issue48 创造历史之伟人Vs.凡人 终于动笔~大家拍吧
The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten.我没照着写重大事件而是推广到整个历史来写的，但是例子举的是重大事件。
TS:历史是人民大众创造的，但我们只可能去研究少数名人。
B1 历史是人民创造的。（人民，唯有人民，才是历史的主人，二战的例子）
B2 不可否认伟人的加速事件发生的作用（贞德的例子）
B3 但是我们只可能研究名人。（因为平凡人太多）
其实不想写结尾，因为B3结束感已经很强了。
打字又差又慢！靠word啦。超时一些吧。大家拍我语言哦！因为实在是太久没写了。
二次修改，B3转折处已改但不一定正
Though the historical study is focused on the celebrities, controversy on who realize the events and trends is still going on. For my part, we should bear in mind that the determinant of history is the forgotten masses rather than the dominant figures, but it is feasible to study only the celebrities rather than the masses.
History actually resided in the hands of the forgotten masses. Take delve into the World War II, what comes to our mind first is the celebrities as Roosevelt and the fellow generals who commanded the battle. However, just as a Chinese saying goes, the fame of the general is based on the casualty of the soldiers一将功成万骨枯的英文版？. What truly defeated the Japanese and Nazi Germany is the hundreds of aircraft carriers and tens of thousands of tanks manufactured by the workers and the death toll of the soldiers that mounted an even greater number. Without their blood and sweat, the generals alone could by no means fight aginst the foe. So, the war was indeed won by the toil of the workers who survived and the sacrifice of soldiers who died.
On the other hand, the function of the celebrity which should not be trivialized availed to the acceleration of the events. Looking into the One Hundred Years War, we observe that although the majority of French were only to willing to drive away the British intruders and reoccupy their homeland, but they were hesitant and the wrath was not released until the 17 year old girl Joan of Arc stood out and mustered the people to fight for their own country. Though the French is destined to claim their own land, were it not for Joan of Arc, the victory would be postponed markedly.
Powerful as the masses are, the pitiful truth is that the historical research is focused merely on several celebrity rather than the masses. It is somewhat reasonable but not justifiable. We already know that the determinant of history is the masses, but due to the great number of the ordinary people, it is impossible to identify, record and examine what every one of them thought and did, while the celebrities’ deeds are easy to observe. So, practically, historians always study only the contribution of the famous people which may to some extent representative the trend and masses.
We shall all remember that the determinant of history is the forgotten masses and their unknown contribution but we can literally observe only the celebrities readily. 呵呵，拜读一下，先占个座 大体上不错的，能在这么短的篇幅内把观点说明白确实很强的。向你学习！
我觉得B3有点问题，前面的B1B2是分两面说的
B3应该是总结出你的观点了，但是你的BUT很突兀，至少跟B2的内容没有转折的关系。看了你后面几句知道你其实是在跟B1的内容转折，那么我觉得最好在but前面加上虽然大众怎么怎么样，这样会好一点的。而且B3的最后一句有点绝对了，留点余地或者说成比较关系比较好。
还有一个问题是，我认为虽然正文可以简洁的表达，但是结尾可以再丰满一点的，因为高分的文章的结尾都是写的很用心。 2段和3段不该是转折关系吧，感觉应该是递进才对啊
还有就是感觉论证有些浅，在深入些就好了
我是新手，只能说这些，见谅。 qian兄的，当然要拜读一下 409words...少了点。不过我觉得这么点差不多了。
这道题似乎把伟人凡人置于antipole，做成一个取舍关系。我在题中表述的是凡人决定，伟人有影响这样的关系。
on the other hand是转折吗？？ The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten.
我没照着写重大事件而是推广到整个历史来写的，但是例子举的是重大事件。
TS:历史是人民大众创造的，但我们只可能去研究少数名人。
B1 历史是人民创造的。（人民，唯有人民，才是历史的主人，二战的例子）
B2 不可否认伟人的加速事件发生的作用（贞德的例子）
B3 但是我们只可能研究名人。（因为平凡人太多）
其实不想写结尾，因为B3结束感已经很强了。
打字又差又慢！靠word啦。超时一些吧。大家拍我语言哦！因为实在是太久没写了。
Though the historical study is focused on the celebrities（吹毛求疵的说，我觉得这个词不好，用giant更好）, controversy on who realize the events and trends is still going on. For my part, we should bear in mind that the determinant of history is the forgotten masses rather than the dominant figures, but it is feasible to study only the celebrities rather than the masses.
History actually resided（是译为属于吗？） in the hands of the forgotten masses. Take delve into the World War II, what comes to our mind first is the celebrities as Roosevelt Barton and the fellow generals who commanded the battle. However, just as a Chinese saying goes, the fame of the general is based on the casualty of the soldiers. What truly defeated the Japanese and Nazi Germany is the hundreds of aircraft carriers and tens of thousands of tanks manufactured by the workers and the death toll of the soldiers that mounted an even greater number. Without their fighting and working（感觉替换成blood和sweat效果更好）, the generals alone could by no means win the war. So, the war was indeed won by the toil of the workers who survived and the sacrifice of soldiers who died.
On the other hand, the function of the celebrity which should not be trivialized availed to the acceleration of the events. Looking into the One Hundred Years War, we observe that although the majority of French were only to willing to drive away the British intruders and regain their homeland, but they were hesitant and the wrath was not released until the 17 year old girl Joan of Arc stood out and mustered the people to fight for their own country. Though the French is destined to claim their own land, were it not Joan of Arc, the victory would be postponed markedly.（总结一句吧！例子不错，不过我觉得如果继续用B1的例子从另一方面说，领导人的作用，也是不错的选择。）
But, the sad（不合适吧） truth is that the historical research is focused merely on several celebrity rather than the masses. It is somewhat reasonable but not justifiable. We already know that the determinant of history is the masses, but due to the great number of the ordinary people, it is impossible to identify, record and examine what every one of them thought and did, while the celebrities’ deeds are easy to observe. So, practically, historians always study only the contribution of the famous people which may to some extent representative the trend and masses.（这段可以用suppose that 来个假设，更说明问题。）
We shall all remember that the determinant of history is the forgotten masses and their unknown contribution but we can literally observe only the celebrities readily.
（短小精悍，语言上挺不错的。虽然字数少，不过我觉得在考场上能说明意思就行了。不过有时间深入阐述观点也是必要的，个人觉得这篇文章有点单薄。） sigh...字数。。。
例子都是战争方面的。。。战争的例子只是想躲开历史唯物主义这个本质问题而已。其实这道题从理论上可以说是：人民创造需求，人民又解决需求，而伟人只是成功了的幸运儿。
后来又想了个关于发明的。这次就涉及最本质的历史唯物主义的观点。。。就非常麻烦了。
Besides, inventors or constructors of ancient relic are, in all likelihood, be forgotten due to the pass of time and the lack of documentation. For example, the inventor of the wheel that drastically changed our way of transportation is lost in history.不是group of people?? The constructors of great pyramids and the Great Wall are all nameless peons.
Someone may argue that contemporary inventors are not likely to be omitted. What in my mind is the established economy principle of “demand creates its supply”. What makes the great inventions possible is not the inventors whimsies but the demand of the masses who are unduly over-shone by the inventors. For example, TV, which became popular in 20th century, was factually invented by a Russian long before that time. But the first invention of TV in Russia did not meet people’s need and was soon forgotten while the second invention of TV just met the masses’ need and had its position. The double-invented TV illustrates that what makes the TV to be a true devise is not the inventor himself but in fact the demand of the masses who is forgotten.
论述哲学问题就很麻烦了。。。还要动用需求决定供给。用了马克思历史唯物又用了他老人家反对的西方经济学~~~~~
还是再举几个战争例子算了。 resided（是译为属于吗？） （与in连用）存在于，属于。 魔兽争霸3 句型。嘻嘻。
（感觉替换成blood和sweat效果更好）, nod nod 原文已改。
至于重复用例子。。。觉得贞德的例子还行。而且二战例子已经也反证过了。B1结尾倒数第二句。
个人觉得这篇文章有点单薄。）。。。。sigh....参见我楼上的帖子No.8
觉得最好还是换种写法。。。 小宇，你收件箱满了。。
楼上xdjm不要只占座啊~~~~~~ 首先要检讨一下，偶占了位置转头就忘了写的行为，lake哥表打偶BOW。。
有两个问题供参考：
1 显然lake是同意历史研究应该emphsize on celebrities的吧？可是偶以为支持这个论点的理由仅仅是“common 太多”不够的，加上“celebrities有影响”也不足以说明。愚以为，只有通过研究伟人得出历史的一些必然结果才是研究他们的主要原因，否则，我们完全可以不研究common也不研究celebrities.这一点看你觉得有必要考虑一下不。
2 题目有一个关键的词identities,不知道lake是怎么理解的，如果理解成群体的同一性，我觉得历史完全有必要研究也是可行的。但是看来lake是理解成个体特征，这样讲来不研究的原因不仅是object太多，还应该考虑一下有没有必要，毕竟人民创造历史中人民是一个集合名词。对于这个identities的理解问题，想跟lake哥讨论一下，因为我在写这篇的时候也跟你一样理解，没有想到这个问题。
另外，用语挺好的，不过偶觉得在B1后面需要用一句话总结一下，毕竟war跟TS的events范围大大缩小了。向你学习！
以上观点有不当地方请批评，毕竟我觉得lake哥在发现逻辑方面比较强，最后在慎重道歉 :) 你8楼的第二段感觉不是很好，我怎么觉得和这题目没多大关系？那段只提到了遗忘却没有提到多数人与少数人呀。 Issue48
The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten.
我没照着写重大事件而是推广到整个历史来写的，但是例子举的是重大事件。
TS:历史是人民大众创造的，但我们只可能去研究少数名人。
B1 历史是人民创造的。（人民，唯有人民，才是历史的主人，二战的例子）
B2 不可否认伟人的加速事件发生的作用（贞德的例子）
B3 但是我们只可能研究名人。（因为平凡人太多）
其实不想写结尾，因为B3结束感已经很强了。
打字又差又慢！靠word啦。超时一些吧。大家拍我语言哦！因为实在是太久没写了。
[首先，你的ts没有突出题目的关键词most significant events and trends，这个跟一般的历史事件还不一样吧。
我感觉最好首先界定个什么是most significant events and trends，然后往下写才有地基]
Though the historical study is focused on the celebrities, controversy on who realize the events and trends is still going on. For my part, we should bear in mind that the determinant of history is the forgotten masses rather than the dominant figures, but it is feasible to study only the celebrities rather than the masses.
History actually resided in the hands of the forgotten masses. Take delve into the World War II, what comes to our mind first is the celebrities as Roosevelt and the fellow generals who commanded the battle. However, just as a Chinese saying goes, the fame of the general is based on the casualty of the soldiers. What truly defeated the Japanese and Nazi Germany is the hundreds of aircraft carriers and tens of thousands of tanks manufactured by the workers and the death toll of the soldiers that mounted an even greater number. Without their blood and sweat,[对啊，不过要是没有Hitler的发动战争，不就没有workers 和 soldiers的努力了么？] the generals alone could by no means fight aginst the foe. So, the war was indeed won by the toil of the workers who survived and the sacrifice of soldiers who died. [可以再举个爱波罗等月的例子，人们都知道三个宇航员登上了月球，缺忘记了阿波罗计划是由几百家美国公司大学N万科学家和工程师的努力]
On the other hand, the function of the celebrity which should not be trivialized availed to the acceleration of the events. Looking into the One Hundred Years War, we observe that although the majority of French were only to willing to drive away the British intruders and reoccupy their homeland, but they were hesitant and the wrath was not released until the 17 year old girl Joan of Arc stood out and mustered the people to fight for their own country. Though the French is destined to claim their own land, were it not for Joan of Arc, the victory would be postponed markedly.[因为历史的不可逆性，怎么证明如果没有Joan of Arc, 百年战争法国就会不有利呢]
But, the pitiful truth is that the historical research is focused merely on several celebrity rather than the masses. It is somewhat reasonable but not justifiable. We already know that the determinant of history is the masses, but due to the great number of the ordinary people, it is impossible to identify, record and examine what every one of them thought and did, while the celebrities’ deeds are easy to observe. So, practically, historians always study only the contribution of the famous people which may to some extent representative the trend and masses.[感觉这段是你的文章的重心，最为critical的地方，不过你论证的有点单薄，可以从public心理学上写写，人们往往崇尚英雄。。。。除了历史学家，没有人会从史料中研究历史。。。再分析一段]
We shall all remember that the determinant of history is the forgotten masses and their unknown contribution but we can literally observe only the celebrities readily.
[虽然短小，但是自圆其说，很不错了，就是感觉逻辑性分析有点少] 8楼写完也觉得不好。第二段使这个意思：某个发明是基于社会需要。因此真正决定trend,event possible 的是大多数人需要而不是某个人的作用。例如：古登堡和毕升斗发明印刷术。这不是因为他们聪明而是必须有人来满足社会的需要soon or later。历史唯物主义观点吧。
To:小宇：
[首先，你的ts没有突出题目的关键词most significant events and trends，这个跟一般的历史事件还不一样吧。
我想回避关键词。先推广到整个历史作论述，再缩小范围还是成立的。我的例子都是从一般意义上来说的重大事件。还是定义下好。
对啊，不过要是没有Hitler的发动战争，不就没有workers 和 soldiers的努力了么？]
hitler一样只是一个celerbrity。简单的说，就算他死了，手下那么多将才，找个人继续就行。
理论上来说：当时德国社会问题积重难返，再加一战战败因此战争势力抬头。需要有人来对外扩张。而且是总会有那么一个人的，hitler，在这种社会意识背景下成功了而已，她失败了还会有人继续的。经济基础决定上层建筑。
因为历史的不可逆性，怎么证明如果没有Joan of Arc, 百年战争法国就会不有利呢]
的确，理论上没法证明。我只好暗示destined to claim their own land，意思一下啦。
感觉这段是你的文章的重心，最为critical的地方，不过你论证的有点单薄，可以从public心理学上写写，人们往往崇尚英雄。。。。除了历史学家，没有人会从史料中研究历史。。。再分析一段]
对。没想到人们的英雄主义情结。。。想想
语言呢？？。。。
3x！！！
PS.
我8楼通过那个例子实际上是想分析。分析为什么人民群众是决定者。但发现分析到位不容易。。。
哟naiba369缓过劲来啦。。。呵呵。拍吧。
Naiba369_思路分析&知识回顾_历史类_英雄历史观？还是大众历史观？
No.1 issue48 创造历史之伟人Vs.凡人 终于动笔~大家拍吧The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made ssible ot by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten. 历史的研究把太多的重点放在对某些个人上。而历史上一些重大的事件和发展趋势不是由个别名人决定的，而是由那些已经被人们淡忘的社会群体所创造的。先破题：这是一个2句话的题目：1，提到了现在的一种客观事实，2，是author对此现象的意见。对于1，只好承认，但那也是客观所致，的确没有什么一般人的资料又保存下来的，可供历史学家进行研究。2，的争议就比较大了，题目说是历史是由mass 弄得，但要注意个词――possible ，是可能不是由伟人创造的。就是说：出题者也没有确认这个由争议的问题。
*****************************************************************
没照着写重大事件而是推广到整个历史来写的，但是例子举的是重大事件
TS:历史是人民大众创造的，但我们只可能去研究少数名人。
B1 历史是人民创造的。（人民，唯有人民，才是历史的主人，二战的例子
题目中的词是made，但历史是不是由人们“创造”的呢？这一点，你的结论有点偏颇。的确，一将功成万骨枯，将军的成功是建立再数百万牺牲普通士兵的身上。但是问？这些士兵是自愿吗？他们是有组织的，分批进行阵亡的吗？不是的，他们是盲目的，或者说稍有目的。他们只是“小兵卒子”，受将军的指挥，战略部署。如果战争胜利了，他们只是一种完成者的角色，而非左右历史的决策者―――而这也正是历史要研究的关键。与此同时，这一点也正是由人的渺小性与历史进程的庞大性的矛盾所必然决定的，谁都一样。设想如果将军是个超人，刀枪不如，个人的战斗力完全可以和敌方整军进行抗衡的话，将军很有可能不用坏事那些士兵。从这点上讲。很清楚，将军的作用是不可忽视的。所以，我认为丛基调上讲，你的立论就不很好。
另外，我觉的，你的这种思维在限时的情况下是很正常的。我们中国的学生，从小受到教育就是“大家的力量大”，“历史是由人民大众创造的”――这种“大众创造历史“观。然而这却与西方学者所认可的――“英雄创造历史”观，大相径庭。这一点，我们初中的历史老师（北师历史系，解放前毕业的，当时应该很牛了）在给我们讲课时专门提到，而我本人因为对历史也比较由兴趣（初中平均20多次考试96分吧，从小就看历史书了）也记得很牢，所以，刚看你的文章的提纲我就觉得不妥。就是不从“讨好改卷人“的角度去考虑，你的基调还是问题很多。
我觉得，“大众历史观”与“英雄历史观”是分析同一问题的两个不同的角度，或者是工具。作个比喻，大众和英雄的关系好比“完成一件工业产品的从设计到投放市场，取得效益”这么一件事。英雄好比产品的设计师，人不多但整个产品的精华是他们是设计的，所以他们拿高工资（历史的伟大评价），而工厂大众（战争中的士兵）是产品的具体制造者，他们决不会知道这个产品为什么要这么做，这么做有什么好处？它的原理是什么？基于什么样的设计思想？他们只是去完成，说的难听点是“活者的机器“，如果机器真的可以代替，且此时利润更大时，工厂的大股东们绝对会换成机器的。但这又是不可能的，是矛盾的（人的渺小性与历史进程的庞大性的矛盾）。所以，国人常说”没有功劳（设计者――英雄），有苦劳（具体干活的人――大众）“。
从整个的历史的进程看来，英雄与大众是密不可分的，是一个问题的两个方面。的确，历史是由大众“完成/实践“（不是创造），但他们是盲目的。作为人，也许他们参战的主观目的是为了要军饷，要活命，填饱肚子。副产品是，完成了历史，有点”歪打正着“的感觉。但是历史，的确是由某些关键的历史人物决定的。就还用战争举例。一战的导火索是――奥匈帝国的王储萨拉热窝大公（头衔好像是这样，懒得查书了）被刺这一具体的，特定的历史事件所导致。但历史的”偶然性“与”必然性“告诉我们，他的被刺是偶然的，必然的是――一战肯定要爆发。一战的爆发肯定是要有个理由，哪怕是无理取闹，就是要找事。而这正是历史的必然性，是由欧洲各国利益不均衡这一很久积聚的历史所决定的，一战爆发是必然结果。这样看来，再比喻一下：新中国的成立是由毛泽东等建国元勋们所”创造“的，而非那些牺牲的士兵，他们只是完成了这一既定计划。由”毛泽东“――这个具体的历史人物创造是偶然的，但必然的是――一定会由个领袖来完成。管他是谁，反正就有。就算来个太离奇的假设――是我naiba369 创造的，也不会是某个没有留名的人。因为他们只是完成者这个历史角色，这就必然促使他们被遗忘。如果要载入史册的话，你就必须成为”英雄”, 成为历史的“创造者”。只有创造者，这个―――历史的主人才会让他的记录的仆人―――历史，记下他。而那些些牺牲的士兵，就好比用来记录的墨汁―――因为是用鲜血做成的很珍贵（苦劳），所以还得再提一下，同时也是很有必要的。
总上，再复习完这么多东西后，我建议，你的理论的基调应该是―――英雄 vs 大众 五五开，或者，英雄 55％ vs 大众 45％
ps：偶说偶的历史还行吧，…………^_^
2 不可否认伟人的加速事件发生的作用（贞德的例子）
B3 但是我们只可能研究名人。（因为平凡人太多）
其实不想写结尾，因为B3结束感已经很强了。
打字又差又慢！靠word啦。超时一些吧。大家拍我语言哦！因为实在是太久没写了。
根据noopia的建议等，小弟在这直接改啦。原文看楼下就行。
Though the historical study is focused on the celebrities, controversy on who realize the events and trends is still going on. For my part, we should bear in mind that the determinant of history is the forgotten masses rather than the dominant figures, but it is feasible to study only the celebrities rather than the masses.
History actually resided in the hands of the forgotten masses. Take delve into the World War II, what comes to our mind first is the celebrities as Roosevelt and the fellow generals who commanded the battle. However, just as a Chinese saying goes, the fame of the general is based on the casualty of the soldiers一将功成万骨枯的英文版？. What truly defeated the Japanese and Nazi Germany is the hundreds of aircraft carriers and tens of thousands of tanks manufactured by the workers and the death toll of the soldiers that mounted an even greater number. Without their blood and sweat, the generals alone could by no means fight against the foe. So, the war was indeed won by the toil of the workers who survived and the sacrifice of soldiers who died.
On the other hand, the function of the celebrity which should not be trivialized availed to the acceleration of the events. Looking into the One Hundred Years War, observe that although the majority of French were only to willing to drive away the British intruders and reoccupy their homeland but they were hesitant and the wrath was not released until the 17 year old girl Joan of Arc stood out and mustered the people to fight for their own country/color Though the French is destined to claim their own land, were it not for Joan of Arc, the victory would be postponed markedly.
But, the pitiful truth is that the historical research is focused merely on several celebrity rather than the masses. It is somewhat reasonable but not justifiable. We already know that the determinant of history is the masses, but due to the great number of the ordinary people, it is impossible to identify, record and examine what every one of them thought and did, while the celebrities’ deeds are easy to observe. So, practically, historians always study only the contribution of the famous people which may to some extent representative the trend and masses.
We shall all remember that the determinant of history is the forgotten masses and their unknown contribution but we can literally observe only the celebrities readily.
PS: ：回复的很晚，自己的任务也很重，没用看楼上下各xdjm的帖子，可能会重复。我感觉不妥的语言方面的问题，可能有些仅标出但未改，请见谅。意见如有不妥，活者还有其他，希望你和我具体讨论: 继续跟贴，或者Pm 我，两者皆可.
Naiba369愚见送上
页:
[1]
2