寄托家园留学论坛 › 论坛 › 寄托语言类备考版 › TOEFL考试(IBT)讨论版 › 给善良的romanus 改作文的

返回列表

查看: 2209|回复: 5

[未归类] 给善良的romanus 改作文的 [复制链接]

Gyps_rueppellii
UID：3340085

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 214
注册时间: 2012-7-7
精华: 0
帖子: 98

发表于 2012-7-20 11:10:10 |显示全部楼层

本帖最后由 Gyps_rueppellii 于 2012-7-22 21:13 编辑

这是我自认为写的比较好一点的，望romanus 多多指教，帮我把所有缺点都指出来吧。那些句型不好，或者逻辑不好等等。真的太感谢啦

As we care about morals more and more deeply, cultivating children’s attribution is a main course in every parent's daily life. Responsibility is a corner stone of success, so it is essential for children to be aware of this useful and key characteristic. To foster children’s responsibility, some parents deems that having children care for animals is the best way. In my perspective, however, there are a lot of good choices for parents to choose but except taking care of animals.

First of all, taking care of animals is not only not stimulating children’s responsibility, but also bad for children. As we all know, some kinds of animals, , such as chicken, duck, cats and even our faithful friend dogs, can infect children with some diseases. They are not clean as children after all. Even you wash them every day. they still possess some bacteria which do harm to children’s health. More importantly, children mayl not learn responsibility in the end, because they don’t regard animals as people so they may don’t care about their lives. As a survey shows, 85 percent of children are not willing to give consideration to animals, on the contrary, children will show their responsibility when they get along with friends more possibly. Caring for animals is not a wise choice for children to learn responsibility.

Since the survey shows making friends and staying with them can benefit for children’s responsibility. So I come up with an idea that it may be more sensible for children to play with their friends. Children may argue with each other sometimes. And there must be someone having done something wrong to the other, so if he or she does’t want to lose his or her friend, He or she has to be responsible to that quarrel. What’s more, a surprising thing is that when an older child play or live with a younger child, the older child will show their responsibility to the other. I want to take myself into example, when I play with my older cousin, she never compete thing with me, and she always tell me care about myself. When just we two stay my home, she will take care of me attentively. these directly demonstrate staying with friends is good for children’s responsibility.

in a final analysis, another efficient way for children to learn responsibility is making themselves undertake responsibility when they make mistakes. in china, parents always would like to help their children solve problems, as a result, children will form a potential awareness that making mistakes does not matter at all, and their parents will be responsible for them. As a matter of fact, this does harm to children. And children will lack responsibility when they live in society singly. In the contrast, if parents never gave hands to their children in unnecessary period, children would have been accustomed to make up their faults and understand the quintessence of responsibility. For example, the constructor of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg were always responsible for his mistakes when he was a child. When he broken his father’s clinic windows carelessly, his father let him repair by himself. This may help him handle the successful affair today. Making children remedy for their faults is a sufficient way to teach responsibility.

In a nutshell, there are substantial approaches to learn responsibility. Every child is unique so that parents should choose proper ways for their children. But I insist that letting them caring animals is a terrible choice. Making friends and playing with them, being responsible for their mistakes are more effective ways indisputably.

相关帖子

回应

使用道具举报

mpromanus
UID：2565872

长老一袋

Rank: 8 Rank: 8

声望: 762
寄托币: 12296
注册时间: 2008-10-30
精华: 4
帖子: 907

发表于 2012-7-24 23:58:09 |显示全部楼层

(这位童鞋下次记得求改作文要给题目啊。。没有题目我没法判断你的论述是否合适啊。。)

As we care about morals more and more deeply, cultivating children’s attribution (I'm not sure what you mean to express with 'attribution'..'attribution' is primarily the process of attributing, which means to associate something as the cause of something else. It can be a completely arbitrary process, and I don't see how it is relevant to 'responsibility'.) is a main course in every parent's daily life. Responsibility is a corner stone of success, so it is essential for children to be aware of this useful and key characteristic. To foster children’s responsibility, some parents deems that having children care for animals is the best way. In my perspective, however, there are a lot of good choices for parents to choose but except taking care of animals.

First of all, taking care of animals is not only not (This kind of double negation is both awkward and hard to read. If you have to put everything into one sentence here, you may want to put the negation into a word – e.g. '.is not only ineffective at stimulating..'. ) stimulating children’s responsibility, but also bad for children. As we all know, some kinds of animals, such as chicken, duck, cats and even our faithful friend dogs, can infect children with some diseases. They are not as clean as children after all. (Dirtiness doesn't cause diseases..and in most countries both pets and children are required to be extensively vaccinated, so that young children can live alongside pets and both would be healthy.)Even you wash them every day, they still possess some bacteria which do harm to children’s health. More importantly, children mayl not learn responsibility in the end, because they don’t regard animals as people so they may not care about their lives. As a survey shows, 85 percent of children are not willing to give consideration to animals, on the contrary, children will show their responsibility when they get along with friends more possibly. (This doesn't show much support to your argument because your survey, if it actually exists, is not necessarily fair and well-designed. You are making very general, sweeping statements such as 'they don't regard animals as people', which is very subjective to individual opinions and very hard to prove to be either true or false.) Caring for animals is not a wise choice for children to learn responsibility.

Since the survey shows making friends and staying with them can benefit for children’s sense of responsibility. So I come up with an idea that it may be more sensible for children to play with their friends. Children may argue with each other sometimes. And there must be someone having done something wrong to the other, so if he or she doesn’t want to lose his or her friend, He or she has to be responsible to that quarrel. What’s more, a surprising thing is that when an older child plays or lives with a younger child, the older child will show their responsibility to the other. I want to take myself as an example: when I play with my older cousin, she never competes for thing with me, and she always tells me to care about myself. When just we two stay in my home, she will take care of me attentively. these directly demonstrate staying with friends is good for children’s responsibility.

in a final analysis, another efficient way for children to learn responsibility is making themselves undertake responsibility when they make mistakes. in china, parents always would like to help their children solve problems. As a result, children will form a potential awareness that making mistakes does not matter at all, and their parents will be responsible for them. As a matter of fact, this does harm to children. And children will lack responsibility when they live in society singly. In the contrast, if parents never gave hands to their children in unnecessarily period, children would have been accustomed to make up for their faults and understand the quintessence of responsibility. For example, the inventor of Facebook, Mark Zuckerberg, was always responsible for his mistakes when he was a child. When he broken his father’s clinic windows carelessly, his father let him repair them by himself. This may help him handle the successful affair today.(Not sure what this means. Plus, it's not unsaid that Zuckerberg stole the idea of Facebook from his college friends – and that would hardly be called 'responsible'. Of course all these are rumors rather than facts. My point is that your example of repairing broken windows doesn't need to be tagged with a famous name such as Zuckerberg to be effective – it's the act of being told to make up for his mistakes that matters to the child, not his name.) Making children remedy for their faults is a sufficient way to teach responsibility.

In a nutshell, there are substantial approaches to learn responsibility. Every child is unique so that parents should choose proper ways for their children. But I insist that letting them care for animals is a terrible choice. Making friends and playing with them, being responsible for their mistakes are more effective ways indisputably.

总结：

请注意动词介词短语的搭配。。另外如果题目是caring for animals is the best choice for children to learn responsibility神马的，那么，这个问题是比较题，而不是单纯的好坏题。。你可以说养动物不好不好另外的方式很好很好，但是这不等于养动物就一定不是最好的。。你说交朋友在一起可以互相照顾，改正错误可以培养责任感神马的，那我可以说这些都可以通过养动物学到（养动物你也可以让好几个小孩组织起来照顾它吧，还可以顺便学学分工合作解决争论神马的；一个不小心把动物弄死了你可以让小孩自己存钱再买一只神马的吧。。）看怎么组织这个养法。。所以你的论述感觉就是拼命要说养动物不好，其他的好，非常单边倒，没有仔细去想如果真的比较起来你要怎么证明养动物和其他的方法比起来，是或者不是最好的，在哪些方面可以比，应该怎么比。。当然托福对论述的要求不会这么严格。。但是严密的思考和对比对将来的学术写作会有好处，所以希望这些评论可以让你多想一想。

2016 fall语言学Phd申请情况叨叨帖
DMC 3表忠心花痴帖！

使用道具举报

Gyps_rueppellii
UID：3340085

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 214
注册时间: 2012-7-7
精华: 0
帖子: 98

发表于 2012-7-25 00:15:16 |显示全部楼层

mpromanus 发表于 2012-7-24 23:58
(这位童鞋下次记得求改作文要给题目啊。。没有题目我没法判断你的论述是否合适啊。。)

As we care about ...

哇哇哇，真的是太感谢 romanus 老师啦，呵呵你的一件很中肯啊，但是说到逻辑，我就觉得真的没有你想的那么多啦。可不可以好好想您请教一下啊？？？嘻嘻您分析起来让我确实意识到了自己的不足。谢谢

使用道具举报

Gyps_rueppellii
UID：3340085

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 214
注册时间: 2012-7-7
精华: 0
帖子: 98

发表于 2012-7-31 14:35:00 |显示全部楼层

本帖最后由 Gyps_rueppellii 于 2012-7-31 14:42 编辑

One can learn a lot about the person from the type of friends the person has

It is believed that knowing a people can be more difficult than knowing other animals or things a lot. In this situation, how we can learn others may be a essential problem. No matter what ways others propose, from my perspective, I think one can learn a person in-depth through different kinds of friends he or she has. I would like to illustrate my reasons as follow.

The first and foremost reason is that we all know the truth that, in most situations. people are willing to make friends who have the similar characteristic with themselves. So we, of course, can learn a person by his or her friends. If a person is exocentric, the friends must be outgoing and talkable. We can, therefore, know what the person's disposition is. Otherwise, they should have the mutual interests. Hence we can know the person's hobbies by know what his or her friends like. In other words, friends just like the people in the mirror of the person. For example, the FBI investigate the friend's of criminal usually to know what the criminal is. Since the police of America would like to learn people in this way, we have no reason to abandon this efficient mean.

What is more, as a rule, friends know a person most deeply. Therefore, we can gain lots of information about a person from his or her friends. With regard to time, people stay with friends for longest time except parents. So people's friends are in the ascendant when we want to learn people. As a survey released by a prestigious group, after doing research on three thousand people between 18 and 40, shows that 80 percent of them would like to get along with friend. Considering myself for example, I learned my best friend Hanna Chen through her ordinary friends past. Because of them, I know what her hobbies are, what her quality is and so forth. When I really understood her by myself, the information from her friends was surprisingly similar to what I got. So friends are crucial to learn a person. They like the shadow of the person. We can save a great deal of time in this way.

In the final analysis, admittedly, people do not show their real characteristic most time. In another words, some people are good at pretending. If we as a stranger want to know one, it will take much time for us to really understand him or her. On the contrary, the friends has gotten along with him or her for a long time, they must understand each other very much. they must know what his or her real quality is. Sometimes we are cheated by others because we do not realize their true colours. Theoretically speaking, people can understand others within two years, but in reality, some people are so hard to understand that it will take long time to know them. So learning a person's types of friends can facilitate our process knowing the person. More importantly, we can know the substance of a person.

In a nutshell, we should realize the importance of one's friends when we want to understand one. Friends are the corner stones of knowing others.

求romanus批改，谢谢

使用道具举报

mpromanus
UID：2565872

长老一袋

Rank: 8 Rank: 8

声望: 762
寄托币: 12296
注册时间: 2008-10-30
精华: 4
帖子: 907

发表于 2012-8-1 10:51:49 |显示全部楼层

Gyps_rueppellii 发表于 2012-7-31 14:35
One can learn a lot about the person from the type of friends the person has

One can learn a lot about the person from the type of friends the person has.

It is believed that knowing a person can be more difficult than knowing other animals or things a lot (This 'a lot' goes with 'difficult', not 'animals or things', i.e. you'd normally say '..can be a lot more difficult than..'). In this situation, how we can learn about others may be an essential problem ('essential' for what and in what sense? Such empty statements do not add much to your discussion.). No matter what ways others propose, from my perspective, I think one can learn about a person in- depth ('in-depth' is an adjective, so it doesn't go with the verb 'learn'.) through different kinds of friends he or she has. I would like to illustrate my reasons as follows ('as follows' is a fixed expression.).

The first and foremost reason is that we all know the truth that, in most situations, people are willing to make friends who have the similar characteristics with themselves. So we, of course, can learn about a person by his or her friends. If a person is exocentric (This does NOT mean 'extrovert'. It is a linguistic term meaning a construction that has a different function or meaning than its constituent parts, e.g. 'English horn' is neither from England nor a horn, but a woodwind instrument, so we say this name is exocentric.), the friends must be outgoing and talkable (I guess you mean 'talkative'..). We can, therefore, know what the person's disposition is. Otherwise, they should have the mutual interests. Hence we can know the person's hobbies by knowing what his or her friends like. In other words, friends just like the people in the mirror of the person (I know what you're trying to say here but the way you constructed this sentence is rather awkward..at the very least, you would have said 'friends ARE just like the person in mirrors'..). For example, the FBI would investigate the friend's of a criminal, usually to know what the criminal is like. Since the police of America (Now, the FBI is not usually considered a 'police' force. It's primarily an intelligence unit for national-level security cases. But then again, it's actually the 'normal' police force, not the FBI, that will investigate most civil crimes..it's not very clear what level of operation you have in mind here, but I'd suggest keeping to either the 'FBI' or the 'police' in both sentences.) would like to learn about people in this way, we have no reason to abandon this efficient means ('means' as meaning 'way, method, instrument' is a word in itself, and is not the plural of 'mean' – as in the phrase 'a means to an end'.).

What is more, as a rule, friends know a person most deeply (A 'rule' is a standard or qualification for doing something, not for the quality or state of things. If you say 'friends know a person most deeply' is a 'rule', it means friends must voluntarily come to know a person deeply, or else they won't be qualified as friends – which would be rather awkward and hard to justify. What you meant to express is actually 'a rule of thumb'.). Therefore, we can gain lots of information about a person from his or her friends. With regard to time, people stay with friends for the longest time except parents. So people's friends are in the ascendant (Not sure what you want to express by this.) when we want to learn about people. As a survey released by a prestigious group, after doing research on three thousand people between 18 and 40, shows that 80 percent of them would like to get along with friends (People wanting to get along with friends has nothing whatsoever to do with whether their friends know them the most..). Considering myself for example: I learned about my best friend Hanna Chen through her ordinary friends from the? past. Because of them, I know what her hobbies are, what her quality is and so forth. When I really understood her by myself, the information from her friends was surprisingly similar to what I got. (This only means her friends know her truly well. It doesn't prove that her friends know her better than everybody else, which is the point you should be justifying.)So friends are crucial to learning about a person. They are like the shadow of the person.(This sounds really like your previous point about how friends are similar to the person..) We can save a great deal of time in this way.

In the final analysis, admittedly, people do not show their real characteristics most of the time. In another words, some people are good at pretending. If we as a strangers want to know one, it will take much time for us to really understand him or her. On the contrary, the friends have gotten along with him or her for a long time, they must understand each other very much (Run-on. You can't connect two independent sentences with just a comma.). They must know what his or her real quality is. Sometimes we are cheated by others because we do not realize their true colours. Theoretically speaking, people can understand others within two years, but in reality, some people are so hard to understand that it will take a long time to know them. So learning about a person's types of friends can facilitate our process of knowing the person. More importantly, we can know the substance of a person.(I don't see why this warrants a completely new paragraph. It seems to me that you've just been building on the point 'friends would know a person most well'. In other words, I feel this paragraph and the previous one should be related, but you seem to intend them as completely independent points since you made no effort in connecting the paragraphs.)

In a nutshell, we should realize the importance of one's friends when we want to understand one. Friends are the corner stones of knowing others.

总结：

请非常注意单复数和短语搭配。。尤其是题目中已经出现了learn about the person结果你都没注意到自己写的一直是learn。。另外就是后两个论点明显找不出话说的感觉于是开始原地绕圈。。同样，建议你学会从自己能驾驭的例子和素材中去提炼论点，而不是先有论点再凑例子。。为了论点凑例子很容易变成生搬硬套。

2016 fall语言学Phd申请情况叨叨帖
DMC 3表忠心花痴帖！