发布时间：
报告用字母R来代表。
参考文献类型及文献类型，根据GB3469-83《文献类型与文献载体代码》规定，以单字母方式标识：
专著M ； 报纸N ；期刊J ；专利文献P；汇编G ；古籍O；技术标准S ；
学位论文D ；科技报告R；参考工具K ；检索工具W；档案B ；录音带A ；
图表Q；唱片L；产品样本X；录相带V；会议录C；中译文T；
乐谱I； 电影片Y；手稿H；微缩胶卷U ；幻灯片Z；微缩平片F；其他E。
例如：[4]冯西桥. 核反应堆压力管道和压力容器的LBB分析[R]. 北京：清华大学核能技术设计研究院，1997.
扩展资料：
在学术论文后一般应列出参考文献（表），其目的有三，即：
为了能反映出真实的科学依据；
为了体现严肃的科学态度，分清是自己的观点或成果还是别人的观点或成果；
为了对前人的科学成果表示尊重，同时也是为了指明引用资料出处，便于检索。
毕业论文的撰写应本着严谨、求实的科学态度，凡有引用他人成果之处，均应按论文中所出现的先后次序列于参考文献中，并且只列出正文中以标注形式引用或参考的有关著作和论文，参考文献应按正文中出现的顺序列出直接引用的主要参考文献。
参考资料来源：百度百科-参考文献
论文参考文献的正确格式如下：
1.参考文献需要顶格书写。开始换行的时候，第二行必须有空格，汉语必须要两个汉字空格。
2. 原则上，要有15条以上的参考文献。英语放在前面，中文放在后面。英语按姓氏的首字母顺序排列，中文用姓氏的音序排列。
3. 一级标题要加粗，其他的标题不要加粗。
4. 外文文献的第一个字母要大学，其他都是小写。
5. 如果引用超过4行以上，就需要另起一行。
6. 正文和正文的小标题之间不要留空行。段落之间也不要留空行。
写论文的注意事项：
1、注重论文的严谨性、严肃性，尽量不出现“我”这个词，建议用“本文”等词汇代替；同时要少使用感叹号，以陈述句为主要句式。
2、对论文的直接引用和间接引用的比例要合理控制，引用参考文献等内容时，要对该内容进行格式设置，避免在查重时出现文字复制比过高的情况。
3、论文全文结构要严谨、完整，目录、摘要、致谢等内容应按学校要求进行撰写，并按校方要求修改论文的格式。
4、论文所用标点符号要规范，逗号、句号、分号、冒号、引号等符号需要正确使用。
题目:应简洁、明确、有概括性。关键词:从论文标题或正文中挑选3~5个最能表达主要内容的词作为关键词。摘要:(150字)要有高度的概括力，语言精练、明确，交代本文的主要内容和观点。目录:写出目录，标明页码。编写提纲的步骤:确定论文提要，再加进材料，形成全文的概要论文提要是内容提纲的雏型。一般书，教学参考书都有反映全书内容的提要，以便读者一翻提要就知道书的大概内容。我们写论文也需要先写出论文提要。在执笔前把论文的题目和大标题、小标题列出来，再把选用的材料插进去，就形成了论文内容的提要。论文提纲可分为简单提纲和详细提纲两种。简单提纲是高度概括的，只提示论文的要点，如何展开则不涉及。这种提纲虽然简单，但由于它是经过深思熟虑构成的，写作时能顺利进行。没有这种准备，边想边写很难顺利地写下去。引言(绪论)-------------------------------------(300字左右)引言是论文的开头部分，主要说明论文写作的目的、现实意义、对所研究问题的认识，并提出论文的中心论点等。
论文提纲格式举例
在平时的学习、工作中，大家都有写论文的经历，对论文很是熟悉吧，通过论文写作可以培养我们独立思考和创新的能力。你知道论文怎样才能写的好吗？下面是我收集整理的论文提纲格式举例，欢迎大家分享。
提纲是论文的骨架和要点，选择哪一种，要根据作者的需要。如果考虑周到，调查详细，用简单提纲问题不是很大；但如果考虑粗疏，调查不周，则必须用详细提纲，否则，很难写出合格的毕业论文。总之，在动手撰写毕业论文之前拟好提纲，写起来就会方便得多。
编写提纲的步骤
（一）确定论文提要，再加进材料，形成全文的概要
论文提要是内容提纲的雏型。一般书、教学参考书都有反映全书内容的提要，以便读者一翻提要就知道书的大概内容。我们写论文也需要先写出论文提要。在执笔前把论文的题目和大标题、小标题列出来，再把选用的材料插进去，就形成了论文内容的提要。
（二）原稿纸页数的分配
写好毕业论文的提要之后，要根据论文的内容考虑篇幅的长短，文章的各个部分，大体上要写多少字。如计划写20页原稿纸（每页300字）的论文，考虑序论用1页，本论用17页，结论用1—2页。
本论部分再进行分配，如本论共有四项，可以第一项3—4页，第二项用4—5页，第三项3—4页，第四项6—7页。
有这样的分配，便于资料的配备和安排，写作能更有计划。毕业论文的长短一般规定为5000—6000字，因为过短，问题很难讲透，而作为毕业论文也不宜过长，这是一般大专、本科学生的理论基础、实践经验所决定的。
（三）编写提纲
论文提纲可分为简单提纲和详细提纲两种。简单提纲是高度概括的，只提示论文的要点，如何展开则不涉及。这种提纲虽然简单，但由于它是经过深思熟虑构成的，写作时能顺利进行。没有这种准备，边想边写很难顺利地写下去。
提纲格式
1、论文题目：要求准确、简练、醒目、新颖。
2、目录：目录是论文中主要段落的简表。（短篇论文不必列目录）
3、提要：是文章主要内容的摘录，要求短、精、完整。字数少可几十字，多不超过三百字为宜。
4、关键词或主题词：关键词是从论文的题名、提要和正文中选取出来的，是对表述论文的中心内容有实质意义的词汇。关键词是用作机系统标引论文内容特征的词语，便于信息系统汇集，以供读者检索。 每篇论文一般选取3—8个词汇作为关键词，另起一行，排在“提要”的左下方。
主题词是经过规范化的词，在确定主题词时，要对论文进行主题，依照标引和组配规则转换成主题词表中的.规范词语。
5、论文正文：
（1）引言：引言又称前言、序言和导言，用在论文的开头。 引言一般要概括地写出作者意图，说明选题的目的和意义， 并指出论文写作的范围。引言要短小精悍、紧扣主题。
〈2）论文正文：正文是论文的主体，正文应包括论点、论据、 论证过程和结论。主体部分包括以下内容：
a、提出—论点；
b、分析问题—论据和论证；
c、解决问题—论证与步骤；
d、结论。
6、一篇论文的参考文献是将论文在和写作中可参考或引证的主要文献资料，列于论文的末尾。参考文献应另起一页，标注方式按《GB7714—87文后参考文献著录规则》进行。
中文：标题——作者——出版物信息（版地、版者、版期）：作者——标题——出版物信息
所列参考文献的要求是：
（1）所列参考文献应是正式出版物，以便读者考证。
（2）所列举的参考文献要标明序号、著作或文章的标题、作者、出版物信息。
论文提纲也可以用最简单的格式和分类，简单明了地说明论文的目的、依据和意义，甚至是两句话。这种提纲往往是用于科学论文，而且在对于各种概念有相互联系而不是孤立的出来讨论的情况下。如果总要分出1、2、3……点来写的话，往往会变成“八股文”的模式，这样的论文往往是应付式的论文，其真正的科学价值会大打折扣。
附：论文提纲范例
简单提纲
以《关于培育和完善建筑劳动力市场的思考》为例，简单提纲可以写成下面这样：
一、绪论
二、本论
（一）培育建筑劳动力市场的前提条件
（二）2012年建筑劳动力市场的基本现状
（三）培育和完善建筑劳动力市场的对策
三、结论
详细提纲
详细提纲是把论文的主要论点和展开部分较为详细地列出来。如果在写作之前准备了详细提纲，那么，执笔时就能更顺利。下面仍以《关于培育和完善建筑劳动力市场的思考》为例，介绍详细提纲的写法：
一、绪论
1、提出中心论题；
2、说明写作意图。
二、本论
（一）培育建筑劳动力市场的前提条件
1、市场经济体制的确立，为建筑劳动力市场的产生创造了宏观环境；
2、建筑产品市场的形成，对建筑劳动力市场的培育提出了现实的要求；
3、城乡体制改革的深化，为建筑劳动力市场的形成提供了可靠的保证；
4、建筑劳动力市场的建立，是建筑行业用工特殊性的内在要求。
（二）具体市场分类
1、供大于求的买方市场；
2、有市无场的隐形市场；
3、易进难出的畸形市场；
4、交易无序的自发市场。
（三）培育和完善建筑劳动力市场的对策
1、统一思想认识，变自发交易为自觉调控；
2、加快建章立制，变无序交易为规范交易；
3、健全市场网络，变隐形交易为有形交易；
4、调整经营结构，变个别流动为队伍流动；
5、深化用工改革，变单向流动为双向流动。
三、结论
1、概述当前的建筑劳动力市场形势和我们的任务；
2、呼应开头的序言。
提纲的选择要根据作者的需要。如果考虑周到，调查详细，用简单提纲问题不是很大；但如果考虑粗疏，调查不周，则必须用详细提纲，否则，很难写出合格的论文。总之，在动手撰写论文之前拟好提纲，写起来就会方便得多。
论文参考文献的正确格式一般包括：书写格式、书写技巧、国家标准、文献标注、参考示例。
参考文献是在学术研究过程中，对某一著作或论文的整体的参考或借鉴。征引过的文献在注释中已注明，不再出现于文后参考文献中。
按照字面的意思，参考文献是文章或著作等写作过程中参考过的文献。然而，按照GB/T7714-2015《信息与文献 参考文献著录规则》”的定义，文后参考文献是指：“为撰写或编辑论文和著作而引用的有关文献信息资源。根据《中国学术期刊（光盘版）检索与评价数据规范（试行）》和《中国高等学校社会科学学报编排规范（修订版）》的要求。
很多刊物对参考文献和注释作出区分，将注释规定为“对正文中某一内容作进一步解释或补充说明的文字”，列于文末并与参考文献分列或置于当页脚地。
参考文献格式包括：
1、 著[M]、论文集[C]、报纸文章[N]、期刊文章[J]、学位论文[D]、报告[R]、标准[S]、利[P]、论文集中的析出文献[A] ；
2、常见的字体字号有两种：和文文本保持一致，或者比正文本字号小一号；
3、行距常见的有1.2倍、22磅、1.5倍 ；
4、缩进方式悬挂缩进、首行缩进、无缩进均有出现；
5、文参考文献中的标符号要胖角标点，粗按照英文输入的习惯，标点符号后应该加一个空格，中幅文献中的标点，可以和英文文献保持一致，全部使用半角标点+空格的形式，也可以全部使用全角标点，标点后不加空格。
论文的参考文献格式怎么写
参考文献的标准格式：
1、专著、论文集、报告
[序号]主要责任者.文献题名[文献类型标识].出版地:出版者,出版年:起止页码(可选).
例如：[1]刘国钧,陈绍业.图书馆目录[M].北京:高等教育出版社,1957:15-18.
2、期刊文章
[序号]主要责任者.文献题名[J].刊名,年,卷(期):起止页码.
例如：[1]何龄修.读南明史[J].中国史研究,1998,(3):167-173.
[2]OU J P,SOONG T T,et al.Recent advance in research on applications of passive energy dissipation systems[J].Earthquack Eng,1997,38(3):358-361.
3、论文集中的析出文献
[序号]析出文献主要责任者.析出文献题名[A].原文献主要责任者(可选)原文献题名[C].出版地:出版者,出版年:起止页码.
例如：[7]钟文发.非线性规划在可燃毒物配置中的应用[A].赵炜.运筹学的理论与应用——中国运筹学会第五届大会论文集[C].西安:西安电子科技大学出版社,1996:468.
4、学位论文
[序号]主要责任者.文献题名[D].出版地:出版单位,出版年:起止页码(可选).
例如：[4]赵天书.诺西肽分阶段补料分批发酵过程优化研究[D].沈阳:东北大学,2013.
5、报纸文章
[序号]主要责任者.文献题名[N].报纸名,出版日期(版次).
例如：[8]谢希德.创造学习的新思路[N].人民日报,1998-12-25(10).
6、电子文献
[文献类型/载体类型标识]：[J/OL]网上期刊、[EB/OL]网上电子公告、
[M/CD]光盘图书、[DB/OL]网上数据库、[DB/MT]磁带数据库
[序号]主要责任者.电子文献题名[电子文献及载体类型标识].电子文献的出版或获得地址,发表更新日期/引用日期.
例如：[12]王明亮.关于中国学术期刊标准化数据库系统工程的进展[EB/OL].1998-08-16/1998-10-01.
[8]万锦.中国大学学报文摘(1983-1993).英文版[DB/CD].北京:中国大百科全书出版社,1996.
扩展资料：
依据ISO 690-2国际标准增加电子文献的著录规则。为了满足知识经济时代电子文献的著录需求，不仅参照ISO 690-2，在“4 著录项目与著录格式”部分为电子文献的著录增加了“4.6 电子文献”。
而且为电子图书和电子期刊分别在“4 . 1专著”、“4.2专著中的析出文献”、“4.3连续出版物”、“4.4连续出版物中的析出文献”、“4.5专利文献”中增设了“引用日期”和“获取和访问路径”2个著录单元。
1、为了便于人们理解本标准，在“3 术语和定义”部分增加了“主要责任者、专著、连续出版物、析出文献、电子文献、顺序编码制、著者-出版年制、合订题名、并列题名”等9 个名词解释。
2、为了便于读者利用文后参考文献查找原文献，在 GB/T 7714-1987著录项目的基础上增设了“文献类型标志”。
3、根据文后参考文献的著录实际需求简化了文献著录规则，删除了GB/T 7714-1987《文后参考文献著录规则》“3.1专著”与“3.2连续出版物”中的“文献数量、丛编项、附注项、文献标准编号”4个供选择的著录项目。
4、在“10参考文献标注法”中解决了多次引用同一著者的同一文献的著录问题，规定了标注方法。明确规定本标准的著录用符号为前置符，规范了标志符号的使用方法。
参考资料来源：百度百科——参考文献标准格式
参考资料来源：百度百科——文后参考文献著录规则
在正文书写完毕后，空两行（宋体小四号），再书写“参考文献”四个字（居中），“参考文献”使用宋体四号加粗，前后两个字之间不空格。“参考文献”书写完毕后空一行（宋体小四号）再书写参考文献的具体内容。
参考文献的序号左顶格书写，并用数字加方括号表示，如〔1〕，〔2〕，?，每一参考文献条目的＇最后均以“．”结束。参考文献只列出作者已直接阅读，在撰写论文过程中主要参考过的文献资料，所列参考文献应按论文参考的先后顺序排列，参考文献一律书写在论文正文结束后，不得放在各章（节）之后。
参考文献引用的技巧
如果我们在论文中有引用了他人的学术观点、数据、材料、结构等，就一定要记得详细的标注出来的。我们引用参考文献也应该要规范，如果我们在论文中标注的参考文献不规范，也从侧面反映出论文写作者的水平和态度。
参考文献不宜过多，文献的多少能体现出论文占有资料的程度。一般情况下，中文论文的参考文献偏少，但也不能简单以文献引用量达到多少简单划分，不同性质的论文引用参考文献的多少页相差很大。
转摘More and more scholars are now showing an interest in adopting linguistic approaches to translation studies. Between 1949 and 1989, an incomplete survey by the author revealed that there were only about 30 textbook passages discussing the relationship between linguistics and translation, including aspects of general linguistics, pragmatics, stylistics, text linguistics, rhetoric and machine translation. From 1990 to 1994, there was an incredible increase in the number of passages looking at translation from a linguistic point of view. Almost 160 articles published over these five years concerned translation and general linguistics, stylistics, comparative linguistics, semantics, pragmatics, sociolinguistics, text linguistics, rhetoric, etc. New terms such as discourse analysis, hermeneutics, dynamic equivalence, deep structure and surface structure, context, theme and rheme, cooperative principles, to mention just a few, appeared in the field of translation studies. We can definitely identify a trend of applying linguistics theories to translation studies in these years. Today, we are at the point of questioning whether linguistics is a necessary part of translation. In recent years, some scholars who are in favour of free translation, have repeatedly raised this question to the public and appealed for an end to the linguistic approach to translation. Some firmly believe that translation is an art and that therefore linguistics is neither useful nor helpful. Such a claim is wrong if we look at translation as a whole, including scientific translation where meanings are rigid and restricted and the degree of freedom is limited. Flexibility, in this case, is neither required nor appreciated. But even in literary translation, linguistics is hardly a burden. Wang Zongyan pointed out that « If one sees linguistics as a body of rules regulating language, translators most probably will yawn with boredom. If it signifies the use of words and locutions to fit an occasion, there is nothing to stop translators from embracing linguistics » (Wang 1991: 38). The controversy over « literal » versus « free » translation has a long history, with convincing supporters on each side. For example, ancient Western scholars like Erasmus, Augustine, and others were in favour of literal translation. Among early Chinese translators, Kumarajiva is considered to be of the free school, while Xuan Zuang appears as literal and inflexible. In modern China, Yan Fu advocated hermeneutic translation, while Lu Xun preferred a clumsy version to one that was free but inexact. There is nothing wrong in any of these stances. When these translators emphasized free translation they never denied the possibility of literal translation, and vice versa. Problems only arise when the discussion turns to equivalent translations. The problem of equivalence has caused much controversy. Some people believed that there could be an equivalence of language elements independent of the setting in which they of occurred. Based on this assumption, some « literal » translators tried to decompose a text into single elements in hopes of finding equivalents in the target language. This is a naive idea. Jakobson (1971: 262) notes that « Equivalence in difference is the cardinal problem of language and the pivotal concern of linguistics. » He does not refer to « equivalence » but to « equivalence in difference » as the cardinal problem. Nida was also misunderstood by many for his notion of « equivalence, » which he took to mean that « Translating consists in reproducing in the receptor language the closest natural equivalent of the source-language message, first in terms of meaning and secondly in terms of style » (1969: 12). He further concluded that « Absolute equivalence in translating is never possible » (1984: 14). De Beaugrande and Dressler believed that the success or failure of either free or literal approaches was uncertain: an unduly « literal » translation might be awkward or even unintelligible, while an unduly « free » one might make the original text disintegrate and disappear altogether. To them, equivalence between a translation and an original can only be realized in the experience of the participants (cf. de Beaugrande and Dressler 1981: 216-217). Catford (1965: 27) expressed the same concern that equivalent translation is only « an empirical phenomenon, discovered by comparing SL and TL texts. » In citing the above examples, I have absolutely no intention of insisting on untranslatability. What I mean is that a translator should incorporate his or her own experience and processing activities into the text: solving the problems, reducing polyvalence, explaining away any discrepancies or discontinuities. Linguistic knowledge can help us treat different genres in different ways, always with an awareness that there are never exact equivalences but only approximations. Therefore, amplification and simplification become acceptable. If we agree that texts can be translated, then, in what way does linguistics contribute to translation? To answer this question, we must look at the acceptance of western linguistics in China and its influence on translation. Systematic and scientific study of the Chinese language came into being only at the end of the last century, when Ma Jianzhong published a grammar book Mashi Wentong «马氏文通» in 1898, which was the first in China and took the grammar of Indo-European languages as its model. The study of language was, in turn, influenced by translation studies in China. In Mashi Wenton, the main emphasis is on the use of morphology, which takes up six-sevenths of the book. Influenced by the dominant trend of morphological studies, a word was regarded as the minimum meaningful unit, and a sentence was therefore the logical combination of words of various specific types. Translation was, then, principally based on the unit of the word. In the West, Biblical translation provided a very good example, just as the translation of Buddhist scriptures did in China. Not until the end of the 19th century did some linguists come to realize that sentences were not just the summary of the sequenced words they contained. The Prague School, founded in the 1920s, made a considerable contribution to the study of syntax. According to the analytic approach of the Functional Perspective of the Prague School, a sentence can be broken down into two parts: theme and rheme. Theme is opposed to rheme in a manner similar to the distinction between topic and comment, and is defined as the part of a sentence which contributes least to advancing the process of communication. Rheme, on the other hand, is the part of a sentence which adds most to advancing the process of communication and has the highest degree of communicative dynamism. These two terms help enlighten the process of translating Chinese into English. In the mid-1950s, the study of syntax peaked with the Chomsky's establishment of transformational-generative grammar. This theory of the deep structure and surface structure of language influenced translation tremendously. Nida relied heavily on this theory in developing his « analyzing-transfering-reconstructing » pattern for translation. Some Chinese linguists, in the meantime, tried to raise language studies to a higher plane. Li Jinxi (1982) enlarged the role of sentence studies in his book A New Chinese Grammar, two thirds of which was devoted to discussing sentence formation or syntax. He writes that « No words can be identified except in the context of a sentence. » The study was then improved by other grammarians, including Lu Shuxiang, Wang Li. With the development of linguistic studies, translation based on the unit of the sentence was put forward by some scholars. It was Lin Yu-Tang who first applied the theory to translation in his article « On Translation. » He claimed that « translation should be done on the basis of the sentence [...] What a translator should be faithful to is not the individual words but the meaning conveyed by them » (Lin 1984: r 3). The importance of context in the understanding of a sentence was therefore emphasized. Chao Yuanren, a Chinese scholar and professor at Harvard University, criticized scholars and translators who tended to forget this point and take language for something independent and self-sufficient. In fact, it is obvious that when we translate a sentence, we depend on its context; when we interpret an utterance we rely on the context of the speech (cf. Chao 1967). When a sentence is removed from the text, it usually becomes ambiguous due to the lack of context. Therefore, translation becomes difficult. In the 1960s, people began to realize that the study of language based on sentences was not even sufficient. A complete study should be made of the whole text. A simple sentence like « George passed » may have different interpretations in different contexts. If the context is that of an examination, it means George did well on a test; in a card game it would indicate that George declined his chance to bid; in sports it would mean the ball reached another player. Without a context, how could we decide on a translation? Linguists therefore shifted their attention to the study of texts and to discourse analysis. Text linguistics have become increasingly popular since that time. Van Dijk was a pioneer in this field, and his four-volume edition of the Handbook of Discourse Analysis is of great value. Halliday's Cohesion in English and Introduction to Functional Grammar help us to better understand the English language on a textual level. It is worth noting that de Beaugrande and Dressler (1981) provided an overall and systematic study of text, which is useful to translation studies. De Beaugrande actually wrote a book called Factors in a Theory of Poetic Translating in 1978. The book did not become very popular as it confined the discussion to translating poetry. At the same time, books on a linguistic approach to translation were introduced into China, such as the works of Eugene Nida, Peter Newmarks, J.C. Catford, Georges Mounin, and others. These books gave a great push to the application of linguistic theories to translation studies in China. Textual or discoursive approaches to the study of translation could not keep pace with the development of text linguistics. Some studies remained on the syntactic or semantic level, though even there textual devices were employed. In talking about the translation units of word and text, Nida wrote: ... average person naively thinks that language is words, the common tacit assumption results that translation involves replacing a word in language A with a word in language B. And the more « conscientious » this sort of translation is, the more acute. In other words, the traditional focus of attention in translation was on the word. It was recognized that that was not a sufficiently large unit, and therefore the focus shifted to the sentence. But again, expert translators and linguists have been able to demonstrate that individual sentences, in turn, are not enough. The focus should be on the paragraph, and to some extent on the total discourse. (Nida and Tabber 1969: 152) From that statement we can see that Nida regards a discourse as something larger than a paragraph, as an article with a beginning and an ending. Nida himself never applied text linguistics to translation, and there might be some confusion if we use his term in our interpretation of discourse, because discourse analysis is not merely a study based on a larger language structure. Some Chinese scholars did make the effort to apply text linguistics to the theory and practice of translation. Wang Bingqin's article (1987) was the first academic paper of this sort. He stated his aim to study and discover the rules governing the internal structure of a text in light of text linguistics. He analyzed numerous examples using textual analysis, but unfortunately, all the samples he collected were descriptions of scenery or quotations from the books of great scholars--no dialogue, no illocutionary or perlocutionary forces in the language. He failed to provide a variety of examples. For this reason, his research findings are largely restricted to rhetorical texts in ancient China (cf. Wang 1981; Luo 1994). Scholars like He Ziran applied pragamatics to translation. He's article (1992) put forth two new terms, « pragmalinguistics » and « socio-pragmatics » which, in translation, refer respectively to « the study of pragmatic force or language use from the viewpoint of linguistic sources » and to « the pragmatic studies which examine the conditions on language use that derive from the social and cultural situation. » He discusses the possibility of applying the pragmatic approach to translation in order to achieve a pragmatic equivalent effect between source and target texts; that is, to reproduce the message carried by the source language itself, as well as the meaning carried by the source language within its context and culture. In this article he tries to distinguish « pragma-linguistics » from « socio-pragmatics » but finally admits that « Actually, a clear line between pragma-linguistics and socio-pragmatics may sometimes be difficult to draw. » Still he insists that the application of the pragmatic approach to translation is helpful and even necessary. Ke Wenli (1992) argued that semantics, which in a broad sense combines semantics and pragmatics, should be studied to help understand, explain and solve some of the problems encountered in translation. In this article, he examines four semantic terms--« sense and reference, » « hyponomy, » « changes of meaning » and « context »--giving many examples to illusrate the importance of having some general knowledge of semantics and of understanding the relationship between semantics and translation. This article is clearly written and readers can easily draw inspiration from it. These linguistics approaches shed new lights on the criteria of « faithfulness, expressiveness and elegance » defined by Yan Fu. Chinese scholars began to criticize the vagueness of these three criteria and endeavored to give them concrete significance through the theories of western linguistics. The result is that the content of these three traditional criteria has been greatly enriched, especially by the effect equivalence theory, which in a broad sense means that the target language should be equivalent to the source language from a semantic, pragmatic, and stylistic point of view. But we are still unable to evaluate translations in a very scientific way. Therefore, Chinese scholars like Fan Shouyi, Xu Shenghuan and Mu Lei embarked on quantitative analyses of translations and used the fuzzy set theory of mathematics in accomplishing their analysis. Fan published several articles on this field of study. His 1987 and 1990 articles evaluate translations according to a numerical quantity of faithfulness. Xu's article « A Mathematical Model for Evaluating a Translation's Quality » presents a normal mathematical model. He states that it is difficult to produce an absolutely accurate evaluation of translations with this model because of the uncertainty and randomness of man's thought process. Making such analysis more accurate and objective would require further research. The unit in translation is a hard nut to crack. Without solving this problem, no research in translation studies will ever be sufficient. To date, very few people have focused their research on this area. Nida holds that the unit should be the sentence, and in a certain sense, the discourse. Barkhudarov (1993: 40), Soviet linguist and translation theorist, suggests that: translation is the process of transforming a speech product (or text) produced in one language into a speech product (or text) in another language. [...] It follows that the most important task of the translator who carries out the process of transformation, and of the theorist who describes or creates a model for that process, is to establish the minimal unit of translation, as it is generally called, the unit of translation in the source text. Though he notes the importance of the unit of translation in a text and considers that this unit can be a unit on any level of language, he fails to point out what a text is and how it might be measured in translation. Halliday's notion of the clause might be significant in this case. To him, a clause is a basic unit. He distinguishes three functions of a clause: textual, interpersonal and ideational. According to Halliday, these functions are not possessed by word or phrase. But he is not quite successful in analyzing the relationship between clause and text (cf. Halliday 1985). In China, some people have tried to solve this problem. Wang Dechun (1987: 10) more or less shares Bakhudarov's view that the translation unit cannot be confined just to sentences. In some ways, the phoneme, word, phrase, sentence, paragraph, or even text can all serve as a unit. At this point, we cannot find anything special in treating text translation except for having text as the highest level among translation units. This is not the aim of text linguistics or discourse analysis. If we want to apply these to the theory and practice of translation, we will require a textual approach.
语言学可以写的内容很多。基本上不外乎以下一些:一，语音类如语音的属性、音韵与语音的关系、强弱、轻浊、音节等二，词汇类如词汇形态学，语义学，构词，词化，语义场等等三，语法类如语法结构，层次，修辞等四，句子类如分析句子的各种成分，语序，基本句型等五，语篇类如连贯性，思维逻辑性，结构修辞，主体与客体意识等这方面的教材很多，就看你的要求了。现在英语与汉语的对比语言学和对比文学比较热，从这方面下手也不错。
一：1、题目。应能概括整个论文最重要的内容，言简意赅，引人注目，一般不宜超过20个字。论文摘要和关键词。2、论文摘要应阐述学位论文的主要观点。说明本论文的目的、研究方法、成果和结论。尽可能保留原论文的基本信息，突出论文的创造性成果和新见解。而不应是各章节标题的简单罗列。摘要以500字左右为宜。关键词是能反映论文主旨最关键的词句，一般3-5个。3、目录。既是论文的提纲，也是论文组成部分的小标题，应标注相应页码。4、引言(或序言)。内容应包括本研究领域的国内外现状，本论文所要解决的问题及这项研究工作在经济建设、科技进步和社会发展等方面的理论意义与实用价值。5、正文。是毕业论文的主体。6、结论。论文结论要求明确、精炼、完整，应阐明自己的创造性成果或新见解，以及在本领域的意义。7、参考文献和注释。按论文中所引用文献或注释编号的顺序列在论文正文之后，参考文献之前。图表或数据必须注明来源和出处。(参考文献是期刊时，书写格式为：[编号]、作者、文章题目、期刊名(外文可缩写)、年份、卷号、期数、页码。参考文献是图书时，书写格式为：[编号]、作者、书名、出版单位、年份、版次、页码。)8、附录。包括放在正文内过份冗长的公式推导，以备他人阅读方便所需的辅助性数学工具、重复性数据图表、论文使用的符号意义、单位缩写、程序全文及有关说明等。
日语论文格式： 目录 はじめ（论文的概括） 第一章 ***** 第一节 ****** 一 ***** 1. ***** 第二节 第二章 ***** 第一节 ****** 一 ***** 1. ***** 第二节 * * 中略（ 第一章、第二章.....，看自己的需要定 章节数。） * * 终わり （论文的总结陈述） 参考文献
日语的论文是和中文的论文是一样的。我上学的时候写的日语论文是学校有规定的格式和纸张就按照你的指导老师的要求去写去排版就好了。
和中文一样啊，晕。1封面。日语叫（表纸）一般有指定用纸，要问老师要，或者是交的时候一大沓放在办公室门口，你自己贴在论文前面。2如果没有表纸，自己用白纸打一张，要有论文标题、学籍番号、提出日、当然还有姓名。3目录4正文（最简单的就是三段式啦）前书き・本文・结论 如果有小标题每个小标题下重复这3个动作好啦，有的小标题不一定需要3个部份，内容清晰、逻辑合理就好了，直接写结论就好了。5出典、参考文献。基本是这样啦，具体要求，多问问老师吧。