The Niche

The University of Pittsburgh committee that investigated Gerry Schatten's role in the Hwang scandal determined that one area where he violated ethics was in having his name on the paper inappropriately. It is rumored that his authorship on this paper came about because the Hwang lab needed a native English speaker to help with the writing, and the condition of that service was authorship. This connection proved very harmful to Schatten's reputation, as he was not aware enough of the experiments to guard against the scientific misconduct that occurred.

It is important that the scientific community develop ways to help non-native English speakers in science communication(eg establishing editing and writing services as Monya Baker proposes) while at the same time guarding against inappropriate authorship from authors whose only contribution is helping with English.

My experience is that this is indeed a big issue with scientists across a broad range of disciplines, particularly in Asia. Moreover this issue is becoming more not less significant as the research output of nations such as China rapidly increases, possibly partially as a result of the research funding in such nations being heavily influenced by the number of papers published in international English-language journals.

Of course I am sure that most journal editors make every effort to disentangle problems with the English language of a paper and the scientific merit of the research reported. However, unfortunately, I feel that Monya is correct that poor language can still lead to rejection for such authors as busy referees find it too easy to slam a paper that they have trouble understanding due to language problems and conversely a well-written paper that is easy to read is more likely to get an easier ride from the refs.

There is not a simple solution to this that is equitable: it will always be harder for ESL authors because like it or not English is the global standard for the communication of scientific findings and this will not change anytime soon. Nonetheless I think that journal editors and, particularly, referees need to make a special effort when such a paper lands in their inbox to make sure that they are not harshly judging a worthy piece of research because of what are, in the grand scheme of things, relatively minor grammatical problems. Perhaps we should ask referees in such cases to consider how hard it would be for them if they had to write their papers in a non-preferred language?

Regardless the onus will, quite rightly, still remain on the authors to ensure that their paper is written in English that is good enough to get their message across. If ESL authors cannot get a native English-speaking co-author or colleague to ensure that this is the case perhaps they need to ask themselves the question whether it might be worth investing in using a professional English-language editing service for scientists? If you compare the cost of such a service to the time, money and effort invested in doing the research in the first place it might start look like a reasonable investment to ensure that they give their paper the best possible chance of being published where they want to publish it. That said, having a beautifully written and/or edited manuscript cannot change the significance of the research itself – a fundamental flaw in experimental approach or data analysis will not be cured even if your text is reworked by a Nobel laureate for literature!

i don't know wether the other non-english speaking country's pepole study english through all their time, but in China, english is the most important subject the student must learn . Even so, that is not enough for the requirment of to be a good scientist. We need to say,write,listen,read. It costs most of our time to grasp a new and important thing but with little chance to use it everyday!