科技论文具有通常所说的创新性

科技论文具有通常所说的创新性

?科技论文具有通常所说的创

新性（innovation)、真实性（reality)、重要性（significance)和可知性（indication)，其目的与功能是传递知识和信息，这使得科技论文与其他文体不同，科技论文的基本语言特质是严

谨（rigorous)、准确（accurate）、清晰（clarity)与洗练（concise)不需要华丽的辞藻修饰。

?What is a scientific paper

?A scientific paper is a written and published report describing original research results. In

?

?

?component parts.

?The most common labeling of the component parts, in the basic sciences, is Introduction, Methods, Results, and Discussion（hence, the acronym IMRAD)

?Also has the following elements: Title, Abstract (or sometimes a final summary instead), References and Acknowledgement.

?The title

?The title of a scientific paper should tell the reader what kind

of work is being reported. ?The length of title ?Titles are too short

“Studies on Mycobacterium tuberculosis”

such a title was not very helpful to the potential reader.

?Titles are too long

“On the addition to the method of microscopic research by a new way of producing color-contrast between an object and its background or between definite parts of the object itself”

less meaningful than short ones. It sounds like a poor title, perhaps it would make a good abstract.

?Need for specific title ?“Action of antibiotics on

Bacteria”

?Abstract

?An abstract should be viewed as a miniature version of the paper. ?Provide a brief summary of each of the main sections of the paper: IMRAD ?Abstract enables readers to identify the basic content of a document quickly and accurately, to determine its relevance to their interests and thus to decide whether they need to read the paper in its entirely. ?Abstract should not exceed the length specified by the journal (commonly 250 words)

?The abstract should :

1) state the principal objectives and the scope of the

investigation

2) describe the methods employed

3) summarize the results

4) state the principal conclusions

?Introduction ?Introduction should supply sufficient background information to allow the reader to understand and evaluate the results of the present study without needing to refer to previous publications on the topic.

?The introduction should also state briefly and clearly your purpose in writing the paper.

?Choose references carefully to provide the most important background information

?Why did you choose that subject, and why is it important? ?Besides, introduction is the proper place to define any specialized terms or abbreviations that you intend to use

?Materials and methods ?Give the full details of the methodology employed in the study

?Written in the past tense

?The main purpose of this section is to describe the experimental design and then provide enough detail so that a competent worker can repeat the experiments

?Also provide information that let readers judge the appropriateness of the methods ?Many peers may skip this section, because they already know the general methods

?List pertinent(related) chemical and physical properties of the reagents used

?Experiments animals, plants, cells, other regents and the source of them

should be listed and described ?Informed consent

?Need for reference:

if the method is new (unpublished), you must provide all of the detail. If, however, the method has been publish in a journal, the literature reference should be given, and you can state like that:“cells were broken by ultrasonic treatment as previous described”

?Results

?The results of each experiment should be presented clearly, without comment, bias, or interpretation

?Results constitute the new knowledge that you are contributing to the world, the

earlier parts of the paper are designed to tell why and how you got the Results, the latter parts of the paper is designed to tell what they mean. Therefore, the whole paper must stand or fall on the basis of the results. Thus, the results must be presented with crystal clarity.

?Results

?How do you present the data?

?Discussion

?In this section, you evaluate the meaning of your results in the terms of the original question or hypothesis and point out their biological

significance.

?If the results are unexpected or contradictory, you should attempt to explain why and possibly point out avenues of further research.

?Related literatures should be cited in this section for further support or purposes of comparison

?What are the essential features of a good Discussion?

?Try to present the principles, relationships, and generalizations shown by the Results.

?Point out any exceptions or any lack of correlation and define

unsettled points.

?Show how your results and interpretations agree with previously published works ?Discuss the theoretical implications of your work, as well as any possible practical applications

?State your conclusions as clearly as possible ?Summarized your evidence for each conclusion.