others choose a nonparametric test (because they aren't sure the Gaussian assumption is met). CHOOSING BETWEEN PARAMETRIC AND NONPARAMETRIC TESTS: DOES IT MATTER? Does it matter whether you choose a parametric or nonparametric test? The answer depends on sample size. There are four cases to think about: Large sample. What happens when you use a parametric test with data from a nongaussian population? The central limit theorem (discussed in Chapter 5) ensures that parametric tests work well with large samples even if the population is non-Gaussian. In other words, parametric tests are robust to deviations from Gaussian distributions, so long as the samples are large. The snag is that it is impossible to say how large is large enough, as it depends on the nature of the particular non-Gaussian distribution. Unless the population distribution is really weird, you are probably safe choosing a parametric test when there are at least two dozen data points in each group. Large sample. What happens when you use a nonparametric test with data from a Gaussian population? Nonparametric tests work well with large samples from Gaussian populations. The P values tend to be a bit too large, but the discrepancy is small. In other words, nonparametric tests are only slightly less powerful than parametric tests with large samples. Small samples. What happens when you use a parametric test with data from nongaussian populations? You can't rely on the central limit theorem, so the P value may be inaccurate. Small samples. When you use a nonparametric test with data from a Gaussian population, the P values tend to be too high. The nonparametric tests lack statistical power with small samples. Thus, large data sets present no problems. It is usually easy to tell if the data come from a Gaussian population, but it doesn't really matter because the nonparametric tests are so powerful and the parametric tests are so robust. Small data sets present a dilemma. It is difficult to tell if the data come from a Gaussian population, but it matters a lot. The nonparametric tests are not powerful and the parametric tests are not robust. ONE- OR TWO-SIDED P VALUE? With many tests, you must choose whether you wish to calculate a one- or two-sided P value (same as one- or two-tailed P value). The difference between one- and two-sided P values was discussed in Chapter 10. Let's review the difference in the context of a t test. The P value is calculated for the null hypothesis that the two population means are equal, and any discrepancy between the two sample means is due to chance. If this null hypothesis is true, the one-sided P value is the probability that two sample means would differ as much as was observed (or further) in the direction specified by the hypothesis just by chance, even though the means of the overall populations are actually equal. The two-sided P value also includes the probability that the sample means would differ that much in the opposite direction (i.e., the other group has the larger mean). The two-sided P value is twice the one-sided P value. A one-sided P value is appropriate when you can state with certainty (and before collecting any data) that there either will be no difference between the means or that the difference will go in a direction you can specify in advance (i.e., you have specified which group will have the larger mean). If you cannot specify the direction of any difference before collecting data, then a two-sided P value is more appropriate. If in doubt, select a two-sided P value. If you select a one-sided test, you should do so before collecting any data and you need to state the direction of your experimental hypothesis. If the data go the other way, you must be willing to attribute that difference (or association or correlation) to chance, no matter how striking the data. If you would be intrigued, even a little, by data that goes in the "wrong" direction, then you should use a two-sided P value. For reasons discussed in Chapter 10, I recommend that you always calculate a two-sided P value. PAIRED OR UNPAIRED TEST? When comparing two groups, you need to decide whether to use a paired test. When comparing three or more groups, the term paired is not apt and the term repeated measures is used instead. Use an unpaired test to compare groups when the individual values are not paired or matched with one another. Select a paired or repeated-measures test when values represent repeated measurements on one subject (before and after an intervention) or measurements on matched subjects. The paired or repeated-measures tests are also appropriate for repeated laboratory experiments run at different times, each with its own control. You should select a paired test when values in one group are more closely correlated with a specific value in the other group than with random values in the other group. It is only appropriate to select a paired test when the subjects were matched or paired before the data were collected. You cannot base the pairing on the data you are analyzing. FISHER'S TEST OR THE CHI-SQUARE TEST? When analyzing contingency tables with two rows and two columns, you can use either Fisher's exact test or the chi-square test. The Fisher's test is the best choice as it always gives the exact P value. The chi-square test is simpler to calculate but yields only an approximate P value. If a computer is doing the calculations, you should choose Fisher's test unless you prefer the familiarity of the chi-square test. You should definitely avoid the chi-square test when the numbers in the contingency table are very small (any number less than about six). When the numbers are larger, the P values reported by the chi-square and Fisher's test will he very similar. The chi-square test calculates approximate P values, and the Yates' continuity correction is designed to make the approximation better. Without the Yates' correction, the P values are too low. However, the correction goes too far, and the resulting P value is too high. Statisticians give different recommendations regarding Yates' correction. With large sample sizes, the Yates' correction makes little difference. If you select Fisher's test, the P value is exact and Yates' correction is not needed and is not available. REGRESSION OR CORRELATION? Linear regression and correlation are similar and easily confused. In some situations it makes sense to perform both calculations. Calculate linear correlation if you measured both X and Y in each subject and wish to quantity how well they are associated. Select the Pearson (parametric) correlation coefficient if you can assume that both X and Y are sampled from Gaussian populations. Otherwise choose the Spearman nonparametric correlation coefficient. Don't calculate the correlation coefficient (or its confidence interval) if you manipulated the X variable. Calculate linear regressions only if one of the variables (X) is likely to precede or cause the other variable (Y). Definitely choose linear regression if you manipulated the X variable. It makes a big difference which variable is called X and which is called Y, as linear regression calculations are not symmetrical with respect to X and Y. If you swap the two variables, you will obtain a different regression line. In contrast, linear correlation calculations are symmetrical with respect to X and Y. If you swap the labels X and Y, you will still get the same correlation coefficient.
文章的摘要十分关键,因为很多研究人员只读摘要而不读全文。因此,摘要提供准确 而详尽的研究总结十分重要:它可以帮助研究人员了解你所开展的工作、你的研究目的和研究发现以及研究结果的益处和重要性。摘要必须能够独立成文,具备研究 概要的功能,使人不看全文就能读懂。在阅读摘要后对文章细节感兴趣的读者自然会继续阅读全文。因此摘要不必太面面俱到,例如,可不必列举方法细节。 尽 管摘要是论文的第一部分,但事实上应最后撰写。在完成其他部分后应尽快写摘要,因为这些内容依然清晰地印在你的脑海中,使你能够对自己的工作进行简明而全 面的总结,而不至于忽略任何重要的内容。不同期刊对摘要的撰写要求有所不同,因此应参照目标杂志的《稿约》了解具体要求。尽管杂志要求不同,但依然存在一 些普遍应遵守的惯例: • 应注意对字数的限制。通常来讲摘要的字数限制平均为250个词,但许多杂志要求更短些(如《Nature》和《BBRC》对摘要的篇幅限制为150个 字),而许多杂志(如《BioMed Central》)允许摘要篇幅稍长些。这充分说明了为什么应在写文章之前确定目标杂志。 • 应避免使用技术行话,从而使摘要更易懂,更具可读性。不同目标期刊的“技术行话”取决于杂志的读者情况(可以通过期刊网站查询)。例如:“焦虑测试”一词 通常比“高架十字迷宫实验”更容易理解,除非该杂志专门针对行为研究人员。通常摘要因受篇幅所限不能对技术术语进行定义和解释。如果术语使用不可避免,应 在首次提到时用简单的措辞加以定义。 • 如同技术术语一样,应尽量不使用缩略语,其可用性也取决于不同的目标期刊。例如,大多数杂志接受HIV的使用。相比之下,RT-PCR对于分子生物学技术 的杂志是可以接受的,但绝大多数杂志要求在首次使用时给出完整拼写(reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction)。许多杂志在网页上列出可使用的缩略语。反复使用三次或以上的必要的缩略语应在首次使用时给出完整拼写。只使用一次或两次的缩略语应使 用全称,除非这样做超出了字数要求。摘要中已给出全称的缩略语在正文中首次使用时也应给出全称。 • 尽管一些杂志允许在摘要中引用文献,但绝大多数杂志不允许引用文献。因此,除非你要投稿的杂志允许这样做,否则不应在摘要中引用文献。 以下是BBRC杂志作者须知给出的指导性意见: • 摘要应放在第2页,即标题页之后 • 摘要应采用一段式,总结文章的主要发现,篇幅不超过150字 • 摘要后应列出10个用于收录和检索的关键词 一些杂志要求采用结构式摘要,分为背景、目的、方法、结果和结论。临床期刊可能要求额外或不同段落,如“patients”。因此,再次强调,在动笔之前应查阅目标杂志的《稿约》,确定杂志的具体版式或格式要求。 摘 要后经常需要列出由作者选择的关键词。《稿约》会指出要求列出多少个关键词,甚至提供可供参考的关键词清单。选择合适的关键词很重要,因为他们可作检索之 用。选择合适的关键词可以使你的文章更容易被发现和引用。因此,关键词越切合你的文章内容越好,应避免选择多数研究所适用的一般性术语。 实例:让为这个题目选择合适的关键词: “Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration” 好的关键词:okadoic acid、hippocampus、neuronal degeneration、MAP kinase signaling以及mouse (或是rat或其他实验动物)。 差的关键词:neuron、brain、OA (简写)、regional-specific neuronal degeneration以及signaling。这些词过于笼统。 英文原文 The snapshot: abstract and keywords Your paper’s abstract is critical because many researchers will read that part only, rather than reading the entire paper. Therefore, it is critical that it provides an accurate and sufficiently detailed summary of your work so that those researchers can understand what you did, why you did it, what your findings are, and why your findings are useful and important. Your abstract must be able to stand alone, that is, to function as an overview of your study that can be understood without reading the entire text. Readers who become interested in learning more details than can be included in the abstract will inevitably proceed to the full text. Therefore, the abstract does not need to be overly detailed; for example, it does not need to include a detailed methods section. Even though the abstract is one of the first parts of your paper, it should actually be written last. You should write it soon after finishing the other sections, while the rest of the manuscript is fresh in your mind, enabling you to write a concise but comprehensive summary of your study without overlooking anything important. Requirements for abstracts differ among journals, so the target journal’s instructions for authors should be consulted for specific details. Despite differences among journals, there are a few general rules that should be obeyed when writing an abstract: • The word limit should be observed; 250 words is probably about average and commonly adopted as a word limit for the abstract, but many journals request shorter abstracts (for example, Nature Articles and BBRC both have a 150-word limit) while many others (for example, BioMed Central journals) allow longer ones. This is one good reason why the target journal should be identified before you write your paper. • Technical jargon should be avoided so that the abstract is understandable for a broad readership, although what is considered “technical” may vary depending on the target journal’s audience (check the journal’s website for details of their readership). For example, “a test of anxiety” would generally be clearer than “elevated plus-maze test” in an abstract unless the journal was specifically targeted to behavioral researchers. Usually, there simply isn’t enough space in the abstract to define and explain technical terminology. If such terminology is unavoidable, it should be defined in simple terms where it is first used. • Like technical jargon, abbreviations should be limited as much as possible, although their acceptability may again depend on the target journal. For example, HIV is likely to be acceptable in abbreviated form by most journals. By contrast, RT-PCR might be considered acceptable by a journal reporting molecular biology techniques, but would it need to be spelt in full (reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction) in most journals at first use. Many journals provide a list of acceptable abbreviations on their websites. Necessary abbreviations used three or more times should be defined at first use; however, abbreviations used only once or twice should be spelled out in full unless doing so causes the word limit to be exceeded. Abbreviations that are defined in the abstract will need to be defined again at first use in the main text. • Although some journals do allow references to be cited in the abstract, the vast majority do not. Therefore, unless you plan to submit to a journal that allows it, you should not cite references in your abstract. If we look at the instructions to authors for BBRC, we can see the following guidelines: • The Abstract should be on page 2, i.e., after the title page • The Abstract must be a single paragraph that summarizes the main findings of the paper in fewer than 150 words. • A list of up to 10 keywords useful for indexing or searching should be included after the Abstract. Some journals request structured abstracts divided into sections such as background, objectives, methods, results, and conclusions. Clinical journals may require additional or alternative sections, such as ‘patients’. Therefore, it is again necessary to check the target journal’s instructions for authors to determine the particular formatting/outline requirements prior to writing. Abstracts are frequently followed by a list of keywords selected by the authors. The instructions for authors will state how many keywords are required and may even provide a list of recommended keywords. Choosing appropriate keywords is important, because these are used for indexing purposes. Well chosen keywords enable your manuscript to be more easily identified and cited. Thus, the keywords should be as specific to your manuscript as possible, and general terms, which could apply to an enormous number of studies, should be avoided. Examples: Let’s consider some appropriate keywords for the following title: “Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration”. Good keywords would be: okadaic acid, hippocampus, neuronal degeneration, MAP kinase signaling, and possibly mouse (or rat or whatever experimental animal was used). Poor keywords would be: neuron, brain, OA (as an abbreviation), regional-specific neuronal degeneration, and signaling. These terms are simply too general. Dr Daniel McGowan 分子神经学博士 理文编辑学术总监
根据关键词不完全共现,下面绘制了《情报学报》 2012 年上半年发文关键词的共现图。 笔者将其归纳为七个方面: A 计量学文献(文献计量、科学计量及信息计量)。这个版块发文数量最多。即有利用传统文献计量方法对某个领域研究(如信息行为研究的文献计量),也有利用知识图谱、引文分析、共词分析等对某领域研究热点(如情报学)或某主题研究热点(如基因工程、人民币汇率)的分析。 B 本体。本体是近年来情报学领域一直关注的一个研究热点。有几篇文章将语义分析、大众标注等相结合,尝试了本体的应用研究。 C 竞争情报。竞争情报是情报学领域又一个倍受关注的话题。在一篇文献是竞争情报领域的文献综述,另两篇探讨了动态竞争情报、竞争情报系统。 D 用户研究与信息推荐。用户是情报学研究过程中,一直会关注和研究对象。有几篇文章对用户的心智模型、用户体验、认知网格等进行了研究;还有几篇探讨了个性化信息推荐。 E 信息检索与信息查询。有几篇文献探讨了查询优化、查询扩展、专家检索、跨语言信息检索;还有几篇文章将信息检索与网络学习、信息服务相关问题进行了研究。 F 文本与文档相似度、语义学习等。 这个版块是情报学领域利用计算机科学等相关知识对词汇、文档及网页为研究对象进行的相关研究。 G 最后一个版块的内容较为分散,涉及到电子政务、搜索引擎、信息经济、网络事件、信息采集等方面。 另外,从图中还可以看出情报学领域目前使用较多的研究方法,如聚类、社会网络分析、共词分析,共现分析、多维尺度分析等。还有值得注意的是语义层面的研究引起了不少研究者的注意。如 B 、 E 、 F 中都有包含语义的词汇。 利用这种方法绘制的“关键词共现图”受到作者关键选择的影响较大。如有的作者使用“科学知识图谱”,有的使用“知识图谱”。这就会导致两个词相关的词无法形成一个连通的网络,而实际上它们是连通的。在以后数据处理过程中,笔者将在这方法进行一些先期的处理,以绘制更加“语义化”的图形。
文章的摘要十分关键,因为很多研究人员只读摘要而不读全文。因此,摘要提供准确 而详尽的研究总结十分重要:它可以帮助研究人员了解你所开展的工作、你的研究目的和研究发现以及研究结果的益处和重要性。摘要必须能够独立成文,具备研究 概要的功能,使人不看全文就能读懂。在阅读摘要后对文章细节感兴趣的读者自然会继续阅读全文。因此摘要不必太面面俱到,例如,可不必列举方法细节。 尽 管摘要是论文的第一部分,但事实上应最后撰写。在完成其他部分后应尽快写摘要,因为这些内容依然清晰地印在你的脑海中,使你能够对自己的工作进行简明而全 面的总结,而不至于忽略任何重要的内容。不同期刊对摘要的撰写要求有所不同,因此应参照目标杂志的《稿约》了解具体要求。尽管杂志要求不同,但依然存在一 些普遍应遵守的惯例: • 应注意对字数的限制。通常来讲摘要的字数限制平均为250个词,但许多杂志要求更短些(如《Nature》和《BBRC》对摘要的篇幅限制为150个 字),而许多杂志(如《BioMed Central》)允许摘要篇幅稍长些。这充分说明了为什么应在写文章之前确定目标杂志。 • 应避免使用技术行话,从而使摘要更易懂,更具可读性。不同目标期刊的“技术行话”取决于杂志的读者情况(可以通过期刊网站查询)。例如:“焦虑测试”一词 通常比“高架十字迷宫实验”更容易理解,除非该杂志专门针对行为研究人员。通常摘要因受篇幅所限不能对技术术语进行定义和解释。如果术语使用不可避免,应 在首次提到时用简单的措辞加以定义。 • 如同技术术语一样,应尽量不使用缩略语,其可用性也取决于不同的目标期刊。例如,大多数杂志接受HIV的使用。相比之下,RT-PCR对于分子生物学技术 的杂志是可以接受的,但绝大多数杂志要求在首次使用时给出完整拼写(reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction)。许多杂志在网页上列出可使用的缩略语。反复使用三次或以上的必要的缩略语应在首次使用时给出完整拼写。只使用一次或两次的缩略语应使 用全称,除非这样做超出了字数要求。摘要中已给出全称的缩略语在正文中首次使用时也应给出全称。 • 尽管一些杂志允许在摘要中引用文献,但绝大多数杂志不允许引用文献。因此,除非你要投稿的杂志允许这样做,否则不应在摘要中引用文献。 以下是BBRC杂志作者须知给出的指导性意见: • 摘要应放在第2页,即标题页之后 • 摘要应采用一段式,总结文章的主要发现,篇幅不超过150字 • 摘要后应列出10个用于收录和检索的关键词 一些杂志要求采用结构式摘要,分为背景、目的、方法、结果和结论。临床期刊可能要求额外或不同段落,如“patients”。因此,再次强调,在动笔之前应查阅目标杂志的《稿约》,确定杂志的具体版式或格式要求。 摘 要后经常需要列出由作者选择的关键词。《稿约》会指出要求列出多少个关键词,甚至提供可供参考的关键词清单。选择合适的关键词很重要,因为他们可作检索之 用。选择合适的关键词可以使你的文章更容易被发现和引用。因此,关键词越切合你的文章内容越好,应避免选择多数研究所适用的一般性术语。 实例:让为这个题目选择合适的关键词: “Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration” 好的关键词:okadoic acid、hippocampus、neuronal degeneration、MAP kinase signaling以及mouse (或是rat或其他实验动物)。 差的关键词:neuron、brain、OA (简写)、regional-specific neuronal degeneration以及signaling。这些词过于笼统。 英文原文 The snapshot: abstract and keywords Your paper’s abstract is critical because many researchers will read that part only, rather than reading the entire paper. Therefore, it is critical that it provides an accurate and sufficiently detailed summary of your work so that those researchers can understand what you did, why you did it, what your findings are, and why your findings are useful and important. Your abstract must be able to stand alone, that is, to function as an overview of your study that can be understood without reading the entire text. Readers who become interested in learning more details than can be included in the abstract will inevitably proceed to the full text. Therefore, the abstract does not need to be overly detailed; for example, it does not need to include a detailed methods section. Even though the abstract is one of the first parts of your paper, it should actually be written last. You should write it soon after finishing the other sections, while the rest of the manuscript is fresh in your mind, enabling you to write a concise but comprehensive summary of your study without overlooking anything important. Requirements for abstracts differ among journals, so the target journal’s instructions for authors should be consulted for specific details. Despite differences among journals, there are a few general rules that should be obeyed when writing an abstract: • The word limit should be observed; 250 words is probably about average and commonly adopted as a word limit for the abstract, but many journals request shorter abstracts (for example, Nature Articles and BBRC both have a 150-word limit) while many others (for example, BioMed Central journals) allow longer ones. This is one good reason why the target journal should be identified before you write your paper. • Technical jargon should be avoided so that the abstract is understandable for a broad readership, although what is considered “technical” may vary depending on the target journal’s audience (check the journal’s website for details of their readership). For example, “a test of anxiety” would generally be clearer than “elevated plus-maze test” in an abstract unless the journal was specifically targeted to behavioral researchers. Usually, there simply isn’t enough space in the abstract to define and explain technical terminology. If such terminology is unavoidable, it should be defined in simple terms where it is first used. • Like technical jargon, abbreviations should be limited as much as possible, although their acceptability may again depend on the target journal. For example, HIV is likely to be acceptable in abbreviated form by most journals. By contrast, RT-PCR might be considered acceptable by a journal reporting molecular biology techniques, but would it need to be spelt in full (reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction) in most journals at first use. Many journals provide a list of acceptable abbreviations on their websites. Necessary abbreviations used three or more times should be defined at first use; however, abbreviations used only once or twice should be spelled out in full unless doing so causes the word limit to be exceeded. Abbreviations that are defined in the abstract will need to be defined again at first use in the main text. • Although some journals do allow references to be cited in the abstract, the vast majority do not. Therefore, unless you plan to submit to a journal that allows it, you should not cite references in your abstract. If we look at the instructions to authors for BBRC, we can see the following guidelines: • The Abstract should be on page 2, i.e., after the title page • The Abstract must be a single paragraph that summarizes the main findings of the paper in fewer than 150 words. • A list of up to 10 keywords useful for indexing or searching should be included after the Abstract. Some journals request structured abstracts divided into sections such as background, objectives, methods, results, and conclusions. Clinical journals may require additional or alternative sections, such as ‘patients’. Therefore, it is again necessary to check the target journal’s instructions for authors to determine the particular formatting/outline requirements prior to writing. Abstracts are frequently followed by a list of keywords selected by the authors. The instructions for authors will state how many keywords are required and may even provide a list of recommended keywords. Choosing appropriate keywords is important, because these are used for indexing purposes. Well chosen keywords enable your manuscript to be more easily identified and cited. Thus, the keywords should be as specific to your manuscript as possible, and general terms, which could apply to an enormous number of studies, should be avoided. Examples: Let’s consider some appropriate keywords for the following title: “Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration”. Good keywords would be: okadaic acid, hippocampus, neuronal degeneration, MAP kinase signaling, and possibly mouse (or rat or whatever experimental animal was used). Poor keywords would be: neuron, brain, OA (as an abbreviation), regional-specific neuronal degeneration, and signaling. These terms are simply too general. Dr Daniel McGowan 分子神经学博士 理文编辑学术总监
讨论:你的研究有何意义? 已有 349 次阅读 2012-5-15 10:22 | 系统分类: 科研笔记 | 关键词:讨论 意义 英语国家 影响力 资料 “ 讨论”部分非常重要。在这部分,你要把“结果”中展示的证据线索和“引言”中的背景资料关联起来。遗憾的是,许多作者(特别是来自非英语国家的作者)常常不够重视“讨论”部分,认为只需把结果罗列出来,然后让读者自行去得出结论即可。但是,给出结果而不说明其意义只会造成随意解读,从而影响研究获得应有的影响力。而期刊编辑往往希望论文能推进该研究领域,并形成影响;所以有必要善用“讨论”部分来尽可能增强论文的影响力。 好的“讨论”可以在开头先重申一下“引言”中提出的研究问题和假设,接着总结一下你的主要研究结果。这样一来,读者对于你是否推进了该领域的研究就一目了然了。从最重要或最相关的结果写起,然后再转向相对次要的内容。此刻暂不要讨论有争议或者难以解释的结果。这个阶段,你只须描述那些能直接回答“引言”中提出的问题或与假设直接相关的主要结果。不要用那些数据不支持的“大而空”的语言,也不要夸大结果的重要性。用“suggests” 比用“shows”更好,切忌使用 “proves”。此外,要尽量不要重复结果”部分的内容,而只需简要说明主要结果然后再谈其含意。这部分需要变换时态,叙述你的结果以及文献结果时用过去时,论述其意义时用现在时。 “讨论”的第二部分常被忽视,并往往造成拒稿。重申问题和结果之后,还需要陈述其相关性和重要性。你需要把你的结果放在文献研究背景中加以比较,并讨论其意义。这部分构成了“讨论”主体;他告诉读者(当然还有编辑):从已有文献的基础上来评价,你的结果到底有什么意义?它们与其他研究者的工作之间存在什么关联。你的研究可能存在备择解释,对此应予提及并尽可能排除(或者至少论证它们的可能性很低)。如果仍有备择解释无法排除,你的研究就属于“尚未完成”,或者至少是“尚在进行中”;在这种情况下,你需要在“讨论”的结尾部分,提出将开展哪些实验来进一步排除备择解释或确认哪种解释才是正确的。 主要结果和背景的关系理清之后,就可以提及有争议或难以解释的发现,并提出可能的解释。没问题,这里你可以猜测,只要不要太过分。关键的问题是,你讨论和阐述了这些问题,而不是置之不理。“讨论”部分不能出现新术语或新结果;所有结果都该在“结果”部分叙述完整;所有术语也应在“引言”中就提出。最后,“讨论”部分要解释一下此研究的局限性。与其等审稿人指出,不如自己提出;这样也许反而会增加正面审稿意见从而缩短发表周期。一个研究存在局限性本身并不是问题,大多数研究都有这样那样的局限性。所以重要的是要承认它并提出在进一步研究中如何克服。在阐述完局限性之后往往紧接着就是描述未来的研究。 有些期刊有单独的“结论”部分;就算没有,也要在“讨论”的最后一段点明研究的结论。最后一段 (或最后一部分)应简要复述一下主要研究结果及其重要性,陈述该研究如何推进了本领域的研究,但不要用完全相同的语言。要提及结果的新颖性和重要性,但再说一次,不要夸大其词。如有必要可以提出进一步研究,如果本工作是初步研究则进一步研究可放在最后一句。若不是初步研究,就可以用明确的措施来总结本研究的影响,但仍要注意不要夸大其词。。 示例 下图节选自《The Journal of Clinical Investigation》上一论文的讨论部分(doi:10.1172/JCI37622; 经同意转载)。其中显示了讨论部分的一些要素,其末尾是一个结论段落。 核对清单 1. 开始先复述研究问题,然后陈述主要结果。 2. 过去时叙述结果,现在时谈意义。 3. 将研究结果同现有文献作比较,陈述其意义。 4. 陈述所有结果的意义,不要忽略那些“不便提及”的内容。 5. 不要在“结果”部分简单重复其他部分已有的内容,不得引入新术语/报告新结果,或夸大其词。 6. 给出本研究的局限性和将来研究方向。 7. 结尾用明确的措辞陈述本研究的相关性和重要性。 英文原文 Discussion: what does it all mean? The discussion section of your manuscript is critically important. It is where you pull together all the ‘threads’ of evidence you have presented in the results in the context of the background you presented in the introduction. Unfortunately, many authors, particularly those from non-English-speaking countries, overlook the importance of this section considering it sufficient to merely present their results and allow the reader to draw their own conclusions. However, presenting your results without describing their implications leaves them open to interpretation and reduces the impact they could have. Journal editors want papers that will advance the field and generate an impact; therefore, use the discussion wisely to maximize the impact of your findings. A good discussion will begin by restating the study question and any hypotheses presented in the introduction. This should be followed by a summary of the major findings of your study so that it is immediately clear how you have advanced the field. Start with the most important or relevant finding and then move to progressively less important ones. However, do not yet discuss results that are perhaps controversial or difficult to explain. At this stage you only want to describe the major findings that directly answer the research question you set out in the introduction and/or those that directly relate to your hypotheses. Avoid making grand statements that are not supported by your data and/or overstating the importance of your findings. The word “suggests” is preferable to “shows”, and the word “proves” should never be used. Also, there should be minimal repetition with the results section, with only brief descriptions of the main findings required before launching into their implications. A mixture of tenses is required, with the past tense used to describe individual results and the results of previous studies, and the present tense used to describe their implications. The next part is the component of a discussion that is often overlooked and a frequent cause of rejection from journals. Having reiterated your initial question and major findings, you need to describe their relevance and significance. This is where you put your findings into the context of previously published literature and discuss their implications. This part forms the bulk of the discussion section, showing the reader (and importantly, the journal editor) what your findings actually mean in the light of the existing literature and how they relate to the efforts of others. All possible alternative interpretations of your study should be described and excluded (or at least shown to be unlikely) wherever possible. If alternative interpretations remain viable, the study is considered ‘incomplete’, or at least ongoing, and experiments to rule out the alternatives or determine which of the alternatives is correct should be described at the end of the discussion section as future research. Once the major findings have been put into context, any controversial or difficult to explain findings should be mentioned along with plausible explanations for them. It is perfectly OK to speculate here (but not too wildly), but it is absolutely essential that these findings, and any inconsistencies, are discussed and addressed rather than ignored. No new results or terms should be introduced in the discussion section; all findings should be described in the results section and relevant terms will all have been introduced in the introduction section. Finally, any limitations of the current study should be explained. Peer reviewers are likely to comment on such limitations anyway, so it is best to be ‘up front’ about them and state what they were; doing so might even improve your chances of a positive peer review and thereby shorten the time to publication. The fact that your study has certain limitations is not a problem in itself, and most studies have limitations of some sort. It is therefore important to acknowledge these and describe how they can be addressed in future research. For this reason, the description of limitations is usually followed by a description of future research. Some journals have a separate conclusions section, but even in those that don’t, the same content should be merged with the discussion and contained in the last paragraph. This final section/paragraph should briefly restate the key findings and their significance, describing how your study represents an advance in the field, but avoiding direct repetition. The novelty and significance of these findings should be mentioned, but again, it is important not to over-emphasize either of these. Future studies should be mentioned where relevant, and can be the subject of the final sentence if the current study is preliminary. If your study is not preliminary, end with a strong statement that summarizes the impact of the study without over-stating its importance. Example The figure below, showing excerpts from the discussion section of paper published in The Journal of Clinical Investigation (doi:10.1172/JCI37622; reproduced with permission), shows some of the important components of a discussion section and the concluding paragraph at the end. Checklist 1. Start by restating the problem/research question and then state the main findings of your study 2. Describe results in the past tense, but implications in the present tense 3. Put findings in the context of the existing literature to describe their implications 4. Describe the implications of all results obtained; do not ignore ‘inconvenient’ ones 5. Avoid repetition, introducing new terms or results, and making grand statements about the importance of your findings 6. Describe the limitations of your study and future directions for research in the field 7. End with a strong statement describing the relevance and significance of your study Dr Daniel McGowan 分子神经学博士 理文编辑学术总监 本文引用地址: http://bbs.sciencenet.cn/blog-288924-571089.html
今天无意中发现一篇包含27个关键词的论文,不知是不是包含关键词最多的论文。该论文的相关信息如下: @ARTICLE{MR95, author = {Morgan, Byron J. T. and Ray, Andrew P. G.}, title = {Non-uniqueness and Inversions in Cluster Clustering}, journal = {Journal of the Royal Statistical Society. Series B (Applied Statistics)}, year = {1995}, volume = {44}, pages = {117--134}, number = {1}, abstract = {Care must be exercised when hierarchical methods of cluster analysis are used. Dendrograms may not be unique, and certain methods are prone to producing inversions. The nature and extend of these features are examined through two case-studies, and by applying seven methods to 20 data sets. Insufficient emphasis on the problems of non-uniqueness and of inversion is made in many text-books and also in computer packages and their manuals.}, file = {:E\:\\Clustering\\Non-uniqueness and Inversions in Cluster Analysis.pdf:PDF}, keywords = {Anorexia Nervosa; BMDP; Centroid Method; Cluster Analysis; Complete Link Analysis; Dendrograms; Genstat; Group Average Analysis; Hierarchical Methods; Inversion; Median Method; Non-uniqueness; NTSYS-pc; Phenograms; Pruned Trees; Reversals; SAS; Single-Link Analysis; S-PLUS; SPSS; STATGRAPHICS; UPGMA; UPGMC; Ward's Method; Weighted Average Analysis; WPGMA; WPGMC}, }
文章的摘要十分关键,因为很多研究人员只读摘要而不读全文。因此,摘要提供准确 而详尽的研究总结十分重要:它可以帮助研究人员了解你所开展的工作、你的研究目的和研究发现以及研究结果的益处和重要性。摘要必须能够独立成文,具备研究 概要的功能,使人不看全文就能读懂。在阅读摘要后对文章细节感兴趣的读者自然会继续阅读全文。因此摘要不必太面面俱到,例如,可不必列举方法细节。 尽 管摘要是论文的第一部分,但事实上应最后撰写。在完成其他部分后应尽快写摘要,因为这些内容依然清晰地印在你的脑海中,使你能够对自己的工作进行简明而全 面的总结,而不至于忽略任何重要的内容。不同期刊对摘要的撰写要求有所不同,因此应参照目标杂志的《稿约》了解具体要求。尽管杂志要求不同,但依然存在一 些普遍应遵守的惯例: • 应注意对字数的限制。通常来讲摘要的字数限制平均为250个词,但许多杂志要求更短些(如《Nature》和《BBRC》对摘要的篇幅限制为150个 字),而许多杂志(如《BioMed Central》)允许摘要篇幅稍长些。这充分说明了为什么应在写文章之前确定目标杂志。 • 应避免使用技术行话,从而使摘要更易懂,更具可读性。不同目标期刊的“技术行话”取决于杂志的读者情况(可以通过期刊网站查询)。例如:“焦虑测试”一词 通常比“高架十字迷宫实验”更容易理解,除非该杂志专门针对行为研究人员。通常摘要因受篇幅所限不能对技术术语进行定义和解释。如果术语使用不可避免,应 在首次提到时用简单的措辞加以定义。 • 如同技术术语一样,应尽量不使用缩略语,其可用性也取决于不同的目标期刊。例如,大多数杂志接受HIV的使用。相比之下,RT-PCR对于分子生物学技术 的杂志是可以接受的,但绝大多数杂志要求在首次使用时给出完整拼写(reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction)。许多杂志在网页上列出可使用的缩略语。反复使用三次或以上的必要的缩略语应在首次使用时给出完整拼写。只使用一次或两次的缩略语应使 用全称,除非这样做超出了字数要求。摘要中已给出全称的缩略语在正文中首次使用时也应给出全称。 • 尽管一些杂志允许在摘要中引用文献,但绝大多数杂志不允许引用文献。因此,除非你要投稿的杂志允许这样做,否则不应在摘要中引用文献。 以下是BBRC杂志作者须知给出的指导性意见: • 摘要应放在第2页,即标题页之后 • 摘要应采用一段式,总结文章的主要发现,篇幅不超过150字 • 摘要后应列出10个用于收录和检索的关键词 一些杂志要求采用结构式摘要,分为背景、目的、方法、结果和结论。临床期刊可能要求额外或不同段落,如“patients”。因此,再次强调,在动笔之前应查阅目标杂志的《稿约》,确定杂志的具体版式或格式要求。 摘 要后经常需要列出由作者选择的关键词。《稿约》会指出要求列出多少个关键词,甚至提供可供参考的关键词清单。选择合适的关键词很重要,因为他们可作检索之 用。选择合适的关键词可以使你的文章更容易被发现和引用。因此,关键词越切合你的文章内容越好,应避免选择多数研究所适用的一般性术语。 实例:让为这个题目选择合适的关键词: “Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration” 好的关键词:okadoic acid、hippocampus、neuronal degeneration、MAP kinase signaling以及mouse (或是rat或其他实验动物)。 差的关键词:neuron、brain、OA (简写)、regional-specific neuronal degeneration以及signaling。这些词过于笼统。 英文原文 The snapshot: abstract and keywords Your paper’s abstract is critical because many researchers will read that part only, rather than reading the entire paper. Therefore, it is critical that it provides an accurate and sufficiently detailed summary of your work so that those researchers can understand what you did, why you did it, what your findings are, and why your findings are useful and important. Your abstract must be able to stand alone, that is, to function as an overview of your study that can be understood without reading the entire text. Readers who become interested in learning more details than can be included in the abstract will inevitably proceed to the full text. Therefore, the abstract does not need to be overly detailed; for example, it does not need to include a detailed methods section. Even though the abstract is one of the first parts of your paper, it should actually be written last. You should write it soon after finishing the other sections, while the rest of the manuscript is fresh in your mind, enabling you to write a concise but comprehensive summary of your study without overlooking anything important. Requirements for abstracts differ among journals, so the target journal’s instructions for authors should be consulted for specific details. Despite differences among journals, there are a few general rules that should be obeyed when writing an abstract: • The word limit should be observed; 250 words is probably about average and commonly adopted as a word limit for the abstract, but many journals request shorter abstracts (for example, Nature Articles and BBRC both have a 150-word limit) while many others (for example, BioMed Central journals) allow longer ones. This is one good reason why the target journal should be identified before you write your paper. • Technical jargon should be avoided so that the abstract is understandable for a broad readership, although what is considered “technical” may vary depending on the target journal’s audience (check the journal’s website for details of their readership). For example, “a test of anxiety” would generally be clearer than “elevated plus-maze test” in an abstract unless the journal was specifically targeted to behavioral researchers. Usually, there simply isn’t enough space in the abstract to define and explain technical terminology. If such terminology is unavoidable, it should be defined in simple terms where it is first used. • Like technical jargon, abbreviations should be limited as much as possible, although their acceptability may again depend on the target journal. For example, HIV is likely to be acceptable in abbreviated form by most journals. By contrast, RT-PCR might be considered acceptable by a journal reporting molecular biology techniques, but would it need to be spelt in full (reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction) in most journals at first use. Many journals provide a list of acceptable abbreviations on their websites. Necessary abbreviations used three or more times should be defined at first use; however, abbreviations used only once or twice should be spelled out in full unless doing so causes the word limit to be exceeded. Abbreviations that are defined in the abstract will need to be defined again at first use in the main text. • Although some journals do allow references to be cited in the abstract, the vast majority do not. Therefore, unless you plan to submit to a journal that allows it, you should not cite references in your abstract. If we look at the instructions to authors for BBRC, we can see the following guidelines: • The Abstract should be on page 2, i.e., after the title page • The Abstract must be a single paragraph that summarizes the main findings of the paper in fewer than 150 words. • A list of up to 10 keywords useful for indexing or searching should be included after the Abstract. Some journals request structured abstracts divided into sections such as background, objectives, methods, results, and conclusions. Clinical journals may require additional or alternative sections, such as ‘patients’. Therefore, it is again necessary to check the target journal’s instructions for authors to determine the particular formatting/outline requirements prior to writing. Abstracts are frequently followed by a list of keywords selected by the authors. The instructions for authors will state how many keywords are required and may even provide a list of recommended keywords. Choosing appropriate keywords is important, because these are used for indexing purposes. Well chosen keywords enable your manuscript to be more easily identified and cited. Thus, the keywords should be as specific to your manuscript as possible, and general terms, which could apply to an enormous number of studies, should be avoided. Examples: Let’s consider some appropriate keywords for the following title: “Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration”. Good keywords would be: okadaic acid, hippocampus, neuronal degeneration, MAP kinase signaling, and possibly mouse (or rat or whatever experimental animal was used). Poor keywords would be: neuron, brain, OA (as an abbreviation), regional-specific neuronal degeneration, and signaling. These terms are simply too general. Dr Daniel McGowan 分子神经学博士 理文编辑学术总监
技术外溢、知识外溢的影响因素、研究方法文献综述 李剑 说明:对于过去一段时间的研究进行概览式文献回顾,综述并梳理一下思路。 关键词:技术外溢、技术溢出、知识溢出、知识外溢、度量、测度、研究模式、影响因素、产出回归、技术回归、收益率回归、外商直接投资、FDI,Foreign Direct Investment, technology spillovers, externalities, Knowledge spillovers 技术外溢,或者知识外溢,就是不需要付费,也能获得他人的技术或知识。有不可避免的外溢,例如新的设计方案。别人一看就学会了。也有故意的外溢,例如微软纵容中国的盗版破解。不管怎样,从他人那里免费获得技术,可以在一定程度上提高自身的技术水平,进而提高生产能力。 这个领域的关键问题是:技术外溢是不是存在?有哪些因素影响技术外溢?如何度量外溢程度?下面是一些关键文献。 一、技术外溢的影响因素 外资参股、行业特征、吸收能力、制度转型、地理因素。 代表性文献有:Aitken and Harrison(1999)、Cohen and Levinthal(1989)、Keller(2002)等。 二、技术外溢的研究模式 1.产出回归模式 Y=f(E,X)+u Y是本国的产出,E为外溢相关类指标(如FDI被怀疑具有外溢效应,则采用FDI的研发指标),X为控制变量。如果回归方程中E对Y具有显著正相关,则有技术外溢。(考虑内生性问题后) 优点:直接获得E外溢引起的增长效应。 缺点:增长效应是一个综合效应,无法甄别纯粹技术溢出的效应。 代表性文献:Aitken and Harrison(1999)。 该模式的拓展:以独特方法定义并计算出E。例如E定义为间接RD。采用投入产出表计算行业相似度,进而生成间接RD的数据。代表性文献:潘文卿等(2011)。 2.技术回归模式 TECH= (E,X)+u TECH为本国技术(可用TFP,专利数据等代理),如果回归方程中E对TECH有显著正相关,则有技术外溢。(考虑内生性问题后) 优点:甄别技术溢出效应 缺点:TECH的度量问题不完善,没有考虑到知识外部性对经济的本质影响——外部性引起收益率差异 代表性文献:Caves(1974), Coe and Helpman(1995), Keller(2002) 3.收益率度量模式 通过度量收益率差异来度量知识外部性。没有外部性,则收益率没有差异;外部性越强,收益率差异越大。但是在2009年以前,学术界只度量技术的社会收益率,没有度量过外部性引起的收益率差异——技术开发者的私人收益率和该项技术的社会收益率之间的差异。一项技术,即使社会收益率再高,如果保密得好,照样没有技术外溢。因此社会收益率虽然重要,但是用来度量技术外溢并不恰当。必须要用收益率差异来研究技术外溢。 3.1.社会收益率度量的代表性文献 :Jones and Williams(1998)。 3.2.收益率差异度量的代表性文献 :沈坤荣、李剑(2009),Li,et.al.(2011)。 前者在研发和外部性驱动的经济中利用C-D生产函数得到了度量收益率差异的方法;后者将沈坤荣、李剑(2009)的方法推广到一般化的知识外溢模型,并且不需要了解企业具体的生产函数形式。实际数据采集中,生产函数、生产成本等信息往往被认为商业机密,即使可用问卷调查获取,也不太可信。这就是私有信息采集难题。该方法巧妙克服了私有信息采集难题。 文献综述 关于技术外溢的影响因素和研究模式的文献综述见 李剑等(2009); 关于知识外溢对空间集聚、创新、区域增长等因素的影响的文献综述见 赵勇、白永秀(2009)。 相关技术扩散英文综述见 Keller(2004) 参考文献 Aitken, Brian J., and Ann E. Harrison. Do Domestic Firms Benefit from Direct Foreign Investment? Evidence from Venezuela . The American Economic Review, 1999, 89(3): 605-618. Caves, Richard E. Multinational Firms, Competition, and Productivity in Host-Country Markets Economica, 1974, 41(162): 176-193. Coe, David T., and Elhanan Helpman. International RD Spillovers . European Economic Review 1995, 39(5): 859-887. Cohen, Wesley M., and Daniel A. Levinthal. Innovation and Learning: The Two Faces of RD The Economic Journal, 1989, 99(397): 569-596. Jones, Charles I., and John C. Williams. Measuring the Social Return to RD . The Quarterly Journal of Economics, 1998, 113(4): 1119-1135. Keller, Wolfgang. Geographic Localization of International Technology Diffusion . The American Economic Review, 2002, 92(1): 120-142. Keller, Wolfgang. International Technology Diffusion. Journal of Economic Literature, 2004, 42(3): 752-782. Li, Jian, Kunrong Shen and Ru Zhang, Measuring Knowledge Spillovers: A Non-appropriable Returns Perspective , Annals of Economics and Finance, 2011, 12(2): 265-293. 潘文卿,李子奈,刘强. 中国产业间的技术溢出效应:基于35个工业部门的经验研究 . 经济研究 . 2011,(07) . 赵勇,白永秀, 知识溢出:一个文献综述. 经济研究,2009,(1). 李剑等.技术外溢的影响因素及其研究模式 ,现代经济探讨.2009,(6)。 沈坤荣 , 李剑 . 企业间技术外溢的测度 . 经济研究 . 2009, (04) 。
文章的摘要十分关键,因为很多研究人员只读摘要而不读全文。因此,摘要提供准确而详尽的研究总结十分重要:它可以帮助研究人员了解你所开展的工作、你的研究目的和研究发现以及研究结果的益处和重要性。摘要必须能够独立成文,具备研究概要的功能,使人不看全文就能读懂。在阅读摘要后对文章细节感兴趣的读者自然会继续阅读全文。因此摘要不必太面面俱到,例如,可不必列举方法细节。 尽管摘要是论文的第一部分,但事实上应最后撰写。在完成其他部分后应尽快写摘要,因为这些内容依然清晰地印在你的脑海中,使你能够对自己的工作进行简明而全面的总结,而不至于忽略任何重要的内容。不同期刊对摘要的撰写要求有所不同,因此应参照目标杂志的《稿约》了解具体要求。尽管杂志要求不同,但依然存在一些普遍应遵守的惯例: • 应注意对字数的限制。通常来讲摘要的字数限制平均为250个词,但许多杂志要求更短些(如《Nature》和《BBRC》对摘要的篇幅限制为150个字),而许多杂志(如《BioMed Central》)允许摘要篇幅稍长些。这充分说明了为什么应在写文章之前确定目标杂志。 • 应避免使用技术行话,从而使摘要更易懂,更具可读性。不同目标期刊的“技术行话”取决于杂志的读者情况(可以通过期刊网站查询)。例如:“焦虑测试”一词通常比“高架十字迷宫实验”更容易理解,除非该杂志专门针对行为研究人员。通常摘要因受篇幅所限不能对技术术语进行定义和解释。如果术语使用不可避免,应在首次提到时用简单的措辞加以定义。 • 如同技术术语一样,应尽量不使用缩略语,其可用性也取决于不同的目标期刊。例如,大多数杂志接受HIV的使用。相比之下,RT-PCR对于分子生物学技术的杂志是可以接受的,但绝大多数杂志要求在首次使用时给出完整拼写(reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction)。许多杂志在网页上列出可使用的缩略语。反复使用三次或以上的必要的缩略语应在首次使用时给出完整拼写。只使用一次或两次的缩略语应使用全称,除非这样做超出了字数要求。摘要中已给出全称的缩略语在正文中首次使用时也应给出全称。 • 尽管一些杂志允许在摘要中引用文献,但绝大多数杂志不允许引用文献。因此,除非你要投稿的杂志允许这样做,否则不应在摘要中引用文献。 以下是BBRC杂志作者须知给出的指导性意见: • 摘要应放在第2页,即标题页之后 • 摘要应采用一段式,总结文章的主要发现,篇幅不超过150字 • 摘要后应列出10个用于收录和检索的关键词 一些杂志要求采用结构式摘要,分为背景、目的、方法、结果和结论。临床期刊可能要求额外或不同段落,如“patients”。因此,再次强调,在动笔之前应查阅目标杂志的《稿约》,确定杂志的具体版式或格式要求。 摘要后经常需要列出由作者选择的关键词。《稿约》会指出要求列出多少个关键词,甚至提供可供参考的关键词清单。选择合适的关键词很重要,因为他们可作检索之用。选择合适的关键词可以使你的文章更容易被发现和引用。因此,关键词越切合你的文章内容越好,应避免选择多数研究所适用的一般性术语。 实例:让为这个题目选择合适的关键词: “Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration” 好的关键词:okadoic acid、hippocampus、neuronal degeneration、MAP kinase signaling以及mouse (或是rat或其他实验动物)。 差的关键词:neuron、brain、OA (简写)、regional-specific neuronal degeneration以及signaling。这些词过于笼统。 练习: 丁香园网友应邀贴出自己的摘要,Dr. McGowan对结构和效果给出反馈意见。大家积极跟贴响应,其中不乏一些好的摘要,此处以“Skye2749”贴出的摘要为例: Abstract AIM: To study the physiological activities of ** on gastrointestinal tract. METHODS: The property of ** on the smooth muscle contractions of the isolated rabbit jejunum was investigated. RESULTS: Lower doses of ** (≤ 400 μg/mL) potentiated the tension of spontaneous muscle contractions. At a concentration of 80 μg/mL, ** increase the contractile tension by 23.10 ± 2.16% (P 0.01) relative to baseline values. On the other hand, higher doses ( 400 μg/mL) of ** induced relaxation, which may be due to the attenuated tension and frequency. Furthermore, atropine (10 μM) but not NE (1 μM) partially inhibited ** -induced smooth muscle contractions suggesting that cholinergic nerves were involved. Moreover, the M3 receptor 4-DAMP (10 μM), but not the nicotinic receptor antagonist hexamethonium (10 μM) or M2 receptor antagonist methoctramine (10 μM) reduced the stimulant effect of CO. In addition, pretreatment of the tissues with verapamil (0.1 μM), significantly (P 0.01) decreased ** -induced contractility. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that M3 muscarinic receptor and Ca2+ influx mediate ** -induced muscle contractions. These provide evidence for the use of ** in GI disorders. Key words: **; Intestinal smooth muscle; Rabbit jejunum; Calcium; Muscarinic receptor; M3 receptor 尽管有几处语言问题,这个摘要还是以不足200字的叙述传达出了所有的必要信息。其中十分清晰地表明了该研究的目的、都进行了哪些操作、有何发现以及这些发现的意义。我建议“Skye2749”进行如下修改以改善摘要的清晰性和可读性: The snapshot: abstract and keywords Your paper’s abstract is critical because many researchers will read that part only, rather than reading the entire paper. Therefore, it is critical that it provides an accurate and sufficiently detailed summary of your work so that those researchers can understand what you did, why you did it, what your findings are, and why your findings are useful and important. Your abstract must be able to stand alone, that is, to function as an overview of your study that can be understood without reading the entire text. Readers who become interested in learning more details than can be included in the abstract will inevitably proceed to the full text. Therefore, the abstract does not need to be overly detailed; for example, it does not need to include a detailed methods section. Even though the abstract is one of the first parts of your paper, it should actually be written last. You should write it soon after finishing the other sections, while the rest of the manuscript is fresh in your mind, enabling you to write a concise but comprehensive summary of your study without overlooking anything important. Requirements for abstracts differ among journals, so the target journal’s instructions for authors should be consulted for specific details. Despite differences among journals, there are a few general rules that should be obeyed when writing an abstract: • The word limit should be observed; 250 words is probably about average and commonly adopted as a word limit for the abstract, but many journals request shorter abstracts (for example, Nature Articles and BBRC both have a 150-word limit) while many others (for example, BioMed Central journals) allow longer ones. This is one good reason why the target journal should be identified before you write your paper. • Technical jargon should be avoided so that the abstract is understandable for a broad readership, although what is considered “technical” may vary depending on the target journal’s audience (check the journal’s website for details of their readership). For example, “a test of anxiety” would generally be clearer than “elevated plus-maze test” in an abstract unless the journal was specifically targeted to behavioral researchers. Usually, there simply isn’t enough space in the abstract to define and explain technical terminology. If such terminology is unavoidable, it should be defined in simple terms where it is first used. • Like technical jargon, abbreviations should be limited as much as possible, although their acceptability may again depend on the target journal. For example, HIV is likely to be acceptable in abbreviated form by most journals. By contrast, RT-PCR might be considered acceptable by a journal reporting molecular biology techniques, but would it need to be spelt in full (reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction) in most journals at first use. Many journals provide a list of acceptable abbreviations on their websites. Necessary abbreviations used three or more times should be defined at first use; however, abbreviations used only once or twice should be spelled out in full unless doing so causes the word limit to be exceeded. Abbreviations that are defined in the abstract will need to be defined again at first use in the main text. • Although some journals do allow references to be cited in the abstract, the vast majority do not. Therefore, unless you plan to submit to a journal that allows it, you should not cite references in your abstract. If we look at the instructions to authors for BBRC, we can see the following guidelines: • The Abstract should be on page 2, i.e., after the title page • The Abstract must be a single paragraph that summarizes the main findings of the paper in fewer than 150 words. • A list of up to 10 keywords useful for indexing or searching should be included after the Abstract. Some journals request structured abstracts divided into sections such as background, objectives, methods, results, and conclusions. Clinical journals may require additional or alternative sections, such as ‘patients’. Therefore, it is again necessary to check the target journal’s instructions for authors to determine the particular formatting/outline requirements prior to writing. Abstracts are frequently followed by a list of keywords selected by the authors. The instructions for authors will state how many keywords are required and may even provide a list of recommended keywords. Choosing appropriate keywords is important, because these are used for indexing purposes. Well chosen keywords enable your manuscript to be more easily identified and cited. Thus, the keywords should be as specific to your manuscript as possible, and general terms, which could apply to an enormous number of studies, should be avoided. Examples: Let’s consider some appropriate keywords for the following title: “Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration”. Good keywords would be: okadaic acid, hippocampus, neuronal degeneration, MAP kinase signaling, and possibly mouse (or rat or whatever experimental animal was used). Poor keywords would be: neuron, brain, OA (as an abbreviation), regional-specific neuronal degeneration, and signaling. These terms are simply too general. Networking scientists were invited to post their own abstracts to receive feedback on their construction and impact. Many abstracts were posted, including some excellent ones. Among them was the following abstract from Skye2749: Abstract AIM: To study the physiological activities of ** on gastrointestinal tract. METHODS: The property of ** on the smooth muscle contractions of the isolated rabbit jejunum was investigated. RESULTS: Lower doses of ** (≤ 400 μg/mL) potentiated the tension of spontaneous muscle contractions. At a concentration of 80 μg/mL, ** increase the contractile tension by 23.10 ± 2.16% (P 0.01) relative to baseline values. On the other hand, higher doses ( 400 μg/mL) of ** induced relaxation, which may be due to the attenuated tension and frequency. Furthermore, atropine (10 μM) but not NE (1 μM) partially inhibited ** -induced smooth muscle contractions suggesting that cholinergic nerves were involved. Moreover, the M3 receptor 4-DAMP (10 μM), but not the nicotinic receptor antagonist hexamethonium (10 μM) or M2 receptor antagonist methoctramine (10 μM) reduced the stimulant effect of CO. In addition, pretreatment of the tissues with verapamil (0.1 μM), significantly (P 0.01) decreased ** -induced contractility. CONCLUSION: The findings suggest that M3 muscarinic receptor and Ca2+ influx mediate ** -induced muscle contractions. These provide evidence for the use of ** in GI disorders. Key words: **; Intestinal smooth muscle; Rabbit jejunum; Calcium; Muscarinic receptor; M3 receptor Although there were a couple of minor problems with the English, this abstract conveys all the necessary pieces of information in under 200 words. It is very clear why the study was performed, what was done, what was found and what these findings mean. I suggested Skye2749 make the following changes to the abstract to improve its clarity and readability: Dr Daniel McGowan 分子神经学博士 理文编辑学术总监
【摘要】在语言学的研究中,预设是一个常常被提及的概念。一般说来,预设可以被分为语义预设和语用预设。语义预设是句子之间的语义关系,研究语句的真值情况。本文概述了预设这一概念的提出和语义预设的概念,并分析了其特征及分类。 【关键词】语义预设;特征;分类 作为语言学中一个重要分支,语用学“研究某一语言的言者如何使用句子成功地进行交际” 84。预presupposition),也称前提、前设、先设,是语言学中一个重要概念。这一概念具有“较大的可塑性” 66,不同语言学家对其理解和定义也不尽相同。然而,语言学家普遍认为,预设这一概念“至少体现出两种不同层次上的关系:语言体系内句子构成成分间的关系和言语过程中说话人与语句的关系” 211。与之相对应,预设可以被划分为两种类型:语义预设(semantic presupposition)和语用预设(pragmatic presupposition)。前者属于语义学的研究范畴,后者属于语用学的研究范畴。 一、预设概念的提出与发展 预设这一概念最初出现在哲学领域, 最早由德国著名哲学家、数学家,现代逻辑学奠基人之一Gottlob Frege(1848-1925)提出的。Frege的预设理论可以概况如下:“(1)指称短语和(例如)时间分句均有所指,因此具有前提;(2)一句句子和它的否定形式具有同样的前提;(3)句子或声言,不论真实或谬误,其前提必须成立。”二十世纪六七十年代,预设这一概念引起了语言学家的注意。而语言学家对预设的关注,首先开始于对语义关系的研究。于是他们从语句的意义或命题的真假值这一角度,提出语义预设的概念。1973 年后,逐渐兴起的语用学又为预设的研究提供了新的视角,进而语言学家提出语用预设的概念。 二、语义预设的概念 语义预设是两个句子或命题之间的一种语义关系,它“依附于语言的表层结构,是句子意义得以形成的基础,其根本特征是无论在什么样的言语行为中,句子本身及其预设应是恒定的” 211。语义预设的概念建立在句子真假值的基础之上,和句子本身的意义有着密切的关系。 当命题a 和命题b 同时满足以下三个条件关系: 如果a 为真,则b 为真; 如果a 为假,b 仍为真; 如果b 为假,则a 不存在真值或假值的问题,即a 是不可能存在的命题。 此时,命题b 是命题a 的预设;换言之,命题a 预设命题b。 例如: a. His brother is a marketing manager. b. He has a brother. 显而易见,当a 为真时,b 也为真; a’. His brother isn’t a marketing manager.(a 的否定形式) b. He has a brother. 由此可见,当a 为假,b 依然为真; a. His brother is a marketing manager. b’.He doesn’t have a brother.(b 的否定形式) 由此可见,在b 为假的情况下,a 中的“his brother”就没有了所指,因此句子a 也就没有真值可言,即a 是不可能存在的命题。从上面的例子中可以看出,句子b 是句子a 的预设,或者说,句子a 预设句子b。 和传统的标准逻辑不同,语义预设不是二值逻辑(只有真、假两个值),而属于三值逻辑(即有真值、假值和无意义三个值)。 三、语义预设的特征 作为“语言内部语义关系的一种本质属性” 69,语义预设具有以下几个方面的特征: 1.语义预设“受到人们普遍接受的逻辑规律的限制” 161,因此对于句子或命题的语义预设分析,“仅仅是根据逻辑和语法来考察” 119 的。例如: a. The movie I watched yesterday is amusing. b. I watched a movie yesterday. 根据“人们普遍接受的逻辑语义” 148,很容易看出,这两个句子中句子a 以句子b 为预设。 2.“如果句中没有名词或者确定描述没有所指(即预设为假)时,整个句子没有真值可言。” 119 也就是说,“ 语义预设 是语句获得真值的必要条件” 66,如果语义预设是假的,那么语句就没有真值假值可言,就变得毫无意义了。 例如: The king of the United States is kind-hearted. 在这个句子中,“the king of the United States”没有所指,即语义预设得不到满足,于是整个句子没有意义。 3.语义预设具有稳定性。 语义预设的稳定性是指,“对语句加以否定或提出提问不仅不会否定或怀疑‘预设’,反而更加说明‘预设’为真” 66-67。 例如: a.The movie that Tim watched yesterday is amusing. b.The movie that Tim watched yesterday isn’t amusing. c.Is the movie that Tim watched yesterday amusing? d.Where did Tim watch the movie yesterday? e.Tim watched a movie. 以上五个句子中,句子a 的预设为句子e;对句子a 进行否定,得到句子b,其预设仍为句子e;对句子a 提出疑问,得到一般疑问句c和特殊疑问句d,且句子c 和d 的预设仍为句子e。 4.语义预设具有可变性。 语义预设的可变性是指,语义预设“会受到语句焦点的影响” 149,随着焦点的变化而变化。通常情况下,英语句子的语调核心位于句子中最后一个重读音节上。但有时为了突出强调句中的某一成分,会把语调核心转移到这个所要强调的成分上,显示出对比,达到强调的效果。例如: a.'Ben broke the valuable vase. b.Ben 'broke the valuable vase. c.Ben broke the 'valuable vase. d.Ben broke the valuable 'vase. (符号“ ' ”表示该词在句中的重读) 句子a 的焦点在Ben 上,预设是交际双方都知道有人打破了一个名贵的花瓶,但是受话人不知道是谁打破的,于是发话人以Ben 为焦点,告诉对方名贵的花瓶是Ben 打破的。 句子b 的焦点在broke 上,预设是交际双方都知道Ben 对一个名贵的花瓶做了某些事情,但是受话人不知道Ben 的具体行为,于是发话人以broke 为焦点,告诉对方Ben 把名贵的花瓶打破了。 句子c 的焦点在valuable 上,预设是交际双方都知道Ben 打破了花瓶, 但是受话人不知道Ben 打破的是怎样的花瓶, 于是发话人以valuable 为焦点,告诉对方Ben 所打破的花瓶是名贵的。 句子d 的焦点在vase 上, 预设是交际双方都知道Ben 打破了一件名贵的东西,但是受话人不知道那件名贵的东西究竟是什么,于是发话人以vase 为焦点,告诉对方Ben 打破的是一只名贵的花瓶。 在这里需要强调一点,以上所说的随着语句焦点的变化预设也发生变化,指的是通过“移动句子的语调核心” 296 使得句中的某一成分得到凸显和强调,从而使得预设有所改变。也就是说,预设的产生和改变是建立在使用音系手段的基础之上的。事实上,预设能够在音系、句法和语义这三个不同的语言层次上产生。因此,除了使用音系手段外,我们也可以使用句法和音系相结合的手段使得预设有所改变。如: It was 'Ben who broke the valuable vase. What did Ben do with the valuable vase is that he 'broke it. The vase that Ben broke is a 'valuable one. It is a valuable 'vase that Ben broke. 显然,尽管使用的方法不同,所达到的效果是一致的,即都使预设发生了改变。 四、语义预设的分类 语义预设可以分为两类:命题性预设和非命题性预设。“存在于两个命题之间的预设关系为命题性预设;存在于命题与非命题之间的预设关系为非命题性预设。” 67 换言之,陈述句与其预设之间的关系是命题性的,而疑问句、祈使句和感叹句与其预设之间的关系是非命题性的。 例如: a.The novel that you borrowed from the library is interesting. b.The novel that you borrowed from the library isn’t interesting. c.Is the novel that you borrowed from the library interesting? d.When did you borrow the novel from the library? e.Please return the novel that you borrowed from the library as soonas possible. f.You borrowed a book from the library. 以上句子中,句子a、b、c、d、e 都是以句子f 为预设的。然而陈述句a、b 与f 之间的预设关系是命题性预设,而一般疑问句c、特殊疑问句d、祈使句e 与f 之间的预设关系是非命题性预设。 五、结语 本文简述了预设这一概念的提出及其哲学渊源,分析了语义预设的概念及其特征。作为两个句子或命题之间的一种语义关系,语义预设受到人们普遍接受的逻辑规律的限制,具有稳定性和可变性,同时当句中没有名词或者确定描述没有所指时, 整个句子无真值可言,也就无意义。 本文并未对语义预设和语用预设的区分问题进行深入探讨。事实上,在这一问题上,语言学界一直存在着分歧,语言学家仍无法准确区分语义预设和语用预设的界限,正如Jean Stilwell Peccei 指出的那样,“语义预设和语用预设的界定是模糊不清的(fuzzy)” 19。因此这一问题还有待我们进行进一步的研究和探索 【参考文献】 [1]戴炜栋、何兆熊. 新编简明英语语言学教程 .上海:上海外语教育出版社,2002. [2]俞如珍、语义预设、语用预设和会话含义 .重庆:四川外语学院学报,1996,(1):66-70. [3]郭聿楷、何英玉.语义学概论 .北京:外语教学与研究出版社,2002. [4]何兆熊、新编语用学概要 .上海:上海外语教育出版社,2000. [5]范晓,陈忠.预设和蕴含 .信阳:信阳师范学院学报,2002,22(5):68-73. [6]汪大昌、普通语言学纲要 .北京:北京大学出版社,2004. [7]杨年保、语义预设与语用预设研究 .岳阳:云梦学刊,2005,26(3):119-121. [8]何自然、语用学概论 .长沙:湖南教育出版社,1988. [9]Jean Stilwell Peccei. Pragmatics .Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press, London and New York:Rountledge,2000. 作者简介:宋瑶(1983—),女,满族,河南省郑州市人,杭州电子科技大学外国语学院硕士研究生在读,研究方向:外国语言学及应用语言学。
文章的摘要十分关键,因为很多研究人员只读摘要而不读全文。因此,摘要提供准确而详尽的研究总结十分重要:它可以帮助研究人员了解你所开展的工作、你的研究目的和研究发现以及研究结果的益处和重要性。摘要必须能够独立成文,具备研究概要的功能,使人不看全文就能读懂。在阅读摘要后对文章细节感兴趣的读者自然会继续阅读全文。因此摘要不必太面面俱到,例如,可不必列举方法细节。 尽管摘要是论文的第一部分,但事实上应最后撰写。在完成其他部分后应尽快写摘要,因为这些内容依然清晰地印在你的脑海中,使你能够对自己的工作进行简明而全面的总结,而不至于忽略任何重要的内容。不同期刊对摘要的撰写要求有所不同,因此应参照目标杂志的《稿约》了解具体要求。尽管杂志要求不同,但依然存在一些普遍应遵守的惯例: • 应注意对字数的限制。通常来讲摘要的字数限制平均为250个词,但许多杂志要求更短些(如《Nature》和《BBRC》对摘要的篇幅限制为150个字),而许多杂志(如《BioMed Central》)允许摘要篇幅稍长些。这充分说明了为什么应在写文章之前确定目标杂志。 • 应避免使用技术行话,从而使摘要更易懂,更具可读性。不同目标期刊的“技术行话”取决于杂志的读者情况(可以通过期刊网站查询)。例如:“焦虑测试”一词通常比“高架十字迷宫实验”更容易理解,除非该杂志专门针对行为研究人员。通常摘要因受篇幅所限不能对技术术语进行定义和解释。如果术语使用不可避免,应在首次提到时用简单的措辞加以定义。 • 如同技术术语一样,应尽量不使用缩略语,其可用性也取决于不同的目标期刊。例如,大多数杂志接受HIV的使用。相比之下,RT-PCR对于分子生物学技术的杂志是可以接受的,但绝大多数杂志要求在首次使用时给出完整拼写(reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction)。许多杂志在网页上列出可使用的缩略语。反复使用三次或以上的必要的缩略语应在首次使用时给出完整拼写。只使用一次或两次的缩略语应使用全称,除非这样做超出了字数要求。摘要中已给出全称的缩略语在正文中首次使用时也应给出全称。 • 尽管一些杂志允许在摘要中引用文献,但绝大多数杂志不允许引用文献。因此,除非你要投稿的杂志允许这样做,否则不应在摘要中引用文献。 以下是BBRC杂志作者须知给出的指导性意见: • 摘要应放在第2页,即标题页之后 • 摘要应采用一段式,总结文章的主要发现,篇幅不超过150字 • 摘要后应列出10个用于收录和检索的关键词 一些杂志要求采用结构式摘要,分为背景、目的、方法、结果和结论。临床期刊可能要求额外或不同段落,如“patients”。因此,再次强调,在动笔之前应查阅目标杂志的《稿约》,确定杂志的具体版式或格式要求。 摘要后经常需要列出由作者选择的关键词。《稿约》会指出要求列出多少个关键词,甚至提供可供参考的关键词清单。选择合适的关键词很重要,因为他们可作检索之用。选择合适的关键词可以使你的文章更容易被发现和引用。因此,关键词越切合你的文章内容越好,应避免选择多数研究所适用的一般性术语。 实例:让为这个题目选择合适的关键词: “Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration” 好的关键词:okadoic acid、hippocampus、neuronal degeneration、MAP kinase signaling以及mouse (或是rat或其他实验动物)。 差的关键词:neuron、brain、OA (简写)、regional-specific neuronal degeneration以及signaling。这些词过于笼统。 英文原文 The snapshot: abstract and keywords Your paper’s abstract is critical because many researchers will read that part only, rather than reading the entire paper. Therefore, it is critical that it provides an accurate and sufficiently detailed summary of your work so that those researchers can understand what you did, why you did it, what your findings are, and why your findings are useful and important. Your abstract must be able to stand alone, that is, to function as an overview of your study that can be understood without reading the entire text. Readers who become interested in learning more details than can be included in the abstract will inevitably proceed to the full text. Therefore, the abstract does not need to be overly detailed; for example, it does not need to include a detailed methods section. Even though the abstract is one of the first parts of your paper, it should actually be written last. You should write it soon after finishing the other sections, while the rest of the manuscript is fresh in your mind, enabling you to write a concise but comprehensive summary of your study without overlooking anything important. Requirements for abstracts differ among journals, so the target journal’s instructions for authors should be consulted for specific details. Despite differences among journals, there are a few general rules that should be obeyed when writing an abstract: • The word limit should be observed; 250 words is probably about average and commonly adopted as a word limit for the abstract, but many journals request shorter abstracts (for example, Nature Articles and BBRC both have a 150-word limit) while many others (for example, BioMed Central journals) allow longer ones. This is one good reason why the target journal should be identified before you write your paper. • Technical jargon should be avoided so that the abstract is understandable for a broad readership, although what is considered “technical” may vary depending on the target journal’s audience (check the journal’s website for details of their readership). For example, “a test of anxiety” would generally be clearer than “elevated plus-maze test” in an abstract unless the journal was specifically targeted to behavioral researchers. Usually, there simply isn’t enough space in the abstract to define and explain technical terminology. If such terminology is unavoidable, it should be defined in simple terms where it is first used. • Like technical jargon, abbreviations should be limited as much as possible, although their acceptability may again depend on the target journal. For example, HIV is likely to be acceptable in abbreviated form by most journals. By contrast, RT-PCR might be considered acceptable by a journal reporting molecular biology techniques, but would it need to be spelt in full (reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction) in most journals at first use. Many journals provide a list of acceptable abbreviations on their websites. Necessary abbreviations used three or more times should be defined at first use; however, abbreviations used only once or twice should be spelled out in full unless doing so causes the word limit to be exceeded. Abbreviations that are defined in the abstract will need to be defined again at first use in the main text. • Although some journals do allow references to be cited in the abstract, the vast majority do not. Therefore, unless you plan to submit to a journal that allows it, you should not cite references in your abstract. If we look at the instructions to authors for BBRC, we can see the following guidelines: • The Abstract should be on page 2, i.e., after the title page • The Abstract must be a single paragraph that summarizes the main findings of the paper in fewer than 150 words. • A list of up to 10 keywords useful for indexing or searching should be included after the Abstract. Some journals request structured abstracts divided into sections such as background, objectives, methods, results, and conclusions. Clinical journals may require additional or alternative sections, such as ‘patients’. Therefore, it is again necessary to check the target journal’s instructions for authors to determine the particular formatting/outline requirements prior to writing. Abstracts are frequently followed by a list of keywords selected by the authors. The instructions for authors will state how many keywords are required and may even provide a list of recommended keywords. Choosing appropriate keywords is important, because these are used for indexing purposes. Well chosen keywords enable your manuscript to be more easily identified and cited. Thus, the keywords should be as specific to your manuscript as possible, and general terms, which could apply to an enormous number of studies, should be avoided. Examples: Let’s consider some appropriate keywords for the following title: “Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration”. Good keywords would be: okadaic acid, hippocampus, neuronal degeneration, MAP kinase signaling, and possibly mouse (or rat or whatever experimental animal was used). Poor keywords would be: neuron, brain, OA (as an abbreviation), regional-specific neuronal degeneration, and signaling. These terms are simply too general. Dr Daniel McGowan 分子神经学博士 理文编辑学术总监
如何从数以亿计的文献中,挖掘自己所需要的信息是一件十分复杂的事情。尽管,我们可以通过编程语言的处理就可达到目的,但是互联网中各种不同格式的网页或文本,其字段、关键词、数据、表格、链接抓取等并不是那么容易,特别是pdf文献中那些各种版式的表格、图片、关键语句的获取更是不太容易。这里首推SciMiner。 SciMiner是一个基于网页服务的生物文献挖掘工具。具体可从这个站点了解: http://jdrf.neurology.med.umich.edu/SciMiner/ 。这个工具采用lighttpd驱动,结合数据库Mysql,进行文献的批量挖掘。要下载它,需要使用学术单位邮件地址向进行申请。当前,这个软件包有两种类型,一种可以自行安装配置的核心包,大小145M,而另一种则是预配置好的VmwarePlayer包(即是说,可以利用虚拟机VmwarePlayer直接使用),大小1.1G。核心包的安装需要以下组件或库文件支持(来自SciMiner安装手册): MySQL database ImageMagick Web-server (如Lighttpd) CGI Perl Perl模组: Boulder::Medline;YAML;Text::NSP;CGI::Debug;CGI::Simple;CGI::Session;CGI::Application; HTML::Template;Data::Dumper;Unicode::String;XML::XPath;Spreadsheet::WriteExcel 这个工具推荐使用Linux系统来安装使用,比如可使用 BioInfoServ 4.0 来安装使用,可省去windows中不必要的麻烦。至于具体的安装配置教程,有空找个时间写个文档出来,供大家参考。 其他的挖掘工具还有很多,下面 这个网页 就值得参考: Tools for Literature-based Discovery Sites that Augment the Standard PubMed Search Service. Sites that are, or Contain Lists of, Search Engines that include Biomedical Topics Sites that are devoted to genes, proteins, and other bioinformatic resources Knowledge Environments (Information Portals, Online Communities) Resources and Tools for Text representation and Visualization General Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery Sites Listservs
孔融“父母于子女无恩论”申义 关键词 : 父母于子女无恩论 http://mraz.bokee.com/3952851.html 二到三世纪的孔融(一五三——二○八),字文举,山东曲阜人。他是孔子第二十世孙子,他“幼有异才”,十岁时就登门见李膺,《后汉书》写这段故事,说: 融幼有异才。年十岁,随父诣京师。时河南尹李膺以简重自居,不妄接士宾客,敕外自非当世名人及与通家,皆不得白。融欲观其人,故造膺门。语门者曰:“我是李君通家子弟。”门者言之。膺请融,问曰:“高明祖父尝与仆有恩旧乎仰融口:“然,先君孔于与君先人李老君同德比义,而相师友,则融与君累世通家。”众坐莫不叹息。太中大夫陈炜后至,坐中以告炜。炜曰:“夫人小而聪了,大未必奇。”融应声曰:“观君所言,将不早惠乎?”膺大笑曰:“高明必为伟器。” 孔融十六岁就坐了牢,为的是通辑犯张俭到孔家来避难,孔融替哥哥孔褒做主,收留了张俭。事发后孔融说他该负责,孔褒说“彼来求我,非弟之过”。他们母亲说她是家长,她该负责。“—门争死”,侠义感人。后来皇帝决定由孔褒负责,孔融就出了狱。 孔融做青州刺史,被袁谭围攻,自春至夏,守城的只剩下几百人了,危在旦夕,但是他“隐几读书,谈笑自若”。城陷之夜,他妻子被俘,他得以逃出。 孔融反对恢复肉刑、反对曹丕私纳袁绍儿媳妇、反对曹操禁酒。……跟曹操不合。小人郗虑从中搞鬼,最后由路粹罗织孔融罪名,说他“招合徒众,欲规不轨”,说他“谤讪朝廷”、“不遵朝仪”、“大逆不道”。于是孔融又第二次入狱,最后全家被杀,年五十六岁。《后汉书》记这一惨剧始末如下: 曹操既积嫌忌,而郗虑复构成其罪,遂令丞相军谋祭酒路粹枉状奏融曰:“少府孔融,昔在北海,见王室不静,而招合徒众,欲规不轨,云‘我大圣之后,而见灭于宋,有天下者,何必卯金刀’。及与孙权使语,谤讪朝廷。又融为九列,不遵朝仪,秃巾微行,唐突宫掖。又前与白衣祢衡跌荡放言,云‘父之于子,当有何亲?论其本意,实为情欲发耳!子之于母,亦复奚为?譬如寄物 缻中,出则离矣!’既而与衡更相赞扬。衡谓融曰:‘仲尼不死。’融答曰:‘颜回复生。’大逆不道,宜极重诛。”书奏,下狱弃市,时年五十六,妻子皆被诛。 初,女年七岁,男年九岁,以其幼弱得全,寄它舍。二子方弈棋,融被收而不动。左右曰:“父执而不起,何也?”答曰:“安有巢毁而卵不破乎!”主人有遗肉汁,男渴而饮之。女曰:“今日之祸,岂得久活,何赖知肉味平?”兄号泣而止。或言于曹操,遂尽杀之。及收至,谓兄曰:“若死者有知,得见父母,岂非至愿!”乃延颈就刑,颜色不变,莫不伤之。 孔融是东汉末年的大名士,又是“建安七子”的龙头老大,在政治见解上,他不脱名士气,“理不胜词”,并不怎么高明;但在哲学见解上,他的“父母于子无恩论”,倒是最有气派的,他最后殉道而死,主要罪名也就在此。在路粹检举孔融罪状后,曹操“宣示孔融罪状令”中下结论:“此州人说,平原祢衡受融传论,以为父母与人无亲,譬如 缻器,寄盛其中。……融违天反道,败伦乱理。”结论这样一下,就杀人了。 在孔融的“父母于子无恩论”之前,王充《论衡》中就有了先声。王充说: 儒者论曰:天地故生人,此言妄也!夫天地合气,人偶自生也。犹夫妇合气,子则自生也。夫妇合气,非当时欲得生子,情欲动而合,合而生子矣!且夫妇不故生子,以知天地不故生人也。 就正因为王充相信夫妇不是有意生子女,而只是“情欲动而合”(性欲冲动性交)的产物,所以他这种开明观念.也最能引动其他开明人士的看法。果然到了孔融的时候,这位孔夫子的二十代孙子,居然提出了青出于蓝的惊人议论,他说:“父之于子,当有何亲? 论其本意,实为情欲发耳!子之于母,亦夏奚为?譬如物寄缻中,出则离矣!”的话,是更进一步,把母子关系,看成了把东西寄放在瓶子里的关系,说得更露骨了。 在王充、孔融以后,文献中这类议论,钱钟书《管锥编》的举例如下: 《朱子语类》卷一二六:释氏以生为寄,故要见得父 母未生时面目。黄蘗一僧有偈与其母云:“先时寄宿此婆 家”;止以父母之身为寄宿处,其无情义、灭绝天性可知! 盖不知孔丘家儿早有“寄物”、“寄盛”之喻,较“寄宿”更簿 情也。古希腊诗人亦谓:“汝曷不思汝父何以得汝乎!汝 身不过来自情欲一饷、不净一滴耳”(If thou rememberest, O man how thy father sowed thee……Thou art sprung from incontinent lust and a filthy drop)①。后世诗文中,习见不鲜,举数例以概。十七世纪英国名作:“汝子被诃,倘不服而反唇曰:‘何故生我?我初未乞求诞生也!’汝将奚如?”(what if thy son/prove disobedient, and, reproved, retort, /“Wherefore didst thou beget me?I sought it not!”)②;又一剧二角色相语,甲云:“若翁生汝,汝则杀之,足以报施,”(Cutting his throat was a very gund return for his begetting you)乙答:“老革初未尝计及生我,渠只自述快意耳。”(, Twas for his own sake, he ne''er thought of me in the business)③《海外轩渠录 》言小人国法令谓父母生子女出于情欲(by the motives of concupiscence),故子女 于亲不必有恩义(obligation)④。当世波兰小说中母诫未 嫁女毋外遇致有孕,曰“吾不欲家中忽添婴儿”(But I don''t want a kid here),女怫然答:“汝之生我,几会先事询我愿不乎!”(You didn''t ask me if I wanted to be born)⑤;一意大利小说中母责女曰:“汝对阿父语,不得如此。”(Guarda che non dovresti ripondere cosi a tuo padre) 女藐之(alzava le spalle)曰:“我初未求出世,汝二人专擅,遽使我生。”(Io non avevo chiesto di venire al mondo. Mi ci avete fatta vemire)⑥吾国旧号“孝治”,故率言如孔融者不多耳⑦。 另一方面,以父母立场发言的,钱钟书也别有举例: 十八世纪英国才妇(Lady Mary Wortley Montagu)致其女(the Countess of Bute)书曰:“汝不必感我诞育为人, 正如我不谢汝惠临出世。俗见多妄,每以孝思绳子女,吾生平绝口未尝道之。”(You are no more obliged to me for bringing you into the world, than I am to you for coming into it, and I never, never made use of that commonplace(and like most commonplace, false)argument, as exacting any return of affection-Letters.“Everyman''s Library”, 400)母久劬劳,而持此论,尤罕事也。 这种以父母立场发言,在二十世纪的中国,曾有过一番讨论, 这是由汪长禄引起的,汪长禄写信给胡适,说: 大作(《我的儿子》)说,“树本无心结子,我也无恩于你。”这和孔融所说的“父之于子当有何亲!……”“子之于 母亦复奚为!……”差不多同一样的口气。我且不去管他。下文说的,“但是你既来了,我不能不养你教你,那是我对人道的义务,并不是待你的恩谊。”这就是做父母一方面 的说法。换一方面说,做儿子的也可模仿同样的口气说 道:“但是我既然来了,你不能不养我教我,那是你对人道的义务,并不是待我的恩谊。”那么两方面凑泊起来,简直 是亲子的关系,一方面变成了跛行的义务者,他一方面变 成了跛行的权利者,实在未免太不平等了。平心而论、旧 时代的见解,好端端生在社会一个人,前途何等遥远,责任何等重大,为父母的单希望他俩的儿子,固然不对。但是照先生的主张,竟把一般做儿子的抬举起来,看做一个 “白吃不还帐”的主顾,那又未免太“矫枉过正”罢。 现在我且丢却亲子的关系不谈,先设一个譬喻来说。 假如有位朋友留我在他家里住上若干年,并且供给我的本食,后来又帮助我的学费,一直到我能够独立生活,他才放手。虽然这位朋友发了一个大愿,立心做个大施主,并不希望我些须报答,难道我自问良心能够就是这么拱拱手同他离开便算了吗?我以为亲子的关系,无论怎样改革,总比朋友较深一层。就是同朋友一样平等看待,果然有个鲍叔再世,把我看做管仲一般,也不能够说“不是待我的恩谊”罢。 大作结尾说道:“我要你做一个堂堂的人,不要你做我的孝顺儿子。”这话我倒并不十分反对。但是我以为应该加上一个字,可以这么说:“我要你做一个堂堂的人,不单要你做我的孝顺儿子。”为甚么要加上这一个字呢?因为儿子孝顺父母,也是做人的一种信条,和那“悌弟”“信友”“爱群”等等是同样重要的。旧时代学说把一切善行 都归纳在“孝”字里面,诚然流弊百出。但一定要把“孝”字“驱逐出境”,划在做人事业范围以外,好像人做了孝子,便不能够做一个堂堂的人。换一句话,就是人若要做一个堂堂的人,便非打定主意做一个不孝之子不可。总而言之,先生把“孝”字看得与做人的信条立在相反的地位。我以为“孝”字虽然没有“万能”的本领,但总还够得上和那做人的信条揍在一起,何必如此“雷厉风行”硬要 把他“驱逐出境”呢? 前月我在一个地方谈起北京的新思潮,便联想到先生个人身上。有一位是先生的贵同乡,当时插嘴说道:“现在一般人都把胡适之看做洪水猛兽一样,其实适之这个人旧道德并不坏。”说罢,并且引起事实为证。我自然是很相信的。照这位贵同乡说话推测起来,先生平日对于父母当然不肯做那“孝”字反面的行为,是决无疑议了。 我怕的是一般根柢浅薄的音年,动辄钞袭名人一两句话, 敢于扯起幌子,便“肆无忌惮”起来。打个比方,有人昨天看见每周评论上先生的大作,也便可以说道:“胡先生教我做一个堂堂的人,万不可做父毋的孝顺儿子。”久而久之,社会上布满了这种议论,那么任凭父母老病冻饿以至于死,都可以不去管他了。我也知道先生的本意无非看见旧式家庭过于“束缚驰骤”,急急地要替他调换空气,不知不觉言之太过,那也难怪。从前朱晦庵说得好,“教学 者如扶醉人”,现有的中国人真算是大多数醉倒了。先生可怜他们,当下令奋勇,使一股大劲,把他从东边扶起。我怕是用力太猛,保不住又要跌向西边去。那不是和没有扶起一样吗?万一不幸,连性命都要送掉,那又向谁叫冤呢? 胡适的答复如下: “父母于子无恩”的话,从王充、孔融以来,也很久了。从前有人说我曾提倡这话,我实在不能承认。直到今年我自己生了一个儿子,我才想到这个问题上去。我想这个孩子自己并不曾自由主张要生在我家,我们做父的不征得他的同意,就糊里糊涂地给了他一条生命。况且我们也并不曾有意送给他这条生命。我们即无意,如何能居功?如何能自以为有恩于他?他既无意求生,我们生了他,我们对他只有抱歉,更不能“市恩”了。我们糊里糊涂地替社会上添了一个人,这个人将来一生的苦乐祸,这个人将来在社会上的功罪,我们应该负一部分的责任。说得偏激一点,我们生一个儿子,就好比替他种下了祸根,又替社会种下了祸根。他也许养成坏习惯,做一个短命浪子;他也许更堕落下去,做一个军阀派的走狗。所以我们“教他养他”,只是我们自己减轻罪过的法子,只是我们种下祸根之后自己补过弥缝的法子。这可以说是恩典吗? 我所说的,是从做父母的一方面设想的,是从我个人对于我自己的儿子设想的,所以我的题目是“我的儿子”。 我的意思是要我这个儿子晓得我对他只有抱歉,决不居功,决不市恩。至于我的儿子将来怎样待我,那是他自己的事。我决不期望他报答我的恩,因为我已宣言无恩于他。 先生说我把一般做儿子的抬举起来,看做一个“白吃不还帐”的主顾。这是先生误会我的地方。我的意思恰 同这个相反。我想把一般做父母的抬高起来,叫他们不要把自已看做一种“放高利债”的债主。 先生又怪我把“孝”字驱逐出境。我要问先生,现在 “孝子”两个字究免还有什么意义?现在的人死了父母都称“孝子”。孝子就是居父母丧的儿子(古书称为“主人”),无论怎样忤逆不孝的人,一穿上麻衣,带上高粱冠, 拿着哭丧棒,人家就称他作“孝子”。 我的意思以为古人把一切做人的道理都包在孝字里,故战阵无勇,莅官不敬,等等都是不孝。这种学说,先生也承认他流弊百出。所以我要我的儿子做一个堂堂的人,不要他做我的孝顺儿子。我的意想以为“一个堂堂的人”决不至于做打爹骂娘的事,决不至于对他的父母毫无感情。 但是我不赞成把“儿子孝顺父母”列为一种“信条”。易卜生的群鬼里有一段话很可研究(《新潮》第五号页八五一): (孟代牧师)你忘了没有,一个孩予应该爱敬他的父母? (阿尔文夫人)我们不要讲得这样宽泛。应该说:“欧士华应该爱敬阿尔文先生(欧土华之父)吗?” 这是说,“一个孩子应该爱敬他的父母”是耶教一种信条,但是有时未必适用。即如阿尔文一生纵淫,死于花柳毒,还把遗毒传给他的儿予欧士华,后来欧士华毒发而死。请问欧士华应该孝顺阿尔文吗?若照中国古代的伦理观念自然不成问题。但是在今日可不能不成问题了。假如我染着花柳毒,生下儿子又聋又瞎,终身残废,他应该爱敬我吗?又假如我把我的儿子应得的遗产都拿去赌输了,使他衣食不能完全,教育不能得着,他应该爱敬我吗?又假如我卖国卖主义,做了一国一世的大罪人,他应该爱敬我吗? 至于先生说,恐怕有人扯起幌子,说,“胡先生教我做一个堂堂的人,万不可做父母的孝顺儿子。”这是他自己错了。我的诗是发表我生平第一次做老子的感想,我并不曾教训人家的儿子! 总之,我只说了我自己承认对儿子无恩,至于儿子将来对我作何感想,那是他自已的事,我不管了。 上面这些文献,都是“父母于子无恩论”引发出来的或不谋而合出来的,我把它们集合在一起,以见古今中外智者的几个断片。 一九八四年十二月四日 ①原注Palladas, Greek Anthology, X. 44, “Loeb”, IV, 25。 ②原注Paradisc Lost, X. 760-2。 ③原注Thomas Shadwell, The Libertine, Complete Works, ed. M. Summers. III, 27(Jacomo and Don John)。 ④原注Gulliver''s Travels, Pt I, ch. 6, Oxford, 67。 ⑤原注Marek Hlasco, The Eighth Day of the Week, tr. N. Guteman, 13(Agnieszka)。 ⑥原注A. Moravia, Noovi racconti romani:“Lasciami perdere,”Opere complete, Bompiani, XI 251-2(Marcella)。 ⑦钱钟书没有看过琼瑶的《窗外》,我为他补一条。《窗外》页四十四:“妈,你别这样不满意我,我并没有向你要求这一条生命,你该对创造我负责任,在我,生命中全是痛苦,假如你不满意我,你最好把我这条生命收回去!” 【作者: MR.A-Z 】【访问统计: 1120】【2005年12月21日 星期三 19:29】【 加入博采 】【 打印 】
3月份是课题申报的高峰,各种有资质的图书馆查新站,现在忙的是一塌糊涂,主要干的就2件事,科技查新和SCI收录检索证明。与往年一样,我又早早花了一笔银子,半个万投进去了,换来的是几张盖了章的纸作为申请书的附件,剩下的就是期待项目能批,把银子收回来。 仔细想想,科技查新和SCI收录检索对于防止滥竽充数、随便报报的低水平申请书满天飞是有用的,起码是个门槛。那些连查新这关都过不了的项目的确不值得后面劳民伤财的评审。然而在这个过程中是不是可以考虑该如何避免浪费,尤其是科研经费在查新和收录证明方面的浪费。这是因为: (1)查新往往流于形式,各个有资质的图书馆查新站断然不会明明查到已有文献报道还给送检者出据无相关文献的证明,但只要送检者提供的关键词足够有机巧,蒙下电脑中的检索系统还是很容易的。图书馆查新站的审查员也不是360行的专家,想让他们对每个申请书的关键词理解很深也是为难人家。 (2)关于SCI收录和引用检索证明,其实很多学校图书馆都定了 http://isiknowledge.com/wos 网络版,申请人个人可以很容易就检索出来自己的文章SCI收录和引用情况,而且不额外要花一分钱。而且很多学者自己都有自己的RESERCHER ID是直接和ISI Web of Knowledge Science Citation Index Expanded 检索系统相连的,每周都自动更新你的SCI文章引用情况,还给你做最近10年的SCI引用次数统计图。 其实申请人要想达到查新或查收录的目的,是很简单的一个事情,只要你的电脑能上国际网,随便把几个申请书的关键词(以中英文,以各种组合方式)敲到任何一个搜索引擎,相关的文章信息就可以查到,如果没有相关主题的论文搜索结果,恭喜你!说明你的想法是“新”的(如果你用的是CNKI、万方和Sciencedirect,至少和现在到图书馆去查的水平不相上下),同样的,即使你单位没有定ISI Web of Knowledge Science Citation Index Expanded 检索系统,把一篇文章的名字敲到Google中,也可以立即搜索到文章的信息包括引用的次数! 问题的关键是“第三方”出据和“有资质的机构“出据的证明更具权威性,可为了申请而做的这些证明所花费的人力和物力对于整个国家来说是不是值得呢,有待思考,(此处省略N个字),欢迎大家点评。
多领域中的物转向及其本质 杨庆峰 闫宏秀 摘要:物转向是当前哲学研究的一个重要动向。伦理学中“物伦理学”、符号学中的物体语义学、分析哲学语境中的人工物研究等等都是这一动向的展现。但是物转向的实质却不相同。在科学技术哲学中,物转向意味着其摆脱先验研究路向,关注经验研究;在伦理学中,物转向意味着其摆脱人类中心主义,关注物的伦理性;在生存哲学中,物转向意味着开始摆脱理性传统,关注身体研究。现象学的物转向意味着摆脱先验意识,关注语境。物转向可以看做是对传统哲学语言学转向的回应。 关键词:物 现象学 科学哲学 技术哲学 拙文发表在《哲学分析》2011年第一期 哲学史上“存在与思维”是基本的二元对立范畴。在物的存在维度上,这一对范畴具体化为“物质与精神”或“物质与意识”;在人的生存角度而言,这一对范畴又具体化为“肉体与灵魂”或者“身体与心灵”。从柏拉图开始的整个西方哲学传统均贬斥前者而弘扬后者,“物”始终被隐藏着。一直到现象学,“物”受到的关注逐渐表现出来的。1900年,现象学家胡塞尔提出了“回到事物自身”这一口号;随后海德格尔在20世纪30年代、50年代对“物”曾进行过多次讨论。60年代罗兰.巴尔特、鲍德里亚等人关注着物意义的阐释。90年代唐.伊德提出了“后现象学”这一口号,21世纪荷兰学者维贝克提的“物伦理学”更进一步推进了这一研究。那么如何看待哲学领域中的“物转向”现象? 关注事物:现代哲学的趋向 可以说,在物的理论上,存在着认知传统向现象学生存论传统的转变。 这一“转变”使得我们能够清晰地把握住西方哲学关注物的特征和动向。在海德格尔之前,物分析均基于“物之属性”展开,也就是物分析的认知传统;在海德格尔之后,物分析均基于“生存论”展开,即生存论传统的形成。有意思的是,现代技术哲学比其他领域如认识论、形而上学有效地延续了这一传统。因此,我们需要从海德格尔的物分析开始。 海德格尔对“物”(thing)的关注是非常显著的,在《存在与时间》(1927)、《什么是物》(1931)和《技术的追问》(1950)、《物》(1950)等作品中都体现出他对于“物”的关注。“物”成为众多物追问的基础。《存在与时间》中的“锤子”、“话筒”、《技术的追问》中的“圣杯”、《筑.居.思》中的“桥”、《物》中的“壶”等等都是海德格尔所钟爱之物。早期他的物分析开启的是此在生存论的视野,“用具”(Zeug)基于此在之“上手与在手”区别,上手之物乃在手之物的基础。晚期他的物分析则超越了此在生存论,而是将更宏大的“天地神人”之四方整体带了出来。追问模式是“X是物吗?”。无论怎样不同,在他的分析中,关注物的有用性 成为最主要的特征。 海德格尔之后,对物分析开始出现了分歧,唐.伊德、格瑞汉姆.哈曼(Graham Harman)、拉图尔(Bruno Latour)、维贝克(P.P. Verbeek)等人从不同角度延续了物分析。 伊德,后现象学流派的开拓者。“回到事物自身”成为国际技术哲学的一个令人关注的现象。伊德通过“后现象学”这一口号所表明的是自身回到事物自身。postphenomenology:Essays in the Postmodern Context(1993)和Bodies in Technology(2002)确立了其后现象学的思想,在这些著作中,后现象学将自身对物的关注表现出来。随即他开始把这一思想向世界推广,2004年、2007年唐.伊德两次来到中国,进行了一系列演讲,这些演讲以《让事物说话——后现象学与技术科学》(2008)为名在中国出版。这本书的出版真正将伊德的“回到事物自身”原则确立了起来,而且首次让中国学者所知晓他的后现象学思想。这期间2006年他的学生伊万.森林格(Evan Selinger)编了Postphenomenology,这部书将世界范围内关于后现象学的看法整合起来。可以说,后现象学所表现的最大趋势是将技术哲学的研究开始贯穿到物中。伊德的物分析主要是基于意向性概念进行的。他所分析的物如眼镜、温度计、ATM机以及冰箱。这种分析的结果直接产生了技术现象学最重要的成果:中介性意向以及各种人与技术之间的关系样式。 拉图尔的行动者网络在人与非人因素之间做出了区分。但是他并没有完全遵循“思想与物”对立的传统,没有遵循自然物与人工物区分的传统。他的物是与人相区别,而不是对立。在科学知识社会学对称性原则的指导下,人与非人的因素都成为了行动者。 格瑞汉姆.哈曼毫无疑问是海德格尔物分析的最直接的继承者,他从海德格尔的工具分析进入到物的分析中。他这一做法是值得肯定的,“关于技术的解释学式的现象学来说,要解答物具体意义的问题,这(工具分析)是一个非常有价值的出发点。” 维贝克出对于技术哲学中的物的理解遵循着西方的传统,即认为自然物与人工物之间存在着区别。《物何为:对技术、行动体和设计的哲学反思》的出版引起了世界范围内的关注。这本书被看作是对物进行追问的集中表现。“他通过追问恰当的问题实现了这一点:人工物在技术文化中扮演着怎样的角色?这些物对于我们有着怎样的影响?他们应该怎样被设计?” 他对于物的关注则是受到后现象学传统的影响。我们知道荷兰在国际技术哲学界掀起了一股经验转向的潮流,表现在技术哲学领域内注重经验研究。在此传统影响下,维贝克也开始了他的个人转向,从先验取向(transcendental orientation)转为语境取向(contextual orientation),运用他自己的术语,即物性转向(thingly turn)。 在语境取向中,他逐渐开始关注物的道德性问题。他认为伦理学应该扩展到物上。“物,在伦理学核心应该拥有一席之地。在技术文化时代做伦理学意味着我们承认物,象人一样,属于道德共同体。物可以携带道德性,因为他们有助于形成人类自身的行为以及解释现实。道德决定并非由自主的主体做出,人类生活于其中的物质化环境也共同形成了决定的产生。” 可以说他的观点是对传统伦理学的一种反对,19世纪的伦理学的核心观念是只有人才有道德。“作出这种分离的人,忘记了只有人才能够有宗教,禽兽没有宗教,也说不上有法律和道德。……须知只有人有宗教、法律和道德。也只有因为人是能思维的存在,他才有宗教、法律和道德。” 维贝克提出的关于物的道德问题让我们很容易与环境伦理学的理论关联在一起,在他们看来,伦理学应该扩展到非人的环境、自然之上,特别是动物伦理学更是明确提出要将伦理学扩展到动物身上。可以说,维贝克的观点与动物伦理学理论的一致之处在于要求将传统的伦理关怀扩展到非人的对象上,如自然物、物、动物。 从上面的分析我们可以看出,海德格尔之前的物分析其实质是属性分析;海德格尔所开启的物分析其实质是有用性 分析并开启生存论视域和超越论视域;可以说,在上述两个阶段其连贯性还是非常明显的,两种物分析范式——属性范式和功能范式——之间的变迁。但是,海德格尔之后诸如伊德、维贝克等人的物之分析却无法上升到此维度。他们的物分析其实质至多是物分析的经验性、语境化表达。 关注物:物转向的指向 那么,物转向的所指究竟为何?在上面的分析中,我们指出,海德格尔关注锤子、圣杯、壶和农鞋;唐.伊德关注眼镜、温度计;但是,我们却不能因此而认为他们的所指一样。对于海德格尔来说,物分析最终指向的是此在以及超越境遇;对于伊德来说,就完全不同了,物分析最终所指为人、技术与世界的关系变更样式。所以,我们必须区分不同的物分析。 我们首先需要对“物”之概念本身给予了解。表达“物”的概念是什么?我们可以看到法国哲学通常用objet来表达事物或物。如罗兰.巴尔特的《物体语义学》和鲍德里亚的《物体系》中的“物”皆为object。但在德国哲学中,我们看到“物”的德语是Ding或Sach的翻译,这个词英文译作thing。整个近代哲学都基于思维与物的对立。“这种思维与事情(Sache)的对立是近代哲学兴趣的转折点。” 根据海德格尔的分析,这一区别来自康德,“我们必须牢记这个划分,康德基于对道德自我的分析,依然确认了这个划分,人(Person)和物(Sache)之间的划分。依照康德,人和物都是res (最宽泛意义上的东西),都是具有实存、实有着的东西(Dinge)。” 这二者的含义是不同的。根据《海德格尔辞典》,作为事物的物不同于事实的物。“Ding,’thing’,is distinct from Sach,’thing,’(subject-)matter,affair.Sache,like the Latin res,originally denoted a legal case or a matter of concern,while Ding was the ‘court’or’assembly’before which a case was discussed(D,166ff./174f).”。 根据解释论的观点,“事物(Sache)这一概念首先由与其相对的概念——人——来标识。物与人,这一对立的意义最初存在于人对物的明显的优越性之中。” 这个概念与罗马的法律中的res存在的相似之处是指法律事实或者关心的事务,当然“物(sache)这个概念比罗马的法律概念res(物)反映更多的内容。” 而“物”(Ding)则是指使得事件被讨论的场所。“事物一词与古德语‘Ding’相关,不仅表达物质化的对象,还有“汇集地点’或者‘导致汇集的某物’”。 如果说,普遍哲学中的物与思维对立。在技术哲学领域,物更多的是人工物或技术物(arefacts)。那么,在技术哲学传统中,“技术物”或“人工物”是否有着相同的限定呢?我们发现情况完全相反。 技术哲学传统中的存在人工物与自然物的区分。这一传统可以追溯到柏拉图和亚里士多德。柏拉图提出来的三个床中木匠的床即是人工物的例子。“柏拉图以床为例,提出床的三个含义“一个是理念上的床,具有本质意义;一个是木匠造的具体特殊的床,是本质意义上的床的影像;还有一个是画家画的床,它是床的影像的模仿。” 亚里士多德从物存在原因角度给出了人工物与自然物的区别。“凡存在的事物有的是由于自然而存在,有的则是由于别的原因而存在。……床、衣服或其他诸如此类的事物,在它们各自的名称规定范围内,亦即在它们是技术制品范围内说,都没有这样一个内在的变化的冲动力的。” “技术物”或“人工物”恰恰意味着人与物的相融而非对立。在这里,人的目的、需求成为技术物、人工物存在的原因。从他们这里,逐渐生发出一种抑物的传统。“从亚里士多德开始的西方哲学家认为技术物具有较低的本体论地位,一些哲学家走得过远甚至宣称真实意义上‘船、房屋、锤子’等等这样的人工物不存在。” 从上述概述中,我们已经看到,传统哲学的物分析基于“人(事情)与物”的对立;所以在重人抑物的传统中“物”被遗忘,以至于淡出。只有随着对传统哲学批判的加强,“物”的维度才开始被关注起来。如伦理学扩展到“物”之上;对“身体”维度的关注等等都是被抑物重新受到关注的过程。技术哲学中的物分析则基于“自然物与人工物”的对立,这充分表明技术哲学与传统哲学的关联与冲突。从关联角度看,无论是自然物还是人工物,都基于非人的物;从冲突来看,人与物的对立在技术物”或“人工物”消解并表现为人与物的相容。 分析哲学与科学哲学中的物转向 物转向并非仅仅限制在技术哲学中,而是在其他哲学分支中都有所体现。如符号学、马克思主义、中国哲学、伦理学等。甚至无视物的分析哲学也开始关注物。 分析哲学对于物的研究主要表现从技术本体论角度对技术物(artifacts)的研究。这主要从Techne电子期刊2009年春季曾经刊发过一组文章可以看出来。这组文章主题是“分析的形而上学中的人工物”(Artifacts in Analytic Metaphysics)。Wybo Houkes、Pieter E. Vermaas等多人发表了不同的文章。 在“分析形而上学中的人工物:导论”中,作者Wyhbo Houbkes描述了分析哲学领域内人工物研究的状况。他认为分析哲学中有两种分析技术物的视角。其一是分离视角(detached way);其二是包含视角(involved way)。二者之间并非完全没有关系,“关于人工物的分离视角与包含视角内在地有联系的。”这些研究的特点是“形而上学占主导地位、非专业性和功能聚焦。”他提到诸如David Wiggins、Lynne Ruder Baker, Van Inwagen和Dipert,R.R等分析哲学家,他们共同的特点都是对技术本体论的问题做出了探讨。这一文章和其他文章将分析哲学中对于人工物的关注给予了粗线条的描述。这无论对于技术哲学还是分析哲学领域来说都是新的,很少为学者所关注到。特别是在国内技术哲学界对技术认识论、技术价值论和技术工具论等问题研究争论较多的时候,技术本体论问题一直因为若干原因沉寂着,有待于挖掘。 科学哲学对于物的研究更多体现在伊德、维贝克等人的研究中。这取决于科学哲学自身的传统。一般说来,科学解释的传统基于“理论”而形成,更准确地说是基于科学语言形成。如卡尔纳普、波普尔等传统科学哲学家对于理论和命题的关注;后来历史主义、科学知识社会学所展开的批判也是基于理论的传统来实现自身。这无疑证实了“科学解释传统的基点是理论”这一观点。其实质是科学解释传统将自身确立在科学语言之上。这一传统也维持了近一个世纪。 随后所发生的事情正逐渐改变着旧的科学解释传统,也恰恰是在这种转折点的描述中隐含着新的科学解释方向。这就是逐渐摆脱语言和理论的束缚。它从三个不同的维度表现了出来。第一个维度是科学自身的趋势;第二个维度科学哲学的外部的某些变化加强了这一趋势的发展。第三个维度则科学哲学内部所出现的一种趋势。 科学内部趋势,也就是科学家自身所意识到的变化。怀特海是最明显的代表。他明确地将科学所研究的东西确定为“对象”(object)。他指出,“科学的目的是要探索统治各种事件——对象被发现处在事件里——中对象表现的规律。对于这种目的来说,我们主要可以集中于两类对象,即我所谓的物质的物理对象和科学对象。” 如果我们认为他所说的“对象”是与主体无涉的存在物,那么我们就错误了。怀特海明确地指出,对象是“在感觉—意识中显露的存在物”,当然对意识—感觉的起源问题我们一无所知。他指出,“换言之,被作为根据的东西是:感觉—意识是关于某物的感觉—意识。”这完全符合现象学原则,因为按照胡塞尔现象学的观点,“但是,意向性这个词表示的因此正是意识的这种一般的根本性质——意识总是关于某物的意识,总是作为在自身中担当起它的我思对象的我思。” 如此,我们可以说对于怀特海而言,对象是在感觉--意识中被构成的。 科学哲学外部主要是源自现象学传统且对科学意义的追问或者科学起源的追问。如胡塞尔的生活世界理论、海德格尔的现成之物理论以及伽达默尔的科学世界观念都是这种逻辑的最好表现。尽管提出了生活世界的理论,但是胡塞尔基本上还是将注意力放在先验意识上,所以在他那里这种外部的变化并不明显。从海德格尔开始,这种变化的迹象变得显著起来,开始扣问科学哲学的传统。海德格尔现象学对理论地位的反思导致了理论从“原初性”的规定中分离了出来,并且摆正了理论与实践的关系。我们可以称之为从根源摆脱传统的束缚,意指为理论重新奠定基础。这种做法开始取消了语言和理论的原初地位,颠覆了科学哲学原有的出发点——理论,将理论的源泉给予揭示。 科学哲学内部,即指科学哲学家关注点的一种变化。由伊德所掀起的后现象学为科学哲学研究带来了新的方向:对于科学研究过程中工具的关注。 还有拉图尔所开启的对于网络问题的研究中,将物的问题导引了出来。技术哲学中的趋势也是明显的,如P.P.维贝克构建起物的体系,他的“物何为”就是如此表现。 物转向的实质 整个科学技术哲学届已经历众多转向,就科学哲学而言,存在着语言学转向、历史转向、社会学转向等动向;就技术哲学而言,存在着先验转向、经验转向。如何理解这种物转向呢?在科学技术哲学中,物转向意味着其摆脱先验研究路向,关注经验研究;在伦理学中,物转向意味着其摆脱人类中心主义,关注物的伦理性。在生存哲学中,物转向意味着开始摆脱理性传统,关注身体研究。 关于技术的理解上,存在着三种立场:内在主义(Internalist)、外在主义(Externalist)和语境主义(contextualism)。内在主义则强调从技术发明者、工程师等角度探讨技术,也就是米切姆所说的的工程主义;外在主义将技术与社会看作是两个分离的系统,这一立场所关注的问题如技术接受问题、技术对社会的影响等问题如米切姆所说的人文主义。第三种立场即语境主义,即,调技术仅仅在某个语境中才是他们所是的东西。可以说,我们上述提到的现象学家都倾向于语境主义。那么,我们会面对这样一个问题:物转向所涉及的若干人物中,在什么程度上他们属于语境主义者?当海德格尔指出锤子、农鞋只有在使用的过程中才是其本身时,当他指出我们只有在用中才达到与这些用具的始源关系,我们可以初步断定他属于先验的语境主义者。“对锤子这物越少瞠目凝视,用它用的越起劲,对它的关系也就变的越始源,它也就越发昭然若揭地作为它所是的东西来照面,作为用具来照面。” “田间的农妇穿着鞋,只有在这里,鞋才存在。农妇在劳动时对鞋想的越少,看的越少,对它们的意识越模糊,它们的存在也就益发真实。” 这些都说明了以“操劳寻视”方式表现的先验语境主义。不同于海德格尔,维贝克与芬伯格、卡普兰等人直接就表达了自身与语境主义的关系,他们都对技术的语境化解释非常器重。“我们需要一种关于技术的语境化解释,它严肃地对待这样一个事实:技术的社会的、文化的影响是由历史发展、物质化环境和伦理的、审美的意义共同形成。事实上,这种语境论形成了我在‘物可以做什么’书中发展出来的后现象学路径的核心。” 如此,可以看出,他们基于使用语境中阐述着技术。这一语境不仅成为经典现象学家进行物分析的特征,更成为后来学者进行分析的前提,正如我们已经揭示的,伽达默尔、布尔迪厄等人在使用语境的基础上将游戏的因素给予突出。“现象学生存论的传统对“使用”所做出的突破在于将使用的功利主义色彩给予摈弃,而是将隐含在其中的游戏、玩耍等因素给予充分地发挥。” 那么现代技术哲学中的“物转向”其实质如何看待?事实上,以物为转向的技术哲学研究现象实际上是技术哲学领域内经验转向的纵深表现。我们知道,技术哲学研究的经验转向开始于20世纪末。“1998年荷兰代夫特大学P.克罗斯和A.梅莱斯提出的‘技术哲学的经验转向’的研究纲领。” 即便是后现象学以物为对象,他们所指物多为人工物(artifact)或者技术物体(Technological Object)。只是我们需要明确的是,技术哲学中的“物转向”更多的是表现为以物为对象,诸如科学研究中关注非语言的因素,如工具、仪器等;如拉图尔的行动者网络中,采取的对称性原则中对非人的因素(nonhuman)。很大程度上,这种转向带有科学的色彩。所以说,物转向是技术哲学研究经验转向的纵深发展。 那么如何理解科学哲学中的物转向?传统的科学解释只关注理论和系统命题,而这些东西最后被还原为语言层面。19世纪末20世纪初的“语言转向(Linguistic turn)在科学哲学中有着怎样的一段辉煌的历史。如今,到了该走出阴影的时候了。21世纪的科学解释应该有一种超然的视野,关注到所发生的悄然迹象:物转向(thingly turn)或物质化转向(material turn)。 然而,我们看到,西方思想家,如唐.伊德、维贝克等所提出的“物转向”其含义需要给予批判对待。我们需要意识到,唐.伊德为我们所呈现出的工具化维度或者物的维度使得我们逐渐看到物取代了理论;Davis Baird给我们揭示出thing knowledge这种知识形态,使得物开始进入到科学解释的方方面面。这也许是我们需要意识到的,一种存在于科学解释上的变化。 最终,如果摆脱各个学科的局限,我们会发现物转向有着其深远的背景,它基于“人—物”的对立,是对以人核心的传统的反叛。所以就可以理解物伦理学出现的合理性在于对传统以人为中心的伦理学的反对。这种反叛在于重新弘扬物因素。如果这种趋势是合理的,那么,我们可以断定:我们对物转向的理解应该放置在更宏大的背景上看待:这就是科学解释已经开始关注其中非语言因素作用,物转向只是一个开端,更细致的非语言因素,如科学图像、科学工具等亟待进一步地挖掘。 杨庆峰.有用与无用:事物意义的逻辑基础 .南京社会科学.2009(4):38-42. P.P. Verbeek给出伊德的四种关系的描述,如体现关系、解释学关系、他者关系和背景关系。具体见Peter-Paul Verbeek, What Things Do: Philosophical Reflections on Technology, Agency, and Design, University Park, PA: Penn State University Press,2005,pp.124-127. Andrew feenberg.. Peter-Paul Verbeek:Review of What Things Do. hum stud(2009)32:226 David M.Kaplan.What Things Still Don’t do.hum stud(2009)32:229-240 Evan Selinger (Editor).2006.Postphenomenology: A Critical Companion to Ihde. State University of New York Press.p127. 黑格尔,小逻辑,贺麟译,商务印书馆,1996年,第38页、39页。 与他相似的还有Lucas D. Introna,他在 Ethics and the Speaking of Things中探讨物的伦理学的可能性。Theory, Culture Society, Vol. 26, No. 4, 25-46 (2009) 黑格尔,小逻辑,贺麟译,商务印书馆,1996年,第77页。 海德格尔,现象学之基本问题,丁耘译,上海译文出版社,2008年,第185页。 Michael Inwood,A Heidegger Dictionary,Blackwell Publishers Ltd,1999,199-200.)。 林治贤编,伽达默尔选集,上海远东出版社,1997年,第194页。 林治贤编,伽达默尔选集,上海远东出版社,1997年,第195页。 P.P. Verbeek.Let’s Make Things Better:A Reply To My Readers. .hum stud(2009)32:260 王德伟,人工物引论,黑龙江人民出版社,2004年,第23页。 亚里士多德,物理学,张竹明译,商务印书馆,1997年,第43页。 Lynne Rudder Baker. The ontology of artifacts. Philosophical Explorations, Volume 7, Issue 2 June 2004 , 104. Special Issue: Artefacts in Analytic Metaphysics.http://scholar.lib.vt.edu/ejournals/SPT/v13n2/ 怀特海,自然的概念,张桂权译,中国城市出版社,2002年,第160页。 胡塞尔,笛卡尔沉思与巴黎演讲,张宪译,人民出版社,2008年,第69页。 杨庆峰,伊德工具实在论的理论内涵及悖论分析,东北大学学报,2009年第4期 海德格尔,存在与时间,陈嘉映译,北京三联书店,1999年,第81页 孙周兴编,海德格尔选集,三联书店,1996年,第253页 P.P. Verbeek.Let’s Make Things Better:A Reply To My Readers. .hum stud(2009)32:252-253. 杨庆峰.有用与无用:事物意义的逻辑基础 .南京社会科学.2009(4):39 王德伟,人工物引论,黑龙江人民出版社,2004年,第15页。 物转向,thingly turn,并不是由伊德提出来的,而是P.P.Verbeek,他提出thingly turn(What Things Do:Philosophical Reflections On Technology,Agency,And Design,2000),但是,有时候,他又使用material turn(Postphenomenology:A Critical Companion To Ihde,2006)。可以看出,后一个概念主要受到唐.伊德的影响,伊德曾提出过“物质化的解释学之概念”,material hermeneutics(2003)。
【备注】这里录下的是本人刊发在美国Translation Journal 2009年第3期的英语文章。 出处: http://translationjournal.net/journal/49corpus.htm The Applications of Keywords and Collocations to Translation-Studies and Teaching A Tentative Research on the Parallel Corpus of the 17 th NCCPC Report by Dai Guangrong Abstract: With the help of parallel corpora and some famous native language corpora such as BNC, BROWN etc, we can learn some useful strategies to deal with the collocation of keywords and their translations. Keywords: corpus-based translation, concordance, collocation, translation teaching and research. This paper investigates the corpora applications to translation studies and teaching. Using the parallel corpus of 17 th NCCPC (17 th National Congress of the Communist Party of China) as the investigation corpus, this paper disagrees with the opinion of the keywords and collocations which based on an abrupt conclusion without scientific statistic strategy. It is very important for the translator(s) to identify the keywords and key collocations in translation studies and teaching. Keywords provide a useful way to characterize a text or a genre which can offer a clear and comprehensive understanding of the original texts. Collocation is a mode of meaning which can help the translator(s) to decide the field and style of word-usage in translation. 1. Introduction: Corpora Applications to Translation Studies and Teaching n recent years Translation Studies became a scholarly discipline in China, and translation teaching has become the focus of many translation researchers and teachers. This paper attempts to apply translation corpora to translation studies and teaching, showing the tentative research methods in daily translation studies and teaching. Different approaches have been taken to Translation Studies, from the earlier workshop approach, the philosophical and linguistic approach, the functionalist approaches, to Descriptive Translation Studies, the post-structuralist and post-modernist approaches, and the cultural studies approach (Munday 2001; Richard Xiao 2008). Translation theories develop quickly, but practice, especially the translation teaching, is lagging far behind theories. With the help of parallel corpora and some native language corpora, we can learn some useful strategies to deal with the collocation of keywords and their translations. With the rapid development of corpus linguistics in the mid-1980s, corpus linguistics started to be of interest to translators. Firth is convinced that linguistic description can be used as a basis for translation: linguistic analysis at the grammatical, lexical, collocational and situational levels can be used as a basis for total translation (Firth 1968: 76-78). The Firthian approach, and its latter-day incarnation in corpus linguistics, might bear fruit in studies of translation (Kenny 2001: 21). Corpora are useful for revealing "relations between frequency and typicality, instance and norm" (Stubbs 2001:151). According to Baker (1993:243), "the most important task that awaits the application of corpus techniques in translation studies is the elucidation of the nature of translated text as a mediated communicative event". Some hypotheses such as "translated texts tend to be more explicit, unambiguous, and grammatically conventional than their source texts" have already been investigated using translation corpora (Baker Malmkjaer 1998: 52). Furthermore, some scholars point out the usefulness of corpora and corpus linguistic techniques in translation, such as providing a powerful tool to identify the characteristic features of translational language, and helping translators understand what translation is and how it works (Baker 1993:243). One of the advantages of the corpus-based approach to translation studies and teaching is that it can reveal the "regularities of actual behavior" (Toury 1995:265). Toury stresses the need to observe regularities—and provide explanatory hypotheses for those regularities—on the basis of ever-expanding corpora of texts, claiming that explanations of features observed even in a single translation must rely on the study of bigger corpora (Kenny 2001: 57). Tymoczko (1998:652) predicates that "Corpus Translation Studies is central to the way that Translation Studies as a discipline will remain vital and move forward." This statement has been confirmed by an ever-growing number of corpus-based translation studies (cf. vers 1998; Baker 1999; Baker 2000; Granger et al 2003; Wang Kefei 2004; McEnery et al 2006, 2007; Richard Xiao 2008, etc). In this paper, we will present a tentative study that seeks to uncover some features of collocation and keywords in translation with the parallel corpora including 17th NCCPC—National Congress of the Communist Party of China report. 2. Keywords used in Translation Studies and Teaching In translation studies and practices, we may encounter all kinds of texts, the contents and plots of some of which are complex and difficult to analyze, especially for the literary texts. It's a great challenge for the beginners to translate the texts word by word, sentence by sentence without a holistic analysis and understanding of the source texts. In this paper, we examine corpus-based translation studies and teaching. With the help of corpus software, we can retrieve some useful information such as word frequency, collocations, patterns, clusters, dispersion of the search words and other statistical data. In this section, we apply "Keywords" to our research. "Keywords" is program within the corpus software (i.e. Wordsmith) for identifying the key words in one or more texts. Keywords are those whose frequency is unusually high in comparison with some norm. Key words provide a useful way to characterize a text or a genre. "Keywords" offers an important measure for the content and language characteristics of the texts (Wang 2007: 27). It also can be used for analyzing the style and retrieving texts. The program compares two pre-existing word-lists, which must have been created using the program of WordList in Wordsmith. One of these is assumed to be a large word list which will act as a reference file. The other is the word list based on one text which is to be studied. The aim is to find out which words characterize the text we are most interested in, which is automatically assumed to be the smaller of the two texts chosen. The larger one will provide background data for reference comparison. Using keywords, we can understand the translation materials (Scott 2004: 95). We can analyze the texts which should be translated and obtain important hints such as the theme, main characters and plot. The translator can then form a schema for the content of the source texts and find the proper words for the equivalents. We once asked students to do some translation practices including the materials of government documents (in this research, we deal with the text of the 17th NCCPC report). Before the discussion of 17th NCCPC, some students found a research paper about the keywords in it. The paper shows the keywords of the Chinese version of the report. Figure 1 is the result of the research: Figure 1 Keywords of the 17th NCCPC It reports that the number of sentences with keyword of "party" is 125; "people" 102; "economics" 77; "democracy" 48; "science" 46; "education" 31; "cadre" 27; "army" 19; "income" 13; "supervision" 13; "law" 9; and "herbalist doctor" zero, etc. Judging from the results, we can say that the research is based on the author's imagination or his own purpose. It wants to prove the researcher's point by offering the data but it breaks the rule of objectivity in the research. Students were puzzled by the result for its subjectivism. In order to help the students to understand the long passage clearly, we use some corpus software to retrieve data. The text of the 17th NCCPC is a kind of government documents and has its specific language characteristics. We make a "Keywords" (17th NCCPC English text as the observed corpus, and "Selected works of Mao Zedong" as the reference corpus) using Wordsmith (Version 4.0). Figure 2 shows part of the result of the Keywords. Figure 2: Keywords of the 17th NCCPC and Selected works of Mao Zedong From Figure 2, we can see the frequency of the key words in the observed corpus and the reference corpus. We can therefore draw the conclusion that: "development" is the most important key word in the 17th NCCPC and this can shed light on theme and help the students to understand the translation material. We make parallel word lists of the bilingual versions of the 17th NCCPC, retrieving only the content words (not the grammatical or functional words), and some data from the lists. This can shed some light on the contrastive study of the language and translations. Figures 3 and 4 represent the first twenty content words of the English and Chinese versions, respectively. Figure 3: Key words of the English version Figure 4: Key words of the Chinese version From figure 3 and figure 4, the two word lists show some difference in the first 20 keywords. In the English version, "development" appears 226 times, and other keywords not included in Figure 3 such as "economy" (36), "government" (36), "education" (35), "force" (34), "management" (34), "progress" (34), "support" (34), "market" (33), "cadre" (31), "need" (31). In Chinese version, "发展(fazhan)" appears 281 times. So, we can see the figures show some difference in the two lists. The results provide some information: the translation has produced changes in the word order, frequency etc. As translation teachers, we should ask the questions: why, where, when and how to change the translation strategies? Judging from the analysis of the passage, we know that the most important keywords is "发展(development)" in the report. With the data, we can direct the translation practice in many ways. The students once translated the sentence in Chinese "推动科学发展,促进社会和谐" (tuidong kexue fazhan, cujin shehui hexie) into "Promote the development of science, accelerate social harmony". In the Chinese sentence, "科学 (kexue)" used as an adverbial, modifying "发展 (fazhan)", because "发展(development)" is the theme of the report. This sentence is very important in the whole passage. With the help of this information, we can translate it into "pursue development in a scientific way and promote social harmony". 3. Collocations used in Translation Studies and Teaching Peter Newmark once pointed out: "He (one who writes or speaks in a foreign language) will be 'caught' every time, not by grammar, which is probably suspiciously 'better' than that of educated natives, not by his vocabulary, which may well be richer, but by his unacceptable or improbable collocations"(1981:180). In the translating process, when translators transfer the native language into the foreign language, they have to choose the proper collocations which is difficult to decide in many situations, such as the idiomatic usage, restricted collocations etc. Collocation is not only connected to lexis, but also relates with the cohesion of the whole text. The cohesive effect of collocations is a key factor to avoid "translationese." Halliday and Hasan (1976:286) said, "The cohesive effect of such pairs depends not so much on any systematic relationship as on their tendency to share the same lexical environment, to occur in COLLOCATION with one another. In general, any two lexical items having similar patterns of collocation—that is, tending to appear in similar contexts—will generate a cohesive force if they occur in adjacent sentences." These remarks remind translators of paying attention to the collocations in the translating process; otherwise, they will stumble into the problem of "translationese." Sinclair once said, "There are virtually no impossible collocations, but some are more likely than others" (1966:411). In this research, we follow Wei Naixing's definition of collocation: A collocation is a conventional syntagmatic association of a string of lexical items which co-occur in a grammatical construct with mutual expectancy greater than chance as realization of non-idiomatic meaning in texts (Wei 2002: 100). Firth (1957:12) put forward that "You shall know a word by the company it keeps." So, collocation is a mode of expressing meaning: Meaning by collocation is an abstraction at the syntagmatic level and is not directly concerned with the conceptual approach to the meaning of words. One of the meanings of night is its collocability with dark, and of dark, of course, collocates with night (ibid: 196). Bowker (1998: 631) observes that "corpus-assisted translations are of a higher quality with respect to subject field understanding, correct term choice, and idiomatic expressions." Here we can retrospect the research which puzzled our students. It says, "This kind of statistic cannot count the collocability, especially the collocation of adjectives and adverbs with the keywords which can explain the importance of the problem." There are many factors which affect collocability, such as semantic, grammatical, and conventional ones. All these factors should be considered in our daily translation practices. Using parallel corpora, we can decide the proper collocations in the target language. For example, when we encounter the word "结果(jieguo)," the dictionary shows only some limited results and collocations. But a large corpus will avoid these kinds of limitations. A parallel corpus will show us several collocations and it will give the translators several choices to decide on the proper collocation. There are different translations of "结果", such as "result/ outcome/ aftermath/ consequence/ effect/ conclusion/ sequel/ finding/ end" etc. With the parallel corpus, we can find the proper collocation of this keyword. In translating "前任 (qianren)" into English, students face difficulties in deciding on the collocation even with the help of dictionaries. With the parallel corpus, we can solve this kind of problem. "前任 (qianren)"as the search item, we can draw some examples like the following: "Especially with the growth of the amateur program, it's here to stay," says former heavy-weight champion Evander Holyfield. "You'll recognize the ornaments," said my former daughter-in-law. Her arrogance has disenchanted many of her former admirers. He is working hard to excel his predecessors. John Smith is a past president of our club. Mr. Heath is the former Prime Minister of Britain. The saddest were the eight ex-cadres who lost their executive jobs. The late Prime Minister attended the ceremony. From these examples, we can say, "前任 (qianren)" is not simply equal to "former", the collocations show that "predecessor/past/ex-/late" etc can used the equivalences (Dai, 2008: forthcoming). Just as the same issue, when the students encounter the phrases, such as "台湾问题 (Taiwan wenti)", maybe we cannot find the translation from the dictionary, and it is difficult for the beginners to choose the collocations, "Taiwan problem/Taiwan issue/Taiwan question" etc. We can consult the parallel corpora and can obtain abundant examples. Figure 5 shows us the result of input collocation "台湾问题 (Taiwan wenti)" from the parallel corpus of 17th NCCPC. Figure 5 In the practice of translating the Chinese version OF THE 17th NCCPC into English, students encounter anumber of collocation problems. We can find a lot of translationese in their translation practice. How to improve this kind of situation? We can use the parallel corpus. First, we suggest to the students to make some KWICs practices from the corpus and learn to find the restricted collocations, such as the Cluster showed in Figure 6: Figure 6 Maybe, it's difficult for the beginners to decide the collocation whether it's a strong collocation or has a high mutual information of the collocation. With the help of corpus software, such as Wordsmith, A Corpus Worker's Toolkit (Hongyin Tao) etc, we can obtain the MI value of the collocation. If the students are not sure whether the collocation "scientific development" is proper, we can get the confirmation from the result of Figure 7: Figure 7 From the figure, we can have a strong confidence about the collocation of "scientific development" for its mutual information value is 5.81. 4. Conclusions Corpus-based translation studies and teaching encounter a number of challenges and opportunities in the information era. The present paper has explored a case study of keywords and collocations in corpus-based translation studies and teaching. The keywords can provide some useful information about the materials for translation and help the translators to decide on the translation strategies. The collocation strategy can help the translators to decide on the proper collocations in target language and check the naturalness in the translation with the help of translation corpora. The two aspects give us some confidence in translation and teaching. All these can stimulate the improvement and innovations of translation studies and teaching. Acknowledgements We are grateful to the China National Education Pattern of the Practical Talents Research for supporting our project A Research and Innovation on the English Teaching Pattern Based on Corpus and Campus-Net (Grant Reference FIB070335-A15-11). We also thank the Scientific Research Division of Fujian University of Technology for supporting our project: A Corpus-based Investigation for Chinese Learners' English Writing Competence (Grant Reference GY-S0827). Note: http://sns.chinavalue.net/Blog/BlogThread.aspx?EntryId=25430 Accessed on 7-16-2008. References Baker, M. 1993, 'Corpus linguistics and Translation Studies: Implications and applications', in M. Baker, G. Francis and E. Tognini-Bonelli (eds.) Text and Technology. In Honour of John Sinclair . 233-250. Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Baker, M. and Kirsten Malmkjaer. 1998, Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London: Routledge. Baker, M. 1999, 'The role of corpora in investigating the linguistic behaviour of professional translators.' International Journal of Corpus Linguistics 4: 281-298. Baker, M. 2000, 'Towards a methodology for investigating the style of a literary translator.' Target 12(2): 241-266. Barlow, M. 2000, 'Parallel texts and language teaching', in S. Botley, A. McEnery and A. Wilson (eds) Multilingual Corpora in Teaching and Research , 106-115. Amsterdam: Rodopi. Bowker, L. 1998, 'Using specialized native-language corpora as a translation resource: A pilot study'. Meta 43(4): 631-651. Dai, Guangrong. 2008, 'A Corpus-based Research on Translation between Chinese and English Words/Phrases'. Xiamen University of Technology Journal. No3. Granger S., Lerot, J., and Petch-Tyson, S. (eds) 2003, Corpus-based Approaches to Contrastive Linguistics and Translation Studies . Amsterdam: Rodopi. Firth, J.R 1957, Papers in Linguistics 1934-1951 . London: Oxford University Press. Firth, J.R. 1968, Selected Papers of J.R.Firth 1952-59, edited by F.R.Palmer. London and Harlow: Longmans, Green and Co.Ltd. Halliday, M. A. K. and Hasan, R. 1976, Cohesion in English . London: Longman. Kenny, D. 2001, Lexis and Creativity in Translation. A Corpus-based Study. Manchester: St. Jerome Publishing. McEnery, A., Xiao, R. and Tono, Y. 2006, Corpus-based Language Studies: An advanced resource book . London: Routledge. McEnery, A. and Xiao, R. 2007, 'Parallel and comparable corpora: What is happening?', in M. Rogers and G. Anderman (eds.) Incorporating Corpora. The Linguist and the Translator .18-31. Clevedon: Multilingual Matters. Munday, J. 2001, Introducing Translation Studies: Theories and applications. London: Routledge. Newmark, P. 1981, Approaches to Translation. Oxford: Pergamon Press. vers, L. 1998, 'In search of the third code: An investigation of norms in literary translation.' Meta 43(4): 557-570. Scott, M. 2004, The WordSmith Tools (v. 4.0). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Sinclair, J. 1966, Beginning the study of lexis. In C. E. Bazell, J. C. Catford, M.A.K. Halliday, and R. H. Robins, eds., In Memory of J. R. Firth . 410-430. London: Longrman. Stubbs, M. 2001, 'Text, corpora and problems of interpretation: A response to Widdowson.' Applied Linguistics 22(2): 149-172. Toury, G. 1995, Descriptive Translation Studies and Beyond . Amsterdam: John Benjamins. Tymoczko, M. 1998, 'Computerized corpora and the future of translation studies.' Meta 43(4): 652-660. Wang Kefei. 2004,. Parallel Corpora: Construction and Applications . Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press Wang Lifei. 2007, Computer-Aided Second Language Research Methods and Their Applications . Beijing: Foreign Language Teaching and Research Press. Wei Naixing 2002, The Definition and Research System of the Word Collocation . Shanghai: Shanghai Jiaotong University Press. Xiao, Z.and Yue, M.2008, Using corpora in Translation Studies: The state of the art. In P. Baker (ed.) Contemporary Approaches to Corpus Linguistics . London: Continuum.
摘要 :技术进步会带来繁荣昌盛的社会,在享受技术进步带来的便利的同时,我们也需要注意技术的阴暗面,提防技术对人的异化作用。本文从技术高度发达的《星球大战》场景出发,讨论了技术对人的异化作用,并从人本身的需要出发,提出了防止技术对人的异化作用的方法。 关键词 :技术,异化,星球大战 From “Star Wars” to See the Alienation of Technology on Human Abstract : Technological advances will bring prosperity. While enjoying the convenience taken by technical progress, we need to pay attention to the dark side of technology, beware of the role of technology on human alienation. The technology is highly developed in the , this paper discusses the role of technological alienation on human, especially from the Star Wars. The technology in Star Wars is highly developed. From one's own needs, this paper proposes a method to prevent the alienation. Key words : technology, alienation, star wars 技术带来的繁荣 在《星球大战》里,城市里的交通工具全是飞行器,餐馆里有机器人服务生给你端上可口的饮料,星际间可以实时传输三维影像,通过超光速技术,往来于星际也是弹指一挥间 ...... 技术的发展可谓登峰造极,在技术发展的帮助下,各个星球的智能生物可以自如沟通,组成了共和国,维护整个星系的和平与繁荣。正是技术的发展应用,才造就了《星球大战》中的繁荣景象。 技术的发展可以给生活带来巨大的便利,已经有无数的歌颂文章,这里就不再敷述了。肯定技术的正面作用是本文的一个大背景,在这个前提下,希望我们能注意技术的阴暗面,特别是对人本身的异化作用,从而更好地让技术为人服务,而不至于受困于技术的框框。 技术的阴暗面 《星球大战》里的技术发展已经登峰造极了,但是我们看看,生活于此的“人”快乐吗?这里的“人”是广义的概念,泛指各个星球的智能生物,当然也包括人类。为了简化问题,有接近人类智能的机器人不属于“人”的范畴。 在《星球大战》的场景中,我们看到繁荣的背后,平和欢快的场景却很少 ,有的也是灯红酒绿的狂欢。整部电影中,安纳金 和帕德美 在纳布星球,平和安宁地生活,应该是最温馨美好的场景了 。 但好景却不长,安纳金又有 新的任务了。 生活于其中的“人”,忙忙碌碌,似乎并不 比低技术时代 的平常 人 家 快乐 。 这也给我们启示,纯粹的技术发展,对人的生活是有负面作用的,技术是存在阴暗面的。 技术对人的分化作用 在技术化的社会里,人要生存,几乎每个人都需要有职业。技术越发达,社会分工越精细,人本身就隔离开了。 安纳金 · 天行者( Anakin Skywalker )和 帕德美 · 阿米达拉 ( Padmé Amidala ) 是《星球大战》的两个主角 。 安纳金经过艰苦 的训练,终于成长为 一个杰出的绝地武士,经常出使危险的任务,维护星系的和平 。 帕德美 通 过自己 的奋斗,得到了 纳布星球民众 的信任,十四岁就被选为星球 的国王,卸任 后, 接替帕尔帕庭称为共和国的 参议员,忙于政务。 安纳金保护帕德美回到纳布星球的时候 , 他们深深地相爱了,却不能公开关系。作为一个绝地武士,是不能有爱情的,因为爱情会影响理性的判断力, 甚至会将绝地武士引入歧途。这种职责高于人性的约束,就把人异化为物体了。这样的人和机器人有什么分别? 帕德美也因为怕影响安纳金的光明前途,放不下自己的职业,不敢公开和安纳金的关系,即使怀上了安纳金的孩子,也只能躲在老家纳布星球,还要为安纳金的安全担惊受怕。最后,因为得知安纳金走向了原力的黑暗面,伤心欲绝,生育孩子的时候,出现难产,痛苦地死去了。 安纳金和帕德美的悲剧,除了自身无法看开之外,与职业需求压过人性需求也有密切的关系。 技术约束人的自由 技术 在给人以选择自由的同时,也约束了人的自由。 人不知不觉中,就会陷入技术的陷阱。在科技化的社会, 人的接触( Human Contact )少了,与机器的接触( Machine Contact )多了。比如我们 的电脑和网络的发明,给整个社会带来了深刻的变革 。博客、社交网站、即时通讯工具等,改变了人与人之间的沟通方式 。 但很多人陷入了网络中,沉迷于技术构建的虚拟世界,大部分时间都面对着电脑,与人的接触反而少于与电脑的接触时间!每个人都成了网络的一个终端,网络联通着人,又减少了直接沟通的时间。网络把人放进了一些框框,人之间面对面的直接接触少了。人际关系的疏远导致人产生孤独、寂寞的情绪 。 安纳金学会了绝地武士控制原力的技巧,也可以近似地理解为掌握了一门技术。他拥有了更多的能力,似乎可以做更多的事情,有更大的自由。但实际上,他必须要到处奔波,完成绝地武士委员会派给的危险任务。因为其他人也掌握了技术,可以对共和国做破坏活动,只能用自己的技术去克服技术带来的威胁。这就需要不断发展自己的技术,就陷入了一个循环,不断地需要新的,更强大的技术。在这个循环里,人总是忙碌的,就陷入了技术的陷阱。 技术“力量”的诱惑 技术代表了力量( power ),可以改造自然,甚至改造人本身,正是依靠智能,发展出了各种技术,人类才能战胜其他物种,主宰地球。技术代表了能力,掌握了技术,就可以做其他人无法做到的事情,所以技术是有很大的诱惑力的。为了掌握技术,人需要不断的学习、研究、探索,总是处在忙碌的状态。如果一味的陷入技术的追求,忘了技术是为人服务的,可能会陷入单纯追求技术的忙碌中,变成人为技术发展服务了,这时候,人本身就被异化了。 为了掌握技术,追求技术的强大,人还可能在技术的诱惑下,做出非人道的抉择。当然,这首先不是技术的错,而是人受不了诱惑。在星球大战里,安纳金通过自己对原力的掌握,预见到了帕德美的死,为自己无力挽救,感到非常痛苦。这时候,代表原力黑暗面的西斯出现了,欺骗安纳金说,原力的黑暗面有强大的力量,可以让人死而复活,在力量的诱惑下,安纳金走向了原力的黑暗面,帮助西斯实现了帝国的独裁统治,奴役整个星系的“人”,使整个星系陷入了黑暗。 如何看待技术 科学把世界当作客体,人是世界的一部分,衍生出的技术也继承了这一基本观点。这种把人本身客体化的观念,可能是导致人物化的根源。现代生命科学的发展,基于一个基本的观念,人与自然的物体没有什么区别,只不过是高级的分子机器。把人当成机器去剖析,发现了大量基本的生命科学规律 ,比如基因组学的遗传和表达规律。人如何感知世界,如何从分子的运动中突现出精神,仍然是一个圣杯 ,现在成了人的特殊性最后一块净土。 哲学从人本身出发,认为世界只是人的一部分,生命的体验才是世界认识的来源 。这种观念把人本身作为主体,是人在认识世界,这种观念才可以避免人的物化,客体化,避免陷入技术力量的无限追求,让技术服务于人,带来生活品质的真正提高。 有一则小故事 ,讲的是一个富人,看到一个穷人在海边悠闲地钓鱼,问他怎么不想多钓点鱼,这样可以买船出海,钓更多的鱼。穷人反问富人,为什么要这样做?富人回答说,这样有钱了,就可以在无忧无虑地钓鱼了。穷人回答道:“我现在不是已经无忧无虑地钓鱼了吗?”。这则寓言提醒我们,我们在追求技术力量的时候,应该认清楚追求的目的,而不是一味地追求手段的层次提高。 总之,人是目的,技术只是手段。我们应该小心技术的阴暗面,提防技术对人的异化,技术是为人服务的,技术应该促进人的生活品质提高。 参考资料: 星球大战—— STAR WARS :安纳金 · 天行者( Anakin Skywalker ) . . . 星球大战—— STAR WARS :帕德美 · 阿米达拉( Padmé Amidala ) . . . 殷正坤 . 科学技术前沿哲学问题(现代科技革命与马克思主义讲义) . 华中科技大学研究生院 , 2010. Williams P L, Bannister L H, Berry M M, et al. 格氏解剖学 . 杨琳 , 高英茂 , 译 . 第 38 版 . 辽宁教育出版社 , 1999. Bear M F, Connors B W, Paradiso M A. Neuroscience: Exploring the brain . Lippincott Williams Wilkins, 2007. 尼古拉 . 别尔嘉耶夫 , 张百春(译) . 论人的使命 神与人的生存辩证法 . 上海人民出版社 , 2007. 故事二则 - 福建省福鼎市莲峰山资国寺官方网 福鼎资国寺 福建省资国寺 普门观音塔 , 华藏多宝塔 .
关键词是指对表达主题内容有实质意义的词。关键词是学术刊物发表文章所必需滴。其作用为便于直观了解内容和检索。 2008年2月揭晓的汉语盘点2007年度关键词,130万投票选出涨、民生、油、全球变暖分别列年度国内字、国内词、国际字、国际词第一。 汪丁丁《经济学的关键词》: 美国国家经济教育委员会在上世纪90年代确定了22个高中毕业生必须掌握的经济学基本概念(关键词)包括: 6个基本经济学概念:scarcity, opportunity, cost and trade-offs, productivity, system, economic institutions and incentives, exchange, money and interdependence 6个微观经济学概念:markets and prices, suppky and demand, competition and market structure, income distribution, market failures, the role of government 7个宏观经济学概念:gross national product, aggregate supply, aggregate demand, unemployment, inflation and deflation, monetary policy, fiscal policy 3个国际经济学基本概念:absolute and comparative advantage and barriers to trade, balance of payments and exchange ratos, international aspects of growth and stability 赖德胜《经济学家的关键词》: 舒尔茨: 人力资本 科斯:交易成本 刘易斯: 二元经济 斯宾塞:信号理论 库茨涅兹:国民收入核算 倒U型假设 科尔内:短缺经济学 林毅夫:比较优势 自生能力
谨以此文庆祝祖国母亲中华人民共和国第一个甲子华诞 ! 让我们都来用顿号 ------ 关键词之间应用顿号而非分号 蒋晓晖 中国 科学院上海有机化学研究所联合编辑室 《 Chinese J Chem 》编辑部 , 上海市零陵路 345 号 , 200032 摘要 根据有关国家标准等文献对标点符号的使用规则分析后认为,关键词栏目属于一个简单句结构,该简单句内并列的关键词之间应当使用简单句内最短停顿、分隔并列词语的顿号,而不是使用复合句内最长停顿、分隔并列分句的分号进行分隔。顿号又是我中华文明之独 创,汉字文化之独用,中文优势之标志,应在我国学术期刊关键词,特别是英文关键词之间广泛使用,以弘扬光大我中华文化的博大精深。 关键词 关键词、标点符号、顿号、分号、国家标准、 中文优势、文化输出 关键词之间使用什么标点符号进行分隔?涉及关键词的三个国家标准( GB/T 3179-92 《科学技术期刊编排格式》 , GB 7713-87 《科学技术报告、学位论文和学术论文的编写格式》 , GB/T 3860-1995 《文献叙词标引规则》 )对此均没有明确具体的规定,因此绝大部分学术期刊参照西文(主要是英文)文献,均使用国际通用的逗号( comma )来分隔中英两版之内的多个关键词(例如我所三刊: 《中国化学》、《化学学报》、《有机化学》)。但到了 1999 初,我国新闻出版总署新出音 17 号文件颁发《〈中国学术期刊 ( 光盘版 ) 〉检索与评价数据规范 ( 试行 ) 》 ,其中明确规定了关键词之间必须使用分号,理由是便于计算机自动切分 。自那时起,我国绝大部分学术期刊陆陆续续地将关键词之间使用的逗号修改为现在的分号( semicolon )。然而笔者认为,关键词之间使用分号并不妥当,妥当的是使用顿号( slight-pause mark )。理由如下: 1. 根据国标 GB/T 15834-1995 《标点符号用法》 及《科技书刊标准化 18 讲》(以下简称《 18 讲》)第 16 讲科技书刊标点符号用法 ,虽然顿号和分号都可以用来表示并列成分之间的停顿,但该并列成分的类型及停顿的长短相对于顿号和分号而言是不同的。在所有句内点号中,顿号表示的停顿最短,因此适用于简单句内简单并列成分(例如词组及简单短语)的停顿;分号表示的停顿最长,因此适用于复合句内各分句之间的停顿,即分号不能用于简单句内较短词语之间短暂的停顿 。显然,学术论文关键词栏目属于一个简单句的架构(例如一文中的中英两版关键词栏目, 关键词 : 学术期刊 国际化 网络化 绿色出版 在线 互动交流; Keyword : academic periodical, internationalization, webification, green publication, online, intercommunication ),该架构内的并列成分都是一些简单的主题词(文献叙词),因此这些主题词即关键词之间应该使用句内最短停顿的顿号而不是最长停顿的分号进行停顿和分隔。如果在一个只具有简单句结构的关键词栏目内使用分号来分隔各个关键词,也就等于在一个简单句内使用了分号,从而明显地违反国标 GB/T 15834-1995 及《 18 讲》 有关顿号和分号的使用规则。《 18 讲》第 245 页在谈及分号误用时作为首条明确地指出:国标规定,分号只用在复句中,不用在单句中。有的书刊不注意这一点,有时在并列的词语之间也用了分号。关键词栏目内并列的所有关键词当然都是词语而非句子,其间理应不能使用分号! 2. 最近有业内人士认为, 关键词之间使用分号是基于分号分行或分项列举的功能 ,其实非也!正如前面所提到的那样,我国学术期刊关键词之间现在改用分号的真正原因是为了便于计算机索引检索时自动切分 ,而不是什么分号的分行或分项列举作用。根据国标 GB/T 15834-1995 及《 18 讲》,分号确有分行 或分项 列举的功能,但笔者的解读是,此处被列的各项并不是简短的词语,而是较长较繁的短语或句子(至少有一项是这样),且往往同时使用序次语 1.2.3.4. 等等协助罗列 。因此这种分行或分项列举已超出一个简单句的框架,而具有一个复合句的结构,该复合句各项之间当然应使用分号分隔。然而,如前所述,关键词都是一些简短的主题词语,并列在一起并不构成复合句结构,整个关键词栏目也就不能使用分号的分行分项列举功能,而只能使用顿号的词语并列功能。否则,就犯了使用分号分隔简单词语的原则性错误 ! 3. 至于分号便于计算机索引检索时自动切分 的理由也是值得商榷的。既然分号可以方便自动切分,顿号也应该同样可以,而且样本期刊采用顿号后,诸如中国学术期刊(光盘版) 等大型索引检索系统对应地改用顿号也是简便地可操作的,即只要请软件专家将有关程序内的分号;修改为顿号、便可。 4. 如此一来,即学术论文纸媒电媒、中英两版的关键词全面使用顿号分隔后,岂不在英文单词字符、阿拉伯数字之后出现顿号?是的,这正是笔者小文的最大目的所在!尽管我国早期古籍里没有任何标点符号,现在使用的标点符号绝大部分是清末民初时期的舶来品,但顿号却是我中华文明之独创,汉字文化之独用,西方文明之缺陷。早在距今约两千年的汉代,我国便开始使用顿号校勘古籍 。除了逗号与分号,现代汉语里使用顿号来专门停顿分隔并列的词语,在书面语厘清句子结构的不同层次方面显然要比西文更加精细与科学合理,是西文书面语所望尘莫及的。也就是说,西文书面语里只使用逗号既分隔停顿简单句内的并列词语之间的较短停顿,又分隔停顿并列句(或复合句)中分句(或主从句)之间较长的停顿,势必混淆停顿的长短和分隔的上下层次,模糊整个句子的精细层次结构,最终影响句子的表达效果和阅读理解。例如, All the new compounds isolated must be alphabetically numbered consecutively in arabic numerals, IUPAC systematically named and characterized by spectral data including IR, 1 H NMR, 13 C NMR, and MS, and elemental analysis data, the deviation of which should be within 0.4% for any of C, H, N and other elements. ( 所有分离得到的新化合物必须按阿拉伯数字依次连续编号 , 根据 IUPAC 系统命名规则进行命名并通过红外、质子核磁共振、碳 13 核磁共振及质谱等光谱数据和元素分析数据进行表征 ; 对碳、氢、氮等任何元素的分析结果误差不得超过 0.4%) 在这一英文复合句中,第 2-4 这三个及第 7 、 8 这两个逗号分别表示该句最内一级的并列层次和最短的停顿,对应于中文里的顿号;第 5 个逗号表示其外一级的并列层次;第 1 个逗号表示更外一级的并列层次;第 6 个逗号则表示最外一级的结构层次,即主从复合句之间的停顿和分隔,对应于中文里的分号。也就是说,此处英文用一种逗号混淆地表示了三种不同的并列层次,显然不如中文分别使用顿号和逗号区别地表达来得清楚明了(比较上例中英两版)。因此,顿号文化是我中华文明的优秀文化,应该输出进入西方文化,以弘扬光大我中华文化的博大精深。至于英文里使用顿号看起来不太顺眼的担心 ,则大可不必 。因为习惯成自然,看多了自然也就顺眼了。随着世界中心自美国逐渐移向我国,中文逐渐进入西方社会并取代英语成为世界科技语言,顿号也必将被西文特别是英文主动地引进和使用。对此笔者深信不疑;所有关键词,首先是我国主办的中外文种学术期刊上的关键词之间,使用汉字文化的顿号进行分隔只是一个时间上的早晚问题而已。 5. 顺便一提,曾有业内人士建议关键词之间使用空格分隔 。这种措施似乎仅适用于中文版,而不适用于英文版关键词,从而并不适用于包含英文关键词的科技期刊。 综上所述,根据国标 GB/T 15834-1995 《标点符号用法》等有关规定 ,关键词之间应当使用顿号而非分号进行分隔。建议涉及关键词的有关国家标准 、《〈中国学术期刊 ( 光盘版 ) 〉检索与评价数据规范》 及《 18 讲》 等规范性文献在再版时明确补充或修改为关键词之间使用顿号分隔的规定。作为倡导,笔者所发论文的博客版均已使用顿号分隔中英两版关键词 。 参考文献 中华人民共和国国家标准 : GB/T 3179-92 科学技术期刊编排格式 中华人民共和国国家标准 : GB 7713-87 科学技术报 告、学位论文和学术论文的编写格式 中华人民共和国国家标准 : GB/T 3860-1995 文献叙词标引规则 中国学术期刊 ( 光盘版 ) 编辑委员会 . 中国学术期刊 ( 光盘版 ) 检索与评价数据规范 , CAJ-CD B/T 1-2006 中华人民共和国国家标准 : GB/T 15834-1995 标点符号用法 陈浩元主编 . 科技书刊标准化 18 讲 , 北京 : 北京师范大学出版社 , 1998, p 241-264 马奋华 , 倪东鸿 , 冯怀莹 . 科技论文中 5 种常见点号的应用 . 中国科技期刊研究 , 2008, 19(4): 676-679 北京大学 国 情研究所 主持编纂 . 世界文明百科全书 . 山西教育出版社 , 1992, p 53-54 陈浩元主编 . 科技书刊标准化 18 讲 , 北京 : 北京师范大学出版社 , 1998, p 242 田美娥 ; 贺元旦 . 中文科技论文中顿号的使用问题 . 出版科学 , 2008, 16(4):38-39 禤胜修 . 关键词标点符号使用之我见 . 编辑学报 , 1995, 7(1): 20-21 周逸辛 , 陆艾五 . 关键词间加标点又何妨 ── 对 关键词标点符号使用之我见 一文的商榷 . 编辑学报 , 1997, 9(2): 123-123 蒋晓晖在科学网的博客 . http://www.sciencenet.cn/u/jiangxh/ 2009-8-17 ---------------------- A slight-pause mark should be used between keywords instead of a semicolon JIANG XiaoHui ( CJC Editorial Office, Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 345 Lingling Road , Shanghai 200032, China ) Abstract On the basis of analysis of the usage policies on punctuation marks declared by The National Standards etc ., the column of Keywords in academic theses belongs structurally to a simplified sentence, in which paratactic keywords should be separated by a slight-pause mark that is used to separate the paratactic academic terms in a simple sentence with the shortest pause, but not by a semicolon that is used to separate the paratactic clauses in a complex sentence with the longest pause. What is more important, the slight-pause mark was created uniquely by our Chinese civilization, is used uniquely by the cultures of Chinese characters, and symbolizes the superiority of our Chinese language to the western one, which should be extensively adopted for the separation of keywords, especially the English keywords in our academic periodicals, in order to popularize the broadness and profoundity of our Chinese culture world-widely. Keywords keyword 、 punctuation 、 slight-pause mark 、 semicolon 、 National Standard 、 Chinese culture superiority 、 culture export
谨以此文庆祝中华人民共和国第一个甲子华诞! 让我们都来用顿号------关键词之间应用顿号而非分号 蒋晓晖 中国 科学院上海有机化学研究所联合编辑室 《 Chinese J Chem 》编辑部 , 上海市零陵路 345 号 , 200032 摘要 根据有关国家标准等文献对标点符号的使用规则分析后认为,关键词栏目属于一个简单句结构,该简单句内并列的关键词之间应当使用简单句内最短停顿、分隔并列词语的顿号,而不是使用复合句内最长停顿、分隔并列分句的分号进行分隔。顿号又是我中华文明之独 创,汉字文化之独用,中文优势之标志,应在我国学术期刊关键词,特别是英文关键词之间广泛使用,以弘扬光大我中华文化的博大精深。 关键词 关键词、标点符号、顿号、分号、国家标准、 中文优势、文化输出 关键词之间使用什么标点符号进行分隔?涉及关键词的三个国家标准( GB/T 3179-92 《科学技术期刊编排格式》 , GB 7713-87 《科学技术报告、学位论文和学术论文的编写格式》 , GB/T 3860-1995 《文献叙词标引规则》 )对此均没有明确具体的规定,因此绝大部分学术期刊参照西文(主要是英文)文献,均使用国际通用的逗号( comma )来分隔中英两版之内的多个关键词(例如我所三刊: 《中国化学》、《化学学报》、《有机化学》)。但到了 1999 初,我国新闻出版总署新出音 17 号文件颁发《〈中国学术期刊 ( 光盘版 ) 〉检索与评价数据规范 ( 试行 ) 》 ,其中明确规定了关键词之间必须使用分号,理由是便于计算机自动切分 。自那时起,我国绝大部分学术期刊陆陆续续地将关键词之间使用的逗号修改为现在的分号( semicolon )。然而笔者认为,关键词之间使用分号并不妥当,妥当的是使用顿号( slight-pause mark )。理由如下: 1. 根据国标 GB/T 15834-1995 《标点符号用法》 及《科技书刊标准化 18 讲》(以下简称《 18 讲》)第 16 讲科技书刊标点符号用法 ,虽然顿号和分号都可以用来表示并列成分之间的停顿,但该并列成分的类型及停顿的长短相对于顿号和分号而言是不同的。在所有句内点号中,顿号表示的停顿最短,因此适用于简单句内简单并列成分(例如词组及简单短语)的停顿;分号表示的停顿最长,因此适用于复合句内各分句之间的停顿,即分号不能用于简单句内较短词语之间短暂的停顿 。显然,学术论文关键词栏目属于一个简单句的架构(例如一文中的中英两版关键词栏目, 关键词 : 学术期刊 国际化 网络化 绿色出版 在线 互动交流; Keyword : academic periodical, internationalization, webification, green publication, online, intercommunication ),该架构内的并列成分都是一些简单的主题词(文献叙词),因此这些主题词即关键词之间应该使用句内最短停顿的顿号而不是最长停顿的分号进行停顿和分隔。如果在一个只具有简单句结构的关键词栏目内使用分号来分隔各个关键词,也就等于在一个简单句内使用了分号,从而明显地违反国标 GB/T 15834-1995 及《 18 讲》 有关顿号和分号的使用规则。《 18 讲》第 245 页在谈及分号误用时作为首条明确地指出:国标规定,分号只用在复句中,不用在单句中。有的书刊不注意这一点,有时在并列的词语之间也用了分号。关键词栏目内并列的所有关键词当然都是词语而非句子,其间理应不能使用分号! 2. 最近有业内人士认为, 关键词之间使用分号是基于分号分行或分项列举的功能 ,其实非也!正如前面所提到的那样,我国学术期刊关键词之间现在改用分号的真正原因是为了便于计算机索引检索时自动切分 ,而不是什么分号的分行或分项列举作用。根据国标 GB/T 15834-1995 及《 18 讲》,分号确有分行 或分项 列举的功能,但笔者的解读是,此处被列的各项并不是简短的词语,而是较长较繁的短语或句子(至少有一项是这样),且往往同时使用序次语 1.2.3.4. 等等协助罗列 。因此这种分行或分项列举已超出一个简单句的框架,而具有一个复合句的结构,该复合句各项之间当然应使用分号分隔。然而,如前所述,关键词都是一些简短的主题词语,并列在一起并不构成复合句结构,整个关键词栏目也就不能使用分号的分行分项列举功能,而只能使用顿号的词语并列功能。否则,就犯了使用分号分隔简单词语的原则性错误 ! 3. 至于分号便于计算机索引检索时自动切分 的理由也是值得商榷的。既然分号可以方便自动切分,顿号也应该同样可以,而且样本期刊采用顿号后,诸如中国学术期刊(光盘版) 等大型索引检索系统对应地改用顿号也是简便地可操作的,即只要请软件专家将有关程序内的分号;修改为顿号、便可。 4. 如此一来,即学术论文纸媒电媒、中英两版的关键词全面使用顿号分隔后,岂不在英文单词字符、阿拉伯数字之后出现顿号?是的,这正是笔者小文的最大目的所在!尽管我国早期古籍里没有任何标点符号,现在使用的标点符号绝大部分是清末民初时期的舶来品,但顿号却是我中华文明之独创,汉字文化之独用,西方文明之缺陷。早在距今约两千年的汉代,我国便开始使用顿号校勘古籍 。除了逗号与分号,现代汉语里使用顿号来专门停顿分隔并列的词语,在书面语厘清句子结构的不同层次方面显然要比西文更加精细与科学合理,是西文书面语所望尘莫及的。也就是说,西文书面语里只使用逗号既分隔停顿简单句内的并列词语之间的较短停顿,又分隔停顿并列句(或复合句)中分句(或主从句)之间较长的停顿,势必混淆停顿的长短和分隔的上下层次,模糊整个句子的精细层次结构,最终影响句子的表达效果和阅读理解。例如, All the new compounds isolated must be alphabetically numbered consecutively in arabic numerals, IUPAC systematically named and characterized by spectral data including IR, 1 H NMR, 13 C NMR, and MS, and elemental analysis data, the deviation of which should be within 0.4% for any of C, H, N and other elements. ( 所有分离得到的新化合物必须按阿拉伯数字依次连续编号,根据 IUPAC 系统命名规则进行命名并通过红外、质子核磁共振、碳 13 核磁共振及质谱等光谱数据和元素分析数据进行表征;对碳、氢、氮等任何元素的分析结果误差不得超过 0.4%) 在这一英文复合句中,第 2-4 这三个及第 7 、 8 这两个逗号分别表示该句最内一级的并列层次和最短的停顿,对应于中文里的顿号;第 5 个逗号表示其外一级的并列层次;第 1 个逗号表示更外一级的并列层次;第 6 个逗号则表示最外一级的结构层次,即主从复合句之间的停顿和分隔,对应于中文里的分号。也就是说,此处英文用一种逗号混淆地表示了三种不同的并列层次,显然不如中文分别使用顿号和逗号区别地表达来得清楚明了(比较上例中英两版)。因此,顿号文化是我中华文明的优秀文化,应该输出进入西方文化,以弘扬光大我中华文化的博大精深。至于英文里使用顿号看起来不太顺眼的担心 ,则大可不必 。因为习惯成自然,看多了自然也就顺眼了。随着世界中心自美国逐渐移向我国,中文逐渐进入西方社会并取代英语成为世界科技语言,顿号也必将被西文特别是英文主动地引进和使用。对此笔者深信不疑;所有关键词,首先是我国主办的中外文种学术期刊上的关键词之间,使用汉字文化的顿号进行分隔只是一个时间上的早晚问题而已。 5. 顺便一提,曾有业内人士建议关键词之间使用空格分隔 。这种措施似乎仅适用于中文版,而不适用于英文版关键词,从而并不适用于包含英文关键词的科技期刊。 综上所述,根据国标 GB/T 15834-1995 《标点符号用法》等有关规定 ,关键词之间应当使用顿号而非分号进行分隔。建议涉及关键词的有关国家标准 、《〈中国学术期刊 ( 光盘版 ) 〉检索与评价数据规范》 及《 18 讲》 等规范性文献在再版时明确补充或修改为关键词之间使用顿号分隔的规定。作为倡导,笔者所发论文的博客版均已使用顿号分隔中英两版关键词 。 参考文献 中华人民共和国国家标准 : GB/T 3179-92 科学技术期刊编排格式 中华人民共和国国家标准 : GB 7713-87 科学技术报 告、学位论文和学术论文的编写格式 中华人民共和国国家标准 : GB/T 3860-1995 文献叙词标引规则 中国学术期刊 ( 光盘版 ) 编辑委员会 . 中国学术期刊 ( 光盘版 ) 检索与评价数据规 范 , CAJ-CD B/T 1-2006 中华人民共和国国家标准 : GB/T 15834-1995 标点符号用法 陈浩元主编 . 科技书刊标准化 18 讲 , 北京 : 北京师范大学出版社 , 1998, p 241-264 马奋华 , 倪东鸿 , 冯怀莹 . 科技论文中 5 种常见点号的应用 . 中国科技期刊研究 , 2008, 19(4): 676-679 北京大学 国 情研究所 主持编纂 . 世界文明百科全书 . 山西教育出版社 , 1992, p 53-54 陈浩元主编 . 科技书刊标准化 18 讲 , 北京 : 北京师范大学出版社 , 1998, p 242 田美娥 ; 贺元旦 . 中文科技论文中顿号的使用问题 . 出版科学 , 2008, 16(4):38-39 禤胜修 . 关键词标点符号使用之我见 . 编辑学报 , 1995, 7(1): 20-21 周逸辛 , 陆艾五 . 关键词间加标点又何妨 ── 对 关键词标点符号使用之我见 一文的商榷 . 编辑学报 , 1997, 9(2): 123-123 蒋晓晖在科学网的博客 . http://www.sciencenet.cn/u/jiangxh/ 2009-7-17 ---------------------- A slight-pause mark should be used between keywords instead of a semicolon JIANG XiaoHui ( CJC Editorial Office, Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry, Chinese Academy of Sciences, 345 Lingling Road , Shanghai 200032, China ) Abstract On the basis of analysis of the usage policies on punctuation marks declared by The National Standards etc ., the column of Keywords in academic theses belongs structurally to a simplified sentence, in which paratactic keywords should be separated by a slight-pause mark that is used to separate the paratactic academic terms in a simple sentence with the shortest pause, but not by a semicolon that is used to separate the paratactic clauses in a complex sentence with the longest pause. What is more important, the slight-pause mark was created uniquely by our Chinese civilization, is used uniquely by the cultures of Chinese characters, and symbolizes the superiority of our Chinese language to the western one, which should be extensively adopted for the separation of keywords, especially the English keywords in our academic periodicals, in order to popularize the broadness and profoundity of our Chinese culture world-widely. Keywords keyword 、 punctuation 、 slight-pause mark 、 semicolon 、 National Standard 、 Chinese culture superiority 、 culture export
The snapshot: abstract and keywords 在本帖中, 理文编辑 学术总监Dr. Daniel McGowan将向大家展示如何写出吸引读者的摘要和关键词。 Your papers abstract is critical because many researchers will read that part only, rather than reading the entire paper. Therefore, it is critical that it provides an accurate and sufficiently detailed summary of your work so that those researchers can understand what you did, why you did it, what your findings are, and why your findings are useful and important. Your abstract must be able to stand alone, that is, to function as an overview of your study that can be understood without reading the entire text. Readers interested in learning details than could not be included in the abstract will inevitably proceed to the full text. Therefore, the abstract does not need to be overly detailed; for example, it does not need to include a detailed methods section. Even though the abstract is one of the first parts of your paper, it should actually be written last. You should write it soon after finishing the other sections, while the rest of the manuscript is fresh in your head, enabling you to write a concise but comprehensive summary of your study without overlooking anything important. Requirements for abstracts differ among journals, so the target journals instructions for authors should be consulted for specific details. Despite differences among journals, there are a few general rules that should be obeyed when writing an abstract: The word limit should be observed; 250 words is probably about average and commonly adopted as a word limit for abstracts, but many journals request shorter abstracts (for example, Nature Articles and BBRC both have a 150-word limit) while many others (for example, BioMed Central journals) allow longer ones. This is one very good reason why the target journal should be identified before you write your paper. Technical jargon should be avoided so that the abstract is understandable for a broad readership, although what is considered technical may vary depending on the target journals audience. For example, a test of anxiety would generally be clearer than elevated plus-maze test in an abstract, unless the journal was specifically targeted to behavioural researchers. Usually, there simply isnt enough space in the abstract to define and explain technical terminology. If such terminology is unavoidable, it should be defined in simple terms where it is first used. Like technical jargon, abbreviations should be limited as much as possible, although their acceptability may again depend on the target journal. For example, HIV is likely to be acceptable in abbreviated form by most journals. By contrast, RT-PCR might be considered acceptable by a journal reporting molecular biology techniques, but it would need to be spelt in full (reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction) in most journals at first use. Many journals provide a list of acceptable abbreviations on their websites. Necessary abbreviations used three or more times should be defined at first use; however, abbreviations used only once or twice should be spelled out in full unless doing so causes the word limit to be exceeded. Abbreviations that are defined in the abstract will need to be defined again at first use in the main text. Although some journals do allow references to be cited in the abstract, the vast majority do not. Therefore, unless you plan to submit to a journal that allows it, you should not cite references in your abstract. If we look at the instructions to authors for BBRC, we can see the following guidelines: The Abstract should be on page 2, i.e., after the title page The Abstract must be a single paragraph that summarizes the main findings of the paper in fewer than 150 words. A list of up to 10 keywords useful for indexing or searching should be included after the Abstract. Some journals request structured abstracts divided into sections such as background, objectives, methods, results, and conclusions. Clinical journals may require additional or alternative sections. Therefore, it is again necessary to check the target journals instructions for authors to determine the particular formatting/outline requirements prior to writing. Abstracts are frequently followed by a list of keywords selected by the authors. The instructions for authors will state how many keywords are required and may even provide a list of recommended keywords. Choosing appropriate keywords is important, because these are used for indexing purposes. Well chosen keywords enable your manuscript to be more easily identified and cited. Thus, the keywords should be as specific to your manuscript as possible, and general terms, which could apply to an enormous number of studies, should be avoided. Example: Lets consider some appropriate keywords for the example title from the previous post: Region-specific neuronal degeneration after okadaic acid administration (note that this title is and one of two suggested alternatives for the poor title in the example in the previous post). Good keywords would be: okadoic acid, hippocampus, neuronal degeneration, MAP kinase signaling, and possibly mouse (or rat or whatever experimental animal was used). Poor keywords would be: neuron, brain, OA (as an abbreviation), regional-specific neuronal degeneration, and signaling 练习: Suggest 35 suitable keywords to accompany the title in the exercise in the previous post: Carvedilol produces dose-related improvements in LV function and dose-related reductions in mortality and hospitalization rate in subjects with chronic heart failure from systolic dysfunction. They dont all have to relate to information contained in the title, so let your imagination run wild: it is the type of keyword rather than the content (the word itself) that is important to consider. 对于上述练习,希望各位可以例举3至5个合适的关键词;同时也欢迎发来您自己的英文摘要以获得 Dr. McGowan 的改进建议。 在这里还需提请各位注意,Dr. McGowan 的母语是英语,无法阅读中文,因此请大家尽量使用英文回帖,如有任何需要与他沟通的学术和语言问题也请使用英语,Dr. McGowan 会及时回复大家的。 Dr. Daniel McGowan 曾任 Nature Reviews Neuroscience 副编辑,负责约稿,管理和撰写期刊内容。于2006年加入理文编辑(Edanz Group) 并从2008年起担任学术总监。Dr. Daniel McGowan 有超过十年的博士后和研究生阶段实验室研究经验,主要致力于神经退化疾病、分子及细胞生物学、蛋白质生物化学、蛋白质组学和基因组学。