Here are links to helpful information and resources which will make your work go more smoothly:
 

1.  Information at the top should include: the title, your name, your affiliation (only if you are not at your home institution), the venue (title of the conference or workshop) and date, and a means contacting the author (e-mail or s-mail address).

2.  A good rule of thumb for the amount of numbered example sentences to include in a handout is about 1 per minute.  Keep in mind that a presentation using foreign language data might need to have fewer examples than one whose data corresponds to the language of the presentation (since an audience can be expected to need time to process the foreign language).  By the way, it is usually better to talk ABOUT your data (pointing out to the audience what you want them to attend to), rather than simply READING it to them.

3.  Use section headings (possibly from the written version of your paper), and group your data under them.  This will help the audience connect the particular data with the point that you are attempting to make about them.

4.  Do not split across a page or column boundary, data that you want your audience to be able to compare.  It makes it very difficult to follow a talk, when one is having to flip back and forth between pages.  As a corrolary, if a datum from page 1 of your handout needs to be brought up again on when you get to page 4, you might consider repeating it on that page.  Again, it cuts down on the distraction of page shuffling.

5.  Make certain that your morpheme-by-morpheme glosses line up with your data, if you have foreign language examples.  Use short but transparent abbreviations for grammatical morphemes in caps.  Don't bother to translate proper names.

 (1)  Keiko ni       kono  hon   o        yom-ase-ta
                  DAT  this    book ACC  read-CAUS-PAST
       ‘[I] made Keiko read this book.'

Also, consider leaving out morpheme-by-morpheme translations once the morphological structure of the word has been established and is (possibly) no longer that relevant.

 (2)  Keiko ni       kono hon     o        yomaseta
                  DAT  this    book  ACC  made.read

Note the different ways of representing yomaseta in examples (1) and (2).

6.  Similarly, keep your representations of structure focussed on the parts that are relevant to the points that you're trying to make.  For example, if you are discussing the Stowell's small clause hypothesis for uniflected propositional complements, and you are tring to show that John angry is a constituent in

 (3)  They consider John angry.

then you would be better off presenting the bracketed structure in (4), rather than the one in (5), even though the latter is more thoroughly articulated.

 (4) they [_VP consider [_SC [_NP John] [_AP angry]]]

 (5) [_CP [_C'  C [_IP they [_I'  consider₁ [_VP t₁ [_SC [_NP John] [_AP angry]]]]]]
 
 

1.  DON'T EVER BEGIN WITH AN APOLOGY.  Everyone has seen speakers beginning a presentation by apologizing for how unworthy they are, how little of their work is really conclusive, how they hope people will forgive them and so on.  No one has ever seen a case in which this improved the reception of the paper or the mood of the audience.  If you're going to be bad, they won't be pleased that they showed up, and if you're not then you are just wasting air time.  Opening up with an apology is like trying to teach a pig to sing (it wastes your time, and it annoys the pig).  Don't ever do it.

2.  RESPECT THE TIME LIMITS.  It is sad to be cut off when you are just about to make your major point, so plan your time and don't let it happen.  As far as the audience is concerned, it is even sadder to see someone ramble on when they should have been stopped by now so that questions can begin.  A good chair will stop you dead at the agreed time, so plan on that, and wrap up before the chairperson has to stand up.

3.  DON'T SURVEY THE WHOLE FIELD.  You need to make a few assumptions clear before you get going on your main point, but you don't need to begin by summarizing the whole prior content of the discipline, explaining what grammars are, what phonemes are, etc etc.  Even in a job talk, where giving your whole dissertation in 55 minutes is the awful temptation, don't do it.  Treat your audience as intelligent and well educated in the field.  Don't treat them as mind-readers - if you're making an unusual assumption, say with great clarity what it is - but treat them as smart and well-trained people.

4.  EXPECT QUESTIONS THAT WILL FLOOR YOU.  It's part of the game for some of the questions to be hard ones.  If the combined wits and backgrounds of the audience can't yield a question that really gives you some trouble, or can't come up with any questions at all, you should feel insulted; they really can't have been seriously thinking about what you said.  It's always a bit sad to give a presentation so perfect that there is no crevice for the critical knife, no little hook on which a challenging or illuminating question might be hung, so that the question period is an embarassing two minutes of silence as if the talk had died.  And it is no shame to be flummoxed by a question; in fact it's a valuable educational experience, and often contributes greatly to the further growth of a paper.  Listen closely, think, and if it's a great question you had never considered before, simply say, "That's a great question that I had never considered before, and I don't have an answer to it right now; thank you!"

5.  REMEMBER THAT YOU'RE AN ADVOCATE, NOT THE DEFENDANT.  It's your idea that's being presented, not you.  The reason you don't really need to feel nervous is that you are not what's up for consideration (not even at a job talk; they consider you later).  None of your talk is supposed to be about you (that's why it should not begin with an apology: nobody cares whether you feel sorry or insecure.)  It's the ideas in your paper that are going to get scrutiny.  If those ideas don't survive after today, that slow you down one bit; you can dump them in favor of more promising ideas as your thinking evolves, and still get credit for a fine presentation of them today.  You're there to do as fair a job as you can manage at giving those ideas their twenty minutes in the sunlight.  You're a vehicle, an advocate, a public defender acting on behalf of some ideas that might otherwise have been unfairly dismissed without a trial.  Whether they are ultimately given a favorable or an unfavorable verdict, you will have been of value to the court of scholarly opinion if you present them effectively.