專文寫作指引

© 此指引的版權屬墨爾本神學院中文部，只允許用作私人學習或研究，未經許可，不得翻印。

這是學院所定的專文寫作指引，其目的是用來幫助學生而不是給予約束，期望學生依指引進行寫作。

1. 一般意見

專文寫作是測試學生對特定課題的認知及理解能力，以個人文字表達論點和論據。一篇成功論文的關鍵是內容及論點貫徹地與「題目」或「論題」關連，包括註腳，不要答非所問。

寫作時應留意行文用詞，避免冗長、口語及借用他人而自己不懂的詞句，使用清晰簡潔的句字便可。專文寫作是以文字來練習溝通，若專文要求「討論」、「評價」、「比較及對比」時，確保你做到，而不僅是「描述」題目而已。

2. 題目選擇

你應按以下準則來選擇老師所訂出一系列的專文題目：

2.1 你對題目感興趣。

2.2 圖書館有足夠的資料（查閱圖書館目錄、期刊索引、網上期刊及其他文獻目錄等）。

2.3 你必須理解題目（若有疑問，向指導老師請教）。

3. 研究步驟

3.1 透徹地分析題目。把題目切割為若干重點，如重要字詞、範圍、限制等，確保你明    白題目的重點。若未能掌握，請與指導老師商討。

3.2 概覽在字典和百科全書裡的相關文章。

3.3 翻看原始資料（例如聖經，路德作品）及二手資料（與題目相關的箸作）。由於維基百科(Wikipedia)的資料來源並不可靠，此資料不應廣泛使用於專文寫作。

3.4 準備大綱。大綱應包括與題目相關的所有範圍，並按次序以分題及副題闡述。而其   中最重要是綱領你對專文題目的回應與論說。

3.5 除非你發現大綱與題目不符，否則應按已定的大綱作進一步閱讀。

3.6 接著，你的閱讀應專注資料整理、解釋和評估，而不只停留在已知的資料上。

3.7 你應從多方面及不同角度收集資料來回應議題，並在專文中表現出分析、評估、獨立思考和判斷的能力。

3.8與同學分享相關題目的參考書目及閱讀資料，豐富資料來源。

4. 專文寫作

4.1 按大綱預備文章初稿。

4.2 引言。引言不是總結文章的論點，而是略述文章主題、研究範圍及方法。引言須與文章內容一致，佔文章5 ~ 10%。

4.3 本文。按大綱分段闡述論題，每段篇幅應平均分配。每分段的首句應提示段落大意，有助閱讀及邏輯辯論的推進。合理地運用連接詞及重申觀點將有助段落間的連貫與透徹。

4.4 結論。結論應與引言和正文一致，把文章的主要重點作結，而不是加上新的資料或論句，但可提出或建議進一步的研究方向。

4.5 整篇專文應顯示你對課題及主要文獻的認知與熟識。

4.6 雖是初稿，但仍要合乎專文寫作格式。切記在研究、閱讀及寫作過程中，把相關文件、書目、註腳等有條理地記載下來，便可省卻定稿的時間。

4.7 初稿定後，最少休息一天，才再次閱讀。修定當中的錯別字、文句及語法等，並與同學交換閱讀，找出明顯錯處，作出修改。

4.8 作最後修改及提交定稿，並確定已加上專文提要 (synopsis)。

4.9 簡單而言，專文內容應包括以下幾個部份：

一、封頁 (Title Page)（請看學生手冊第29頁或瀏覽神學院網頁並下載有關文封）

二、提要 (Synopsis)

三、引言 (Introduction)

四、本文 (Main Body)

五、結論 (Conclusion)

六、後註 (Endnote)（若己有註腳(Footnote)在每頁之頁底，就不需這一部份）

七、參考書目(Bibliography)（用新頁開始）。

5. 寫作幫助

5.1 鼓勵學生在專文定稿前，約見指導老師討論專文題目。

5.1.1 有關專文寫作格式，可與教務長或科任老師聯繫。 若沒有在新生歡迎日收到注釋及參考資料的格式, 可到教務處索取。

5.2 學生必須出席學期初學院舉辦的「專文寫作工作坊」。

6. 格式

6.1 文章必需為單面電腦打印稿，使用雙行距，12號字體，左/右邊邊界為3cm/2.5cm, 上下邊界為2cm。註腳用10號字體，使用單行距。

6.2 仔細檢查錯別字、語法和標點符號。

6.3  全文各頁應編上連貫的頁碼。每頁的右上角須編上學生號碼。

6.4 當提及人物時，應使用可包括所有性別的語言（特別是英語），免除不必要的冒犯。總體來說，行文用詞應準確恰當，避免含糊不清。

6.5 文章內容避免使用縮寫，但註腳則可。聖經書卷名稱只可在同時列出章節的情況下使用縮寫，如創五2。

6.6 提交的專文必須附上已填妥的標準專文封頁。

6.7 專文必須引用正確的參註格式，並附上參考書目。

6.8 標題及附屬標題對文章有助益，應恰當地使用。

6.9 專文字數不應超過指定字數的10%上下限，如3000字限，不應超過3300字或少於2700字。提要、註腳及書目的字數不計算在內（其限定字數見6.13）。道學碩士12,000字限的研究專文，不包括註腳的字數，但不可超過全文指定字數的25%（細則見下列附表）。

6.10 摘要：學士或以上的專文報告須同時提交1頁約225字（不計算在總字數內）的摘要。摘要不是解釋專文的目的，方法或引言，乃是一段連貫的文章簡述，不需分段、註腳或編號。請不要把摘要當作引言。

6.11 當使用希臘文及希伯來文時，應把原文寫出，不是字/音譯 (transliteration)。希臘文應加上重音符號，希伯來文則不用（除非它影響釋經和意義）。

6.12 一般而言，使用其他語言時應列出該字原本的形式並在其後加上括號（）的中文翻譯。

6.13  註腳不應過長或過多，總篇幅不可超過全文指定字數的25%。註腳應是與論題相關卻不影響論點發展的補充資料，任何直接與論題有關的資料應置於文本中。

學位	字數(+/-10%)	最多字數	註腳的字數(全文25%為限)	註腳的最多字數	參考書目	引言	附錄	附記
Bachelor **490	9,000	9,900	不包括	2,250	不包括	不包括	不包括	包括
MDiv **690	12,000	13,200	不包括	3,000	不包括	不包括	不包括	包括
MA(Min) **790	22,500	24,750	不包括	6,188	不包括	不包括	不包括	包括

7. 學術違規

學生應持守嚴謹的學術要求和忠誠，若被發現學術違規，將跟據【學術指引】中之「延期、中止、取消學生註冊」等政策進行處分。（詳細請參閱《學習須知》之七。學術違規， 第9頁）

8. 參考資料註明和剽竊

當你引用別人的思想及見解（不是一般常識）來作自己的觀點，卻沒有註明資料來源，這便是剽竊。剽竊是極大的學術違規，會引致嚴重的學術處分。（詳細請參閱《學習須知》之八。參考資料註明和剽竊，第9-10頁）

9. 一化語言 (Non – Discriminatory Language) (呈交英語文章的同學需留意)

Non – Discriminatory Language

It is increasingly acknowledged that language is a powerful means of perpetuating discrimination against people because of their gender, age, race, and national or ethnic origin. Many people feel inferior, offended, stereotyped and denigrated by the continued use of such language. Language is constantly changing and developing. The Melbourne School of Theology encourages its faculty and students to adapt their communication to contribute towards removing discrimination and enhancing good relationships between all people. This policy extends to cover all written communication as well as both public and classroom presentations.

Titles and Other Modes of Address

Titles and modes of address should be used consistently, and in parallel fashion, for women and men.

Avoid	Use
Albert Einstein and Mrs Mead	Dr Einstein and Dr Mead, Albert Einstein and Margaret Mead

The title ‘Ms’ is recommended to parallel ‘Mr’ and should be used when a woman’s preferred title is unknown.

Alternatives for Using Man Generically

Avoid the use of gender ~ oriented language in contexts that clearly refer to people, inclusive of men and women.

Avoid	Use
man, men	we, person, people, human beings
mankind	humankind, humanity, human beings, civilization
sons of God	children of God, people of God
sons of men	children
every man	everyone
Brethren, brothers	brothers and sisters, friends, neighbours

Personal Pronouns

Use he, his, him himself only when referring specifically to a male person and not in a generic sense. When the generic sense is intended alternatives should be found：

Avoid	Use
A student may have a maximum of 9 points of transfer credit out of the final 18 points of his degree.	Students may have a maximum of 9 points of transfer credit out of the final 18 points of their degree.
	A student may have a maximum of 9 points of transfer credit out of the final 18 points of his or her degree.
	A maximum of 9 points of transfer credit out of the final 18 points may be applied to a student’s degree.

In Greek and Hebrew respectively the words anthrōpos and ‘ādām are not always gender specific but can refer inclusively to men and women. The following verses represent the manner in which Bible translators have approached Hebrew and Greek words for people.

 

	KJV (1611)	RSV (1948)	NIV (1978)	NRSV (1989)
Gen 1：26 Heb.：‘ādām LXX：anthrōpos	Let us make man in our image	Let us make man in our image	Let us make man in our image	Let us make humankind in our image
Psa 8：4 Heb.：‘enōsh, ‘ādām LXX：anthrōpos	What is man, that thou art mindful of him? And the son of man, that thou visitest him?	What is man that thou are mindful of him, and the son of man that thou dost care for him?	What is man that you are mindful of him, the son of man that you care for him?	What are human beings that you are mindful of them, mortals that you care for them?
Dan 7：13 Ar.：bar ‘enōsh LXX：huios anthrōpou	One like the Son of man came	There came one like a son of man	And there before me was one like a son of man	I saw one like a human being
1 John 2：1 Gr.：tis, m, f	If any man sin	If any one does sin	If anybody does sin	If anyone does sin
1 Tim 2：4 Gr.：anthrōpoi	Who will have all men to be saved	Who desires all men to be saved	Who wants all men to be saved	Who desires everyone to be saved
1 Tim 2：5 Gr.：anthrōpoi, anthrōpos	There is . . . one mediator between god and men, the man Christ Jesus	There is . . . one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus	There is . . . one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus	There is . . . one mediator between god and humankind, Christ Jesus, himself human

For further reference：

Australian Government, Style Manual for Authors, Editors and Printers (4th Edition; Canberra, 1994), 111 – 127.

Lawrence D. McIntosh, A Style Manual for the Presentation of Papers and Theses in Religion and Theology (Wagga Wagga: Centre for Information Studies, 1994), 40 – 43.

http：//www.usyd.edu.au/eeo/html/policies_language_guidelines.htm

10. 專文批改標準 (Essay Grading Criteria)

	Foundational 300 level	Foundational 500 level
	Units at foundational level introduce undergraduate students to the foundational features and principles of a discipline or topic. A foundation for the critical evaluation of ideas is also established.	Units at foundational level introduce graduate students to the foundational features and principles of a discipline or topic. The critical and evaluative faculties of students are developed.
Pass P – 50 ~ 57 P+ 58 ~ 64	The student attempts to engage primary sources (or documents), shows an awareness of relevant scholarly viewpoints and evidences a basic understanding of the foundational features of the discipline as that intersects with the topic.	The student demonstrates an engagement with the primary sources, has begun to grasp the foundational features of the discipline, and evidences engagement with a range of scholarly viewpoints.
Credit 65 ~ 74	The student demonstrates an engagement with primary sources, has begun to grasp the foundational features of the discipline, and evidences engagement with a range of scholarly viewpoints.	The student demonstrates ability in engaging the primary sources, evidences a grasp of the foundational features of the discipline, and exhibits engagement with a range of scholarly viewpoints.
Distinction 75 ~ 84	The student demonstrates ability in engaging the primary sources, evidences a grasp of the foundational features of the discipline, and shows promise in the task of critically evaluating a range of scholarly viewpoints.	The student demonstrates a pronounced ability to engage primary sources, exhibits a sound grasp of the foundational features of the discipline, and evidences ability in the tasks of critically evaluating a range of scholarly points of view.
High Distinction 85+	The student demonstrates a pronounced ability to engage primary sources, a sound grasp of the foundational features of the discipline, and shows promise in the task of critically evaluating a range of scholarly points of view.	The student demonstrates a pronounced ability in the analysis of primary sources and in the tasks of critically evaluating and assessing empathically a range of scholarly points of view.

 

	Advanced 400 level	Advanced 600 level
	Units at advanced level build upon foundational studies. Critical issues are introduced and evaluated; documents analysed; and the critical and evaluative faculties of the student are developed.	Building upon both knowledge and skills developed at foundational levels, candidates will be expected to analyse texts and ideas and come to independent judgments in a select area of study.
Pass P – 50 ~ 57 P+ 58 ~ 64	The student demonstrates an engagement with primary sources, has begun to grasp the foundational features of the discipline as that intersects with the topic, and evidences engagement with a range of scholarly viewpoints.	The student demonstrates ability in engaging the primary sources, evidences a grasp of the foundational features of the discipline, and exhibits engagement with a range of scholarly viewpoints.
Credit 65 ~ 74	The student demonstrates a pronounced ability in engaging primary sources, a sound grasp of the foundational features of the discipline, and shows promise in the task of critically evaluating a range of scholarly viewpoints.	The student demonstrates a pronounced ability to engage primary sources, exhibits a sound grasp of the foundational features of the discipline, and evidences ability in the task of critically evaluating a range of scholarly viewpoints.
Distinction 75 ~ 84	The student demonstrates a pronounced ability to engage primary sources, a sound grasp of the foundational features of the discipline, and an ability to evaluate critically a range of scholarly viewpoints.	The student demonstrates a pronounced ability in the analysis of primary sources and in the tasks of critically evaluating and assessing empathically a range of scholarly points of view.
High Distinction 85+	The student demonstrates a pronounced ability in the analysis of primary sources and in the tasks of evaluating and assessing empathically a range of scholarly points of view, and an ability to evaluate critically a range of scholarly viewpoints.	The student demonstrates superior ability in the analysis and critique of primary sources and ideas in critical dialogue with a wide range of scholarly points of view reporting these empathically.

Fail Grades (applicable for all levels)

%	Descriptor
0	·             The student has written nothing or has written material that is either completely incoherent, fragmentary or irrelevant to the topic or a related topic; and/or ·             The student’s response has not connected with the question, is fragmentary or related only tangentially to the set question; and/or ·             No knowledge of related data is demonstrated; and/or ·             There is no attempt to structure an argument
1 ~ 19	·              The student’s response has connected with the question but their response is confused; and/or ·              Very little knowledge of relevant data is demonstrated; and/or ·              There is an unsatisfactory attempt to structure an argument – it is confused, unstructured, or illogical.
20 ~ 39	·              The student’s response to the question lacks focus; and/or ·              Little knowledge of the relevant primary data is demonstrated; and/or ·              There is a rudimentary but unsatisfactory attempt to structure an argument and to present conclusions.
40 ~ 49	·              The student evidences no more than a basic understanding of the foundational and introductory features of the discipline as that intersects with the topic. ·              There is an unsatisfactory attempt to structure a relevant argument and there is a paucity of warranted evidence to support the conclusions.