中国的作者在写作文章中有哪些常见错误呢？下面是我们编辑的总结，转载请注明来自 EssayStar.com

文章题目大小写不规范
All words except for articles and prepositions should be capitalized in a title, although some do not follow this guideline.

Introduction不符合期刊的要求
Some journal asks for a statement of aims or goals in the introduction，however some authors do not have this part. Some journals specifically state that there should be no summary of results in the Introduction, yet the author put lot of details on this aspect.

滥用etc
The use of "etc." in listing items in formal writing is not preferred. If more items should be mentioned, do so, otherwise it is better to leave "etc" out and because you said "such as ..". the reader knows that the listed items are not the only items.

从中文版本/高版本的公式编辑器中引入符号到论文中，造成一些读者无法阅读
Watch your symbols- these characters are showing up as rectangles in my copy.

错误用词
Wrong sentence: This phenomenon was in accordance with that seen in P. aeruginosa.
Revised sentence: This observation was in accordance with that seen in P. aeruginosa. ("phenomenon" usually means something very unusual.)

单复数误用
Wrong sentence: There are increasing evidences that...
Revised sentence: There is increasing evidence that.. (the noun "evidence" is never pluralized by adding "s".)

指代不明
Wrong sentence: An important finding of this study was that...
Revised sentence: An important finding of the present study was that...
(Watch your use of "this study" when you are referring to your own current study. You just talked about a study on fluvastatin, so the reader assumes that when you now say "this study", you are still referring to the
fluvastatin study. Use "the current study" or "the present study", when referring to your own work, to avoid this confusion.)

空洞的语句
Avoid "empty" words like "the data show" "the results indicated" "we found that" etc. The reader is aware that you did the study and that data were generated.

So the sentence "Meanwhile, we can readily find that a similar reduction in PCA production was caused by the rhlI mutation and the lasR rhlI double mutation" can be revised to "A similar reduction in PCA production was caused by the rhlI mutation and the lasR rhlI double mutation"

不能正确区分Results section和Discussion section
If you are going to do a both a Results and a Discussion section, separately, all commentary like this (the results' meaning) should be moved to the Discussion. The Results section should only state what you observed, not what it means. This Journal does allow, and in fact recommends, a combined "Results and discussion"- you might want to use that format?

在不同的section里不断重复已有的信息，造成冗余
Methodology, hypothesis formation, and data interpretation do not belong in the Results section.

使用过长的语句
You had some very important points that were not being made clearly because they were buried within very very long paragraphs. Simply breaking these up into more manageable thoughts has greatly increased the impact of your writing.