昨天，營長分享了寫作三要素：興趣、素材、乾貨今天，我們繼續來聊聊寫作技巧！
以下轉編自：外研社Unipus（ID:upipus）
已獲得其授權，未經允許禁止轉載。
以下筆者將通過反省自己的寫作經驗，歸納幾條具有可操作性的寫作技巧。
一、主旨句和主題句幫助組織全文
幾乎所有的寫作老師都會教學生在開頭段寫主旨句（thesis statement），並在中間段開頭寫主題句（topic sentence）來概括該段的主要內容。在我的寫作實踐中，有部分的文章也會採用這種策略。
比如16年11月發表的Fine-tune E-health System that Shares Records of Patients in Hong Kong，開頭段的最後一句便是典型的主旨句：
Despite its promise to enhance the efficiency of health care and promote collaboration, the system needs improvement in three major respects in order to realise its full potential.
這裡的three major respects實際上概括了中間各段的主要內容，但是由於篇幅所限，並沒有具體指出是哪些方面。而在這篇文章的中間段開頭，並沒有寫出概括全段的主題句，比如中間第一段：
The current opt-in registration system must be replaced by an opt-out programme in order to sign up most Hong Kong residents. To join the current system, patients must register online and activate their e-health records by going to an eHR registration centre. Not many Hongkongers would take the trouble to do this. Only through a programme that automatically enrols all residents (except those who opt out) can the government monitor public health accurately and make informed health-related policy decisions accordingly.
而在17年6月發表的Trump's Climate Change Accord Snub Will Hurt Future Generations一文中，雖然沒在開頭段末寫典型的主旨句，但在中間段的開頭卻寫了主題句作為概括，包括Withdrawing from the Paris agreement will leave the young and future generations in the US particularly vulnerable to climate change.和The decision to leave the Paris accord is also opposed by the US business community.
在我看來，主旨句和主題句的寫作技巧並不一定要用在每篇文章的每段話上面，而需要根據具體的寫作需要和情況來具體決定。但是，主旨句和主題句這兩個技巧的意義並不僅僅在於指導我們具體如何寫開頭段的結尾和中間段的開頭，而是引導我們在構思全文時嘗試使用某種框架來給文章一個合理的結構。
比如Trump's Climate Change Accord Snub Will Hurt Future Generations一文，主要從美國退出巴黎協定對年青一代以及美國商界的影響這兩個角度論述，因此主題句的寫作可以向讀者明確的展示這兩個角度所形成的論述框架。而Fine-tune E-Health System that Shares Records of Patients in Hong Kong一文裡的主旨句中所提及的three major respects也是同樣的效果。
所以，即使我們寫的文章並不總有明顯的主旨句和主題句，這種寫作技巧背後對框架的強調對我們寫作的指導意義還是很顯著的。
二、他山之石可以攻玉
我的博士生導師Prof. John Flowerdew和大師姐Dr. Yongyan Li曾經在著名的語言學期刊 Applied Linguistics上發表過一篇論文：Language Re-use among Chinese Apprentice Scientists Writing for Publication，主要指出中國學者在寫作英語科技論文時會借鑑和使用前人文獻中的句子。
而事實上，在英語寫作中，合理合法的借鑑不僅可以發生在語言層面上，在思想和內容的層面上也很普遍，因此也是值得向學生們推薦的寫作技巧。
比如，在Fine-tune E-health System that Shares Records of Patients in Hong Kong提出應該用opt-out制度取代opt-in制度：The current opt-in registration system must be replaced by an opt-out programme in order to sign up most Hong Kong residents. 這兩種制度我曾經在閱讀器官捐贈相關文獻裡了解過，這裡將器官捐贈的語境下的概念借用到電子健康記錄的語境下，從而產生新的思想火花。
除了在思想層面上借鑑來自其他語境的概念，直接引用其他文獻作為自己文章的論據則是更為常見的做法。
比如，在Drones Could Detect Illegal Parking Cases in Hong Kong一文中引述美國費城利用無人機抄牌的計劃（Philadelphia, for example, announced a plan in 2015 to replace one-third of its parking enforcement staff with a new drone fleet. ）。
又如，在Warning Labels and Sugar Tax can Help us Make Healthy Choices一文中介紹英美等國已經採取相關政策（In the UK, a sugar tax has been proposed for soft drinks sold nationwide as well as in public hospital cafes. Health warning labels for sugary drinks will soon be obligatory in San Francisco）。
這些來自不同文獻的資料都為文章的論述提供了有力的理據，也再次彰顯在寫作中查閱和引用相關資料的重要性。
三、歷史的視角與洞見
◇ 歷史使人明智，站在歷史的高度去觀察時事往往可以給我們難得的啟發。
比如，在Trump's Climate Change Accord Snub Will Hurt Future Generations的結尾處寫到：
At the age of 71, Donald Trump may not witness the immense suffering of mankind caused by catastrophic climate change. Thanks to his administration’s decision on the Paris accord, however, he will most likely be remembered in history as an immature and incompetent demagogue whose climate policies threatened the livelihood of US citizens and people around the world.
這裡我嘗試從歷史的眼光來考量和審判川普的氣候政策，實現了對現任美國總統的當下權力的一種制衡。
而在Campaigns Opposing Genetically Modified Food are Misguided一文中再次開啟歷史視角，指出基因工程並不是現代科技，而是古已有之的生產技術：
Historically speaking, mankind has been genetically modifying crops for thousands of years since the advent of agriculture through breeding and crossbreeding different varieties to create plant species with faster growth, higher yields and sweeter fruits. Modern genetic engineering merely continues such a tradition with more advanced technologies for manipulating genes more precisely.
◇ 有些時候歷史的視角需要作者對討論的問題有較深入的了解。
比如在Octopus Needs to Join with Other Mobile Payment Vendors一文的最後，挖掘了八達通的發跡史，指出其和公共利益千絲萬縷的聯繫，從而推導出它對香港的社會責任：
Nearly 20 years ago, Octopus cards were first introduced in Hong Kong through a joint venture of five major public transport operators. Given its strong ties with the public interest and the resulting natural monopoly, Octopus is socially responsible to advance mobile payment technologies and to ensure a level playing field for all mobile payment vendors in the city.
未完待續……