CHEMICAL REPORT WRITING' S. J. COOW National Research Council of Canada, Ottawa Editorial examination of chemical reports and papers reueals that many authors lack skill i n writing clearly and concisely or that they do not take suflicient care in thepreperation of their manuscripts. Eramples of inaccuracies in writing and faulty composition are qlloted from seleetedpapers. It is suggested that improvement in report writing can best be effectedby giving more attention to this subject in secondary schools and colleges.
CHEMICAL
reports l i e chemical solutions should be clear. Readers, however, find that some papers on scientific subjects are lacking in the essential features of conciseness and clssity. Writers who have a natural gift in the matter of expression are few in number, and most of those who are to become writers of scientific reports require to be trained in this work as well as in their laboratory techniques. It follows then that more attention should be given to the teaching of English composition and to the requirement of practice on the part of the student in the writing of reports prepared according to procedures approved by the better scientific journals. Only in this way can the desired standards of excellence in scientific papers be attained. Nor is i t only in the writing of scientific reports that we are deficient in the use of the English language. This point was emphasized in an editorial that appeared recently in one of Canada's larger daily newspapers. Advocating the greater use of the dictionary in the preparation of written reports and public addresses, the editorial read, in part, as follows: Canadians, notoriously, speak and writernglish poorly. The reason is that Canadiins do not appreciate sufficiently the importance of good English, do not know the glory and majesty of their speech. The best speaker in the House of Commons in our generation was Sir Wilfrid Laurier. There was hardly a day when, as we remember him, he did not have a dictionary hrougbt to his desk. It was simply that he knew the importance of the right word; understood what Morley once called "the glory of wnrdn." .. It was said of Mr. Asquith that he used the "inevitable prd." Use of the inevitable word, the word that contains the exad shade of meaning to be conveyed, is not possible without study of the dictionary.
A good general training in the use of the English language is essential to good scientific report writing. The Canadian Journal of Research, published by the National Research Council of Canada since 1929, offers a Canadian medium for the publication of manuContribution from Research Plans and Publieatious, National Research Laboratories, Ottawa, Canada. Issued as N.R.C. No. 1406. Managing Editor, Canadian Journal of Research, and Officerin-Charge, Research Plans and Pdlioations.
,
scripts on original scientific work carried on in Canada. In the preparation of papers for publication in it, every effort is made to keep editorial standards high. A representative Board of Editors is responsible for the review of all submitted manuscripts, and they take care to ensure that only creditable work is published. As a guide to authors, editorial instructions for the preparation of manuscripts are published in each issue of the J o u m l , but some manuscripts indicate that the authors have not followedthe procedures suggested. Sometimes the editors can make the necessary revisions to ensure correctness and clarity in the text, but this practice is not recommended because it is felt that responsibility for the accuracy of the manuscript should rest on the author of the paper. It is usual, therefore, to make a complete editorial study of each paper and to submit any proposed changes to the author for consideration. , This is time-consuming and not infre' quently delays the publication of a paper that might have been printed promptly if the author had but taken more care in the preparation of his manuscript. In most instances, such editorialbelp is highly appreciated; especially by younger authors, but others who have developed bad habits in writing are likely to be annoyed by the suggestion that changes should be made in their manuscripts. Occasionally, and especially whenauthors are obviously in the wrong, they may even adopt a somewhat hostile attitude in regard to proffered editorial assistance. Authors have even been known to defend theirmistakes by remarking that, if they make grammatical errors, these should be ignored by editors because such constructions are characteristic of the authors' "style." In the writer's view, the long-term solution of this problem is to introduce the criticism of writing a t as early a stage as possible in the training of potential scientists and, despite the crowded nature of the curricula in most undergraduate courses, i t is suggested that consideration be given to the inclusion of practice in report writing in the junior years and that an effort be made to secure intensive criticism of such work by competent English teachers. It is quite possible too that even in the secondary schools the plan of studies
APRIL, 1947
could be modified so as to provide students k t h a better foundation in the theory and practice of good English usage. Chemical topics might well be used as subject material. The purpose of this paper is to give point to the argument by quoting a few examples from papers that have come to the writer's attention. It is thought that the illustrations given may prove.usefu1 in preventing some of the less experienced writers from falling into editorial pitfalls in chemical report writing that have beset the paths of their senior colleagues. It must be admitted that the problem is as old as the mirth-provoking "howlers" of the written tests of public and high school days. It becomes serious however when errors in writing find their wayinto manuscripts on original research that are intended for publication in scientific journals; undetected errors may not only be misleading or ambiguous, but they may indeed convey an entirely wrong idea concerningthe results of the experimental work being reported. It is often said that research work is incomplete until i t is published, and this is certainly tme of any worth-while investigation. Precision and care in laboratory technique are recognized as essential; clarity and accuracy of expression in the written record are not less important. Readers of manuscripts occasionally find that good experimental work is badly reported. Books have been written on this subject, and the chief justification for this further brief contribution is the hope that it may prompt some potential authors of scientific papers to read and ponder the precepts set down by numerous authorities on the preparation of mauuscripts and that it may stimulate teachers to give more consideration to this subject. Examples of errors have been selected from a few papers taken a t random to show that inaccuracies of statement, and faulty constmction, can easily be found even in scientific papers that have been passed for publication by competent reviewers. ' It can be said, no doubt, that such examples are merely the work of "gremlins," and perhaps they are, but..afew old fashioned readers of manuscripts still think that many of the common pitfalls in the use of the English language could be avoided. Here are few typical cases of faulty constrnction encountered recently. One author said: "We mixed the ingredients and shook for half au hour." Could i t be that the author suffered from a serious nervous ailment? Another "centrifuged the mixture and stood in the refrigerator overnight." He does not record his feelings in the morning, but perhaps the cooling process clarified his thinking. Another more restful observation was that "our conclusious can only be applied to the seated posture with minimal activity." Ambiguities creep in, as when "preliminary work showed 98 per cent rooting, the highest percentage for greenhouse propagation reached by the authors." Since greenhouse propagation has proved so successful,
191
it may be that the solution of the general housing problem has been found. As noted previously, most authors fully appreciate the service rendered to them by painstaking editors, but sometimes even letters of thanks have to be read with a degree of leniency, as when one author replied: "We are grateful for having drawn our attention to this error:" But perhaps one of the most telling admissions by an author was couched in the advice that "when first carried out, we too suspected the toxic effects of alcohol." It would be a matter of some scientific interest to know whether his suspicion was confirmed or removed in subsequentepisodes. Inaccuracies of statement in a manuscript have a fair chance of survival in print. A few examples will indicate how difficult it is to detect this kind of error. "The powder with 1.4 per cent moisture maintained the lowest pH level during the storage period." From consideration of a curve supplied with the text, i t was obvious that "lowest" should have read "highest"; the authors expressed their appreciation when this mistake was drawn to their attention. Everyone knows how omitted words can change the sense of a given expression, as when an author wrote "proportional to" when he meant "inversely proportional to." The same author transposed Greek letters a t the top of two columns of data in a table. This error was caught but almost wholly through sheer good luck. Another author submitted duplicate copies of two curves and duplicate mptions. One caption stated that the dotted lines represented the "experimental" results and the solid line the Licalculated" results. I n the duplicate csjption the dotfkd lines were said to represent the "calculated" results and the solid line the "experimental" results. It was impossible to tell from the context which statement was correct. Every con6eivable type of error is made in reference lists: misspelling of authors' nabes, wrong initials, wrong volume numbers, wrong page numbers, wrong dates of publication, etc. Through errors in citation, statements have even been attributed to persons who never made them. Much time is spent in checking references cited in papers submitted for publication in the Canadian Journal of Restqrch, but the number of errors detected in manuscripts each year is considered sufficient to warrant continuance of the practice. Mention has been made of the "Notes on the Preparation of Copy" published on the inner back cover of eachissue of the Canadian Journal of Research. These "notes" serve as a guide to the author and, if followed carefully, enable him to present a manuscript on which only the minimum amount of editorial work needs to be done before copy is sent to the printer, provided, of course, that the reviewers do not take issue with the scientific content of the paper. On such papers, also, the subsequent editorial work is limited to the correction of the occasional typographical errors that escape the attention of even the best printers. Apart from advice as to the number of copies of text
192
and illustrations to be supplied, the requirements of an abstract, the desirability of submitting clean, typewritten manuscripts, and a few other items regardlug atyle, arrangement of matter, spelling, and the use of abbreviations, the "notes" contain information on several other points that are often overlooked by authors. For example, authors often submit line drawings that, a t first sight, appear to be very well prepared. On closer examination they are found to be quite unsuitable for reproduction. The lines in the chart may be too light, or the lettering may be too small to be legible on reduction of the chart to the required width. Again, many drawings are made on coordinate paper ruled in green, yellow, or red, all of which colors appear as black lines on the printed page and sometimes mask the data represented on the curves. The "notes" specify that for line drawings "all lines should be of sufficient thickness to reproduce well. Drawings should be carefully made with India ink on white drawing paper, blue tracing linen, or coordinate paper ruled in blue only; any coordinate lines that are to appear in the reproduction should be ruled in black ink. Paper ruled in green, yellow, or red should not be used unless i t is desired to have all the coordinate lines show. Lettering and numerals should be neatly done in India ink preferably with a stencil (do not use typewriting) and be of such size that they will be legible and not less than one millimeter in height when repmduced in a cut three inches wide. All experimental points should be carefully drawn with instruments. Illustrations need not be more than two or three times the size of the desired reproduction, but the ratio of height to width should conform with that of the type page." Similar instructions are given in regard to other items such as photographs, tables, and references. It is surprising to find that many manuscripts are submitted in what appears to.be draft form. These papers, of course, require far more, than the usual amount of editorial preparation. Curiously enough, too, and almost invariably in such instances, the authors express the hope that their papers may be accorded
JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL EDUCATION
"early publication." Properly prepared papers, as already mentioned, can be dealt with expeditiously. But manuscripts in typewritten form, with cancellations, additions in poor handwriting and often in pencil and blurred, insert sheets separated from their context, illustrations without captions, charts in which the curves lack proper identification-in short, badly prepared manuscriptssimply cannot be sent to the printer until much work has been done on them, and that takes time. Printers' deadlines have to be met to ensure promptness in publication. Fortunately, poorly prepared manuscripts are the exception and not the rule, but why, editors ask, should there be any of them? Is i t laziness, or carelessness, or sheer inability to produce a tidy manuscript that prompts authors to submit such documents for publication? Possibly, contributors in this class we shall always have with us. There is probably nothmg we can do in the way of reforming the more incorrigible cases, but high-school and university students, who will be the laboratory workers and research scientists in the coming years and who will then be preparing our scientific papers, can be trained in this essential art of clear and concise writing. It is suggested that appropriate steps should be taken at once in high schools and colleges to intensify the teaching of English, particularly in its relation to the development of clarity in report writing. There should be, in addition to lectures, provision for more practice in the writing of reports. Details of the changes required in school and college curricula to meet these needs can very well be left to Canadian educators, hut it is suggested that the p~oblemis real and that an effort shou1d"be made now to ensure that the university men of tomorrow are better trained in report writing than some of their predecessors have been in the past. ACKNOWLEDGMENT
.,
The author wishes to thank Dr. W. W. Thomson and Dr. Pauline Snure, Associate Editor and Assistant Editor, respectively, Canadian Journal ojResearch, for their assistance in the preparation of this paper.
