ISSUE101 从19岁写到20岁请大虾看看有没有点进步
101"Governments should provide funding for artists so that the arts can flourish and be available to all people."------------------------------
Whether governments should provide funding for artist is a complex issue. On the one hand, governments’ patronage on art may lead to imposing of certain value on people and unfair distribution of wealth; on the other hand, the substantive benefits that art brings to common people and the society may justify governments’ funding for art.
In the first place, the value of art, like that of morality, can be imposed on people by government. The reason is simple. Since it is not realistic for government to provide funding for all forms of art, the government must select one form or certain forms from all that are concerned; and this process of selection demonstrates the government’s weighing preference to one form or another. In other words, by selecting, the government is actually propagating to people which art is worthwhile and which are not. However, why should an office worker whose idea of entertaining himself is to watch a soap movie, when he finally gets rid of those boring routine jobs and has the time to do so, has to choose to watch the relatively high brow form of art such as ballet? In a truly democratic society, no one can force anyone else to accept the evaluating criterion of right and wrong, beautiful and ugly.
Secondly, governments’ funding for artist may result in the inequity in distribution of wealth, because governments base their funding on tax, which should be used for projects which is beneficial to all people, such as building roads, protecting environment, fortifying security and social stability. However, art, unlike education, which deals with knowledge and is indispensable to everyone, is not a necessity in modern people’s lives. Therefore, the governments’ using of tax to subsidize art which is dispensable for most people amounts to using the common wealth to help a minority of artists and those who love art; and this is certainly unfair. After all, no one is obliged to denote his hard-earned money to things he has no enthusiasms.
In spite of this unfairness, governments still patronizes on certain arts because of their substantive benefits to all people. What is the common benefit? Some people may argue that it is a beauty sense. Nevertheless, in the theory of art, the importance of such beauty sense offered by art has long ago been denied by artists; and only those who do not understand art will misunderstand the governments’ patronage on art for providing the sense of beauty. Other people may propound that the common benefit lies in originality. However, though originality is primitively regarded as the vanguard of art, it is now shadowed by the more frequent and astounding joys people obtain from technology. In fact, true answer lies in economy and education. Though it seems to be a mundane idea, art, as a kind of commodity, indeed brings more and more revenues to our nation. For instance, the grand concert held by the world’s three most famous tenors in China attracted numerous people, however painstaking, come to China to attend it, which undoubtedly brought in tremendous business chances. More and more cross-national exhibitions are held in many countries now, not only for the cultural communication but also for boosting economy. Another more remarkable is the tourism. After all, neither Pairs, nor London, nor Rome would be attraction to foreigners were they not to possess glorious art. Moreover, government’s support on art education in school helps to perfect our educational system, in that it offers the students an opportunity to discover the world, and more importantly, to discover themselves. And this is undoubtedly beneficial for every individual.
In sum, governments’ patronage on art may lead to a certain kind of restriction of freedom and inequity, while at the same time it contributes to economy and education. Therefore, when we decide whether the government should auspice a certain art or not, we should take care not to over generalize; though it is warranted to spend money on grand art events influential to our society , the government might as well think twice before it defrays for a promising artist or a untapped art work.
今天20岁生日，竟然一个人在宿舍吃方便面===考G的代价 先祝xiaoaier生日快乐啦
就算女孩子没有弱冠这个说法，二十岁也是一个很特别的年龄了。特别的生日怎能传统地过，此一包方便面很有意义了。
废话说完，开始改
101"Governments should provide funding for artists so that the arts can flourish and be available to all people."
------------------------------
Whether governments should provide funding for artist is a complex issue. On the one hand, governments’ patronage on art may lead to imposing of certain value on people and unfair distribution of wealth; on the other hand, the substantive benefits that art brings to common people and the society may justify governments’ funding for art.[开头还算好。不过作者的立场表达地有一些不太明晰，建议一句话表达]
In the first place, the value of art, like that of morality, can be imposed on people by government. The reason is simple. Since it is not realistic for government to provide funding for all forms of art, the government must select one form or certain forms from all that are concerned; and this process of selection demonstrates the government’s weighing preference to one form or another. In other words, by selecting, the government is actually propagating to people which art is worthwhile and which are not. However, why should an office worker whose idea of entertaining himself is to watch a soap movie, when he finally gets rid of those boring routine jobs and has the time to do so, has to choose to watch the relatively high brow form of art such as ballet? In a truly democratic society, no one can force anyone else to accept the evaluating criterion of right and wrong, beautiful and ugly.[这段总体还不错，但是TS写的不好（In the first place, the value of art, like that of morality, can be imposed on people by government.）。如果TS是这个的话，整个段子应该讲艺术观如何能被政府所强加，这就与主题不符了。后面再加一句，which is detrimental to both … and …就好些]
Secondly, governments’ funding for artist may result in the inequity in distribution of wealth, because governments base their funding on tax, which should be used for projects which is beneficial to all people, such as building roads, protecting environment, fortifying security and social stability. However, art, unlike education, which[这儿是不是有歧义？一开始我以为这个which clause是修饰art] deals with knowledge and is indispensable to everyone, is not a necessity in modern people’s lives. Therefore, the governments’ using of tax to subsidize art which is dispensable for most people amounts to using the common wealth to help a minority of artists and those who love art; and this is certainly unfair. After all, no one is obliged to denote his hard-earned money to things he has no enthusiasms. [这一段比前一段强。20岁的时候写的？]
In spite of this unfairness, governments still patronizes on certain arts because of their substantive benefits to all people. What is the common benefit? Some people may argue that it is a beauty sense. Nevertheless, in the theory of art, the importance of such beauty sense offered by art has long ago been denied by artists; and only those who do not understand art will misunderstand the governments’ patronage on art for providing the sense of beauty. Other people may propound that the common benefit lies in originality. However, though originality is primitively regarded as the vanguard of art, it is now shadowed by the more frequent and astounding joys people obtain from technology. [到这儿才提到句子的关键，前面的就显得冗长。其实它们根本没有必要，无助于逻辑严密性，与主题也无关系。若是非要凑字数不可，就把前两点放到这个In fact后面，免得碍事]In fact, true answer lies in economy and education. Though it seems to be a mundane idea, art, as a kind of commodity, indeed brings more and more revenues to our nation. For instance, the grand concert held[不是他们“举办”的吧 ]by the world’s three most famous tenors in China attracted numerous people, however painstaking[这个地方的插入语让人感到十分的不舒服], come["come" to be deleted] to China to attend it, which undoubtedly brought in tremendous business chances.[“商业机会”直译确实是"business chances"，但用在这儿浓浓的Chinglish] More and more cross-national exhibitions are held in many countries now, not only for the cultural communication but also for boosting economy. Another more remarkable is the tourism. After all, neither Pairs, nor London, nor Rome would be attraction to foreigners were they not to possess glorious art. Moreover, government’s support on art education in school helps to perfect our educational system, in that it offers the students an opportunity to discover the world, and more importantly, to discover themselves. And this is undoubtedly beneficial for every individual.[这一段读起来有地方像政治课本的语气，一条一条清清楚楚，纲线分明，思路清晰。（但中国的政治课本是全球逻辑最混乱的书。:D）比如最后一句And this is undoubtedly beneficial for every individual.没有证明了，没有论据支持了？当然如此么？想象一下如果argument的题目里面来这么一句，你会怎么批？当然是unwarranted了。所以说最后一点内容带来的只是逻辑错误而已。不要认为有了些“闪光”的思想就应该写上——这是中学语文在误人子弟——没有把握和stuff展开就不要写，写了作用是致命的负面]
In sum, governments’ patronage on art may lead to a certain kind of restriction of freedom and inequity, while at the same time it contributes to economy and education. Therefore, when we decide whether the government should auspice a certain art or not, we should take care not to over generalize; though it is warranted to spend money on grand art events influential to our society , the government might as well think twice before it defrays for a promising artist or a untapped art work. 谢谢downspeaker的修改
101"Governments should provide funding for artists so that the arts can flourish and be available to all people."
------------------------------
Whether governments should provide funding for artist is a complex issue. On the one hand, governments’ patronage on art may lead to imposing of certain value on people and unfair distribution of wealth; on the other hand, the substantive benefits that art brings to common people and the society may justify governments’ funding for art.[开头还算好。不过作者的立场表达地有一些不太明晰，建议一句话表达]修改：最后一句改为：on the other hand, it is conductive to economy and education.
In the first place, the value of art, like that of morality, can be imposed on people by government. The reason is simple. Since it is not realistic for government to provide funding for all forms of art, the government must select one form or certain forms from all that are concerned; and this process of selection demonstrates the government’s weighing preference to one form or another. In other words, by selecting, the government is actually propagating to people which art is worthwhile and which are not. However, why should an office worker whose idea of entertaining himself is to watch a soap movie, when he finally gets rid of those boring routine jobs and has the time to do so, has to choose to watch the relatively high brow form of art such as ballet? In a truly democratic society, no one can force anyone else to accept the evaluating criterion of right and wrong, beautiful and ugly.[这段总体还不错，但是TS写的不好（In the first place, the value of art, like that of morality, can be imposed on people by government.）。如果TS是这个的话，整个段子应该讲艺术观如何能被政府所强加，这就与主题不符了。后面再加一句，which is detrimental to both … and …就好些] 修改：In the first place, the value of art, like that of morality, can be imposed on people by government, which is detrimental to the notion of respect for individual choice.
Secondly, governments’ funding for artist may result in the inequity in distribution of wealth, because governments base their funding on tax, which should be used for projects which is beneficial to all people, such as building roads, protecting environment, fortifying security and social stability. However, art, unlike education, which[这儿是不是有歧义？一开始我以为这个which clause是修饰art]修改： 去掉education后的逗号 deals with knowledge and is indispensable to everyone, is not a necessity in modern people’s lives. Therefore, the governments’ using of tax to subsidize art which is dispensable for most people amounts to using the common wealth to help a minority of artists and those who love art; and this is certainly unfair. After all, no one is obliged to denote his hard-earned money to things he has no enthusiasms. [这一段比前一段强。20岁的时候写的？] 猜对了！^_^
In spite of this unfairness, governments still patronizes on certain arts because of their substantive benefits to all people. What is the common benefit? Some people may argue that it is a beauty sense. Nevertheless, in the theory of art, the importance of such beauty sense offered by art has long ago been denied by artists; and only those who do not understand art will misunderstand the governments’ patronage on art for providing the sense of beauty. Other people may propound that the common benefit lies in originality. However, though originality is primitively regarded as the vanguard of art, it is now shadowed by the more frequent and astounding joys people obtain from technology. [到这儿才提到句子的关键，前面的就显得冗长。其实它们根本没有必要，无助于逻辑严密性，与主题也无关系。若是非要凑字数不可，就把前两点放到这个In fact后面，免得碍事]修改： 其实也知道这段话对主题没有多大帮助，只是在找材料的时候看到这两个观点，觉得挺深刻的， 有点割舍不下。虚荣心作怪！删掉改为：Then, what’s the point of providing funding for art! The answer lies in economy and education. In fact, true answer lies in economy and education.这句删了 Though it seems to be a mundane idea, art, as a kind of commodity, indeed brings more and more revenues to our nation. For instance, the grand concert held[不是他们“举办”的吧 ]by the world’s three most famous tenors in China 改为： the grand concert held in China not long along , which assembled world’s three most prominent tenors attracted numerous people, however painstaking[这个地方的插入语让人感到十分的不舒服],删掉 come["come" to be deleted] to China to attend it, which undoubtedly brought in tremendous business chances.[“商业机会”直译确实是"business chances"，但用在这儿浓浓的Chinglish]想不出别的词了 More and more cross-national exhibitions are held in many countries now, not only for the cultural communication but also for boosting economy. Another more remarkable is the tourism. After all, neither Pairs, nor London, nor Rome would be attraction to foreigners were they not to possess glorious art. Moreover, government’s support on art education in school helps to perfect our educational system, in that it offers the students an opportunity to discover the world, and more importantly, to discover themselves. And this is undoubtedly beneficial for every individual.[这一段读起来有地方像政治课本的语气，一条一条清清楚楚，纲线分明，思路清晰。（但中国的政治课本是全球逻辑最混乱的书。 ）比如最后一句And this is undoubtedly beneficial for every individual.没有证明了，没有论据支持了？当然如此么？想象一下如果argument的题目里面来这么一句，你会怎么批？当然是unwarranted了。所以说最后一点内容带来的只是逻辑错误而已。不要认为有了些“闪光”的思想就应该写上——这是中学语文在误人子弟——没有把握和stuff展开就不要写，写了作用是致命的负面]其实我在写的时候也感觉有点底气不足，加句名言垫垫底。改为：Moreover, government’s support on art education at school helps to perfect our educational system, which is almost dominated by scientific courses such as mathematics and physics, by offering the students an opportunity to discover the world, and more importantly, to discover themselves. As Schiller once said: art is the right hand of nature, the latter has only given us being, and the former has made us men.
In sum, governments’ patronage on art may lead to a certain kind of restriction of freedom and inequity, while at the same time it contributes to economy and education. Therefore, when we decide whether the government should auspice a certain art or not, we should take care not to over generalize; though it is warranted to spend money on grand art events influential to our society, the government might as well think twice before it defrays for a promising artist or a untapped art work. 怎么让我的修改变成其它颜色？ 加参数
或者用恢复上面的彩色条,点一下会出现两个参数框在两个参数中括号之间写字就行了
页:
[1]