千里之行，始於足下：臺灣人文社會學術專書英文長摘實作分析

Creating Extended English Abstracts for Taiwan’s Scholarly Books in the Humanities and Social Sciences: An Implementation Study

10.29912/CTR.201603_9(1).0001

林奇秀(Chi-Shiou Lin)；林慶隆(Ching-Lung Lin)；邵婉卿(Wang-Ching Shaw)；張婕妤(Chieh-Yu Chang)

中書英摘 ； 英文摘述 ； 摘要製作 ； 摘要規範 ； English abstracts for Chinese-language books ； library books ； humanities and social sciences ； English translations ； library science

編譯論叢

9卷1期（2016 / 03 / 01）

1 - 36

繁體中文

本研究透過實作分析來探討臺灣人文社會學術專書之英文長摘產製過程中可能遭遇的問題，並提出可行的因應策略。具體而言，本研究的目的有三：（1）實際製作中書英摘成品，了解現行規劃的中書英摘產製模式是否可行；（2）分析中書英摘成品，評析英摘內容是否有可加以改進之處；（3）探討中書英摘製作人員在製作英摘時所遭遇的實務問題，並嘗試規劃及設計解決方案與配套措施。本研究自近年由國教院補助出版的人文社會學術專著中，挑選15 本主題互異、內容具有臺灣特色者，並兼容不同論著形式（單一研究或論文合集），用以實際製作英文長摘及電子書。同時，本研究亦從摘要製作過程的審查紀錄、深度訪談譯者所得之實作經驗中，歸結出中書英摘實作過程中會遭遇的翻譯技術問題，以及中摘製作、整體計畫執行時須注意的事項，並據此提出研究結論與建議。本研究的貢獻在於確認摘要專業編修是英摘產製過程中重要的加值工作、提出摘要英譯時可能發生的問題與解決策略，並歸納出未來大規模推動中書英摘工作時需注意的問題，包含團隊溝通與稿酬等問題。

This study examined the feasibility of supplying extended English-language abstracts for Taiwan’s scholarly books in the humanities and social sciences (H&SS). First, it sought to determine the potential difficulty of doing the necessary abstracting and translation work. Second, it sought to determine the feasibility of improving the quality of extended English abstracts by beginning to do so and then evaluating the relative degree of difficulty of this task. Third, it sought to identify problems that may arise in the course of engaging in such a project and to propose ways of facilitating future large-scale implementation of the project. Fifteen H&SS scholarly books that had been sponsored by the National Academy for Educational Research were chosen for the pilot study. Each featured a unique topic that concerned Taiwan, and the selection included both standard books and compilations of independent essays. Informed by action research, this study adopted a reflexive analysis approach to analyze the data, which were collected via in-depth interviews with the abstractors and translators as well as review logs. The study identified the problems encountered in the production of Chinese abstracts as well as in their extended English translations. The findings showed that professional abstracting skills will significantly improve the end-products. Translation problems that might arise in producing English abstracts for scholarly texts and strategies for facilitating the future implementation of this project were also discussed.

1. 林金定、嚴嘉楓、陳美花(2005)。質性研究方法：訪談模式與實施步驟分析。身心障礙研究，3(2)，122-136。
   連結：
2. 黃慕萱、張郁蔚(2005)。從研究產出探討人文社會學者學術評鑑之特性。圖書資訊學刊，2(3/4)，1-19。
   連結：
3. Clayton, J. (2003). Crafting a powerful executive summary. Retrieved from http://hbswk.hbs.edu/archive/3660.html
4. Colorado State University. (2013). Executive summaries. Retrieved from http://writing.colostate.edu/guides/guide.cfm?guideid=76
5. Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. (2013). Book reviews. Retrieved from http://www.lib.vt.edu/find/byformat/bookreviews.html
6. Book review(2013).Merriam-Webster's online dictionary.
7. Borgman, C. L.(Ed.)(1990).Scholarly communication and bibliometrics.Newbury Park, CA:Sage Publications.
8. Cleveland, D.,Cleveland, A.(2001).Introduction to indexing and abstracting.Englewood, CO:Linraries Unlimited, Inc.
9. Cremmins, E. T.(1996).The art of abstracting.Arlington, VA:Information Resources Press.
10. Cross, C.,Oppenheim, C.(2006).A genre analysis of scientific abstracts.Journal of Documentation,62(4),428-446.
11. Emanuel, J. T.(1996).The executive summary: A key to effective communication.Technical Communication,43(1),78-82.
12. Fontanet, I.(Ed.)(1998).English for academic purposes.Castello de la Plana, Spain:Universitat Jaume.
13. Hartley, J.(1997).Is it appropriate to use structured abstracts in social science journals?.Learned Publishing,10(4),313-317.
14. Hartley, J.(2006).Reading and writing book reviews across the disciplines.Journal of the American Society for Information Science & Technology,57(9),1194-1207.
15. Hartley, J.,Betts, L.(2009).Common weaknesses in traditional abstracts in the social sciences.Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,60(10),2010-2018.
16. Hartley, J.,Sydes, M.(1996).Which layout do you prefer? An analysis of readers' preferences for different typographic layours of structured abstracts.Journal of Information Science,22(1),27-37.
17. Haynes, R. B.,Mulrow, C. D.,Huth, E. J.,Altman, D. G.,Gardner, M. J.(1990).More informative abstracts revisited.Annals of Internal Medicine,113(1),69-76.
18. Koltay, T.(2010).Abstract and abstracting: A genre and set of skills for the twenty-first century.Oxford, England:Condos Publishing.
19. Lancaster, F. W.(2003).Indexing and abstracting in theory and practice.London, England:Facet Publishing.
20. Lindholm-Romantschuk, Y.(1998).Scholarly book reviewing in the social sciences and humanities: The fl ow of ideas within and amongst disciplines.Westport, CT:Greenwood Press.
21. Milas-Bracović, M.,Zajec, J.(1989).Author abstracts of research articles published in scholarly journals in Croatia (Yugoslavia): An evaluation.Libri,39(4),303-318.
22. Minichiello, V.,Aroni, R.,Timewell, E.,Alexander, L.(1995).In-depth interviewing: Principles, techniques, analysis.Melbourne, Australia:Longman Australia.
23. National Information Standards Organization(1997).ANSI/NISO Z39.14-Guidelines for Abstracts.Bethesda, MD:NISO Press.
24. Pinto, M.,Lancaster, F. W.(1999).Abstracts and abstracing in knowledge discovery.Library Trends,48(1),234-248.
25. Rowley, J.(1988).Abstracting and indexing.London, England:Clive Bingley Limited.
26. Rubin, H. J.,Rubin, I.(1995).Qualitative interviewing: The art of hearing data.Thousand Oaks, CA:Sage Publications.
27. Šauperl, A.,Klasinc, J.,Lužar, S.(2008).Components of abstracts: Logical structure of scholarly abstracts in pharmacology, sociology, and linguistics and literature.Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,59(9),1420-1432.
28. Sollaci, L. B.,Mauricio, G. P.(2004).The introduction, methods, results, and discussion (IMRAD) structure: A fifty-year survey.Journal of the Medical Library Association,92(3),364-367.
29. Thomson, R. G.(2005).Consensus publication guidelines: The next step in the science of quality improvement?.Qual Saf Health Care,14,317-318.
30. Tibbo, H.(1992).Abstracting across the disciplines: A content analysis of abstracts from the natural sciences, the social sciences, and the humanities with implications for abstracting standards and online information retrieval.Library and Information Science Research,14(1),31-56.
31. Weiss, R. S.(1995).Learning from strangers: The art and method of qualitative interview studies.New York, NY:Free Press.
32. Zhang, C.,Liu, X.(2011).Review of James Hartley's research on structured abstracts.Journal of Information Science,37(6),1-7.
33. Zuccala, A.,Leeuwen, T. V.(2011).Book reviews in humanities research evaluations.Journal of the American Society for Information Science and Technology,62(10),1979-1991.
34. 王雲東(2007)。社會研究方法：量化與質性取向及其應用。臺北縣:威仕曼文化。
35. 吳美枝譯、何禮恩譯、McNiff, J.、Lomax, P.、Whitehead, J.(2001)。行動研究：生活實踐家的研究錦囊。嘉義市:濤石文化。
36. 林奇秀、林慶隆、邵婉卿、陳彥如、張瑋麟(2012)。國家教育研究院委託研究報告國家教育研究院委託研究報告,臺北市:國家教育研究院。
37. 胡述兆編(1995)。圖書館學與資訊科學大辭典。臺北市:漢美。
38. 陳向明(2002)。社會科學質的研究。臺北市:五南。
39. 蔡清田(2000)。教育行動研究。臺北市:五南。
40. 賴慈芸、賴守正、李奭學、蘇正隆(2006)。建立我國學術著作翻譯機制之研究。臺北市:國立編譯館。
41. 瞿海源編、畢恆達編、劉長萱編、楊國樞編(2012)。社會及行為科學研究法（二）：質性研究法。臺北市:東華。

1. (2016)。人文學者心目中理想的學術摘要。圖書資訊學研究，10(2)，45-85。