• CHAINS: Characterising Individual Speakers CHAINS is a research project funded by Science Foundation Ireland from April 2005 to March 2009. Its goal is to advance the science of speaker identification by investigating those characteristics of a persons speech that make them unique.
• The Blog Authorship Corpus The Blog Authorship Corpus consists of the collected posts of 19,320 bloggers gathered from blogger.com in August 2004. The corpus incorporates a total of 681,288 posts and over 140 million words – or approximately 35 posts and 7250 words per person.
• Old Bailey Corpus The proceedings of the Old Bailey, London’s central criminal court, were published from 1674 to 1913 and constitute a large body of texts from the beginning of Late Modern English. The Proceedings contain over 200,000 trials, totalling ca. 134 million words and its verbatim passages are arguably as near as we can get to the spoken word of the period. The material thus offers the rare opportunity of analyzing everyday language in a period that has been neglected both with regard to the compilation of primary linguistic data and the description of the structure, variability, and change of English.
• CoRD | Corpus of Early English Medical Writing (CEEM) The Corpus of Early English Medical Writing is a corpus of English vernacular medical writing. Consisting of three diachronically divided subcorpora, the corpus covers the entire history of medical writing in English from the earliest manuscripts to the beginning of modern clinical medicine.
• The York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose (YCOE) The York-Toronto-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Old English Prose (YCOE) is a 1.5 million word syntactically-annotated corpus of Old English prose texts. As a sister corpus to the Penn-Helsinki Parsed Corpus of Middle English (PPCME2), it uses the same form of annotation and is accessed by the same search engine, CorpusSearch. The YCOE was created with a grant from the English Arts and Humanities Research Board (B/RG/AN5907/APN9528). The corpus itself (the annotated text files) is distributed by the Oxford Text Archive and can be obtained from them free of charge for non-commercial use.
• ARCHER Corpus (The University of Manchester) ARCHER is a multi-genre corpus of British and American English covering the period 1650-1990, first constructed by Douglas Biber and Edward Finegan in the 1990s. It is managed as an ongoing project by a consortium of participants at fourteen universities in seven countries.
• Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English The Santa Barbara Corpus of Spoken American English is based on a large body of recordings of naturally occurring spoken interaction from all over the United States. The Santa Barbara Corpus represents a wide variety of people of different regional origins, ages, occupations, genders, and ethnic and social backgrounds. The predominant form of language use represented is face-to-face conversation, but the corpus also documents many other ways that that people use language in their everyday lives: telephone conversations, card games, food preparation, on-the-job talk, classroom lectures, sermons, story-telling, town hall meetings, tour-guide spiels, and more.
• The Newcastle Electronic Corpus of Tyneside English (NECTE) The Newcastle Electronic Corpus of Tyneside English (NECTE) is a corpus of dialect speech from Tyneside in North-East England. It is based on two pre-existing corpora, one of them collected in the late 1960s by the Tyneside Linguistic Survey (TLS) project, and the other in 1994 by the Phonological Variation and Change in Contemporary Spoken English (PVC) project. NECTE amalgamates the TLS and PVC materials into a single Text Encoding Initiative (TEI)-conformant XML-encoded corpus and makes them available in a variety of aligned formats: digitized audio, standard orthographic transcription, phonetic transcription, and part-of-speech tagged. This website describes the NECTE corpus in detail, and makes it available to academic researchers, educationalists, the media in non-commercial applications, and organisations such as language societies and individuals with a serious interest in historical dialect materials.
• The Limerick Corpus of Irish English The Limerick Corpus of Irish English (L-CIE) has been developed by the University of Limerick in conjunction with Mary Immaculate College, Limerick. This one-million word spoken corpus of Irish English discourse includes conversations recorded in a wide variety of mostly informal settings throughout Ireland. The corpus is a collection of naturally occurring spoken data from everyday Irish contexts. There are currently 375 transcripts (totaling over 1,000,000 words) available at this site.
• American National Corpus The American National Corpus (ANC) project is creating a massive electronic collection of American English, including texts of all genres and transcripts of spoken data produced from 1990 onward. The ANC will provide the most comprehensive picture of American English ever created, and will serve as a resource for education, linguistic and lexicographic research, and technology development.
• Great Britain (ICE-GB) @ ICE-corpora.net The British component of ICE is based at the Survey of English Usage, University College London. The British ICE corpus (ICE-GB) was released in 1998 and is now available. The corpus is POS-tagged and parsed.
• WebCorp: The Web as Corpus WebCorp LSE is a fully-tailored linguistic search engine to cache and process large sections of the web.
• WaCKy “We are a community of linguists and information technology specialists who got together to develop a set of tools (and interfaces to existing tools) that will allow linguists to crawl a section of the web, process the data, index and search them. We try to keep everything very laid-back and flexible (minimal constraint on data representation, programming language, etc.) to make it easier for people with different backgrounds and goals to use our resources and/or contribute to the project. We built a few corpora you can download, and in the near future we’ll have a web interface for direct online use of the corpora.
• VISL – Corpus Eye VISL’s grammatical and NLP research are both largely corpus based. On the one hand, VISL develops taggers, parsers and computational lexica based on corpus data, on the other hand these tools – once functional – are used for the grammatical annotation of large running text corpora, often with or for external partners (project list 1999-2009. The main methodological approach for automatic corpus annotation is Constraint Grammar (CG), a word based annotation method.
• TIME Magazine Corpus of American English This website allows you to quickly and easily search more than 100 million words of text of American English from 1923 to the present, as found in TIME magazine. You can see how words, phrases and grammatical constructions have increased or decreased in frequency and see how words have changed meaning over time.
• Regex Dictionary by Lou Hevly The Regex Dictionary is a searchable online dictionary, based on The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, 4th edition, that returns matches based on strings —defined here as a series of characters and metacharacters— rather than on whole words, while optionally grouping results by their part of speech.
• Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English >> ELI Corpora & UM ACL The Michigan Corpus of Academic Spoken English (MICASE) is a collection of nearly 1.8 million words of transcribed speech (almost 200 hours of recordings) from the University of Michigan (U-M) in Ann Arbor, created by researchers and students at the U-M English Language Institute (ELI). MICASE contains data from a wide range of speech events (including lectures, classroom discussions, lab sections, seminars, and advising sessions) and locations across the university.
• LDC – Linguistic Data Consortium New Corpora at the LDC include: Indian Language Part-of-Speech Tagset: Bengali ~100K words of manually annotated Bengali text Message Understanding Conference 7 Timed (MUC7_T) ~ timed annotation for named entities Asian Elephant Vocalizations ~57.5 hours of audio recordings of vocalizations by Asian Elephants NIST 2005 Open Machine Translation (OpenMT) Evaluation ~ source data, reference translations, and scoring software used in the NIST 2005 OpenMT evaluation TRECVID 2006 Keyframes & Transcripts ~keyframes extracted from English, Chinese, and Arabic broadcast programming
• Linas’ collection of NLP data Here is a collection of linguistic data, including a collection of parsed texts from Voice of America, Project Gutenberg, the simple English Wikipedia, and a portion of the full English Wikipedia. This data is the result of many CPU-years worth of number-crunching, and is meant to provide pre-digested input for higher order linguistic processing. Two types of data are provided: parsed and tagged texts, and large SQL tables of statistical correlations. The texts were dependency parsed with a combination of RelEx and Link Grammar, and are marked with both dependencies (subject, object, prepositional relations, etc.), with features (part-of-speech tags, verb-tense and noun-number tags, etc., with Link Grammar linkage relations, and with phrasal constituency structure.
• LexChecker LexChecker is a web-based corpus query tool that shows how English words are used. Users submit a word into the query box (like a Google search) and LexChecker returns a list of the patterns in which the word is typically used. Each pattern listed for a word is linked to sentences from the British National Corpus (BNC) that show the word occurring in that pattern. The patterns are what we have dubbed ‘hybrid n-grams’. These are a uniquely useful form of corpus search result. They can consist of a string of words such as keep a close eye on or gain the upper hand. Or they could contain substitutable slots marked by specific parts of speech, for example run the risk of [v-ing] or stand [noun] in good stead or [verb] a storm of protest (as in raise/spark/cause/create/unleash a storm of protest).
• Forensic Linguistics Institute (FLI) Corpus of Texts Appeals, Blackmail and Extortion, Confessions, Death Row Final Statements, Declarations of War, Last Wills and Testaments, Miscellaneous, Statements by Police, Suicide Notes
• David Lee’s Corpus-based Linguistics LINKS “These annotated links (c. 1,000 of them) are meant mainly for linguists and language teachers who work with corpora, not computational linguists/NLP (natural language processing) people, so although the language-engineering-type links here are fairly extensive, they are not exhaustive…”
• CORPORA List The CORPORA list is open for information and questions about text corpora such as availability, aspects of compiling and using corpora, software, tagging, parsing, bibliography, conferences etc. The list is also open for all types of discussion with a bearing on corpora.
• Corpora for Language Learning and Teaching
• [bnc] British National Corpus The British National Corpus (BNC) is a 100 million word collection of samples of written and spoken language from a wide range of sources, designed to represent a wide cross-section of current British English, both spoken and written.
• AUE: The alt.usage.english Home Page This is the web site of the alt.usage.english newsgroup. Contains audio archive.
• Project We Say Tomato
• Corpus of Historical American English (COHA) COHA allows you to quickly and easily search more than 400 million words of text of American English from 1810 to 2009 (see details on corpus composition). You can see how words, phrases and grammatical constructions have increased or decreased in frequency, how words have changed meaning over time, and how stylistic changes have taken place in the language.
• Speech Accent Archive The speech accent archive uniformly presents a large set of speech samples from a variety of language backgrounds. Native and non-native speakers of English read the same paragraph and are carefully transcribed. The archive is used by people who wish to compare and analyze the accents of different English speakers.
• IDEA – The International Dialects Of English Archive IDEA was created in 1997 as a free, online archive of primary source dialect and accent recordings for the performing arts. Its founder and director is Paul Meier, author of the best-selling Accents and Dialects for Stage and Screen, a leading dialect coach for theatre and film, and a specialist in accent reduction.
• American Rhetoric: The Power of Oratory in the United States Database of and index to 5000+ full text, audio and video versions of public speeches, sermons, legal proceedings, lectures, debates, interviews, other recorded media events, and a declaration or two.
• The AMI Meeting Corpus The AMI Meeting Corpus is a multi-modal data set consisting of 100 hours of meeting recordings.

Because writing is a reflective process in which writers critically reflect concepts they obtain from reading activities and develop arguments based on the acquired/comprehended concepts, reading block can simply be  understood as inadequate reading #NoDrama. Read!

Kita (termasuk saya) sering lupa bahwa pengetahuan dalam bidang tertentu (knowledge of a particular subject) berbeda dari pengetahuan dan ketrampilan pedagogis untuk pengajaran bidang tersebut (pedagogical knowledge and skills of the subject). Sehingga, kita sering terjebak pada analogi ‘pemain sepak bola yang jago adalah pelatih yang baik untuk siswa sekolah sepak bola’ atau analogi ‘mike tyson adalah pelatih tinju terbaik karena dia adalah juara dunia tinju’. Apakah Cus D’Amato seorang boxer kelas dunia?

It’s easier for us to see our inabilities and doubts, which prevent us from trying, doing and achieving. Perfection is shadowing us, making it difficult to accept flaws and failures.

Well, my friends. Focus on abilities and confidence. Try, do and achieve. Perfection is a myth. It’s ok to get 7 out of 10, or even 5. Believe in yourself. Let’s accept our flaws and failures as part of our journey to achievements. Without the pain, our gain would be plain.

Everybody is playing a game and sometimes they will take you into the field and push you to play it. If you do, there will be two possible results: you win the game or you lose it. Because it’s not your game, the probability that you lose is greater. They set the rules.

Leave it.

Not playing the game doesn’t mean you lose. That means you have your own rules and won’t let others drag you. Leave their game.

Life is like riding a motorcycle.
You will face the wind and rain, but you always have the option to accelerate. Focus on the destination. Just make sure you keep your balance and enjoy the ride. Be grateful for the journey. #life

Membenci dan berkata buruk tentang makanan saja tidak boleh, apalagi membenci sesama manusia

Sepatutnya biasa saja. Membenci orang lain karena berbeda dari kita itu bentuk pengingkaran kenyataan bahwa kita juga tidak sempurna, dan mungkin ada orang lain yang membenci kita karena ketidaksempurnaan itu. Membenci orang lain karena berbeda juga bisa jadi bentuk kesombongan, karena kita menilai orang lain tidak lebih baik dari kita.

Paijo malah ikut tertawa ketika beberapa orang di dalam ruangan itu menertawakan dirinya. Mungkin karena jengkel, orang-orang itu semakin semangat mengolok dan menertawakan Paijo. Tapi Paijo memang aneh. Semakin keras mereka tertawa, semakin keras pula tawa Paijo. Bhahaha…

Mungkin level jengkel mereka sudah memuncak, sampai akhirnya mereka berteriak. ‘Gendeng kowe jo, tak guyu kok kamu ngguyu. Kamu edan ya, kami tertawakan kok kamu tertawa juga’.

Dengan tawa yang dia nikmati, Paijo menjawab ‘Bhahaha… Jangankan sampeyan, saya sendiri lo menertawakan diri saya. Memang bodoh saya ini haha… Saya ikut menikmati kebahagiaan sampeyan menertawakan orang lain’.

‘Pancen edan!’ Umpat salah satu dari mereka sambil bergerak menjauh. Kemudian, semua ikut berjalan menjauh, meninggalkan Paijo sendiri di dalam ruangan.

Paijo mendekati kursi di sisi ruangan. Duduk tenang, dia menikmati kopi yang sudah tidak panas lagi. Dia biasa saja.

Paijo sudah terlatih remuk hati. Bully itu semacam biskuit yang sering dia nikmati di masa lalu. Sudah biasa. Dia tahu, menyangkal dan melawan orang lain yang menertawakan tidak akan membuatnya merasa lebih baik. Sebaliknya, menerima kekurangan dirinya dan ikut tertawa membuatnya lebih kuat.

Pelan, Paijo bergumam ‘it’s the power of self-acceptance bro’

Seperti anjuran untuk menyelamatkan hutan dan pepohonan yang dicetak di atas berlembar-lembar kertas

Seperti manusia yang berharap surga, percaya bahwa dunia hanya tempat persinggahan sementara, tapi berebut dunia seperti hidup selamanya

Sesekali saya biarkan anak-anak kalah, supaya mereka mengerti bahwa terkalahkan itu manusiawi, supaya mereka bisa menerima kenyataan bahwa hidup tidak melulu tentang kemenangan dan keberhasilan.

Alasan lain yang lebih penting. Saya biarkan mereka kalah supaya mereka bisa menjadi lebih peka hati dan penuh kasih, bisa berempati, bisa merasakan apa yang dirasakan oleh orang lain, sehingga mereka tidak jumawa terhadap kemenangan dan pencapaian.

Sesekali biarkan mereka kalah, agar mereka tidak menjadi manusia egois.

Seorang teman datang dengan penuh emosi. ‘Kurang ajar penulis itu. Dia menulis kalimat-kalimat yang tidak bisa saya terima. Saya tersinggung’.

‘Sik, kenapa bro?’ saya bertanya lewat jalur panggilan yang samar, mungkin jaringan sedang tidak baik.

‘Dia menulis kalimat begitu, maksudnya pasti menyinggung saya. Saya emosi’.

𝐃𝐮𝐚 𝐡𝐚𝐥 𝐲𝐚𝐧𝐠 𝐰𝐚𝐣𝐢𝐛 𝐝𝐢𝐤𝐮𝐚𝐬𝐚𝐢 𝐦𝐚𝐡𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐬𝐰𝐚 𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐤𝐚𝐢𝐭 𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐠𝐚𝐧 ‘𝐭𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐤𝐢𝐧𝐠’ – 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐬𝐞𝐬 𝐛𝐞𝐫𝐩𝐢𝐤𝐢𝐫.

(1). Systematic Thinking – banyak mahasiswa di berbagai level masih belum bisa berpikir sistematis. Kemampuan untuk mengorganisir informasi masih belum cukup baik.

(2). Critical Thinking – belum mampu dan belum ‘berani’ berpikir kritis, cenderung menerima konsep/ide dan pandangan tanpa evaluasi kritis yang cukup.

Sekitar tahun 2008, bersama beberapa teman, saya terlibat dalam proyek Microsoft for Indonesia. Salah satu tujuan proyek tersebut adalah mengukur computer literacy guru-guru dan siswa di beberapa daerah.

Banyak hal menggembirakan. Namun, kita juga menemukan kondisi yang membuat kita sedih.

Pada umumnya, sekolah sudah memiliki komputer (dan lab), tapi banyak siswa dan beberapa guru tidak mempunyai akses menggunakan komputer (akses ya, bukan kepemilikan komputer atau laptop). Saat itu, masih banyak guru tidak memiliki komputer atau laptop personal, sehingga satu komputer digunakan 4 sampai 6 guru.

Selain pertanyaan ‘how’s the progress?’ dan ‘what chapter are you working on?’ – pertanyaan lain yang sering diajukan pembimbing riset doktoral saya adalah ‘are you ok?’ – ‘are you feeling ok?’.

Yes, student well-being adalah salah satu aspek penting dari studi. Studi (dan hampir semua layanan kampus) sangat berorientasi pada mahasiswa. Dalam proses studi, pembimbing bertanggung jawab akan dua hal, penyelesaian riset dan student well-being.

Saya akan fokus ke student well-being. Apa dampaknya terhadap mahasiswa? Saya merasa nyaman dan menikmati masa studi (malah kalau boleh studi lagi, saya mau 😁 #ngarep). Saya merasa mendapatkan banyak hal, bukan sekedar ilmu, tetapi pengalaman hidup. Living experience, seperti yang dijanjikan di iklan-iklan kampus luar negeri. Hah? Apalagi itu living experience?

Online Corpus

Parallel Corpus

Text Archive

Word Cloud

Corpus Tools

Lexical Analysers

Taggers

Phonetic Analysis

Development Workbench

Descriptive Resources

Statistical Tools

Scientific manuscript writing requires writers (researchers) to use various genres (cognitive genres – Bruce, 2008). In this post, I arrange the sample practices provided by UEfAP based on the basic structure of a scientific article. The arrangement will help you understand how particular genres are used in article sections, and allow you to compare genres employed in different sections (by doing the practices). You can start with the introduction [1], and then finish the other sections.

[1] Writing an Introduction

[2] Writing the Method Section

[3] Writing the Results Section

[4] Writing the Discussion 

[5] Writing the Conclusions

[6] Writing an Abstract

[responsivevoice_button voice=”UK English Male” buttontext=”Play”]

If you are looking for updated references for your English-related studies, you can use the reference lists provided by the International Research Foundation for English Language Education (TIRF). Download HERE

Summarizing various reasons for rejection of scientific manuscripts, Lucey (2015) proposed 12 dominant factors:

1. Clarity: the paper needs to tell us what it is doing. If there are a host of good ideas all crowding each other out then in the confines of the space available in a modern journal article this is going to present a problem. Without getting into salami slicing, where a host of papers are created from one base, each differing only minutely form each other, the rubric of “One for One”, one major idea per paper, is one to live by. That way you can present a tightly argued, clear, organised paper. The other ideas go in other papers. Ask yourself – is this tightly coherent.

2. Fit: It still astonishes me how often I see papers that are simply not within the aims and scope of the journal. How hard can it be to check have similar papers been published in the last few years, to read the journal homepage, to perhaps even email the editor or an associate editor? Again, this is not to say that journals shouldn’t, and perhaps even have a responsibility to, go outside the box a little, but sending a theory paper to an empirical journal, or a paper on international trade to one focusing on corporate finance suggests sloppy preparation and a lack of clarity. Check if it fits.

3. Contribution: I mentioned salami slicing. In empirical papers this most often appears where one or two variables or approaches are changed and a new paper produced. Thus one paper uses one methodology and another a similar, with essentially the same explanatory variable set. Really this is down to referees and editors, where the dreaded “robustness checks” are required to be shown. Let the reader feel they learned something

4. Triviality: Some things, if not known (can anything be known, really, in social science?) are well accepted. A paper that demonstrates already well attributed findings but in another setting, that is hard to publish. In my area this usually manifests itself as a paper that takes a concept or finding from developed or increasingly emerging markets, applies it to a frontier market and finds the same findings. Salami slicing works this way also, or rather, not. Give the reader a solid reason for reading the paper

5. Coherence: Some papers are a mess. There is a good reason for, and again this is in my area, a conventional layout: introduction, previous literature, data and methodology, findings, robustness checks, conclusion and recommendations. It works to aid the writer and more important the reader in understanding the flow of the paper. Too many or too few sections, lack of integration across same, a sense where there are multiple authors of multiple voices rather than one, all these make it hard to read and hard to understand. Remember, this is a discourse, a communication. Make the paper clear

6. Completeness: some papers are simply not complete. For most publishers now there is a technical screening before it hits the editor; are the manuscripts, tables, figures, data etc. in the submission? Has it passed the plagiarism screening? Is it legible? Sometimes people simply forget to include material. It is uncommon but not unknown to have papers that have <to be added – Jim> or something similar. If it’s not complete, it’s not going anywhere. Complete the paper.

7. Legibility: At times I feel like channelling Samuel L. Jackson, discussing linguistics with Brett, in Pulp Fiction. English is overwhelmingly the language of academic publishing. If the language is poorly structured, riddled with errors syntactical and lexical, then it’s going to be rejected. Get it proofread, even if you are a native English speaker.

8. Correctness. A paper needs, especially if it is going to challenge established wisdom, to be very well constructed and to leave the reader feeling that yes there is a solid challenge. If the paper misses a whole pile of literature, has bad statistics, overambitious conclusions drawn from fuzzy data, is in general riddled with poor science, then it’s going to go down. Alternative perspectives are great, but being wrong is an alternative to being right. Check your science.

9. Strength: This is often the case when papers are from junior researchers or are driving forward a new area. At the end we want to know – so now what do we do or where do we go? If the paper cant tell us that, perhaps because of some of the other issues noted here or because the paper spent too long or in too rambling a way to get to the point, then it is not going to prosper. Make it strong but grounded.

10. Replicability: Data integrity and replicability are becoming key concerns of journal editors. Some have adopted a policy of having data and commands deposited with the paper. In general however the paper should be complete in its descriptions so that someone with the same or similar data can reproduce the flow. Explain what data, where sourced, what cleaning etc.; outline the nature of the theoretical steps; explain the experiments. Many of these explanations, which can be quite long, can be placed now as supplemental appendices, and should be so done. That way the paper as such can be short and pointed and the interested replicator can go to the appendices for detail. If there is a sense that this can’t be replicated, then it’s incomplete and poorly written and will crash. Make it reproducible

11. Courtesy: The academy is quite small once you get into paper writing and reviewing. I have had occasion to reject a paper from a journal knowing, as I had been the reviewer just two weeks before, that the paper authors had not made any effort to address my previous concerns. That doesn’t mean agreeing with them, it does mean addressing them. Sending a literally identical paper sequentially rejected to a multiple of journals will get you a bad reputation and you WILL meet as editors or other gatekeepers people whose views you have blown off. Address the concerns.

12. Bad Luck: ideas and topics go into and out of vogue. It is not uncommon to see two or more similar papers addressing similar areas being submitted. In that case there is an element of luck. Generally I will try to track back, via working papers dates, and see who has some claim on priority. This, by the way, is another reason why working papers and conference presentations are useful; they show intellectual priority. At any rate, Solomonic judgements are sometimes required. Be swift, but sure, I suggest.

Ref. https://brianmlucey.wordpress.com/2015/09/09/a-dozen-ways-to-get-your-academic-paper-rejected/

Typical rhetorical functions used in academic writing

Descriptive

1. Describing objects, location, structure and direction
2. Reporting and narrating
3. Defining
4. Writing instructions
5. Describing function
6. Describing processes, developments and operations
7. Classifying / categorising
8. Giving examples
9. Including tables and charts

Critical

10. Writing critically
11. Arguing and discussing
12. Evaluating other points of view
13. Comparing and contrasting: similarities and differences
14. Generalising
15. Expressing degrees of certainty
16. Expressing reasons and explanations / cause and effect
17. Expressing feelings
18. Analysing
19. Planning action
20. Providing support
21. Application
22. Working with different voices and finding your own
23. Taking a stance
24. Using theory
25. Persuading
40. Introducing
41. Using previous research
42. Indicating a gap
43. Presenting findings from statistical analyses
44. Presenting findings from interviews
45. Discussing limitations
46. Drawing conclusions
47. Recommendations
48. Implications

Reflective

1. Writing reflectively

Source: http://www.uefap.com/writing/function/funcfram.htm

Most people read scientific articles by following the structure of the articles, starting from the first section until the last one. This is the most common method, but I found it inefficient.
.
Here is my method.
.
Skim the abstract quickly
Go to the conclusions/summary section and identify the author’s main conclusions/arguments
Flip through the article to look at the research data supporting the conclusions; identify the most prominent data.
Now, you can start reading the introduction.

Saya sudah banyak berlatih berbicara dan menulis, tapi hasilnya belum baik. Kenapa?

Karena ucapan dan tulisan adalah produk olah pikir, maka yang harus ditingkatkan atau diperbaiki adalah pola pikir (kemampuan berpikir sistematis), bukan sekedar berlatih berbicara atau menulis.

Pembicara dan penulis yang baik mampu berpikir secara sistematis dan menata ide dengan baik sehingga ucapan dan tulisannya bisa dipahami audiensi*.

Read this first – Writing the Introduction

How should you write the section? What are important points you should include in the section Ok. Let’s use the Q&A method. Here are key questions you need to answer for completing the methodology part of your scientific article.

Writing an introduction is not easy. Writers (researchers) often face the challenging question of how to write the introduction part of a scientific article. In my workshop, I use a Q&A method to help writers (researchers) identify key points which should be included in the introduction. If you can answer most of these questions, then you are ready to write the introduction part of your scientific article. What you need to do next is to arrange the answers to these questions into paragraphs. Pay attention to the coherence and cohesion. So, here are the questions. Ready?
.
𝗤𝘂𝗲𝘀𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝗮𝗱𝗱𝗿𝗲𝘀𝘀 𝗶𝗻 𝗜𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗼𝗱𝘂𝗰𝘁𝗶𝗼𝗻 ⬇️
.
What is the general topic of the manuscript?
Why is the topic important?
Are there any data or research findings related to the topic?
What do the data or research findings say about the topic?
Are there any grand theories related to the topic?
What do the theories propose?
Are there any practical aspects/implications or regulations related to the topic?
How does the topic affect practical aspects? Are there any practical implications?
How are the regulations related to the topic?
.
𝗟𝗲𝘁’𝘀 𝗯𝗲 𝗺𝗼𝗿𝗲 𝘀𝗽𝗲𝗰𝗶𝗳𝗶𝗰 ⬇️
.
What is the main research question? Or- what is the specific issue the article addresses?
What is the main objective of the article?
Why is it important to address the main research question?
Why is it important to achieve the main objective?
What do available data or research findings say about the specific issue?
Are there any grand theories related to the specific issue?
What do the theories say about the specific topic?
.
Great! Now you are ready to write the introduction part of your article.