Issue193 政治事件和社会变革
Issue193"It is not the headline-making political events but the seldom-reported social transformation that have the most lasting significance."
Is it the seldom-reported social transformation that has the most lasting significance, as the speaker asserts? Or is it the headline-making political events that have more lasting importance? We should not oversimplify these question with an answer of yes or no, concerning the way people usually think about the criteria of judging the significance of social affairs. On balance, I fundamentally agree that the social transformation have the most profound and ever-lasting significance, even though sometimes it appears that the political events are more important.
Why people normally believe the headline-making political events have so much influence? As we experience living in this complex world, what impress us most is always those things that have direct influence on our everyday life. Anytime we look at ourselves, the changes in our of beliefs, in what is on the dinner table, in our preference of dressing seems to be the consequence of those so-called headline political events. One should look no further than the lives of Iraqi War. What we saw is the replacement of government control as a result of the war itself, and the hottest discussion is always staying in the impact of the War on diverse aspects. Since seeing is believing, the impression of the war is limited to what we have seen. In short, it is the direct impact of political events on people’s life that makes it appear to be of extremely significance.
Actually, it is the social transformation that impels the political events. Everything has a reason. When drawing the conclusion on the influence of a political event, we should ask ourselves such a question--what ignite the occurrence of the event? The Reform and Open Policy in China has brought about magnificent alternations on almost every social realm of Chinese society. But what is the impetus of this policy? In fact, it is the transformation of the ways people think, especially those people in charge, that results in the implement of the policy. The social change brought about by the old policy was proved to be a failure, therefore a more effective and efficient policy had to be sought out. And this policy left the society with the impression of great significance, while actually it is propelled by social transformation in people’s mind.
As a social individual who lives on the surface of the world, we need to dig inside of the superficial events and figure out what is the real cause. The process of seeking real cause not only help us better analyze the event itself, it also brings a brand new way to think--the ability to see through superficial events and grasp the spirit of them. If we could transplant this ability into academic fields, more facts and truth may appear out of nowhere. Actually it is where it was behind the statistics of the experiment, but we master the method to catch them with the ability to think more deeply.
In sum, even though the headline-making political events normally appear to be of great importance, we should not neglect the real impetus of such events -- the social transformation, which carries a more profound significance.
524words + 43.5mins Issue193
"It is not the headline-making political events but the seldom-reported social transformation that have the most lasting significance."
Is it the seldom-reported social transformation that has the most lasting significance, as the speaker asserts? Or is it the headline-making political events that have more lasting importance（importance？搭配？）? We should not oversimplify these question with an answer of yes or no, concerning（我觉得至少也得是on concerning之类的，这里的分词感觉怪怪的？） the way people usually think about the criteria of（刚刚在google查出来，for，我说我怎么感觉怪怪的） judging the significance of social affairs. On balance, I fundamentally agree that the social transformation have the most profound and ever-lasting significance, even though sometimes it appears that the political events are more important.既然你基本上全都同意，干吗还来一个 we cannot oversimplify 什么的？:confused:
Why people normally（不太好吧，有没有表达common practice的副词？） believe the headline-making political events have so much influence? As we experience（累赘？） living in this complex world, what impress us most is always those things that have direct influence on our everyday life.（it is always……that impress us most，that exert … on…） Anytime we look at ourselves（这里的什么look at基本没必要。In any given time，it is observed that…然后用第三人称叙述）, the changes in our of beliefs, in what is on the dinner table, in our preference of dressing seems to be the consequence of those so-called headline political events. One should look no further than（？） the lives（？） of Iraqi War. What we saw is the replacement of government control as a result of the war itself, and the hottest discussion is always staying（lies in？） in the impact of the War on diverse aspects. Since seeing is believing（不是吧，光是一个seeing is believing就比较玩儿悬的了，还再加一个since？）, the impression of the war is limited to what we have seen. In short, it is the direct impact of political events on people’s life that makes it appear to be of extremely significance.例子应该说不错，不过我没理解你的叙述顺序。我觉得应该在这里把米国人的决策和最后的效果做一个表面的因果关系出来，这样来证明ostensibly如何如何。而且完全可以再想想办法把你的让步给做好，很多文章都是这样的啊。我觉得不用我多说，自己再想想。
Actually,（However/Nevertheless/Yet） it is the social transformation that impels the political events.（而且这里的立论和前面的衔接不好，这种admittedly…however的典型套路都已经很成熟了，这次不应该在衔接上做成这样。看看你这段的TS和上段的最后一句，体会一下） Everything has a reason.（倒，不是吧，我觉得…先看下面好了） When drawing the conclusion on the influence of a political event, we should ask ourselves（such question should never be …把论述的主体当作主语吧，有时候这样写会有更好效果的，we多了的确不舒服，虽然绝不是禁止we出现） such a question--what ignite the occurrence（搭配？其实用动词give rise to就可以） of the event? The Reform and Open（opening up？自己查查） Policy in China has brought about magnificent alternations（？） on（？两个都拿不准） almost every social realm of Chinese society. But what is the impetus of this policy?这里反问的话并没有太好的联系和分析表象原因和内在动力，其实这才是论述的中心 In fact, it is the transformation of the ways people think, especially those people in charge, that results in the implement of the policy. The social change brought about by the old policy was proved to be a failure, therefore a more effective and efficient policy had to be sought out.连续几句话的transition都不太好，主要是注意叙述的对象和表达的意思不要跳得太快了，同时要使用好连词 And this policy left the society with the impression of great significance, while actually it is propelled by social transformation in people’s mind. 刚才已经说过了，分析的应该更深入一些
As a social individual who lives on the surface of the world, we need to dig inside of the superficial events and figure out what is the real cause. The process of seeking real cause not only help us better analyze the event itself, it also brings a brand new way to think--the ability to see through superficial events and grasp the spirit of them. If we could transplant this ability into academic fields, more facts and truth may appear out of nowhere. Actually it is where it was behind the statistics of the experiment, but we master the method to catch them with the ability to think more deeply.
这一段基本上可以删光光。尤其考虑到你是限时了（鼓励一下:D），还不如省出时间好好琢磨琢磨上两段怎么更加充分的论述和分析表象和内在的关系，这种让步反驳写好的话能让人看的拍案叫绝的。哪怕只有两段body，照样是5分。前提是论述要够。现在的上两段还需要改进。
In sum, even though the headline-making political events normally appear to be of great importance, we should not neglect the real impetus of such events -- the social transformation, which carries a more profound significance.
结尾的写法可以再想想。:)
524words + 43.5mins Issue193
"It is not the headline-making political events but the seldom-reported social transformation that have the most lasting significance."
Is it the seldom-reported social transformation that has the most lasting significance, as the speaker asserts? Or is it the headline-making political events that have more lasting importance?（这两个问句觉得有点罗嗦，能不能合成一句？） We should not oversimplify these question（s） with an answer of yes or no, concerning the way people usually think about the criteria of judging the significance of social affairs. On balance, I fundamentally agree that the social transformation have the most profound and ever-lasting significance, even though sometimes it appears that the political events are more important.（appears不太好，感觉有点specious的意思，但这里应该是说political events也重要啊）
Why people normally believe the headline-making political events have so much influence? As we experience living in this complex world, what impress us most is always those things that have direct influence on our everyday life. Anytime we look at ourselves, the changes in our of（？） beliefs, in what is on the dinner table, in our preference of dressing seems（seem） to be the consequence of those so-called headline political events. One should look no further than the lives(这个lives好像有点vague) of Iraqi War. What we saw is the replacement of government control as a result of the war itself, and the hottest discussion is always staying in the impact of the War on diverse aspects. Since seeing is believing（有这么说的吗？）, the impression of the war is limited to what we have seen(what we have seen应该再明确一点吧？). In short, it is the direct impact of political events on people’s life that makes it appear to be of extremely significance.
感觉这一段写得有点偏，你想说的是直接看到的影响最深，那么headline-making political events和直接看到的有什么联系？没有说清楚。比如说一下大街小巷头版头条都是这个，是不是更好一点。（虽然说Iraqi War在咱们看来是耳濡目染（嘿嘿，用词不当），但不一定对所有人都是啊）
而且，the changes in our beliefs, in what is on the dinner table, in our preference of dressing seem to be the consequence of those so-called headline political events.这句话放在这有点唐突，因为后面并没有说美伊战争对我们的日常生活有什么切实影响
Actually, it is the social transformation that impels the political events. Everything has a reason（这句话好别扭）. When drawing the conclusion on（from?） the influence of a political event, we should ask ourselves such a question(ask ourselves such a question -> first consider)--what ignite the occurrence of the event? The Reform and Open Policy in China has brought about magnificent alternations on almost every social realm of Chinese society. But what is the impetus of this policy? In fact, it is the transformation of the ways people think, especially those people in charge, that results in the implement of the policy. The social change brought about by the old policy was proved to be a failure, therefore a more effective and efficient policy had to be sought out. And this policy left the society with the impression of great significance, while actually it is propelled by social transformation in people’s mind.
这一段论述觉得比较牵强，the transformation of the ways people think, especially those people in charge != seldom-reported social transformation.而且用改革开放的例子，实际上感觉更多还是policy决定transformation
As a social individual who lives on the surface of the world, we need to dig inside of the superficial events and figure out what is the real cause. The process of seeking real cause not only help us better analyze the event itself, it(it->but) also brings a brand new way to think--the ability to see through superficial events and grasp the spirit of them. If we could transplant this ability into academic fields, more facts and truth may appear out of nowhere. Actually it is where（？） it was behind the statistics of the experiment(这句没懂), but we master the method to catch them with the ability to think more deeply.
这一段感觉和上面两段有点脱节，是不是应该和politic联系起来？
In sum, even though the headline-making political events normally appear to be of great importance, we should not neglect the real impetus of such events -- the social transformation, which carries a more profound significance.
524words + 43.5mins 谢谢imong百忙之中这么认真的帮我改，感动ing。同时为自己写出这么烂的文章伤心 :(
本来没想写成让步转折的，而是想从现象入手-〉挖掘本质-〉提出希望。写完我就觉得和平时不大一样，我考虑的是能不能写一些题目引申的东西，不过显然顾此失彼，连基本段落都没把握好。
第一个body是想在举例之前做理论铺垫，交待一下人们之所以关注政治事件是因为她带给人们直接的影响，体现在吃、穿、想等方面。然后从伊拉克战争导致的后果讨论进一步说明人们关注的是表面现象。
第二个body是对第一段的现象做出解释，是因为社会变革让人们的思想发生了变化导致了政治事件的发生，进而让人们关注。现在想起来，社会变革的影响力部分没有说清楚，我理解问提出在这里，所以觉得分析的不深入。
第三个body是提出上一段的应用，也就是说我们应该透过现象看到本质，这样一来会在更多领域取得收获。
至于结尾，实在是有所忌惮跑题之嫌，生套了回来。 :(
总的来说是非常不爽的一篇文章，1好就考了，真是受打击。 看上去似乎百无是处
其实......
一块魔方在最后一转之前
永远有着4个面的混乱
我想我不用多说
加油 Issue193
"It is not the headline-making political events but the seldom-reported social transformation that have the most lasting significance."
Is it the seldom-reported social transformation that has the most lasting significance, as the speaker asserts? Or is it the headline-making political events that have more lasting importance? We should not oversimplify these question with an answer of yes or no, concerning the way people usually think about the criteria of judging the significance of social affairs. On balance, I fundamentally agree that the social transformation have(has) the most profound and ever-lasting significance, even though sometimes it appears that the political events are more important.
Why people normally believe the headline-making political events have so much influence? As we experience living in this complex world, what impress(es) us most is always those things that have direct influence on our everyday life. Anytime we look at ourselves, the changes in our of(?) beliefs, in what is on the dinner table, in our preference of dressing seems to be the consequence of those so-called headline political events. One should look no further than the lives of Iraqi War. What we saw is the replacement of government control as a result of the war itself, and the hottest discussion is always staying in the impact of the War on diverse aspects. Since seeing is believing, the impression of the war is limited to what we have seen. In short, it is the direct impact of political events on people’s life that makes it appear to be of extremely significance.( 我认为题目的观点是辨析headline-making political和seldom-reported social transformation的价值，headline-making和seldom-reported这两个形容词是不能丢的，在第一段的主题句中“I fundamentally agree that the social transformation have(has) the most profound”，我就觉得有问题，你只说上social transformation重要，那是seldom-reported的还是headline-making的social transformation重要呢？如果只从主题句看，就是你认为无论是seldom-reported的还是headline-making的，只要是social transformation就是重要的是吗？如果你是这个意思，就第二段的例子就没什么大问题，如果不是的话，也就是说如果你还是认为是seldom-reported的social transformation重要，那么你第二段Iraqi War的例子就有问题了，因为在那个例子中你说“and the hottest discussion is always staying in the impact of the War on diverse aspects”，既然都是hottest discussion，又怎么能说是seldom-reported呢？)
Actually, it is the social transformation that impels the political events.（我觉得还是没有形容词的问题，如果按照imong的话说就是有beg the question的嫌疑） Everything has a reason. When drawing the conclusion on the influence of a political event, we should ask ourselves such a question--what ignite the occurrence of the event? The Reform and Open Policy in China has brought about magnificent alternations on almost every social realm of Chinese society. But what is the impetus of this policy? In fact, it is the transformation of the ways people think, especially those people in charge, that results in the implement of the policy. The social change brought about by the old policy (which)was proved to be a failure, therefore a more effective and efficient policy had to be sought out. And this policy left the society with the impression of great significance, while actually it is propelled by social transformation in people’s mind.
As a social individual who lives on the surface of the world(明白你的意思，可总认为这么所合适吗？), we need to dig inside of the superficial events and figure out what is the real cause. The process of seeking real cause not only help(s) us better analyze the event itself, it also brings a brand new way to think--the ability to see through superficial events and grasp the spirit of them. If we could transplant this ability into academic fields, more facts and truth may appear out of nowhere. Actually it is where it was behind the statistics of the experiment, but we master the method to catch them with the ability to think more deeply.
In sum, even though the headline-making political events normally appear to be of great importance, we should not neglect the real impetus of such events -- the social transformation, which carries a more profound significance.
主要的问题就是我觉得你并没有强调seldom-reported， 而只是说social transformation了。 coni说的很有道理
另外dig inside of the superficial events 这个表达恐怕有问题. 我想dig into的是一个东西而不是一个东西的表面吧.当然,我并不是确定,还得查查字典.这种表达经常有人用,问题是到底什么样的写法是准确的.我觉得什么disclose reveal之类的也许可以,应该能找到很精准的表达的,再找找.
原题立论在了it is而不是we should所以我认为你的第三个body可以删光光,再想想? 表面现象不就是headline-making，被忽视的东西不就是seldom-reported
不知我这么说是不是把意思说清楚了
页:
[1]