主题：【整理】黎阳：为肖传国说句公道话（一个海归的杯具） -- 迷途笨狼

Although I do not read or speak Chinese, I have had access to an English version of Fang’s article, translated by an independent source. We believe that Fang’s article would not be considered acceptable journalism in the United States. He did not give the names of the researchers who carried out the research or the journal in which it was published, nor did he include quotes from other scientists. All these aspects would be essential for a journalistic article in a US publication.

However, a charge of plagiarism would be difficult to uphold since Fang did say the work was performed by researchers at Princeton University, and–unless the translation I have is wrong–he neither implied that the work was his own by witing in the first person nor directly copied the language in the Science paper.

译文：

虽然我不会说汉语，我有一个独立人士翻译过来的方文章的英文版。我们认为方的文章在美国作为写作报道是不可被接受的。他既没有写出该研究中研究者的姓名及其发表的杂志，也没有引用其他科学家的话。所有这些东西是在美国发表一篇写作报道必要的。

但是，剽窃指控却是难于确认，因为方的确说了该项工作是普林斯顿大学的研究者做的，除非我所到的翻译有误，他既没有以第一人称的方式暗示他做了该项研究，也没有直接拷贝那篇《科学》论文的语言。

以上就是方舟子好意思说的不是抄袭？ 人家不过是说不是原文照抄， 难于指控。按照同样的说法， 汪晖朱学勤都不是抄袭了。