請各位先登陸 (studentID,Moodle 密碼登陸),後編輯
請各位使用左方之工具列上的上載文件連結上載習作相關的相片

9 common errors found in Hong Kong research paper

出自香港新聞網 - 樹仁新傳系學生實習習作

跳轉到: 導航, 搜尋

The founder of Wallace Academic Editing, Dr .Steve Wallace, said

today in Shue Yan University that Hong Kong researchers are

commonly rejected by international publishers mainly because of the

poor level in English in submitted papers.


Wallace suggested 9 errors*which can commonly found in Hong Kong

research paper. He also mentioned that writer should find a

more interesting and hot topic to work on which can grab the

attention of readers, he also said that the chosen words in

research paper are not precise enough, for example writer

should use ‘verify’ instead of ‘check’ to give a more

concrete meaning.


‘Publisher always wants a high-level journal as they need

to build up their reputation,’ Wallace said. He claimed that

we should use simple and easy words in daily conversation as

audiences have only one chance to listen to; speaker should

concern about the level and standard of his/her audience.

However when people are working on a written paper, they

should use more complicated words as readers will check

the meaning and do more research if they found any difficulties

in reading.


Wallace works in different university in Beijing and

Taiwan. He said that students in China are more aggressive

and eager to learn compare to Taiwan students .As a teacher;

he prefers teaching in China.


When talking about the international status of Chinese, Wallace

said, ‘I don’t think Chinese will replace English in my lifetime.’

He claimed that Chinese is too difficult to learn as it involves

four phonetics with many different words. He believes that English

is easier to learn compare to Chinese. And he suggested that

many academic journals and publications are printed in English,

people are more willing to learn this language in order to read them.


(*1.poor writing style and use of English; 2.Subject of little novel

interest are not applicable; 3. Authors did not follow manuscript

instructions; 4.Poor quality supporting figures; 5.Not enough contributions

to field; 6.Outside the scope of journal; 7.Poorly written discussion ;

8.Inadequate references; 9.Title not representative of study) --115041 2013年10月29日 (二) 17:50 (UTC)

個人工具