issue175 我的第四篇，再次修改
It is always an individual who is the impetus for innovation; the details may be worked out by a team, but true innovation results from the enterprise and unique perception of an individual.艺术文学革新（艺术的革新=个人创作+引起跟风）的个人性
早期科学的发现 与简单的设备发明 。
现代科学采取集体创造,因为简单的理论，发现都被早就被搞定了
（下划线表明结构词及提示性词）
Innovations have been made throughout human history, and two patterns may be roughly seen: the innovation in art, literature and primitive(早期) scientific innovation may be the outcome of individual endeavor while contemporary scientific innovation is largely a result of cooperation.
When we turn to literature and art , their creativity is, after all, always an individual task such as the conception of some scenarios by Shakespeare or a painting by Van Gogh derived from his own impetus. When a new style of writing or a new opus from the composer’s trial may precisely cater to the appetite of the masses, suddenly gain popularity, and start a new genre. So was born an innovation of literature single-handedly. So the individuality of innovation is actually a destined consequence traceable from that the creativity itself is a matter of the artist himself.
In the pioneering day, a single scientist may achieve some primitive scientific discoveries because the basic knowledge we held then was too scarce. At that time, when the foundation of contemporary physics was still under construction, fundamental discovery is easy to be found by a single one’s endeavor. For example, the basic rule in the domain of electromagnetism that electricity is associated with magnet was proved by Faraday himself with a single simple set of instrument. Chemical discovery, mainly the isolation of certain quotidian material was critical just in that people and even chemists themselves lacked the knowledge concerning the constituent of the planet we live in. These innovations, in our eyes, are even too simple for an educated college student.
What succeeded these basic discoveries is the primitive inventions which were also completed readily by a inventor’s trial. Nobel born with feebleness designed and produced dynamite through toil and ordeal--narrowly escaping several threats from explosion. Other scientists such as Bell, Edison, Flemming(???弗莱明???) almost solely brought forth their own primitive scientific inventions. Admittedly, the breakthrough still need hard-work and perseverance but compared with today’s inventions such as rockets, shuttles, and super computers they are rather simplified at the thought of the gigantic experiments being carried out by many scientists.
As to the contemporary science, when the basic discoveries and inventions have been already depleted and drained , the innovation has become increasingly sophisticated , and required an exacting task mostly through a myriad of trials with error and correction. The computer is a grand innovation contrived and constructed by the collaboration of multi-national scientists in the consistent aim of decoding—a need for espionage. Besides, the Internet was first developed by the American military and was later discovered useful. Cell phone was another product of military research. When physicist began to marching into the micro-world, experiment loomed incrediblely difficult . Tons of heavy water and exact measurement were employed handled by the leading scientists in all concerned field to detect the trace of very foundational constituent particles of the world and ourselves. These effort and exertion are already far out of the power of any individual and in need of the universal participation of scientists in many multifarious fields.
And even Bell and Edison the individual innovators noted the importance of cooperation and establish labs employing fellow scientists to work together. All of the illustrations serve as strong examples to remind us the contemporary science is so sophisticated that individual effort is not enough to achieve innovation.
In a word, both patterns of innovation existed but due to disciplinal difference and increasing complexity, the contemporary science, deviated from art, literature and primitive science, adopted the pattern of cooperative innovation. 第一个
占座
还有成就感
嘿嘿 分为艺术，早期科学，现代科学，结构很不错
B2 论述的不太能使人信服，难道炸药，电磁等的发现只是因为简单吗？easy to be found ？在当时的条件下恐怕不能说是easy吧？
B3 when the basic discoveries and inventions have been already depleted and drained 这话太绝对吧？
从你的行文来看，似乎innovation是比较狭义的，指的是新发现和发明？ 如果是这样的话，我觉得你需要定义一下。 B2 论述的不太能使人信服，难道炸药，电磁等的发现只是因为简单吗？easy to be found ？在当时的条件下恐怕不能说是easy吧？
简单是相对的。相对于正负电子对撞机，第一代电脑，光蚀刻来说简单多了。当然个人确实做了不少努力的。
分为艺术，早期科学，现代科学，结构很不错
谢谢夸奖。我主要追求好写。
似乎innovation是比较狭义的，指的是新发现和发明？ 如果是这样的话，我觉得你需要定义一下。
嗯小宇也这么说。一般意义上的innovation差不多这意思吧？？？所以我没定义它~~查一下去。
大家觉得扣题否？
我没明确写individual who is the impetus for innovation，details may be worked out by a team。我主要按280篇的方法比较了集体个人。 innovation:
1 the introduction of sth new
2 a new idea, method or device: novelty
差不多这样吧？应该包括了自然科学的理论创新，发明，人文科学的想法等吧？
狭义的，指的是新发现和发明？
我的innovation还有艺术类的啊。 最初由 lakeqian 发布
简单是相对的。相对于正负电子对撞机，第一代电脑，光蚀刻来说简单多了。当然个人确实做了不少努力的。
用简单来解释为什么一个人也可以完成，个人觉得不太合适，或者换一种说法，只需要狭小范围的知识，而个人完全可以掌握，你觉得呢？ 最初由 lakeqian 发布
innovation:
1 the introduction of sth new
2 a new idea, method or device: novelty
差不多这样吧？应该包括了自然科学的理论创新，发明，人文科学的想法等吧？
我觉得你的行文中科技部分的没有体现新的想法这一点。。。
比如人类基因组计划，好像最初就是1985年一个科学家提出的，然后集体完成的 innovation的范围很广, 我比较倾向a creation (a new device or process) resulting from study and experimentation
定义不同,行文就不同了 而且这题前半部分的impetus怎么理解?
在文章中是不是要体现呢?
如果仅仅是推动的话,就有很多因素了 同意gra cie的意见，所以我觉得lakeqian在文中应该给个定义，这样更容易自圆其说 :) 嗯。考虑开头来个定义。加一段论述impetus的个人性。接下来不变，算是讨论innovation的实现吧。。。 Innovations have been made throughout human history, and two patterns may be roughly seen: the innovation in art, literature（加个逗号） and primitive(早期) scientific innovation may be the outcome of individual endeavor（加个逗号，while改成whereas） while contemporary scientific innovation is largely a result of cooperation.
When we turn to literature and art , their creativity is, after all, always an individual task such as（such as在这里能这么用吗？） the conception of some scenarios by Shakespeare or a painting by Van Gogh derived from his own impetus. When a new style of writing or a new opus from the composer’s trial may precisely cater to the appetite of the masses, suddenly gain popularity, and start a new genre.（自己检查语法，一个when管到头了，主句呢？） So was born an innovation of literature single-handedly. So the individuality of innovation is actually a destined consequence traceable from that the creativity itself is a matter of the artist himself.（列举现象，原因呢？Without your illustration我是不能从现象看出原因来的）
In the pioneering day, a single scientist may achieve some primitive scientific discoveries because the basic knowledge we held then was too scarce. At that time, when the foundation of contemporary physics was still under construction, fundamental discovery is easy to be found by a single one’s endeavor. For example, the basic rule in the domain of electromagnetism that electricity is associated with magnet was proved by Faraday himself with a single simple set of instrument. Chemical discovery, mainly the isolation of certain quotidian material was critical just in that people and even chemists themselves lacked the knowledge concerning the constituent of the planet we live in. These innovations, in our eyes, are even too simple for an educated college student. （这一段比上一段好些，仍尚未做到足够）
What succeeded these basic discoveries is the primitive inventions which were also completed readily by a inventor’s trial. Nobel born with feebleness designed and produced dynamite through toil and ordeal--narrowly escaping several threats from explosion. Other scientists such as Bell, Edison, Flemming(???弗莱明???) almost solely brought forth their own primitive scientific inventions. Admittedly, the breakthrough still need hard-work and perseverance but compared with today’s inventions such as rockets, shuttles, and super computers they are rather simplified at the thought of the gigantic experiments being carried out by many scientists.（仍然是列举现象：怎么让人信服？怎么让人确定的确是他们的individual effort？你的例子在这里都应该突出的是"individual effort"，尽量证明这个是必然现象才是）
As to the contemporary science, when the basic discoveries and inventions have been already depleted and drained , the innovation has become increasingly sophisticated（innovation become sophisticated搭配？） , and required an exacting task（require task搭配？） mostly through a myriad of trials with error and correction. The computer is a grand innovation contrived and constructed by the collaboration of multi-national scientists in the consistent aim of decoding—a need for espionage. Besides, the Internet was first developed by the American military and was later discovered useful. Cell phone was another product of military research.（这里的关键是military还是collaborative？） When physicist began to marching（to marching？？） into the micro-world, experiment loomed incrediblely difficult . Tons of heavy water and exact measurement were employed handled by the leading scientists in all concerned field to detect the trace of very foundational constituent particles of the world and ourselves. These effort and exertion are already far out of the power of any individual and in need of the universal participation of scientists in many multifarious fields.
And even Bell and Edison the individual innovators noted the importance of cooperation and establish labs employing fellow scientists to work together.（这句话本来是一个相当好的展开点） All of the illustrations serve as strong examples to remind us the contemporary science is so sophisticated that individual effort is not enough to achieve innovation.
In a word, both patterns of innovation existed but due to disciplinal difference and increasing complexity, the contemporary science, deviated from art, literature and primitive science, adopted the pattern of cooperative innovation.
堆例子，例子对论点做诠释做的不到位。语法错误自己查。
这个题目开篇就提出TRUE innovation，并且在后半句还有个让步，true这里有可能大做文章的其实。
很不错的语言:)
有几个问题：
1. 最好给一个将早期艺术单列出来的理由
2. 个人在题目的理解上有一些不同观点
an individual who is the impetus for innovation这里的impetus可以理解成fuse一类的东西，这样对于现代科技而言，很多方面虽然最终的模型什么的是由一个实验室，一个团队做出来的，但前期是某一个人发现理论中的一些待完善之处，提出一些想法，最终导致innovation(现在很多论文都是这么做出来的:)),从这个层面上说，individual的作用仍如题所说。
3. 对于艺术中的跟风，如果点出与论点的关系可能更好，比如产生了从外部看是团体innovation的假象等等 最好给一个将早期艺术单列出来的理由...早期艺术。。。偶不懂。。。早期？近代？艺术
觉得艺术本身基本都是个人的是，innovation当然就是个人的事啦。
关于impetus。应该加一段。但是，280篇里的文章根本没提impetus耶。奇怪。
对于艺术中的跟风，如果点出与论点的关系可能更好，比如产生了从外部看是团体innovation的假象等等
我不太懂艺术，所以略写艺术详写科技了。。。
3x 用简单来解释为什么一个人也可以完成，个人觉得不太合适，或者换一种说法，只需要狭小范围的知识，而个人完全可以掌握，你觉得呢？
嗯，有道理，又牵扯到社会分工协作了。。。sigh...
页:
[1]
2