- Văn bản
- Lịch sử
l. Avoid humorBeing funny in print
l. Avoid humor
Being funny in print is hard. Being funny under stress and time pressure is harder still. Better to stay serious.
Don't worry about making an impression, standing out, or being remembered: Your goal is to come across as smart, careful, and clear, not scintillating. As one former law review editor told me, “The simplest way to stand out is to write well.”
Especially avoid sarcasm. Another editor's comment: “Some people can write well, but far fewer people can write wittily and well; and even fewer can write sarcastically and well. A serious and respectful tone will generally get a better response from a reader of a write-on submission; moreover, they are more likely not to be angered if they happen to disagree with your political stance.” m. When you get tired
When you get too tired to write, you may still have some energy for other things. Alternate between (1) doing another pass of the editing test (see p. 314) and (2) proofreading whatever you've written of your piece. A student reports: “alternating between writing and doing the Bluebook test helped me be as productive as possible.”
Doing the editing test as you write your piece will also help keep the bluebooking rules fresh in your mind, and thus help you bluebook your own piece well.
n. Add the footnotes/endnotes as you write, but don't let the formatting distract you too much
When you use a source, add the footnote or endnote right away. If you plan to add it at the end, you might find at the end that you didn't leave enough time for that, or that you've forgotten where to give credit or what source to credit. And a good chunk of your grade will be based on the completeness, accuracy, and formatting of the footnotes. Checking and editing footnotes is a big part of the law review's job, so the editors are looking for people who are good with footnotes.
At the same time, don't let the details of the footnotes distract you too much as you write. If you're on a roll wi h your writi g, keep writing, and don't take time off to make the formatting perfect. Then, when you're tired of writing, and need a distraction—later in the day, not at the very end of the competition—go over the footnotes and fix them up.
Also, if you know some assertion is right but don't remember where you read it, just add a blank footnote. You can then fill it in when you go over the passages you highlighted as you read the sources (see p. 325 below).
o. Avoid putting text in the endnotes
If you want the graders to read something, put it in the text. They probably won't read the endnotes until they're done with the rest of the paper; they thus won't see any important text that you put in the endnote until it's too late. On the other hand, if you don't care whether the graders read the material, then why include it anywhere, even in the endnotes?
There is at least one exception to this rule: If you cite a case in an endnote, and think there might be some controversy about whether it applies, you might want to clarify this in the endnote. Also, if you're told to use footnotes rather than endnotes, you might have more flexibility, because a reader is likelier to notice footnote text than endnote text. But be careful even then; some readers will be distracted and annoyed by what they see as a digression.
p. Avoid strange formatting features
Don't use fancy formatting features that you aren't asked to use (for instance, line numbers on the left-hand side of the page, strange fonts, and the like). Grading is a tedious process, and graders tend to be easily annoyed. Don't try to distinguish your paper through its look. Distinguish it through its clarity and persuasiveness.
9. Use the sources effectively
a. Use all the endnote space that you're allowed
If you are asked to put your sources in endnotes, and are given limited space for them, try to use all the space that you're given. Otherwise, the piece may look shallow and quickly patched together. Of course, don't just throw in irrelevant filler: Find citations that are relevant to your argument—there will almost certainly be plenty.
A former chief notes editor at a leading law school echoes this. “Make sure you use all of the endnote space you are given. It's not really fair (or reflective of literary merit), but I remember that people who used, say, only 5 pages of endnote space out of the 15 they were given were regarded as not having worked very hard at their submissions. Every bit counts, and even the appearance of lack of effort can be fatal.”
b. Try to us all h sources
If you haven't used some of the sources that you're given, look over them again to make sure that you haven't missed anything.
Sometimes, editors may intentionally give you sources that you don't really need. Sometimes, your argument may legitimately take you in a direction that makes certain sources irrelevant.
But those situations should be rare. Generally, if the editors give you some sources, each one of the sources is likely to be helpful. Read them, cite them, but most importantly, use them: Don't just cite them for the sake of having cited each source, but figure out what the value of the source is to your argument (or to some counterargument).
c. Don't just describe the authorities
Don't just describe the authorities, for instance, “In X v. Y, this happened. The Court ruled this way. In A v. B, this happened. The Court ruled that way.... Therefore, in this case, the Court should rule this way.” Rather, synthesize the authorities into a rule, and then cite them to support your synthesis. See Part IV.B, p. 64 for examples.
d. Pay attention to the weight of authorities
If the law review editors give you a packet of source materials, the packet may contain statutes, U.S. Supreme Court cases, lower appellate court cases, trial court cases, law review articles, and excerpts from treatises. If they ask you to do your own research, then the results of that research will contain a similarly mixed set of materials.
Keep in mind that some of the authorities are more important than others. A U.S. Supreme Court case is more important than a district court case; the U.S. Supreme Court case is binding throughout the nation, while the district court case isn't even binding in that very district. Don't overstate the value of lower court precedents.
“X v. Y held that Z,” where X v. Y is a district court case or even a court of appeals case, is not itself a conclusive argument that Z is the law, or that other courts will reach the same result. Definitely use the lower court cases where they seem relevant—but keep in mind that if you rely on a lower court case, you must also explain why that decision should be followed, rather than just assuming that it would be followed (even if the lower court case seems very close to your facts).
You should also rely on the real authorities—such as cases, statutes, constitutions, and regulations—more than on any law review articles that you might have been given. Articles are just opinions; “Professor Schmoe says this-and-such” is not by itself a good argument that courts would or should accept this-and-such.
Certainly cite the articles when you borrow arguments from them; and do take advantage of whatever enlightenment they can provide, and whatever support they can give your thesis. But the main support for your argument should be the legal authorities, linked together by your own logic.
e. Cite everything you rely o
The law review editors will likely be on the lookout for inadequate attribution, which they may well see as plagiarism that would categorically disqualify you. What's more, because they're familiar with all the sources, they can easily spot any unattributed copying, paraphrasing, or even reuse of a general idea. You should read Part XXVI.A for more on what constitutes plagiarism, and how you can avoid it; but the brief summary is cite everything you rely on, including sources that you rely on for ideas as well as for literal words. A few tips:
i. Include footnotes or endnotes as you write, rather than just waiting for later. Later, it will be
too easy to forget.
ii. If you run out of footnote space, edit the footnotes down—for instance, by tightening the
parentheticals—rather than just deleting enough of the footnotes to get within the limit.
iii. Don't worry about having your work look too derivative if everything is footnoted. Footnotes
generally make the work look wellsupported, not unoriginal. iv. When you use an idea or an argument that you borrow from a source—even if you didn't use
any of the literal text from the source—give credit in a footnote.
v. Even when you come up with an idea on your own, and then see it in a source, give credit. The
academic tradition is to credit people who came up with an argument before you did, even if you arrived at it independently. What's more, your readers won't know that you found the argument independently: They might just assume the worst, and think that you deliberately borrowed it, and refused to acknowledge the borrowing.
Being funny in print is hard. Being funny under stress and time pressure is harder still. Better to stay serious.
Don't worry about making an impression, standing out, or being remembered: Your goal is to come across as smart, careful, and clear, not scintillating. As one former law review editor told me, “The simplest way to stand out is to write well.”
Especially avoid sarcasm. Another editor's comment: “Some people can write well, but far fewer people can write wittily and well; and even fewer can write sarcastically and well. A serious and respectful tone will generally get a better response from a reader of a write-on submission; moreover, they are more likely not to be angered if they happen to disagree with your political stance.” m. When you get tired
When you get too tired to write, you may still have some energy for other things. Alternate between (1) doing another pass of the editing test (see p. 314) and (2) proofreading whatever you've written of your piece. A student reports: “alternating between writing and doing the Bluebook test helped me be as productive as possible.”
Doing the editing test as you write your piece will also help keep the bluebooking rules fresh in your mind, and thus help you bluebook your own piece well.
n. Add the footnotes/endnotes as you write, but don't let the formatting distract you too much
When you use a source, add the footnote or endnote right away. If you plan to add it at the end, you might find at the end that you didn't leave enough time for that, or that you've forgotten where to give credit or what source to credit. And a good chunk of your grade will be based on the completeness, accuracy, and formatting of the footnotes. Checking and editing footnotes is a big part of the law review's job, so the editors are looking for people who are good with footnotes.
At the same time, don't let the details of the footnotes distract you too much as you write. If you're on a roll wi h your writi g, keep writing, and don't take time off to make the formatting perfect. Then, when you're tired of writing, and need a distraction—later in the day, not at the very end of the competition—go over the footnotes and fix them up.
Also, if you know some assertion is right but don't remember where you read it, just add a blank footnote. You can then fill it in when you go over the passages you highlighted as you read the sources (see p. 325 below).
o. Avoid putting text in the endnotes
If you want the graders to read something, put it in the text. They probably won't read the endnotes until they're done with the rest of the paper; they thus won't see any important text that you put in the endnote until it's too late. On the other hand, if you don't care whether the graders read the material, then why include it anywhere, even in the endnotes?
There is at least one exception to this rule: If you cite a case in an endnote, and think there might be some controversy about whether it applies, you might want to clarify this in the endnote. Also, if you're told to use footnotes rather than endnotes, you might have more flexibility, because a reader is likelier to notice footnote text than endnote text. But be careful even then; some readers will be distracted and annoyed by what they see as a digression.
p. Avoid strange formatting features
Don't use fancy formatting features that you aren't asked to use (for instance, line numbers on the left-hand side of the page, strange fonts, and the like). Grading is a tedious process, and graders tend to be easily annoyed. Don't try to distinguish your paper through its look. Distinguish it through its clarity and persuasiveness.
9. Use the sources effectively
a. Use all the endnote space that you're allowed
If you are asked to put your sources in endnotes, and are given limited space for them, try to use all the space that you're given. Otherwise, the piece may look shallow and quickly patched together. Of course, don't just throw in irrelevant filler: Find citations that are relevant to your argument—there will almost certainly be plenty.
A former chief notes editor at a leading law school echoes this. “Make sure you use all of the endnote space you are given. It's not really fair (or reflective of literary merit), but I remember that people who used, say, only 5 pages of endnote space out of the 15 they were given were regarded as not having worked very hard at their submissions. Every bit counts, and even the appearance of lack of effort can be fatal.”
b. Try to us all h sources
If you haven't used some of the sources that you're given, look over them again to make sure that you haven't missed anything.
Sometimes, editors may intentionally give you sources that you don't really need. Sometimes, your argument may legitimately take you in a direction that makes certain sources irrelevant.
But those situations should be rare. Generally, if the editors give you some sources, each one of the sources is likely to be helpful. Read them, cite them, but most importantly, use them: Don't just cite them for the sake of having cited each source, but figure out what the value of the source is to your argument (or to some counterargument).
c. Don't just describe the authorities
Don't just describe the authorities, for instance, “In X v. Y, this happened. The Court ruled this way. In A v. B, this happened. The Court ruled that way.... Therefore, in this case, the Court should rule this way.” Rather, synthesize the authorities into a rule, and then cite them to support your synthesis. See Part IV.B, p. 64 for examples.
d. Pay attention to the weight of authorities
If the law review editors give you a packet of source materials, the packet may contain statutes, U.S. Supreme Court cases, lower appellate court cases, trial court cases, law review articles, and excerpts from treatises. If they ask you to do your own research, then the results of that research will contain a similarly mixed set of materials.
Keep in mind that some of the authorities are more important than others. A U.S. Supreme Court case is more important than a district court case; the U.S. Supreme Court case is binding throughout the nation, while the district court case isn't even binding in that very district. Don't overstate the value of lower court precedents.
“X v. Y held that Z,” where X v. Y is a district court case or even a court of appeals case, is not itself a conclusive argument that Z is the law, or that other courts will reach the same result. Definitely use the lower court cases where they seem relevant—but keep in mind that if you rely on a lower court case, you must also explain why that decision should be followed, rather than just assuming that it would be followed (even if the lower court case seems very close to your facts).
You should also rely on the real authorities—such as cases, statutes, constitutions, and regulations—more than on any law review articles that you might have been given. Articles are just opinions; “Professor Schmoe says this-and-such” is not by itself a good argument that courts would or should accept this-and-such.
Certainly cite the articles when you borrow arguments from them; and do take advantage of whatever enlightenment they can provide, and whatever support they can give your thesis. But the main support for your argument should be the legal authorities, linked together by your own logic.
e. Cite everything you rely o
The law review editors will likely be on the lookout for inadequate attribution, which they may well see as plagiarism that would categorically disqualify you. What's more, because they're familiar with all the sources, they can easily spot any unattributed copying, paraphrasing, or even reuse of a general idea. You should read Part XXVI.A for more on what constitutes plagiarism, and how you can avoid it; but the brief summary is cite everything you rely on, including sources that you rely on for ideas as well as for literal words. A few tips:
i. Include footnotes or endnotes as you write, rather than just waiting for later. Later, it will be
too easy to forget.
ii. If you run out of footnote space, edit the footnotes down—for instance, by tightening the
parentheticals—rather than just deleting enough of the footnotes to get within the limit.
iii. Don't worry about having your work look too derivative if everything is footnoted. Footnotes
generally make the work look wellsupported, not unoriginal. iv. When you use an idea or an argument that you borrow from a source—even if you didn't use
any of the literal text from the source—give credit in a footnote.
v. Even when you come up with an idea on your own, and then see it in a source, give credit. The
academic tradition is to credit people who came up with an argument before you did, even if you arrived at it independently. What's more, your readers won't know that you found the argument independently: They might just assume the worst, and think that you deliberately borrowed it, and refused to acknowledge the borrowing.
0/5000
l. tránh hài hướcNgười funny trong in ấn là khó khăn. Là funny dưới áp lực căng thẳng và thời gian là khó khăn hơn vẫn còn. Tốt hơn để ở nghiêm trọng.Đừng lo lắng về làm cho một ấn tượng, đứng ra, hoặc được ghi nhớ: mục tiêu của bạn là để đi qua như thông minh, cẩn thận và rõ ràng, không scintillating. Là một cựu luật review biên tập viên nói với tôi, "cách đơn giản nhất để nổi bật để viết tốt."Đặc biệt là tránh mỉa mai. Một biên tập viên của bình luận: "một số người có thể viết tốt, nhưng đến nay ít người có thể viết wittily và tốt; và thậm chí ít có thể viết sarcastically và tốt. Một nghiêm trọng và tôn trọng giai điệu nói chung sẽ nhận được một phản ứng tốt hơn từ một độc giả của bản ghi trên thông tin; hơn nữa, họ có nhiều khả năng không được tức giận nếu chúng xảy ra không đồng ý với lập trường chính trị của bạn."m. Khi bạn cảm thấy mệt mỏiKhi bạn nhận được quá mệt mỏi để viết, bạn có thể vẫn còn có một số năng lượng cho những thứ khác. Thay thế giữa (1) làm một qua của các chỉnh sửa thử nghiệm (xem trang 314) và (2) proofreading bất cứ điều gì bạn đã viết của mảnh của bạn. Một sinh viên báo cáo: "Luân phiên giữa các văn bản và làm bài kiểm tra Bluebook giúp tôi hiệu quả nhất có thể."Làm thử nghiệm chỉnh sửa như bạn viết mảnh của bạn sẽ cũng giúp giữ cho các quy tắc bluebooking tươi trong tâm trí của bạn, và do đó giúp bạn bluebook mảnh riêng của bạn tốt.n. Thêm chú thích/endnotes như bạn viết, nhưng không để cho các định dạng phân tâm bạn quá nhiềuKhi bạn sử dụng một nguồn, thêm chú thích hoặc endnote ngay lập tức. Nếu bạn có kế hoạch để thêm nó vào cuối, bạn có thể tìm thấy vào cuối rằng bạn đã không để lại đủ thời gian cho rằng, hoặc rằng bạn quên nơi để cung cấp cho tín dụng hoặc những gì nguồn để tín dụng. Và một đoạn tốt của lớp của bạn sẽ được dựa trên sự hoàn chỉnh, chính xác, và định dạng của các chú thích. Kiểm tra và chỉnh sửa chú thích là một phần lớn của việc xem xét luật pháp, do đó, các biên tập viên đang tìm kiếm những người sử dụng được tốt với chú thích.Cùng lúc đó, không để cho các chi tiết của các chú thích phân tâm bạn quá nhiều như bạn viết. Nếu bạn đang trên một cuộn wi h g writi của bạn, hãy viết, và không mất thời gian để làm cho các định dạng hoàn hảo. Sau đó, khi bạn đang mệt mỏi của văn bản, và cần một phân tâm — sau đó trong ngày, không phải ở cuối của cuộc thi-đi qua các ghi chú và sửa chữa chúng.Ngoài ra, nếu bạn biết một số khẳng định là đúng nhưng không nhớ nơi bạn đọc nó, chỉ cần thêm một cước chú trống. Bạn có thể sau đó điền vào nó khi bạn đi qua đoạn bạn đánh dấu như bạn đọc các nguồn (xem trang 325 dưới đây).o. Tránh đặt văn bản trong các endnotesNếu bạn muốn các học sinh lớp để đọc một cái gì đó, đặt nó trong văn bản. Họ có lẽ sẽ không đọc các endnotes cho đến khi họ đang thực hiện với phần còn lại của giấy; do đó họ sẽ không thấy bất kỳ văn bản quan trọng mà bạn đặt trong endnote cho đến khi nó quá muộn. Mặt khác, nếu bạn không chăm sóc cho dù các học sinh lớp đọc các tài liệu, sau đó tại sao bao gồm nó bất cứ nơi nào, ngay cả trong các endnotes?Có ít nhất một ngoại lệ cho quy tắc này: nếu bạn trích dẫn một trường hợp của một endnote, và nghĩ rằng có thể có một số tranh cãi về việc liệu nó áp dụng, bạn có thể muốn làm rõ điều này trong endnote. Ngoài ra, nếu bạn đang nói để sử dụng chú thích chứ không phải là endnotes, bạn có thể có thêm tính linh hoạt nhất, bởi vì một người đọc là likelier nhận thấy chú thích văn bản hơn endnote văn bản. Nhưng hãy cẩn thận ngay cả sau đó; một số độc giả sẽ được phân tâm và khó chịu bởi những gì họ xem như một digression.p. tránh lạ định dạng tính năngKhông sử dụng ưa thích định dạng tính năng mà bạn không yêu cầu sử dụng (ví dụ, số dòng phía bên trái của trang, phông chữ lạ, và như thế). Chấm điểm là một quá trình tẻ nhạt, và học sinh lớp có xu hướng được khó chịu một cách dễ dàng. Không nên cố gắng phân biệt giấy của bạn thông qua cái nhìn của nó. Phân biệt thông qua rõ ràng và persuasiveness.9. sử dụng các nguồn có hiệu quảa. sử dụng tất cả không gian endnote bạn đang cho phépNếu bạn được yêu cầu để đưa các nguồn trong endnotes, và được cho không gian hạn chế cho họ, hãy thử sử dụng tất cả không gian bạn đang đưa ra. Nếu không, các mảnh có thể nhìn nông và một cách nhanh chóng vá với nhau. Tất nhiên, không chỉ ném vào phụ không liên quan: tìm thấy trích dẫn có liên quan đến các đối số — sẽ gần như chắc chắn là rất nhiều.Một biên tập ghi chú cựu trưởng tại một trường luật hàng đầu vang này. "Hãy chắc chắn rằng bạn sử dụng tất cả các không gian endnote bạn được cung cấp. Nó không phải là thực sự công bằng (hoặc phản chiếu bằng khen văn học), nhưng tôi nhớ rằng những người sử dụng, nói rằng, chỉ có 5 trang endnote không gian trong 15 họ đã được đưa ra đã được coi là không có làm việc rất chăm chỉ tại đệ trình của họ. Mỗi bit đếm, và thậm chí là sự xuất hiện của thiếu nỗ lực có thể gây tử vong."sinh cố gắng cho chúng tôi tất cả các nguồn hNếu bạn không sử dụng một số các nguồn bạn đang đưa ra, xem qua chúng một lần nữa để đảm bảo rằng bạn đã không bỏ lỡ bất cứ điều gì.Đôi khi, biên tập viên có thể cố ý cung cấp cho bạn nguồn mà bạn thực sự không cần. Đôi khi, các đối số có thể hợp pháp đưa bạn theo một hướng mà làm cho một số nguồn không liên quan.Nhưng những tình huống nên hiếm. Nói chung, nếu các biên tập viên cung cấp cho bạn một số nguồn tin, mỗi một trong những nguồn có thể là hữu ích. Đọc chúng, trích dẫn chúng, nhưng quan trọng nhất, sử dụng chúng: không chỉ trích dẫn chúng vì lợi ích của có trích dẫn mỗi nguồn, nhưng tìm ra những gì giá trị của nguồn là để tranh luận của bạn (hoặc một số counterargument).c. không chỉ mô tả các nhà chức tráchKhông chỉ mô tả các quyền, ví dụ, "trong X v. Y, điều này xảy ra. Tòa án phán quyết theo cách này. Ở A v. B, điều này xảy ra. Tòa án phán quyết như vậy... Vì vậy, trong trường hợp này, tòa án nên cai trị theo cách này." Thay vào đó, tổng hợp các nhà chức trách thành một quy tắc, và sau đó trích dẫn họ để hỗ trợ tổng hợp của bạn. Xem phần IV.B, trang 64 cho ví dụ.mất chú ý đến trọng lượng của chính quyềnNếu các biên tập viên xem xét luật cung cấp cho bạn một gói nguồn vật liệu, gói có thể chứa quy chế, trường hợp tòa án tối cao Hoa Kỳ, thấp hơn trường hợp tòa án phúc thẩm, trường hợp tòa án xét xử, Pháp luật xem xét bài viết và trích từ luận. Nếu họ yêu cầu bạn làm nghiên cứu của riêng bạn, sau đó các kết quả của nghiên cứu đó sẽ chứa một bộ tương tự như hỗn hợp vật liệu.Hãy nhớ rằng một số các nhà chức trách là quan trọng hơn những người khác. Một trường hợp tòa án tối cao Hoa Kỳ là quan trọng hơn một trường hợp tòa án quận; trường hợp tòa án tối cao Hoa Kỳ là bắt buộc trên toàn quốc, trong khi các trường hợp tòa án quận không phải là ràng buộc ngay cả trong huyện rất. Không overstate giá trị của tiền lệ tòa án thấp hơn."X v. Y tổ chức đó Z," nơi X v. Y là một trường hợp tòa án quận hoặc thậm chí là một trường hợp tòa án phúc thẩm, là không chính nó một đối số kết luận rằng Z là pháp luật, hoặc tòa án đó khác sẽ đạt được kết quả tương tự. Chắc chắn sử dụng các trường hợp tòa án thấp hơn nơi họ có vẻ có liên quan — nhưng hãy ghi nhớ rằng nếu bạn dựa vào một trường hợp tòa án thấp hơn, bạn phải cũng giải thích tại sao quyết định đó phải được theo sau, thay vì chỉ cần giả định rằng nó sẽ được theo sau (ngay cả khi trường hợp tòa án thấp hơn có vẻ như rất gần với sự thật của bạn).Bạn nên cũng dựa vào các cơ quan chức thực — chẳng hạn như trường hợp, quy chế, hiến pháp và quy định-nhiều hơn bất kỳ luật xem lại bài viết mà bạn có thể đã được đưa ra. Bài viết này là chỉ là ý kiến; "Giáo sư Schmoe nói này-và-như vậy" không phải là của chính nó một đối số tốt mà tòa án sẽ hoặc nên chấp nhận này-và-như vậy.Chắc chắn trích dẫn các bài viết khi bạn mượn đối số từ họ; và tận dụng lợi thế của giác ngộ bất cứ điều gì họ có thể cung cấp, và hỗ trợ bất cứ điều gì họ có thể cung cấp cho luận án của bạn. Nhưng sự hỗ trợ chính cho đối số của bạn nên là các cơ quan pháp lý, liên kết với nhau bởi logic riêng của bạn.e. trích dẫn tất cả mọi thứ bạn dựa oCác biên tập viên xem xét luật pháp có thể sẽ trên lookout cho ghi công không đầy đủ, họ cũng có thể thấy như đạo văn categorically nào loại bạn. Hơn nữa, bởi vì họ đang quen thuộc với tất cả các nguồn, họ có thể dễ dàng phát hiện bất kỳ sao chép unattributed, paraphrasing, hoặc thậm chí tái sử dụng của một ý tưởng chung. Bạn nên đọc phần XXVI.A cho biết thêm về những gì tạo đạo văn, và làm thế nào bạn có thể tránh nó; nhưng các bản tóm tắt ngắn gọn trích dẫn tất cả mọi thứ bạn dựa vào, bao gồm cả nguồn mà bạn dựa vào cho ý tưởng là tốt đối với chữ từ. Một vài lời khuyên:i. bao gồm ghi chú hoặc endnotes khi bạn viết, thay vì chỉ cần chờ đợi cho sau này. Sau đó, nó sẽquá dễ dàng để quên.II. nếu bạn hết dung lượng chú thích, chỉnh sửa các ghi chú xuống — ví dụ, bằng cách thắt chặt cáchoàn — chứ không phải là chỉ cần xóa đủ của chú thích để có được trong giới hạn.III. Đừng lo lắng về việc tìm kiếm công việc của bạn quá phái sinh nếu tất cả mọi thứ footnoted. Chú thíchnói chung thực hiện công việc nhìn wellsupported, bản sao lại không. IV. khi bạn sử dụng một ý tưởng hay một đối số mà bạn mượn từ một nguồn — ngay cả khi bạn không sử dụngbất kỳ văn bản chữ từ nguồn — cung cấp tín dụng trong một chú thích.v. ngay cả khi bạn đi lên với một ý tưởng trên của riêng bạn, và sau đó nhìn thấy nó trong một nguồn cung cấp tín dụng. Cáchọc tập truyền thống là tín dụng những người đến với một đối số trước khi bạn đã làm, ngay cả khi bạn đến vào nó một cách độc lập. Những gì nhiều hơn, độc giả của bạn sẽ không biết rằng bạn tìm thấy các đối số một cách độc lập: họ chỉ có thể giả định tồi tệ nhất, và nghĩ rằng bạn cố ý mượn nó, và từ chối thừa nhận việc vay.
đang được dịch, vui lòng đợi..
l. Avoid humor
Being funny in print is hard. Being funny under stress and time pressure is harder still. Better to stay serious.
Don't worry about making an impression, standing out, or being remembered: Your goal is to come across as smart, careful, and clear, not scintillating. As one former law review editor told me, “The simplest way to stand out is to write well.”
Especially avoid sarcasm. Another editor's comment: “Some people can write well, but far fewer people can write wittily and well; and even fewer can write sarcastically and well. A serious and respectful tone will generally get a better response from a reader of a write-on submission; moreover, they are more likely not to be angered if they happen to disagree with your political stance.” m. When you get tired
When you get too tired to write, you may still have some energy for other things. Alternate between (1) doing another pass of the editing test (see p. 314) and (2) proofreading whatever you've written of your piece. A student reports: “alternating between writing and doing the Bluebook test helped me be as productive as possible.”
Doing the editing test as you write your piece will also help keep the bluebooking rules fresh in your mind, and thus help you bluebook your own piece well.
n. Add the footnotes/endnotes as you write, but don't let the formatting distract you too much
When you use a source, add the footnote or endnote right away. If you plan to add it at the end, you might find at the end that you didn't leave enough time for that, or that you've forgotten where to give credit or what source to credit. And a good chunk of your grade will be based on the completeness, accuracy, and formatting of the footnotes. Checking and editing footnotes is a big part of the law review's job, so the editors are looking for people who are good with footnotes.
At the same time, don't let the details of the footnotes distract you too much as you write. If you're on a roll wi h your writi g, keep writing, and don't take time off to make the formatting perfect. Then, when you're tired of writing, and need a distraction—later in the day, not at the very end of the competition—go over the footnotes and fix them up.
Also, if you know some assertion is right but don't remember where you read it, just add a blank footnote. You can then fill it in when you go over the passages you highlighted as you read the sources (see p. 325 below).
o. Avoid putting text in the endnotes
If you want the graders to read something, put it in the text. They probably won't read the endnotes until they're done with the rest of the paper; they thus won't see any important text that you put in the endnote until it's too late. On the other hand, if you don't care whether the graders read the material, then why include it anywhere, even in the endnotes?
There is at least one exception to this rule: If you cite a case in an endnote, and think there might be some controversy about whether it applies, you might want to clarify this in the endnote. Also, if you're told to use footnotes rather than endnotes, you might have more flexibility, because a reader is likelier to notice footnote text than endnote text. But be careful even then; some readers will be distracted and annoyed by what they see as a digression.
p. Avoid strange formatting features
Don't use fancy formatting features that you aren't asked to use (for instance, line numbers on the left-hand side of the page, strange fonts, and the like). Grading is a tedious process, and graders tend to be easily annoyed. Don't try to distinguish your paper through its look. Distinguish it through its clarity and persuasiveness.
9. Use the sources effectively
a. Use all the endnote space that you're allowed
If you are asked to put your sources in endnotes, and are given limited space for them, try to use all the space that you're given. Otherwise, the piece may look shallow and quickly patched together. Of course, don't just throw in irrelevant filler: Find citations that are relevant to your argument—there will almost certainly be plenty.
A former chief notes editor at a leading law school echoes this. “Make sure you use all of the endnote space you are given. It's not really fair (or reflective of literary merit), but I remember that people who used, say, only 5 pages of endnote space out of the 15 they were given were regarded as not having worked very hard at their submissions. Every bit counts, and even the appearance of lack of effort can be fatal.”
b. Try to us all h sources
If you haven't used some of the sources that you're given, look over them again to make sure that you haven't missed anything.
Sometimes, editors may intentionally give you sources that you don't really need. Sometimes, your argument may legitimately take you in a direction that makes certain sources irrelevant.
But those situations should be rare. Generally, if the editors give you some sources, each one of the sources is likely to be helpful. Read them, cite them, but most importantly, use them: Don't just cite them for the sake of having cited each source, but figure out what the value of the source is to your argument (or to some counterargument).
c. Don't just describe the authorities
Don't just describe the authorities, for instance, “In X v. Y, this happened. The Court ruled this way. In A v. B, this happened. The Court ruled that way.... Therefore, in this case, the Court should rule this way.” Rather, synthesize the authorities into a rule, and then cite them to support your synthesis. See Part IV.B, p. 64 for examples.
d. Pay attention to the weight of authorities
If the law review editors give you a packet of source materials, the packet may contain statutes, U.S. Supreme Court cases, lower appellate court cases, trial court cases, law review articles, and excerpts from treatises. If they ask you to do your own research, then the results of that research will contain a similarly mixed set of materials.
Keep in mind that some of the authorities are more important than others. A U.S. Supreme Court case is more important than a district court case; the U.S. Supreme Court case is binding throughout the nation, while the district court case isn't even binding in that very district. Don't overstate the value of lower court precedents.
“X v. Y held that Z,” where X v. Y is a district court case or even a court of appeals case, is not itself a conclusive argument that Z is the law, or that other courts will reach the same result. Definitely use the lower court cases where they seem relevant—but keep in mind that if you rely on a lower court case, you must also explain why that decision should be followed, rather than just assuming that it would be followed (even if the lower court case seems very close to your facts).
You should also rely on the real authorities—such as cases, statutes, constitutions, and regulations—more than on any law review articles that you might have been given. Articles are just opinions; “Professor Schmoe says this-and-such” is not by itself a good argument that courts would or should accept this-and-such.
Certainly cite the articles when you borrow arguments from them; and do take advantage of whatever enlightenment they can provide, and whatever support they can give your thesis. But the main support for your argument should be the legal authorities, linked together by your own logic.
e. Cite everything you rely o
The law review editors will likely be on the lookout for inadequate attribution, which they may well see as plagiarism that would categorically disqualify you. What's more, because they're familiar with all the sources, they can easily spot any unattributed copying, paraphrasing, or even reuse of a general idea. You should read Part XXVI.A for more on what constitutes plagiarism, and how you can avoid it; but the brief summary is cite everything you rely on, including sources that you rely on for ideas as well as for literal words. A few tips:
i. Include footnotes or endnotes as you write, rather than just waiting for later. Later, it will be
too easy to forget.
ii. If you run out of footnote space, edit the footnotes down—for instance, by tightening the
parentheticals—rather than just deleting enough of the footnotes to get within the limit.
iii. Don't worry about having your work look too derivative if everything is footnoted. Footnotes
generally make the work look wellsupported, not unoriginal. iv. When you use an idea or an argument that you borrow from a source—even if you didn't use
any of the literal text from the source—give credit in a footnote.
v. Even when you come up with an idea on your own, and then see it in a source, give credit. The
academic tradition is to credit people who came up with an argument before you did, even if you arrived at it independently. What's more, your readers won't know that you found the argument independently: They might just assume the worst, and think that you deliberately borrowed it, and refused to acknowledge the borrowing.
Being funny in print is hard. Being funny under stress and time pressure is harder still. Better to stay serious.
Don't worry about making an impression, standing out, or being remembered: Your goal is to come across as smart, careful, and clear, not scintillating. As one former law review editor told me, “The simplest way to stand out is to write well.”
Especially avoid sarcasm. Another editor's comment: “Some people can write well, but far fewer people can write wittily and well; and even fewer can write sarcastically and well. A serious and respectful tone will generally get a better response from a reader of a write-on submission; moreover, they are more likely not to be angered if they happen to disagree with your political stance.” m. When you get tired
When you get too tired to write, you may still have some energy for other things. Alternate between (1) doing another pass of the editing test (see p. 314) and (2) proofreading whatever you've written of your piece. A student reports: “alternating between writing and doing the Bluebook test helped me be as productive as possible.”
Doing the editing test as you write your piece will also help keep the bluebooking rules fresh in your mind, and thus help you bluebook your own piece well.
n. Add the footnotes/endnotes as you write, but don't let the formatting distract you too much
When you use a source, add the footnote or endnote right away. If you plan to add it at the end, you might find at the end that you didn't leave enough time for that, or that you've forgotten where to give credit or what source to credit. And a good chunk of your grade will be based on the completeness, accuracy, and formatting of the footnotes. Checking and editing footnotes is a big part of the law review's job, so the editors are looking for people who are good with footnotes.
At the same time, don't let the details of the footnotes distract you too much as you write. If you're on a roll wi h your writi g, keep writing, and don't take time off to make the formatting perfect. Then, when you're tired of writing, and need a distraction—later in the day, not at the very end of the competition—go over the footnotes and fix them up.
Also, if you know some assertion is right but don't remember where you read it, just add a blank footnote. You can then fill it in when you go over the passages you highlighted as you read the sources (see p. 325 below).
o. Avoid putting text in the endnotes
If you want the graders to read something, put it in the text. They probably won't read the endnotes until they're done with the rest of the paper; they thus won't see any important text that you put in the endnote until it's too late. On the other hand, if you don't care whether the graders read the material, then why include it anywhere, even in the endnotes?
There is at least one exception to this rule: If you cite a case in an endnote, and think there might be some controversy about whether it applies, you might want to clarify this in the endnote. Also, if you're told to use footnotes rather than endnotes, you might have more flexibility, because a reader is likelier to notice footnote text than endnote text. But be careful even then; some readers will be distracted and annoyed by what they see as a digression.
p. Avoid strange formatting features
Don't use fancy formatting features that you aren't asked to use (for instance, line numbers on the left-hand side of the page, strange fonts, and the like). Grading is a tedious process, and graders tend to be easily annoyed. Don't try to distinguish your paper through its look. Distinguish it through its clarity and persuasiveness.
9. Use the sources effectively
a. Use all the endnote space that you're allowed
If you are asked to put your sources in endnotes, and are given limited space for them, try to use all the space that you're given. Otherwise, the piece may look shallow and quickly patched together. Of course, don't just throw in irrelevant filler: Find citations that are relevant to your argument—there will almost certainly be plenty.
A former chief notes editor at a leading law school echoes this. “Make sure you use all of the endnote space you are given. It's not really fair (or reflective of literary merit), but I remember that people who used, say, only 5 pages of endnote space out of the 15 they were given were regarded as not having worked very hard at their submissions. Every bit counts, and even the appearance of lack of effort can be fatal.”
b. Try to us all h sources
If you haven't used some of the sources that you're given, look over them again to make sure that you haven't missed anything.
Sometimes, editors may intentionally give you sources that you don't really need. Sometimes, your argument may legitimately take you in a direction that makes certain sources irrelevant.
But those situations should be rare. Generally, if the editors give you some sources, each one of the sources is likely to be helpful. Read them, cite them, but most importantly, use them: Don't just cite them for the sake of having cited each source, but figure out what the value of the source is to your argument (or to some counterargument).
c. Don't just describe the authorities
Don't just describe the authorities, for instance, “In X v. Y, this happened. The Court ruled this way. In A v. B, this happened. The Court ruled that way.... Therefore, in this case, the Court should rule this way.” Rather, synthesize the authorities into a rule, and then cite them to support your synthesis. See Part IV.B, p. 64 for examples.
d. Pay attention to the weight of authorities
If the law review editors give you a packet of source materials, the packet may contain statutes, U.S. Supreme Court cases, lower appellate court cases, trial court cases, law review articles, and excerpts from treatises. If they ask you to do your own research, then the results of that research will contain a similarly mixed set of materials.
Keep in mind that some of the authorities are more important than others. A U.S. Supreme Court case is more important than a district court case; the U.S. Supreme Court case is binding throughout the nation, while the district court case isn't even binding in that very district. Don't overstate the value of lower court precedents.
“X v. Y held that Z,” where X v. Y is a district court case or even a court of appeals case, is not itself a conclusive argument that Z is the law, or that other courts will reach the same result. Definitely use the lower court cases where they seem relevant—but keep in mind that if you rely on a lower court case, you must also explain why that decision should be followed, rather than just assuming that it would be followed (even if the lower court case seems very close to your facts).
You should also rely on the real authorities—such as cases, statutes, constitutions, and regulations—more than on any law review articles that you might have been given. Articles are just opinions; “Professor Schmoe says this-and-such” is not by itself a good argument that courts would or should accept this-and-such.
Certainly cite the articles when you borrow arguments from them; and do take advantage of whatever enlightenment they can provide, and whatever support they can give your thesis. But the main support for your argument should be the legal authorities, linked together by your own logic.
e. Cite everything you rely o
The law review editors will likely be on the lookout for inadequate attribution, which they may well see as plagiarism that would categorically disqualify you. What's more, because they're familiar with all the sources, they can easily spot any unattributed copying, paraphrasing, or even reuse of a general idea. You should read Part XXVI.A for more on what constitutes plagiarism, and how you can avoid it; but the brief summary is cite everything you rely on, including sources that you rely on for ideas as well as for literal words. A few tips:
i. Include footnotes or endnotes as you write, rather than just waiting for later. Later, it will be
too easy to forget.
ii. If you run out of footnote space, edit the footnotes down—for instance, by tightening the
parentheticals—rather than just deleting enough of the footnotes to get within the limit.
iii. Don't worry about having your work look too derivative if everything is footnoted. Footnotes
generally make the work look wellsupported, not unoriginal. iv. When you use an idea or an argument that you borrow from a source—even if you didn't use
any of the literal text from the source—give credit in a footnote.
v. Even when you come up with an idea on your own, and then see it in a source, give credit. The
academic tradition is to credit people who came up with an argument before you did, even if you arrived at it independently. What's more, your readers won't know that you found the argument independently: They might just assume the worst, and think that you deliberately borrowed it, and refused to acknowledge the borrowing.
đang được dịch, vui lòng đợi..
Các ngôn ngữ khác
Hỗ trợ công cụ dịch thuật: Albania, Amharic, Anh, Armenia, Azerbaijan, Ba Lan, Ba Tư, Bantu, Basque, Belarus, Bengal, Bosnia, Bulgaria, Bồ Đào Nha, Catalan, Cebuano, Chichewa, Corsi, Creole (Haiti), Croatia, Do Thái, Estonia, Filipino, Frisia, Gael Scotland, Galicia, George, Gujarat, Hausa, Hawaii, Hindi, Hmong, Hungary, Hy Lạp, Hà Lan, Hà Lan (Nam Phi), Hàn, Iceland, Igbo, Ireland, Java, Kannada, Kazakh, Khmer, Kinyarwanda, Klingon, Kurd, Kyrgyz, Latinh, Latvia, Litva, Luxembourg, Lào, Macedonia, Malagasy, Malayalam, Malta, Maori, Marathi, Myanmar, Mã Lai, Mông Cổ, Na Uy, Nepal, Nga, Nhật, Odia (Oriya), Pashto, Pháp, Phát hiện ngôn ngữ, Phần Lan, Punjab, Quốc tế ngữ, Rumani, Samoa, Serbia, Sesotho, Shona, Sindhi, Sinhala, Slovak, Slovenia, Somali, Sunda, Swahili, Séc, Tajik, Tamil, Tatar, Telugu, Thái, Thổ Nhĩ Kỳ, Thụy Điển, Tiếng Indonesia, Tiếng Ý, Trung, Trung (Phồn thể), Turkmen, Tây Ban Nha, Ukraina, Urdu, Uyghur, Uzbek, Việt, Xứ Wales, Yiddish, Yoruba, Zulu, Đan Mạch, Đức, Ả Rập, dịch ngôn ngữ.
- Unable to process your payment: This tra
- hiện tại tôi đang làm việc part time tại
- fuck you
- Chào bạn thân mến ! Chúc anh mọi điều tố
- the t-shirt scent too, not thinking, tha
- The movie theater is between the bakery
- the t-shirt scent too, not thinking, tha
- 取り付いている
- Tôi cần sự quan tâm và chia sẻ mọi thứ c
- Blurry Photos.Hold the camera still with
- Tôi cần sự quan tâm và chia sẻ mọi thứ c
- I. Special Suggestions for Case NotesIf
- But the key to retailer Wal-Mart’s succe
- 後端
- từ bỏ là giải pháp tốt nhất đối với tôi
- Có một điều đặc biệt là không bao giờ tô
- eat 20 brains without exceeding 8 zombie
- Nói chung cuộc sống ở thành phố tiện ngh
- Tôi đọc rất nhiều thể loại sách
- tôi không muốn can thiệp vào đời sống ri
- I. Special Suggestions for Case NotesIf
- Le Nom d'utilisateur comporte un format
- Equation (5.17) is from now on our defin
- we do not care what kind of help we offe
