基础语言错误：1. Line 1. 题目direct popliteal cutaneous artery perforator propeller flap，前面缺冠词 a。2. Line 8. soft tissue defects ... 前面缺冠词 the3. Line 12-13. Perforator propeller flap...前面应该有冠词 The。4. Line 16. function,and patients’satisfaction... and前面应该有个空格。s’s也缺空格。5. Line 18. donor and recipient site... 应该用复数sites。6. Line 20. after 6 to 60 months follow-up...如果follow-up是名词，60 months应该做形容词使用，即6- to 60-month follow-up。其他方法是6 to 60 months of follow-up; after 6 to 60 months; 6 to 60 months after surgery; 或 the follow-up at 6 to 60 months after surgery.7. Line 20. 2 cases appeared ...阿拉伯数字不能起始句子, Two cases appeared...8. Line 21. healed after dressing. The efficacy... 多出一个空格。9. Line 21-22. The efficacy was satisfactory in 8 cases, general in 1 case and without dissatisfactory...最后一部分without dissatisfactory和前面satisfactory和general不属于 “结构相同或相似”，无法构成排比句。10. Line 23. early\|stage...不能理解这两个单词之间是什么。11. Line 23-24. 1st degree in 6 patients, 2nd degree in 2 patients, 3rd degree in 1 patient;...应该是 and 3rd degree in1 patient.12. Line 26. to repair soft tissue defects of ...soft前面缺冠词。13. Line 11-12. in which including 6 men and 3 women whose ages ranged from 25 to 73 years old… 这是个从句，请问，从句的谓语动词在哪里？没有。14. Line 28. method for repairing...多出一个空格。不能认为“空格”是小事，本摘要并不长，已经至少4次没有正确处理空格了。15. Line 29. soft tissue defects...前面缺冠词。16. Line 21. edge 前面缺冠词the。17. Line 26-28. It is simple…soft tissue defects of popliteal fossa … soft tissue defects of the popliteal fossa. 一个句子中重复出现这么长的词组，一般称为“累赘”(redundant part)。18. Line 26-28. 更糟糕是It is simple, safe and reliable to repair soft tissue defects of popliteal fossa with transferred direct popliteal cutaneous artery perforator propeller flap 和which would be an ideal method for repairing soft tissue defects of the popliteal fossa. 这个主从句，含义竟然几乎完全一样。其中一个就是“累赘”(redundant part)。19. Line 27. direct 前缺冠词。评论：基础知识方面，不能正确使用冠词，不知道如何安排空格，属于高度频发。高级语言错误：1. Line 1.题目 Transferred, 应该用Transferring。2. Line 7. transferred, 和前面一样。3. Line 13. cut... 这个词过于简单且含义太多，描述不清，应该使用 raised或 elevated。4. Line 10-12. 这个长句有明显的构句问题。由于构句不属于语法，这就出现老师不教，考试不考，一用就错的现象。大多数人学了n年英语，不知构句为何物。回到这句，主语data，谓语were analyzed，两者距离如此之遥远，不知道花半分钟读过of 9 patients with defects of popliteal fossa from June 2013 to June 2019 之后，是否还会想起“初心”“到底在分析（analyzed）什么？”。常用的改进方法是将时间from June 2013 to June 2019放到句首; 删除The clinical data of; 9 patients with the defects of popliteal fossa were treated…5. Line 11. analyze 这个词的意思是分析，在英语科技文章中，analyze大多指“统计学分析”，纵观全文，作者并未“分析数据”。国人喜欢将“分析”翻译成analyze，完全是基于英汉词典的词义对应，而不考虑中英文词汇“分析”的内在含义和范围是什么。为避免误解，这里应该使用不产生歧义的 assess或evaluate。当然，如果删除data，“分析”也就不需要了。6. Line 11-12. in which including 6 men and 3 women whose ages ranged from 25 to 73 years old…which前面一大堆名词，which指代什么？是不是需要花时间去搞明白。如果独立起句子，就不会很绕，例如 The patients included 6 men and 3 women，当然，我更推荐there were 6 male and 3 female patients.7. Line 14. 又一个 in which 从句。which 从句不是不能用，而是不能给读者出考试题，让读者猜，到底which指代前面一大堆名词里的哪一个。重新开一句不香么？The largest flap was …科技文章要尽量避免歧义。可能，应试教育学出来写句子，喜欢写考卷上的这种句子，考卷是干什么的？考卷是让你看不明白的；我们写句子的目的，是让人看明白的。8. Line 12-14. Perforator propeller flap was …, in which the largest was 18.0 cm×10.0 cm and the smallest was 7.5 cm×4.5 cm. 一个皮瓣，怎么会有“最大”和“最小”的说法？9. Line 20-21. 2 cases appeared necrosis on edge of distal flaps and were healed after dressing. 这里， were healed的主语是2 cases，于是有了2 cases were healed这句。客观地说，国内医生大多分不清“患者”、“肢体”、“病例”三者的区别。患者是人，分男女，可以受伤或患病，可以被治疗。肢体是器官，不分男女，可以受伤，也可以被治疗。病例是案例，或量词，无生命，不分男女，不会受伤，也不能被治疗。英国有句谚语说“把铲子叫铲子”，说的就是实事求是，他是患者，你就直接叫他“患者”，不要转弯抹角的叫人家“病例”，把生命力都叫没了；同理，也不要含蓄地把“肢体”叫“病例”。否则，很清晰的事，反而搞糊涂了。回到2 cases were healed，这里直接说 two flaps were healed多清楚。10. Line 21. after dressing ，这里，不是“换药后愈合”，而是“换药使伤口愈合”。换药是changing dressing 或 changing wound dressing，于是by changing dressing。11. Line 21-22. The efficacy was satisfactory in 8 cases, general in 1 case and without dissatisfactory. 参照中文，我才看明白，作者表达的意思是“满意satisfactory，一般general，无不满意without dissatisfactory。”算了，懒得解释为啥了，反正, 满意是very satisfied, 一般是 moderately satisfied 或 slightly satisfied, 不满意是dissatisfied。或者satisfied, fair, dissatisfied 也说得过去。12. Line 22-23. The function of knee joint was excellent in 7 cases, good in 1 case, and general in 1 case…和上面一样，“一般（general）”应该翻译成fair。13. Line 23. Skin swelling rating in early\|stage was 1st degree in 6 patients, 2nd degree in 2 patients, 3rd degree in 1 patient这句建议如下可能会好些：Based on the skin swelling rating, there were 1st degree (n=6) , 2nd degree (n=2) , and 3rd degree (n=1) of swelling in the early stage. 如果写成early postoperative stage就更好了。评论：中国式英语，闭门造车，是导致外国人看不懂，国人看不明白的主要原因。医学专业问题：1. Line 1.这个皮瓣是否叫 direct popliteal cutaneous artery perforator propeller flap，涉及解剖学问题在这里不讨论，但可以考虑 The popliteal artery perforator-based propeller flap这种样式。2. Line 12-14. The sizes of soft tissue defects ranged from 6.5 cm×3.5 cm to 17.0 cm×8.5 cm. Perforator propeller flap was …18.0 cm×10.0 cm and the smallest was 7.5 cm×4.5 cm…创面的数据“从小往大”叙述，皮瓣的数据“从大往小”叙述。两个相互匹配的数据为什么反方向叙述，例如，螺母的直径从1 cm—10 cm，需要用10 cm—1 cm内径的扳手取，这种叙述符合大众自然理解顺序么？我们会奇怪，如何用10 cm内径的扳手取下直径1cm的螺母。3. Line 18-21. The survival of flaps was good. .. 2 cases appeared necrosis on edge of distal flaps…既然皮瓣存活很好，怎么后面出现了2例坏死？前后矛盾。我建议的叙述是这样： Seven flaps survived completely, and distal edge necrosis was observed in 2 flaps. 两部分句子不要距离很远，因为这里谈的是一件事survival。4. Line 18. 和上面一样前后矛盾，既然All the flaps survived，怎么后面还有坏死的？5. Line 18. All the flaps survived. 和 The survival of flaps was good. 内容重复了吧？6. Line 18. The incisions in donor and recipient site were primary healing. 和后面的2 cases appeared necrosis on edge of distal flaps…依然有相互矛盾的嫌疑。7. Line 18. 供区是植皮区，受区是皮瓣，incisions 在哪里？建议The donor and recipient sites primary healed。8. Line 14-16和line 21-24. 摘要里“方法”和“结果”相互不对应。方法里，作者评估了survival, infection control, elasticity and color, appearance of the flaps, the scar at the donor site, cutaneous sense, knee joint function, and patients’ satisfaction. 但在“结果”里，infection control, elasticity, cutaneous sense却没有提及。反之，结果里的Skin swelling rating，在方法里也没有提到。还有，方法里的顺序是knee joint function, and patients’ satisfaction，结果里是satisfactory，function of knee joint，为啥要颠倒顺序？作为摘要，不可能把所有方法和结果都包含进来，但相互匹配还是需要的，这叫有因有果。9. 一般摘要里的数据，要同时提供均数和范围，本文没有均数，不知为何。10. 随访时间缺失，让读者无法想象，文中的结果到底是否大致正常。好比介绍一个孩子，讲了一堆本领，说能够认识50个字，偏偏不提年龄（2岁，聪明绝顶；15岁，傻子）。评论：国内最权威期刊，权威学者审稿，大医院医生写作。320个单词，少说40多处错误，相当于每写8个单词就出错一次。如此之多的错误，都顺利发表了。
