<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
<channel>
<title>Shanghaiist: Stammering Sino scientists steal sayings so says snipey supervisor</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2007/04/06/stammering_sino.php</link>
<description>All comments for Stammering Sino scientists steal sayings so says snipey supervisor</description>
<language>en-us</language>
<copyright>2009 shang_sueanne</copyright>
<lastBuildDate>Fri, 16 Jan 2009 16:00:21 +0800</lastBuildDate>
<docs>http://blogs.law.harvard.edu/tech/rss</docs>
<managingEditor>satay@shanghaiist.com</managingEditor>
<webMaster>satay@shanghaiist.com</webMaster>
<ttl>60</ttl>
<item>
<title>M art Y</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2007/04/06/stammering_sino.php#comment-1061906</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://shanghaiist.com/2007/04/06/stammering_sino.php#comment-1061906</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Sat, 07 Apr 2007 13:16:43 +0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;Hi everyone, I am the napkin dad.  Thanks for not plagiarizing my napkin drawing quote on plagiarizing.  Of course since I didn&apos;t attribute the quote to anyone I could be accused of plagiarizing the quote on plagiarizing, but I promise I didn&apos;t.  Please don&apos;t plagiarize this comment about my non-plagiarizing.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item><item>
<title>zhwj</title>
<link>http://shanghaiist.com/2007/04/06/stammering_sino.php#comment-1061306</link>
<guid isPermaLink="true">http://shanghaiist.com/2007/04/06/stammering_sino.php#comment-1061306</guid>
<category>Comments</category>
<pubDate>Fri, 06 Apr 2007 20:02:31 +0800</pubDate>
<description>&lt;p&gt;The &quot;turn of phrase&quot; line is probably just an unfortunate turn of phrase by the New Scientist reporter (and the last paragraph of that short article doesn&apos;t really make much sense, either).

The plagiarism problem that exists (if you take the word of a blog commenter) involves the basic presentation of research. Scientists are seeking ways to present something they are competent in (their research and their data) in a medium they are not comfortable using (English). It&apos;s often simpler just to copy an existing analysis, plug in the numbers, and tweak the discussion a bit; high-impact journals will reject out-of-hand papers that don&apos;t reach a minimum level of English fluency. Mandarin gets singled out because Chinese submissions to technical journals rank near the top by numbers and scientists aren&apos;t native English speakers. Here&apos;s a report about an ACS delegation that came over last summer. It doesn&apos;t mention the plagiarism issue, but it does imply a general attitude toward Chinese research that&apos;s more that just hearsay.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
</item>
</channel>
</rss>