毕业论文外文翻译-中国的知识产权保护以及外国的直接投资

《毕业论文外文翻译-中国的知识产权保护以及外国的直接投资》由会员分享，可在线阅读，更多相关《毕业论文外文翻译-中国的知识产权保护以及外国的直接投资（14页珍藏版）》请在装配图网上搜索。

1、中国的知识产权保护以及外国的直接投资摘要：有实证研究说明开展中国家采取知识产权保护的措施对吸引外国直接投资有直接的影响，特别是经济大国在吸引外国直接投资中略显匮乏。本文探讨了知识产权对中国最近激增的外商直接投资所起的作用和奉献。我们认为，知识产权的替性代措施在经济开展水平不同的地区对外商直接投资的影响可能会有所不同。我们使用38个国家的贸易数据进行研究，结果说明，在中国加强知识产权保护对外国直接投资有着积极和重要的作用。调查结果还显示，来自香港和台湾地区的外国直接投资的行为高于其他高收入国家。关键词：知识产权；专利法;外国直接投资;中国;开展中国家正文：1、介绍在过去二十年里，中国的外商直接投

2、资FDI量有着迅猛的增长。虽然亚洲大局部外国直接投资流入到了开展中国家，其中中国占亚洲全球外国直接投资额几乎一半见下列图。中国的外国直接投资从1979年几乎没有增长至1998年的45.5亿美元，而在随后的不到十年，在2006年，其外国直接投资流入增加至695亿美元，其数量已经超过整个非洲大陆355亿美元，但却远远落后于一个落后的拉丁美洲的总量约合838亿美元见贸发会议，2007年。自1993年以来，中国已成为吸收外商直接投资最多的开展中国家和最受跨国公司欢送的首选目的地，仅次于美国。中国这么巨大和快速的的外商直接投资增量自然使人们提出一个问题：这么强大投资的背后动力是什么呢？中国是一个开展中国

3、家，特别适合作为知识产权改革对外国直接投资流入的影响分析和的案例研究。令人惊讶的是，中国在1985年以前没有知识产权保护。然而，在1985年第一部专利法和在1992年和2000年大幅修订成立以来，中国经历了其专利制度的渐进改革。于1992年，由于来自美国的压力，中国的专利法大幅修订，以适应许多工业国家的要求。中国加强专利法律也是为了加速其参加世界贸易组织的步调，中国知识产权法律要求(如专利,版权和商标)也是为了更好的符合WTO的协议与贸易有关的知识产权(TRIPS)和其他主要的国际知识产权公约(Maskus,2004)。自1992年以来，外国专利保持在19%的年平均增长率见图2。大多数的中国专

4、利创造专利申请，由外国公司提出，如日本，美国，欧盟成员国，以及韩国等。图2 本文目的是为了探讨中国知识产权法律对其吸收外资的影响 (19922005)。这篇文献的奉献在于有几个方面。首先，这是第一个专注于大型和有影响力的经济开展，在过去二十年经历了其知识产权制度的显着变化的实证分析。因此，这种分析提供了一个可以替代以往通常从一个主要工业化国家如美国家长的角度强调不同群体的主办国的外国直接投资流入的研究。其次，我们还探讨知识产权保护对外商直接投资的效果可能会有所不同的伙伴国家的经济开展水平史密斯，2001年的可能性。第三、从一个单一的一年的横截面数据为根底的研究，这项研究使用的38个国家，涵盖了

5、更多的扩展时期1992-2005的数据，并允许考虑动态性质的外商直接投资与知识产权制度的政策变化。第四，本文适用于其他知识产权作为知识产权制度的代理措施：作为每年衡量中国知识产权的保护强度。知识产权指数，即使用前人研究的根底上，用打分的方法，经常被任意的选择上的重要性权重各种标准。虽然在某些情况下很有效果，但是以知识产权指数为根底的研究措施，可能无法充分反映以书本为法律的专利法的修改和标准之间的相互间的动态影响作用，另外，随着时间的推移，对其他经济变量的影响例如，外国直接投资也不能很好地表达出来。另外，我们使用实际数据，随着时间的推移原始国家的专利申请数量。每年越来越多的外国专利申请可能是一个

6、很好的指标，越来越多的外国公司在知识产权保护的法律和执法提供在中国的信心。相对指数为根底的方法，这种跨越时间和措施，这一措施保护知识产权的强度变化占更多星移斗转、可能不易测量误差。本研究的主要发现说明，中国知识产权保护的加强，导致在其外国直接投资流入的增加。本文的实证结果进一步支持这一假设，加强专利法具有一定的市场扩张效果。此外，我们的研究结果还说明，外商直接投资来自香港和台湾表现不同于源自其他高收入国家。因此，本研究提供了关于当前有关政策改革在知识产权制度及技术转让同对中国贸易有何影响的相关实证。知识产权保护和全球直接投资之间的联系并不明确，一直是大量的辩论和争议的来源。更强的知识产权保护是

7、否刺激或阻碍外国直接投资流向开展中国家的分歧依然存在。根据一个国家的知识产权制度，通过几个选项之间进行选择：出口，外国直接投资，合资企业和许可，来为国外市场效劳。虽然一些理论研究说明，更强的知识产权保护能够促进创新，但是其对外国直接投资的影响既可以是积极也可以是消极的Chin等，1988和赫尔普曼，1993。更强的知识产权保护可以减少因当地企业的模仿造成的威胁，从而确保外国公司直接投资的增加产生积极的影响和结果。相比之下，如果加强知识产权保护，那么它在外国公司的垄断力量的增加可能会对外国直接投资产生负面影响。当面对来自于本地生产的仿制品的竞争，跨国公司可能会尝试以最大限度地减少子公司的产量和销

8、售利润的方式进行竞争马库斯和本巴提1995，史密斯，1999和史密斯，2001。此外，更强的知识产权保护也阻碍跨国公司选择增加外国直接投资，而不是许可。相反，技术含量低的生产者，在沉重的知识型产业投资公司可能产生更敏感的知识产权保护问题曼斯菲尔德，1995年，马库森，2001年和夹克瑞克，2004。因此，保护知识产权和外国直接投资之间的关系仍然是一个经验性的尚未得到足够重视的问题。近年来，有许多关于外国直接投资流入的影响因素的实证研究，如中欧和东欧国家和中国的经济转型。以欧洲经济转型为重点的研究发现有助于吸引外国直接投资卡斯特森和特拜耳传统因素例如，市场潜力，生产要素本钱和距离和过渡的具体因素

9、例如，私有化和欧盟成员国的水平和方法，2004年，贝文和埃斯特林，2004年。相比之下，关注中国的实证研究将更加倾向于对根本经济因素，如市场规模，劳动力和投资本钱的重视。在重点研究了1978年至1992年进入中国的外国直接投资的驱动程序后，王和斯温1995年发现，GDP、工资和贸易限制措施都对外商直接投资具有积极的作用，而利率和汇率对外国直接投资却有着负面影响。同样，海德和里斯1996通过研究对外国直接投资的54个中国城市中的位置决定的因素发现，外国直接投资主要是吸引中国有雄厚的工业根底和优良的根底设施的城市。在另一项研究中，孙等人分析了整个中国的从1986年到1998年30个省的外国直接投资

10、决定因素发现，外国直接投资的主要驱动力随着时间的推移改变。萧2004在研究了中国为什么能够吸引这么多的外国直接投资后发现，中国的外国直接投资约50来源于香港和台湾。张2005问：为什么前往中国的外国直接投资的很大一局部来自于香港和台湾？研究发现，从主要兴旺国家欧盟，美国和日本的外国直接投资和香港、台湾不同。此外，一些探讨了除中国外的外国直接投资的其他方面的研究和一些学者探讨的生产性投入对外商直接投资的影响，推动中国近期的经济增长陈等人，1995年，吴，2000和姚明和伟，2007。虽然许多作者分析了各种经济因素外国直接投资的影响，但很少有研究知识产权的作用，因为在这项研究中所提倡的。李和曼斯菲

11、尔德1996年的创作是有关一个开展中国家的知识产权保护体系和美国的外国直接投资数量之间联系的第一个实证调查之一。他们的经验证据说明，加强知识产权保护，对外国直接投资流入有积极的作用。在最近的研究中，夹克瑞克2004年，评价了知识产权在对东欧和前苏联的经济转型中外国直接投资吸引的积极作用。该研究得出结论是，薄弱的知识产权保护对技术密集型行业的外商直接投资负面影响。同样，奴凯姆和斯帕茨2004对知识产权的调查发现，外商直接投资联动使以东道国分类部门为数据的的外国直接投资有促进作用。在中国，对知识产权在经济上的担任何种角色的分析比比皆是，但数据为根据的实证研究却寥寥无几。近日，杜等人研究了区域经济、

12、体制因素即产权保护和合同执行及美国跨国公司在区位选择上之间的关系，他建议美国跨国投资在有更好的知识产权保护的地区，以便减少政府对企业的干预，从而更好地执行合同。然而，他们使用由每个省作为一个知识产权保护区域，从而代理政府批准的专利数量的决定可能会有问题。虽然有可能在一些地区中经济开展水平和体制根底设施会有变化，但没有这样的变化就存在跨省的知识产权保护问题，因为中国有统一的国家知识产权法律。统计推论强调，区域差异的影响会产生利用外商直接投资的知识产权保护知识产权代理变量时不改变跨区域的疑问。结束语本文探讨了知识产权保护在中国对外直接投资内流近期剧增中的奉献。虽然一些研究探讨了开展中国家的外国直接

13、投资的决定因素，其中知识产权的作用已相对忽略，但中国是一个有趣的案例研究，研究给出了其主要开展中国家的经济作用，呈现出跨国公司具有强大的威胁和模仿能力。在其试图参加世贸组织的过去十年中中国经历了其知识产权制度的显着变化。实证证据说明，在在中国加强知识产权保护在吸引外国直接投资中具有积极和重要的作用。其结果也说明除了知识产权因素，市场规模，区域一体化，运输和贸易本钱也是中国吸引外国直接投资的重要因素。此外，这一结果是强大的替代型号规格和数据样本的分割。总的来说，我们的结果说明，加强开展中国家在知识产权保护，特别是对于大型经济体国家而言，可能会对吸引外国直接投资起到积极的作用，从而促进技术的转让。

14、附注：本文摘自?经济学学报?2021年6月第2期Intellectual property rights protection andthe surge in FDI in ChinaTitus O. AwokuseAbstract：There is scarcity of empirical studies focusing on the role of intellectual property rights (IPR) in attracting FDI into developing nations, especially large economies with relatively

15、 strong threat of imitation. This paper examines the contribution of IPR to the recent surge in Chinas inward FDI. We consider two alternative measures of IPR and explore the possibility that the effect of IPR protection on FDI may vary by the level of economic development. Using a panel data for 38

16、 countries, the empirical results indicate that the strengthening of IPR protection in China has a positive and significant effect on FDI. The results also show that FDI from Hong Kong and Taiwan behaves differently from the FDI originating from other high-income countries.Keywords：Intellectual prop

17、erty rights; Patent laws; FDI; China; Developing countriesChina has experienced a phenomenal surge in its inflow of foreign direct investment (FDI) in the past two decades. While Asia receives the bulk of FDI flows to the developing world, China accounts for almost half of Asias share of global FDI

18、(see Table 1). Chinas FDI grew from virtually nothing in 1979 to $45.5 billion in 1998; and less than a decade later in 2006, its FDI inflow increased to $69.5 billion. FDI flow into China accounts for more FDI than that of the entire African continent ($35.5 billion) and is just a bit behind all of

19、 Latin America ($83.8 billion) combined (see UNCTAD, 2007). Since 1993, it has become the largest recipient of FDI among developing countries and the most popular destination of choice for multinational firms, second only to the United States. This substantial volume and growth of FDI to China natur

20、ally raises the question: what is the driving force behind this growth?Among developing countries, China is particularly suitable as a case study for analyzing the impact of IPR reforms on FDI flows. Surprisingly, China had no IPR protection before 1985. However, since the establishment of its first

21、 patent law in 1985 and its substantial revision in 1992 and 2000, China has undergone a gradual reform of its patent systems. In 1992, mainly due to pressure from the United States, Chinas patent law was substantially amended to make it more aligned with those of many industrial nations (Allison an

22、d Lin, 1999). The strengthening of Chinas patent laws was also accelerated by its membership in the WTO that required that Chinese IPR laws (i.e. patents, copyrights and trademarks) be better aligned with the WTOs Agreement on Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) and other m

23、ajor international IPR conventions (Maskus, 2004). Since 1992, foreign patents have increased steadily with an annual growth rate of 19% (see follow picture) of Chinese patents (invention patent applications) were filed by foreign firms with the most important patentees coming from Japan, the US, EU

24、 member countries, and South Korea.The objective of this paper is to investigate the impact of Chinas IPR laws on its ability to attract FDI from 19922005. This paper contributes to the literature in several ways. First, this is the first empirical analysis focusing on a large and influential develo

25、ping economy that has experienced significant changes in its IPR systems in the past two decades. Thus, this analysis provides an alternative to most previous studies that usually emphasize FDI flows from the perspective of a major industrialized parent-nation (e.g., United States) to a diverse grou

26、p of host nations. Second, we also explore the possibility that the effect of IPR protection on FDI may vary by the level of economic development in partner countries (Smith, 2001). Third, in contrast to studies based on cross-sectional data from a single year, this study uses a panel data for 38 co

27、untries which covers a more extended time period (19922005) and allows for the consideration of the dynamic nature of the relationship between FDI and policy changes in IPR regimes. Fourth, this paper applies two alternative measures of IPR as a proxy for IPR regimes: Annual foreign patent applicati

28、ons as a measure of the strength of IPR protection in China The IPR index, used by most previous studies, is based on a scoring method that is often arbitrary in their choice of weights on the importance of various criteria. Although useful in some cases, the index-based measures of IPR, based on la

29、ws on the books, may not adequately capture the dynamic nature of the interaction between changes in patent laws and standards over time as well as their potential impact on other economic variables (e.g., FDI). Alternatively, we use actual data on the number of patent applications from parent count

30、ries over time. The growing number of foreign patents filed each year could be a good indicator of growing confidence of foreign firms in the IPR protection laws and enforcement offered in China. Relative to the index-based approach, this measure of IPR protection strength accounts for more variatio

31、n across time and may be less susceptible to measurement errors.The main finding from this study suggests that the strengthening of IPR protection in China led to an increase in its FDI inflows. This papers empirical results further support the hypothesis that the strengthening of patent laws has a

32、market expansion effect. Furthermore, our results also show that FDI from Hong Kong and Taiwan behaves differently from the FDI originating from other high-income countries. Thus, this study provides much needed empirical evidence on the current debate regarding policy reforms in IPR regimes and its

33、 effects on technology transfer and trade with China. The nature of the linkages between IPR protection and global direct investment is ambiguous and has been a source of much debate and controversy. Disagreements persist on whether stronger IPR protection stimulates or discourages FDI flows to deve

34、loping countries (for a review see Shatz et al. (2000). Depending on a nations IPR regime, multinational firms can serve a foreign market by choosing among several options: exports, FDI, joint ventures and licensing. While some theoretical studies have shown that stronger IPR protection stimulates i

35、nnovation, the effect on FDI could be either positive or negative ( Chin et al., 1988 and Helpman, 1993). Stronger IPR protection could have a positive effect and result in an increase in FDI by reducing the threat of imitation by local firms and thereby ensuring high returns to the investment in re

36、search and development of foreign firms.In contrast, the strengthening of IPR protection may have a negative effect on FDI if it results in an increase in the monopoly power of foreign firms. When faced with less competition from locally produced imitation products, multinational firms may attempt t

37、o maximize profits by reducing affiliate output and sales ( Maskus and Penubarti, 1995, Smith, 1999 and Smith, 2001). Furthermore, stronger IPR protection could also discourage FDI if multinational firms choose to license instead of increasing FDI. In contrast to low-tech producers, firms investing

38、in heavy knowledge-based industries may be more sensitive to IPR protection concerns ( Mansfield, 1995, Markusen, 2001 and Javorcik, 2004). Thus, the relationship between IPR protection and FDI remains an empirical question that has yet to receive adequate attention.In recent years, many empirical s

39、tudies have examined the factors influencing FDI flows to transition economies such as Central and Eastern European Countries and China. The studies focusing on European transition economies usually found that traditional determinants (e.g., market potentials, factor costs, and distance) and transit

40、ion-specific factors (e.g., levels and methods of privatization and EU membership) help to attract FDI ( Carstensen and Toubal, 2004 and Bevan and Estrin, 2004). Comparatively, empirical studies focusing on China tend to place more emphasis on fundamental economic factors such as market size, labor

41、and investment costs. In a study focusing on the drivers of FDI into China over 19781992, Wang and Swain (1995) found that GDP, wages, and trade restrictions have a positive effect while interest rates and exchange rates appear to have a negative effect on FDI. Similarly, Heid and Ries (1996) invest

42、igated the determinants of FDI location decision in 54 Chinese cities and found that FDI is mostly attracted to Chinese cities that have strong industrial base and excellent infrastructure.In another study, Sun et al. (2002) analyzed the determinants of FDI across Chinas thirty provinces from 1986 t

43、o 1998 and found that the key drivers of FDI have changed over time. Hsiao and Hsiao (2004) also examined why China has attracted so much FDI and found that about 50% of Chinas FDI originated in Hong Kong and Taiwan. Zhang (2005) asked why a very large portion of China-bound FDI comes from Hong Kong

44、 and Taiwan. They found that the characteristics of FDI from the major developed nations (EU, US, and Japan) are different from those of Hong Kong and Taiwan. Also, several studies have investigated other aspects of FDI in China. Some authors explored how FDI is a productive input spurring Chinas re

45、cent economic growth ( Chen et al., 1995, Wu, 2000 and Yao and Wei, 2007).Although many authors have analyzed the effect of various economic determinants of FDI, very few have examined the role of IPR as advocated in this study. Lee and Mansfield (1996) authored one of the first empirical investigat

46、ions of the possible linkage between a developing countrys IPR protection system and the volume and composition of US FDI in that country. Their empirical evidence indicates that the strengthening of IPR protection has a positive effect on FDI inflows. In a more recent study, Javorcik (2004) examine

47、d the effect of IPR on the composition of FDI for a group of transition economies in Eastern Europe and the former Soviet Union. The study concludes that weak IPR protection has a negative effect on FDI in technology-intensive sectors. Similarly, Nunnenkamp and Spatz (2004) investigated the IPR-FDI

48、linkage using sectorally disaggregated FDI data for a large sample of host countries and found that stronger IPR protection played a positive role in attracting FDI.In Chinas case, while qualitative analyzes on the role of IPR on its economy abound, data-driven empirical studies have been relatively

49、 scarce. Recently, Du et al. (2021) investigated the relationship between regional economic institutional factors (i.e., property rights protection and contract enforcement) and the locational choice of US multinational firms in China.1 Their results, based on a panel data set (19932001), suggest th

50、at US multinationals prefer investing in the regions that have better IPR protection, less government intervention in business, and better contract enforcement. However, their decision to use government-approved number of patents by each province as a proxy variable for regional IPR protection could

51、 be problematic. Although there may be some regional variations in the level of economic development and institutional infrastructures, no such variation exist for IPR protection across provinces since China has uniform national IPR laws.2 Thus, statistical inference emphasizing regional variations

52、in the effect of IPR on FDI may be questionable when the IPR protection proxy variable does not vary across regions.Concluding remarksThis paper examines the contribution of IPR protection to the recent surge in Chinas inward flow of FDI. While several studies have investigated the impact of various

53、 factors as determinants of FDI into developing nations, the role of IPR has been relatively ignored. China is an interesting case study given its role as a major developing economy, which presents multinational firms with a strong threat of imitation. In its attempt to obtain membership in the WTO,

54、 China has experienced notable changes in its IPR systems in the past decade. Using a panel data for 38 diverse countries from 1992 to 2005, the empirical evidence suggests that the strengthening of IPR protection in China has a positive and significant effect in attracting FDI. In addition to IPR,

55、the results also show that measures of market size, regional integration, and transportation and trade costs are important determinants of FDI in China. Furthermore, this result is robust to alternative model specifications and segmentation of the data sample. Overall, our results suggest that the s

56、trengthening of IPR in developing countries, particularly large economies, might play a positive role in attracting FDI and thus promote technology transfer.五分钟搞定5000字毕业论文外文翻译，你想要的工具都在这里!在科研过程中阅读翻译外文文献是一个非常重要的环节，许多领域高水平的文献都是外文文献，借鉴一些外文文献翻译的经验是非常必要的。由于特殊原因我翻译外文文献的时机比拟多，慢慢地就发现了外文文献翻译过程中的三大利器：Google“翻译

57、频道、金山词霸完整版本和CNKI“翻译助手。具体操作过程如下： 1.先翻开金山词霸自动取词功能，然后阅读文献； 2.遇到无法理解的长句时，可以交给Google处理，处理后的结果猛一看，不堪入目，可是经过大脑的再处理后句子的意思根本就明了了； 3.如果通过Google仍然无法理解，感觉就是不同，那肯定是对其中某个“常用单词理解有误，因为某些单词看似很简单，但是在文献中有特殊的意思，这时就可以通过CNKI的“翻译助手来查询相关单词的意思，由于CNKI的单词意思都是来源与大量的文献，所以它的吻合率很高。 另外，在翻译过程中最好以“段落或者“长句作为翻译的根本单位，这样才不会造成“只见树木，不见森林的

58、误导。四大工具： 1、Google翻译： google，众所周知，谷歌里面的英文文献和资料还算是比拟详实的。我利用它是这样的。一方面可以用它查询英文论文，当然这方面的帖子很多，大家可以搜索，在此不赘述。回到我自己说的翻译上来。下面给大家举个例子来说明如何用吧比方说“电磁感应透明效应这个词汇你不知道他怎么翻译，首先你可以在CNKI里查中文的，根据它们的关键词中英文对照来做，一般比拟准确。 在此主要是说在google里怎么知道这个翻译意思。大家应该都有词典吧，按中国人的方法，把一个一个词分着查出来，敲到google里，你的这种翻译一般不太准，当然你需要验证是否准确了，这下看着吧，把你的那支离破碎的

59、翻译在google里搜索，你能看到许多相关的文献或资料，大家都不是笨蛋，看看，也就能找到最精确的翻译了，纯西式的！我就是这么用的。 2、CNKI翻译： CNKI翻译助手，这个网站不需要介绍太多，可能有些人也知道的。主要说说它的有点，你进去看看就能发现：搜索的肯定是专业词汇，而且它翻译结果下面有文章与之对应因为它是CNKI检索提供的，它的翻译是从文献里抽出来的，很实用的一个网站。估计别的写文章的人不是傻子吧，它们的东西我们可以直接拿来用，当然省事了。网址告诉大家，有兴趣的进去看看，你们就会发现其乐无穷！还是很值得用的。 3、网路版金山词霸不到1M： 4、有道在线翻译：翻译时的速度：这里我谈的是电

60、子版和打印版的翻译速度，按个人翻译速度看，打印版的快些，因为看电子版本一是费眼睛，二是如果我们用电脑，可能还经常时不时玩点游戏，或者整点别的，导致最终SPPEED变慢，再之电脑上一些词典金山词霸等在专业翻译方面也不是特别好，所以翻译效果不佳。在此本人建议大家购置清华大学编写的好似是国防工业出版社的那本?英汉科学技术词典?，根本上挺好用。再加上网站如：google CNKI翻译助手，这样我们的翻译速度会提高不少。具体翻译时的一些技巧主要是写论文和看论文方面 大家大概都应预先清楚明白自己专业方向的国内牛人，在这里我强烈建议大家仔细看完这些头上长角的人物的中英文文章，这对你在专业方向的英文和中文互译

61、水平提高有很大帮助。 我们大家最蹩脚的实质上是写英文论文，而非看英文论文，但话说回来我们最终提高还是要从下大工夫看英文论文开始。提到会看，我想它是有窍门的，个人总结如下： 1、把不同方面的论文分夹存放，在看论文时，对论文必须做到看完后完全明白你重视的论文；懂得其某局部讲了什么你需要参考的局部论文，在看明白这些论文的情况下，我们大家还得紧接着做的工作就是把论文中你觉得非常巧妙的表达写下来，或者是你论文或许能用到的表达摘记本钱。这个本将是你以后的财富。你写论文时再也不会为了一些表达不符合西方表达模式而烦恼。你的论文也降低了被SCI或大牛刊物退稿的几率。不信，你可以试一试 2、把摘记的内容自己编写成检索，这个过程是我们对文章再回忆，而且是对你摘抄的经典妙笔进行梳理的重要阶段。你有了这个过程。写英文论文时，将会有一种信手拈来的感觉。许多文笔我们不需要自己再翻译了。当然前提是你梳理的非常细，而且中英文对照写的比拟详细。 3、最后一点就是我们往大成修炼的阶段了，万事不是说成的，它是做出来的。写英文论文也就像我们小学时开始学写作文一样，你不练笔是肯定写不出好作品来的。所以在此我鼓励大家有时尝试着把自己的论文强迫自己写成英文的，一遍不行，可以再修改。最起码到最后你会很满意。呵呵，我想我是这么觉得的。