新东方给我改的文章，奉献给大家
发信人: lani (Phd=Pig head~~^_^), 信区: EnglishTest标 题: 新东方给我改的文章，奉献给大家(转寄)(转载)
发信站: 北大未名站 (2002年11月23日22:06:08 星期六), 转信
【 以下文字转载自 lani 的信箱 】
【 原文由 lani@smth.edu.cn 所发表 】
来 源: from smthnew (bbs.net.tsinghua.edu.cn )
日 期: Sat Nov 23 22:05:34 2002
发信人: lightangel (光明天使--深爱eid), 信区: EnglishTest
标 题: 新东方给我改的文章，奉献给大家
发信站: BBS 水木清华站 (Sat Nov 23 22:03:20 2002), 转信
也希望和我一样找ets修改了的人都贴出来
这样利于后来人
Topic: "No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders
bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study."
The knowledge from without is sometimes very helpful for one
discipline to become prosperous. However, to claim it as an essential
factor for any significant progress in any field is too arbitrary to
be cogent. The interchange of knowledge and experience among different
spheres, I believe, is always beneficial, yet still far from
definitive.
(Extremely good start. Just changed the first sentence around to make
a little more, sense, changed pre-comma grammar in last sentence, and
added in "between" rather than "among".)
Outside knowledge is sometimes essential for a discipline if it is to
develop and become prosperous. However, to claim it as an essential
factor for significant progress in any field is too arbitrary to be
believable. The interchange of knowledge and experience between
different spheres is, I believe, always beneficial, yet still far from
definitive.
When outsiders come to a certain field, they not only facilitate it with
their knowledge and experience, but also provide a chance to open a new
era. When we look at the history of Physics and Chemistry, we will find
that they had their own start points and orientations. After a period
of successful development, they both found they were on a point of
stagnation when they both began to pursue their study from the
molecule level. It was the exchange of information and research
methods that helped them out of the mire and led to the prosperity of
each finally.
(Split this into two pars for easier reading. Good but not as good as
the first par. Added "ushered in" and "re-examine the subject".)
When outsiders enter a certain field, they bring not only their own
knowledge and experience, but also usher in a new generation of
thinkers. Let us take the example of Physics and Chemistry, which have
their own start points and orientations. After a period of early
success, both fields were on the point of stagnation, when they
decided to re-examine their subject from a molecular level. It was the
exchange of information and research methods that helped them out of the
mire and led them to prosperity again.
Moreover, the combination of information and thought ways from different
fields of study may sometimes engender a whole new domain, a kind of
cross-discipline study. When Biology started to research on genes,
they had to borrow some knowledge and research methods from Chemistry.
This brought us to a brand new discipline-Biochemistry, which fixating
on the chemical straits of life and study life-form in the light of
chemistry.
(Put last sentence into next par - was the logical thing to do.
Another good par, but increasingly jumbled. "creates" rather than
"engenders", and I pointed out the mix of Biology AND Chemistry in the
last sentence, to make it obvious.)
Moreover, the entry of information and thought processes from
different fields sometimes creates a new subject, a cross-discipline
study. When biologists started researching genetics, they had to
borrow some knowledge and research from Chemistry. This led to the
invention of Biochemistry, which focuses on studying the origins of life
by using thinking from the fields of both Biology and Chemistry.
Beneficial as the interchange is to these fields, it is not an
indispensable part. Just as nobody will expect an artist to make a
nuclear bomb, no field will rest there and wait for a significant
development endowed by other fields. As the basis of every science and
engineering discipline, Mathematics is always acting as a donor. It is
the development in this very field that make the significant progress,
such as linear control, nonlinear control and chaos control, in other
fields possible.
(Separated this par into three. Much much better - very good in fact.
Very logical and reasonable. Added in "rest on its laurels", which
sounds right. Added in "borrowing knowledge" and mathematics as the
science's "cousin".
Beneficial as the interchange is to these fields, it is not an
indispensable part. Just as nobody expects an artist to make a nuclear
bomb, no subject will rest on its laurels and wait for a significant
development in another field. Science and engineering is always
borrowing theories from its cousin, mathematics. It is developments in
mathematics, such as linear control, nonlinear control and chaos
control, that have made discoveries in other fields possible.
However, as to Mathematics itself, it can not hope for any help from
other fields unless the whole architecture of modern science and
technology is upside-down. Therefore the only creed in math must be
"asking His bless and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's
work must truly be our own". Maybe math is only an extreme situation,
but if we put the very idea, any significant progress in any field is
inevitably the result of the use of knowledge and experience from
other fields, into other fields, we could find its absurdity.
(Another good par, though not sure about the God stuff in the middle.
Changed the last sentence to make more sense, by starting off with using
a strong first clause to distance the following text and link it to the
previous sentence.)
But mathematics itself cannot expect help from any other field without
the entire structure of modern science and technology being turned
upside-down. So the only creed in mathematics is "asking His blessing
and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be
our achievement". Perhaps mathematics is an extreme example, but it
seems absurd that any significant progress in any field results from
using knowledge and learning from other subjects.
Suppose that I am a researcher in one field, with that belief deeply
rooted in my heart, then I have only 2 choices if I am to make any
significant development-to find an outsider who can bring some knowledge
and experience to our field thus help me reach my goal, or, to be an
outsider and bring about the development of other fields. Hither, the
question arises, why should we do our research? Without others' help our
research will be an endless road without any achievement! What a huge
joke!
(This (good)par was all messed around and wordy, so I cut down the first
sentence by a third. I also brought in "endless journey…" instead,
as it allowed the development of a suitable metaphor.)
Suppose that I am a researcher who believes there are two ways to make
significant progress in a field - either to bring in an outsider with
new knowledge and a different perspective, or to take their own
knowledge to a different area of expertise. So the question arises of
what to do with our research? Without the help of others, research is an
endless journey with no hope of reaching a destination. What a joke!
Knowing both the limitation and the benefit of the absorption of
information from other fields, we should call for a balance, at which
point we dedicate into our own field of study whilst keeping an eye on
the knowledge and experience outside.
(A good conclusion, just changed it to "strike a balance" to make it
more, er, balanced.)
Knowing both the limitations and benefits of using information from
other fields, we can strike a balance that allows our own field to
develop from within, while keeping an eye on changes in other subjects.
Presented Insightful Position? Reasons/Examples Persuasive? Ideas
well-focused and well-organized? Effective vocabulary and sentence
variety? Many Violations of Conventions?
Y Y Y (mostly) Y N
改个格式 都好看~~
Topic: "No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study."The knowledge from without is sometimes very helpful for one discipline to become prosperous. However, to claim it as an essential factor for any significant progress in any field is too arbitrary to be cogent. The interchange of knowledge and experience among different spheres, I believe, is always beneficial, yet still far from definitive.
(Extremely good start. Just changed the first sentence around to make a little more, sense, changed pre-comma grammar in last sentence, and added in "between" rather than "among".)
Outside knowledge is sometimes essential for a discipline if it is to develop and become prosperous. However, to claim it as an essential factor for significant progress in any field is too arbitrary to be believable. The interchange of knowledge and experience between different spheres is, I believe, always beneficial, yet still far from definitive.
When outsiders come to a certain field, they not only facilitate it with their knowledge and experience, but also provide a chance to open a new era. When we look at the history of Physics and Chemistry, we will find that they had their own start points and orientations. After a period of successful development, they both found they were on a point of stagnation when they both began to pursue their study from the molecule level. It was the exchange of information and research methods that helped them out of the mire and led to the prosperity of each finally.
(Split this into two pars for easier reading. Good but not as good as the first par. Added "ushered in" and "re-examine the subject".)
When outsiders enter a certain field, they bring not only their own knowledge and experience, but also usher in a new generation of thinkers. Let us take the example of Physics and Chemistry, which have their own start points and orientations. After a period of early success, both fields were on the point of stagnation, when they decided to re-examine their subject from a molecular level. It was the exchange of information and research methods that helped them out of the mire and led them to prosperity again.
Moreover, the combination of information and thought ways from different fields of study may sometimes engender a whole new domain, a kind of cross-discipline study. When Biology started to research on genes, they had to borrow some knowledge and research methods from Chemistry. This brought us to a brand new discipline-Biochemistry, which fixating on the chemical straits of life and study life-form in the light of chemistry.
(Put last sentence into next par - was the logical thing to do. Another good par, but increasingly jumbled. "creates" rather than "engenders", and I pointed out the mix of Biology AND Chemistry in the last sentence, to make it obvious.)
Moreover, the entry of information and thought processes from different fields sometimes creates a new subject, a cross-discipline study. When biologists started researching genetics, they had to borrow some knowledge and research from Chemistry. This led to the invention of Biochemistry, which focuses on studying the origins of life by using thinking from the fields of both Biology and Chemistry.
Beneficial as the interchange is to these fields, it is not an indispensable part. Just as nobody will expect an artist to make a nuclear bomb, no field will rest there and wait for a significant development endowed by other fields. As the basis of every science and engineering discipline, Mathematics is always acting as a donor. It is the development in this very field that make the significant progress, such as linear control, nonlinear control and chaos control, in other fields possible.
(Separated this par into three. Much much better - very good in fact. Very logical and reasonable. Added in "rest on its laurels", which sounds right. Added in "borrowing knowledge" and mathematics as the science's "cousin".
Beneficial as the interchange is to these fields, it is not an indispensable part. Just as nobody expects an artist to make a nuclear bomb, no subject will rest on its laurels and wait for a significant development in another field. Science and engineering is always borrowing theories from its cousin, mathematics. It is developments in mathematics, such as linear control, nonlinear control and chaos control, that have made discoveries in other fields possible.
However, as to Mathematics itself, it can not hope for any help from other fields unless the whole architecture of modern science and technology is upside-down. Therefore the only creed in math must be "asking His bless and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our own". Maybe math is only an extreme situation, but if we put the very idea, any significant progress in any field is inevitably the result of the use of knowledge and experience from other fields, into other fields, we could find its absurdity.
(Another good par, though not sure about the God stuff in the middle. Changed the last sentence to make more sense, by starting off with using a strong first clause to distance the following text and link it to the previous sentence.)
But mathematics itself cannot expect help from any other field without the entire structure of modern science and technology being turned upside-down. So the only creed in mathematics is "asking His blessing and His help, but knowing that here on earth God's work must truly be our achievement". Perhaps mathematics is an extreme example, but it seems absurd that any significant progress in any field results from using knowledge and learning from other subjects.
Suppose that I am a researcher in one field, with that belief deeply rooted in my heart, then I have only 2 choices if I am to make any significant development-to find an outsider who can bring some knowledge and experience to our field thus help me reach my goal, or, to be an outsider and bring about the development of other fields. Hither, the question arises, why should we do our research? Without others' help our research will be an endless road without any achievement! What a huge joke!
(This (good)par was all messed around and wordy, so I cut down the first sentence by a third. I also brought in "endless journey…" instead, as it allowed the development of a suitable metaphor.)
Suppose that I am a researcher who believes there are two ways to make significant progress in a field - either to bring in an outsider with new knowledge and a different perspective, or to take their own knowledge to a different area of expertise. So the question arises of what to do with our research? Without the help of others, research is an endless journey with no hope of reaching a destination. What a joke!
Knowing both the limitation and the benefit of the absorption of information from other fields, we should call for a balance, at which point we dedicate into our own field of study whilst keeping an eye on the knowledge and experience outside.
(A good conclusion, just changed it to "strike a balance" to make it more, er, balanced.)
Knowing both the limitations and benefits of using information from other fields, we can strike a balance that allows our own field to develop from within, while keeping an eye on changes in other subjects.
Presented Insightful Position?
Reasons/Examples Persuasive？
Ideas well-focused and well-organized?
Effective vocabulary and sentence variety?
Many Violations of Conventions?
Y Y Y (mostly) Y N
红色的部分是改的建议
黑体部分好象是那老兄自己根据建议改的
不过说实在的觉得写的真不怎么样
先看吧
呵呵~~~ 仔细研读了一下
发觉语言的奥妙还是很有意思的
明明是同样的内容
80%的句子都是一样的
却能达到完全不同的表达效果
改过以后的文章立马就上了一个档次
但跟最早的文章比 也不过换了几个词语
语言顺序颠倒了一下而已
里面有玄机啊~~~~~~
建议每个为语言着急的人都来读一下 找一下原因
共同进步
页:
[1]