1.0 INTRODUCTION
In preparing a title for a technical report, you would do well to remember one salient fact: That title will be read by scores, possibly hundreds, of people. Perhaps few people, if any, will read the entire report, but many people will read the title for various reasons and at different points in time. Therefore, all words in the title of your report should be chosen with great care, and their association with one another must be carefully managed. The most common error in defective titles, and certainly the most damaging in terms of comprehension, is faulty syntax (word order).What is a good title? You may define it as the fewest possible words that adequately describe the contents of a technical report, of a scientific paper, thesis, dissertation or a book. You will learn all about how to select and prepare a good title in this unit.
This unit is divided into five parts. The first part shows you how to write short, rather than long titles. The second commends specific titles and provides you witha few examples of how to attain specificity in preparing titles. Part three emphasises the importance of syntax and, again, provides you some examples of how faulty syntax can produce titles with completely unintended meanings. In part four, you are shown how to label your report properly by providing appropriate "keys" in its title that will facilitate its understanding and retrieval. Finally, in part five, you are shown why and how to avoid using abbreviations and jargon in the titles of your technical reports.
However, many titles are too long. An overly long title is often less meaningful than a short title. In the early years of the 20th century, when science was less specialised, titles tended to be long and non-specific, such as the following published in 1896 in a prestigious journal:
"On the addition to the method of microscopic research by a new way of producing colour-contrast between an object and its background or between definite parts of the objects itself"
That certainly sounds like a poor title; perhaps it would make a good abstract. Happily, such overly long titles are now out of fashion in all forms of scientific writing. But many writers of science still yield to the temptation of constructing and publishing overly long titles. They are not good examples to emulate and by the end of this unit, you are expected to be able to do better, much better.
Without question, most overly long titles are long for only one reason, and it is a very poor one: the use of "waste" words. Often, these waste words appear right at the start of the title, words such as "Studies on"
"Investigations on," and "Observations on." You should, therefore, get into the habit of avoiding such waste words in the construction of the titles of your technical reports and scientific papers. Produce several versions of the title of a manuscript that you want to write, then sit down and slowly "cut and paste" the words in the alternative titles until you produce one with "the fewest possible words that adequately describe the contents of yourmanuscript." Repeat the process many times.
This unit is divided into five parts. The first part shows you how to write short, rather than long titles. The second commends specific titles and provides you witha few examples of how to attain specificity in preparing titles. Part three emphasises the importance of syntax and, again, provides you some examples of how faulty syntax can produce titles with completely unintended meanings. In part four, you are shown how to label your report properly by providing appropriate "keys" in its title that will facilitate its understanding and retrieval. Finally, in part five, you are shown why and how to avoid using abbreviations and jargon in the titles of your technical reports.
2.0 OBJECTIVES
At the end of unit, you should be able to:- state the difference between a poor (lengthy) title and a good (short) one
- construct appropriately specific titles for technical reports and scientific papers
- recognise and apply the importance of syntax in composing the titles of technical reports and scientific papers
- prepare the title of a scientific work as a label to facilitate its understanding and retrieval
- compose the title of a scientific manuscript without using abbreviations or jargons.
3.0 MAIN CONTENT
3.1 Length of the Title
Generally, only a few titles of scientific manuscripts are too short.Consider a paper submitted to a prestigious journal in biology with the title"Studies on Brucella." Obviously, such a title was not very helpful to the potential reader. Was the study taxonomic, genetic, biochemical, or medical? You would certainly want to know at least that much, won't you?However, many titles are too long. An overly long title is often less meaningful than a short title. In the early years of the 20th century, when science was less specialised, titles tended to be long and non-specific, such as the following published in 1896 in a prestigious journal:
"On the addition to the method of microscopic research by a new way of producing colour-contrast between an object and its background or between definite parts of the objects itself"
That certainly sounds like a poor title; perhaps it would make a good abstract. Happily, such overly long titles are now out of fashion in all forms of scientific writing. But many writers of science still yield to the temptation of constructing and publishing overly long titles. They are not good examples to emulate and by the end of this unit, you are expected to be able to do better, much better.
Without question, most overly long titles are long for only one reason, and it is a very poor one: the use of "waste" words. Often, these waste words appear right at the start of the title, words such as "Studies on"
"Investigations on," and "Observations on." You should, therefore, get into the habit of avoiding such waste words in the construction of the titles of your technical reports and scientific papers. Produce several versions of the title of a manuscript that you want to write, then sit down and slowly "cut and paste" the words in the alternative titles until you produce one with "the fewest possible words that adequately describe the contents of yourmanuscript." Repeat the process many times.
3.2 Need for Specific Titles
Let us examine a sampletitle: "Action of Antibiotics on Bacteria." Is this a good title? In form it is; it is short and carries no excess baggage (waste words). Certainly, it would not be improved by changing it to "Preliminary Observations on the Effect of certain Antibiotics on various Species of Bacteria." However, and this brings us to the next print, most titles that are too short are too short for only one reason: the use of general rather than specific terms.So, take another look at the title above. Obviously, we can safely assume that the study introduced by the title did not test the effect of all antibiotics on all kinds of bacteria. Therefore, the title is essentially meaningless, as you will soon appreciate. If only one or a few antibiotics were studied, they should be individually listed in the title. If the number of antibiotics or organisms was awkwardly large for listing in the title, perhaps a group name could have been substituted.
Therefore, consider the following generally more acceptable titlesand select one that you judge the best replacement for the title in paragraph one above:
"Action of Streptomycin on Mycobacterium tuberculosis"
"Action of Streptomycin, Neomycin, and Tetracycline on Grain-Positive Bacteria"
"Action of Polyene Antibiotics on Plant-Pathogenic Bacteria"
"Action of various Antifungal Antibiotics on Candida albicans and Aspergillus fumigatus"
Whichever of the four alternative titles you selected, it would have been more acceptable than the sample. But they can still be improved upon to remove the too general impression in the mind of the reader by the use of the words "Action of." By defining those two words, the meaning of the title might be much clearer and closer to what its author intended. The first of the four titles above might then finally appear as follows:
Therefore, consider the following generally more acceptable titlesand select one that you judge the best replacement for the title in paragraph one above:
"Action of Streptomycin on Mycobacterium tuberculosis"
"Action of Streptomycin, Neomycin, and Tetracycline on Grain-Positive Bacteria"
"Action of Polyene Antibiotics on Plant-Pathogenic Bacteria"
"Action of various Antifungal Antibiotics on Candida albicans and Aspergillus fumigatus"
Whichever of the four alternative titles you selected, it would have been more acceptable than the sample. But they can still be improved upon to remove the too general impression in the mind of the reader by the use of the words "Action of." By defining those two words, the meaning of the title might be much clearer and closer to what its author intended. The first of the four titles above might then finally appear as follows:
"Inhibition of Growth of Mycobacterium tuberculosis by Streptomycin" --a much more specific title and one which, by all accounts, should be more helpful to the reader than either of its earlier variations.
You should consider one final example to illustrate the need to be specific in composing the titles of technical reports. In the 1930s, an important series of papers was published under the title "Studies on Bacteria." Although the title was acceptable then, it would not be acceptable today. If the study features an organism, the title would give the genus and species and possibly even the strain number. If the study featured an enzyme of an organism, a general title such as "Enzymes in Bacteria," would not be acceptable either. Perhaps something like "Dihydrofolate Reductase in Bacillus subtilis" would.
The examples here come from a particular branch of science. You should practise the construction of specific titles for your technical reports in particular and scientific monographs generally, using your own area(s) of specialisation. That is the only way to systematically build up your confidence until composing specific titles become routine in your writing.
The use of English as the medium of scientific communication in many developing countries (including Nigeria) has had a troubled history. During the first two or three decades of university education in Nigeria, for example, all undergraduates were expected to demonstrate competency in written English prior to their admission into bachelor's degree programmes. A few science and technology undergraduates who fell short of this requirement were often given the opportunity of demonstrating such competency during their undergraduate days by sitting for and passing the examinations prescribed by appropriate external authorities. There was no question of anybody taking a first degree without satisfying this competency requirement.
Since about the mid-1970s, however, much confusion has characterised the status of competency in written English among undergraduates in Nigerian universities. At one time, the required standard was lowered considerably; at another, the requirement was abolished completely. Although much of its original status has been restored in many Nigerian universities lately, the damage had already been done. We now have a generation of students at all levels of education who have never been taught correct grammar and syntax in the English language and who, as a result, don't know the difference between correct and faulty syntax. Consequently, it would be difficult if not impossible, for such students to understand, let alone appreciate, the importance of syntax in the composition of appropriate titles for technical reports in particular and scientific papers in general.
If you are among the students who have acquired the kind of deficiency described above, this unit cannot teach you the basic rules of grammar and syntax. However, you will be given several examples of faulty syntax in the titles of published scientific writing. You should practise at correcting the faults and doing the same with additional examples in your areas of specialisation. Here, then are the examples, with one corrected for you and clues provided in the other.
(a) "Mechanism of Suppression of Non transmissible Pneumonia in Mice Induced by Newcastle Disease Virus" 'should have read:"Mechanism of Suppression of Non transmissible Pneumonia Induced in Mice by Newcastle Disease Virus"
(b) "Preliminary Canine and Clinical Evaluation of a New Antitumor Agent, Streptovitacin" (Clue:"canine" = dog)
(c) "Isolation of Antigens from Monkeys using Complement Fixation Techniques" (clue: one simple word is missing).
(d) "Characterization of Bacteria Causing Mastitis by Gas-Liquid Chromatography" (clue: can bacteria use GI IC?)
You should consider one final example to illustrate the need to be specific in composing the titles of technical reports. In the 1930s, an important series of papers was published under the title "Studies on Bacteria." Although the title was acceptable then, it would not be acceptable today. If the study features an organism, the title would give the genus and species and possibly even the strain number. If the study featured an enzyme of an organism, a general title such as "Enzymes in Bacteria," would not be acceptable either. Perhaps something like "Dihydrofolate Reductase in Bacillus subtilis" would.
The examples here come from a particular branch of science. You should practise the construction of specific titles for your technical reports in particular and scientific monographs generally, using your own area(s) of specialisation. That is the only way to systematically build up your confidence until composing specific titles become routine in your writing.
3.3 Importance of Syntax
In the first paragraph of the introduction to this unit, you were given the following statement of fact: 'the most common error in defective titles, and certainly the most damaging in terms of comprehension, is faulty syntax (word order)." here, you will be invited to consider this important issue a little more closely and to make strenuous efforts to eliminate faulty syntax in the construction of the titles of your technical reports.The use of English as the medium of scientific communication in many developing countries (including Nigeria) has had a troubled history. During the first two or three decades of university education in Nigeria, for example, all undergraduates were expected to demonstrate competency in written English prior to their admission into bachelor's degree programmes. A few science and technology undergraduates who fell short of this requirement were often given the opportunity of demonstrating such competency during their undergraduate days by sitting for and passing the examinations prescribed by appropriate external authorities. There was no question of anybody taking a first degree without satisfying this competency requirement.
Since about the mid-1970s, however, much confusion has characterised the status of competency in written English among undergraduates in Nigerian universities. At one time, the required standard was lowered considerably; at another, the requirement was abolished completely. Although much of its original status has been restored in many Nigerian universities lately, the damage had already been done. We now have a generation of students at all levels of education who have never been taught correct grammar and syntax in the English language and who, as a result, don't know the difference between correct and faulty syntax. Consequently, it would be difficult if not impossible, for such students to understand, let alone appreciate, the importance of syntax in the composition of appropriate titles for technical reports in particular and scientific papers in general.
If you are among the students who have acquired the kind of deficiency described above, this unit cannot teach you the basic rules of grammar and syntax. However, you will be given several examples of faulty syntax in the titles of published scientific writing. You should practise at correcting the faults and doing the same with additional examples in your areas of specialisation. Here, then are the examples, with one corrected for you and clues provided in the other.
(a) "Mechanism of Suppression of Non transmissible Pneumonia in Mice Induced by Newcastle Disease Virus" 'should have read:"Mechanism of Suppression of Non transmissible Pneumonia Induced in Mice by Newcastle Disease Virus"
(b) "Preliminary Canine and Clinical Evaluation of a New Antitumor Agent, Streptovitacin" (Clue:"canine" = dog)
(c) "Isolation of Antigens from Monkeys using Complement Fixation Techniques" (clue: one simple word is missing).
(d) "Characterization of Bacteria Causing Mastitis by Gas-Liquid Chromatography" (clue: can bacteria use GI IC?)
Finally, you should be particularly careful when you use "using" in the title of a scientific manuscript. The word "using" is, arguably, the most common dangling participle in scientific writing, even by those whose mother tongue is English. It can easily be used to convey a completely unintentioned meaning, such as in the following sentence: "Using a fiberoptic bronchoscope, dogs were immunised with sheep red blood cells." Obviously, the writer had meant to say, "Dogs were immunised with sheep red blood cells by using a fiberoptic bronchoscope."
When you compose the title of your report, its function as a label should make you to keep two categories of potential readers in mind: (a) the potential readers who see the title in some published or unpublished table of contents reporting similar works, and (b) the potential users of the bibliographic services in which the work is cited (the indexing and abstracting services, or 'secondary sources' as opposed to 'primary sources,' such as journals and books). Most of the indexing and abstracting services are geared towards "key word" systems, that is, generating either KWIC (key word in context) or KWOC (key word out of context) entries. Therefore, it is fundamentally important that your title provide the right "keys" to your report by labeling it appropriately. This means that the terms in the title should be limited to those words that highlight the significant content of the report that are both understandable and retrievable.
Many writers provide an additional aid to readers by providing "running titles" or "running heads" at the top of each page. Such aid is particularly desirable when the report is a bulky one, has many sub-topics, or is produced in two or more volumes. Often, the title of the report is given at the top of left-facing pages and the chapter or section headings are given at the top of right-facing pages. Usually, a short version of the title is needed because of space limitations. This useful aid can easily be accommodated in most word processing software.
computer programs which are capable of bringing together entries such as deoxyribonucleic acid, DNA, and even ADN (acide deoxyribonucleique). However, by far the best rule for you and other authors is to avoid abbreviations in titles. And the same rule should apply to proprietary names, jargon, and unusual or outdated terminology.
3.4 The Title as a Label
The title of your technical report is a "label"; it is not a sentence.Since it is not a sentence, with the usual subject, verb, object arrangement, it is really simpler (and shorter) than a sentence. But then, the choice and order of the words become even more important.When you compose the title of your report, its function as a label should make you to keep two categories of potential readers in mind: (a) the potential readers who see the title in some published or unpublished table of contents reporting similar works, and (b) the potential users of the bibliographic services in which the work is cited (the indexing and abstracting services, or 'secondary sources' as opposed to 'primary sources,' such as journals and books). Most of the indexing and abstracting services are geared towards "key word" systems, that is, generating either KWIC (key word in context) or KWOC (key word out of context) entries. Therefore, it is fundamentally important that your title provide the right "keys" to your report by labeling it appropriately. This means that the terms in the title should be limited to those words that highlight the significant content of the report that are both understandable and retrievable.
Many writers provide an additional aid to readers by providing "running titles" or "running heads" at the top of each page. Such aid is particularly desirable when the report is a bulky one, has many sub-topics, or is produced in two or more volumes. Often, the title of the report is given at the top of left-facing pages and the chapter or section headings are given at the top of right-facing pages. Usually, a short version of the title is needed because of space limitations. This useful aid can easily be accommodated in most word processing software.
3.5 Abbreviation and Jargon
As a rule, your titles should almost never contain abbreviations, chemical formulas, proprietary (rather than generic) names, jargon, and the like. In composing the title of your report, you should ask: "How would 1 look for this kind of information in an index?" If the report concerns an effect of hydrochloric acid, should the title include the words "hydrochloric acid" or should it contain the much shorter and readily recognisable HO? Your answer to the question should be quite obvious: Most users would look under "hy" in an index, not under "hc." Furthermore, if some authors used HC1 and others used hydrochloric acid, the users of the bibliographic services might locate only part of the literature relevant to their search, not noting that additional relevant references are listed under another, abbreviated entry. Fortunately, the larger secondary services now routinelycomputer programs which are capable of bringing together entries such as deoxyribonucleic acid, DNA, and even ADN (acide deoxyribonucleique). However, by far the best rule for you and other authors is to avoid abbreviations in titles. And the same rule should apply to proprietary names, jargon, and unusual or outdated terminology.
4.0 CONCLUSION
This unit has attempted to impress on you that the composition of the title of your report is a vital element in either facilitating or inhibiting readers' understanding of the report. Good titles need to be short and specific, but also should adequately convey the contents of the reports they summarise. The word order (syntax) of a title is of fundamental significance because a mistake in this respect could easily produce a title with an unintended (and even embarrassing) meaning. Your title is also a label for your report. Therefore, take time to select appropriate key words that can be easily recognised and used by readers to access your report, especially in the context of bibliographic services, also called indexing and abstracting services. Finally, avoid the use of abbreviations and jargon in your title, even when such abbreviations and jargon are popular.5.0 SUMMARY
In this unit, you have learned how to:- tell and appreciate the difference between a poor title and a good one
- construct appropriately specific titles for technical reports and scientific papers
- recognise and apply the importance of syntax in composing the titles of technical reports and scientific papers
- prepare the title of a scientific work as a label to facilitate its understanding and retrieval; and
- compose the title of a scientific manuscript without using abbreviations or jargon.
TUTOR-MARKED ASSIGNMENT
- Constuct five specific titles for a technical report or a scientific paper.
- State the importance of syntax in composing the titles of technical reports.
Social Plugin