issue217,觉得比较BT的一个题目
Issue 217In order to produce successful original work, scholars and scientists must first study the successful work of others to learn what contributions remain to be made.
为了产生成功的作品，学者和科学家必须首先学习其他人的成功作品，进而知道还有哪些成就是没有做的。
The speaker suggests that scholars and scientists should study others’ works firstly and find out the remaining contribution in order to produce their own original work. I strongly agree with this assertion, since researching others’ work could gain not only the background knowledge, but also some inspirations.
No one could produce any original work without assimilating the former contributions in relative fields. As a student, we have deep impressions about the arduous and dull tasks before doing a research, referring to many books or magazines and collecting much information, especially the students in social science. Why is this process necessary? One obvious explanation is that the background knowledge obtained from former contributions is important as a basement of the new research. There is one famous maxim which could support this statement clearly said by Newton that “If I have seen further than certain other men it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants”. It clearly explains the function about former contributions as a foundation of an original work and a stimulus of new ideas.
With the development of social conditions, many premises and assumptions in former contributions have been altered. Just these defects are where we could revise or change, and then possibly make our own contributions. Take economic theories for an instance. It is not exaggerated to draw a conclusion that nearly all theories in economy, especially in modern ages, are developed from revising or questioning basic assumptions in former theories. The H-O model, a main theory in international economics, emphasizes the important function about factor endowments in international trade, whose basic assumptions are the countries as trade partners should have a similar production function, a consumer preference, and so on. However, these restrictions are too difficult to be satisfied in real world. It is Leontief, an American economist, who discovered that the reality contradicted with the theory, called the Leontief Paradox. As a result, he relaxed some assumptions in H-O model and obtained his own original contribution which is more suitable for checking out the current situation. Therefore, there are always some shortcomings in former works, one should firstly study successful works and try to find the place needed to be improved, and then obtain the original work.
In a large sense, what is called “original” work is usually not a work fully new, but an improvement on the work done by previous scholars and scientists. Sciences have developed thousands years, inducing that it is too difficult to explore a fully new domain undiscovered by predecessors, unless one has extraordinary original creative ideas, such as Einstein’s principle of relativity. Most scholars and scientists are not as genius as Einstein, so the best way to gain their own work is to make an improvement on formers’ works, either works in their own field or other relative fields. Gravity Model, a current popular economic model using in calculating regional trade in regional organizations, comes from a basic theory in physics. This mode seems a fully original creation in economics, but in fact it is only an improvement on the basis of an existing theory referred from another field. Therefore, gaining a real original work, not being discovered by predecessors, becomes so difficult that many original works are nothing more than amendments from existing contributions.
To sum up, the feasible approach to gain an original work is to study others’ work at first in order to get background knowledge and inspirations, and then learn the remaining contributions. (577 words)
属于common sense的，却非让说个道理出来，FT死了！
谢谢批评！ The speaker suggests that scholars and scientists should study others’ works firstly（？） and find out the remaining contribution in order to produce their own original work. I strongly agree with this assertion, since researching others’ work could gain not only the background knowledge, but also some inspirations.
No one could produce any original work without assimilating the former contributions in relative fields. As a student, we have deep impressions about the arduous and dull（这两个词用and连起来怎么就觉得别扭呢？） tasks before doing a research, referring to many books or magazines and collecting much information, especially the students in social science. Why is this process necessary? One obvious explanation is that the background knowledge obtained from former contributions is important as a basement of the new research. There is one famous maxim which could support this statement clearly said by Newton that “If I have seen further than certain other men it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants”. It clearly explains the function about former contributions as a foundation of an original work and a stimulus of new ideas.
With the development of social conditions, many premises and assumptions in former contributions have been altered. Just these defects（which defects?） are where we could revise or change, and then possibly make our own contributions. Take economic theories for an（不用an） instance. It is not exaggerated to draw a conclusion that nearly all theories in economy, especially in modern ages, are developed from revising or questioning basic assumptions in former theories. The H-O model, a main theory in international economics, emphasizes the important function about factor endowments in international trade, whose basic assumptions are the countries as trade partners should have a similar production function, a consumer preference, and so on. However, these restrictions are too difficult to be satisfied in real world. It is Leontief, an American economist, who discovered that the reality contradicted with the theory, called the Leontief Paradox. As a result, he relaxed some assumptions in H-O model and obtained his own original contribution which is more suitable for checking out the current situation. Therefore, there are always some shortcomings in former works, one should firstly study successful works and try to find the place needed to be improved, and then obtain the original work.
In a large sense, what is called “original” work is usually not a work fully new, but an improvement on the work done by previous scholars and scientists. Sciences have developed thousands（of） years, inducing（？） that it is too difficult to explore a fully new domain undiscovered by predecessors, unless one has extraordinary original creative ideas, such as Einstein’s principle of relativity. Most scholars and scientists are not as genius as Einstein, so the best way to gain their own work is to make an improvement on formers’ works, either works in their own field or other relative fields. Gravity Model, a current popular economic model using in calculating regional trade in regional organizations, comes from a basic theory in physics. This mode seems a fully original creation in economics, but in fact it is only an improvement on the basis of an existing theory referred from another field. Therefore, gaining a real original work, not being discovered（有问题，不如改成not following the steps of the predecessors） by predecessors, becomes so difficult that many original works are nothing more than amendments from existing contributions.
To sum up, the feasible approach to gain an original work is to study others’ work at first in order to get background knowledge and inspirations, and then learn the remaining contributions. (577 words)
总的感觉是说服力不强，论证漏洞不少。
最关键的一点，没有注意到题目中的一个关键词：original。我的理解是这样的，题目是想让写作的人讨论一下，到底怎样才能研究出original的东西（注意强调的是original而不是随便什么东西），是像题目中说的学习前人，还是自己独创。
你的论证过程大体是这样，因为没人能在不学习前人的基础上就研究出新东西，所以要学习前人；因为每个旧观点都是有漏洞的，所以可以改；第三个body的确写得比较让人FT，因为original work 不是original的。第一段感觉是在用结论证明结论，跟没说差不多；第二段太绝对，好像argument一样，我们证明一种东西的存在性是容易的，只要找到一个例子就可以，但要证明论题在任意情况下都不成立就比较困难了，你想想是不是这个道理；至于说第三段，是把题目整个否定掉，明显的beg the question.如果同意题目，就要说出研究没有被发现的，到底对于创新有什么好处，这才是关键。注意题目中to learn后面的壮语，研究的目的是知道自己还有什么研究对象。
这道题我的看法反对题目观点并且分领域讨论。在艺术领域，前人的作品会限制艺术家的创造性，不利于创作；在科学领域即便是看到了前人的作品，只要能够加入自己的理解，同样可以称之为original; 而且去寻找没有被发现的往往会打击人的自信，不利于original work的产生。
语言上不错，注意前后句间的联系。 Issue 217
In order to produce successful original work, scholars and scientists must first study the successful work of others to learn what contributions remain to be made.
为了产生成功的作品，学者和科学家必须首先学习其他人的成功作品，进而知道还有哪些成就是没有做的。
The speaker suggests that scholars and scientists should study others’ works firstly and find out the remaining contribution in order to produce their own original work. I strongly agree with this assertion, since researching others’ work could gain not only the background knowledge, but also some inspirations.（观点是完全赞同 给出两个原因：背景知识 灵感）
1。没有人能不参考前人的贡献而在相关领域做出成绩
No one could produce any original work without assimilating the former contributions in relative fields. As a student, we have deep impressions about the arduous and dull tasks before doing a research, referring to many books or magazines and collecting much information, especially the students in social science. Why is this process necessary? One obvious explanation is that the background knowledge obtained from former contributions is important as a basement of the new research. There is one famous maxim which could support this statement clearly said by Newton that “If I have seen further than certain other men it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants”. It clearly explains the function about former contributions as a foundation of an original work and a stimulus of new ideas.（举了学生做实验的例子 牛顿的肩膀名言 我觉得论证的很充分了）
2。许多前人的前提，理论是不（完全）正确的，我们由此做出成绩
With the development of social conditions, many premises and assumptions in former contributions have been altered. Just these defects are where we could revise or change, and then possibly make our own contributions. Take economic theories for an instance. It is not exaggerated to draw a conclusion that nearly all theories in economy, especially in modern ages, are developed from revising or questioning basic assumptions in former theories. The H-O model（这个俺不懂啊 呵）, a main theory in international economics, emphasizes the important function about factor endowments in international trade, whose basic assumptions are the countries as trade partners should have a similar production function, a consumer preference, and so on. However, these restrictions are too difficult to be satisfied in real world. It is Leontief, an American economist, who discovered that the reality contradicted with the theory, called the Leontief Paradox. As a result, he relaxed some assumptions in H-O model and obtained his own original contribution which is more suitable for checking out the current situation. Therefore, there are always some shortcomings in former works, one should firstly study successful works and try to find the place needed to be improved, and then obtain the original work.（看懂了！通过经济学理论纵向的对比，证明了ts 但是ts没放在第一句~~是吧？这倒不是问题）
3。界定original是发展而不是发明——摆在这里感觉有点问题
In a large sense, what is called “original” work is usually not a work fully new, but an improvement on the work done by previous scholars and scientists. Sciences have developed thousands years, inducing that it is too difficult to explore a fully new domain undiscovered by predecessors, unless one has extraordinary original creative ideas, such as Einstein’s principle of relativity. Most scholars and scientists are not as genius as Einstein, so the best way to gain their own work is to make an improvement on formers’ works, either works in their own field or other relative fields. Gravity Model, a current popular economic model using in calculating regional trade in regional organizations, comes from a basic theory in physics. This mode seems a fully original creation in economics, but in fact it is only an improvement on the basis of an existing theory referred from another field. Therefore, gaining a real original work, not being discovered by predecessors, becomes so difficult that many original works are nothing more than amendments from existing contributions.
To sum up, the feasible approach to gain an original work is to study others’ work at first in order to get background knowledge and inspirations, and then learn the remaining contributions.
In order to produce successful original work, scholars and scientists must first study the successful work of others to learn what contributions remain to be made.
为了产生成功的作品，学者和科学家必须首先学习其他人的成功作品，进而知道还有哪些成就是没有做的。
我是这样看得：
这篇文章如果不看原issue题目的话，的确写得还不错！条理清晰，层次分明，虽然深度上还不太够~~~~前提是——不看原题目~~
我认为这个题目的理解是不是有问题？题目强调的是看先人的贡献以确定哪些是没有做的~~~也就是说，目的是去填补空白~~~~差不多相当于不要做重复的研究工作~~~如果这样看，那就跑题了~~~~God~~I hope not~
ft了~~~我去查查这个题目的理解~~~
还是列下逻辑线
must study successful work----------->to learn what contribution remain to be made--------------->produce successful original worknotice "original" and "must" ! 恩？
我觉得没跑题啊？
我是分成三个角度来讨论应该学习前人的东西，进而找出自己的观点的啊，在我理解，original指的是自己的观点，但是并不一定是说是前人从来没有过的观点，完全可以是在前人的基础产生的自己的观点。
请大家继续指教
谢谢！ 我晕拉：what contributions remain to be made在题目中是个什么作用啊~~~~~ 再看一下题目
to learn what contributions remain to be made.
学习没有错，关键是讨论学习什么，学习的目的是什么——original work In order to produce successful original work, scholars and scientists must first study the successful work of others to learn what contributions remain to be made
又注视了这个题目弱干秒钟~~~~我这样理解：
学者看（学习）先前的作品——〉知道什么没做——〉更成功的发展“原创”
不知道对不对~~
先去自习了~~~~晚上回来再讨论 我认为original work的意思是，scholars and scientists 不要做重复的工作（前人作过的），WHICH 通过 first study the successful work of others
一点建议，仅供参考！！ 先说说我对题目的理解吧
原题目里说
In order to produce successful original work, scholars and scientists must first study the successful work of others to learn what contributions remain to be made
我觉得这黑体的三点关系都要抓到
思路暂时还没....
先看你文章
position:
I strongly agree with this assertion, since researching others’ work could gain not only the background knowledge, but also some inspirations.
背景知识和灵感 与 to learn what contributions remain to be made的联系? 我觉得需要在POSITION里点一下
3个BODY的TS
No one could produce any original work without assimilating the former contributions in relative fields.
With the development of social conditions, many premises and assumptions in former contributions have been altered.
In a large sense, what is called “original” work is usually not a work fully new, but an improvement on the work done by previous scholars and scientists.
1,要做OW必须吸收相关领域的前人贡献---扣到了must first
2,随着社会的发展,许多前人的定理和假设已经被改变---和TS就有点远了,或者这段TS改成"研究以前成功的学说也许现在又能发现了漏洞",然后你的这句就可以在下面做说理的部分
3,OW通常并不是完全新的而是前人的理论发展.---我觉得这个角度挺好,但是相比较前面的来说有点抽象了,做TS不太合适,还有从TS们的逻辑关系出发,这个还是要改改,比如"我们就可以根据这个漏洞做出OW",然后现在的TS同样可以作为你下面解释的着手点之一,当然如果这样些,BODY2的内容就要点到为止,不然会和这段内容有重复了
段落内的论述没细看....嘿嘿,不算跑题,我觉得只要稍做些表述上的修改就好 Issue 217
In order to produce successful original work, scholars and scientists must first study the successful work of others to learn what contributions remain to be made.
为了产生成功的作品，学者和科学家必须首先学习其他人的成功作品，进而知道还有哪些成就是没有做的。
The speaker suggests that scholars and scientists should study others’ works firstly and find out the remaining contribution in order to produce their own original work. I strongly agree with this assertion, since researching others’ work could gain not only the background knowledge, but also some inspirations.
No one could produce any original work without assimilating the former contributions in relative fields. As a student, we（个人觉得最好不要用第一人称，用students也可以阿） have deep impressions about the arduous and dull tasks before doing a research, referring to many books or magazines and collecting much information, especially the students in social science. Why is this process necessary? One obvious explanation is that the background knowledge obtained from former contributions is important as a basement of the new research. There is one famous maxim（saying） which could support this statement clearly said by Newton that “If I have seen further than certain other men it is by standing upon the shoulders of giants”.(引用是恰当的，但是牛哥的例子太多人用了，换换比较好) It clearly explains the function about former contributions as a foundation of an original work and a stimulus of new ideas.
With the development of social conditions, many premises and assumptions in former contributions have been altered. Just these defects are where we could revise or change, and then possibly make our own contributions. Take economic theories for an instance. It is not exaggerated to draw a conclusion that nearly all theories in economy, especially in modern ages, are developed from revising or questioning basic assumptions in former theories. The H-O model, a main theory in international economics, emphasizes the important function about factor endowments in international trade, whose basic assumptions are the countries as trade partners should have a similar production function, a consumer preference, and so on. However, these restrictions are too difficult to be satisfied in real world. It is Leontief, an American economist, who discovered that the reality contradicted with the theory, called the Leontief Paradox. As a result, he relaxed some assumptions in H-O model and obtained his own original contribution， which is more suitable for checking out the current situation. Therefore, there are always some shortcomings in former works, one should firstly study successful works and try to find the place needed to be improved, and then obtain the original work.（论据和TS很好）
In a large sense, what is called “original” work is usually not a work fully new, but an improvement on the work done by previous scholars and scientists. Sciences have developed thousands years, inducing that it is too difficult to explore a fully new domain undiscovered by predecessors, unless one has extraordinary original creative ideas, such as Einstein’s principle of relativity（也是一个n个人都用的例子）. Most scholars and scientists are not as genius as Einstein, so the best way to gain their own work is to make an improvement on formers’ works, either works in their own field or other relative fields. Gravity Model, a current popular economic model（一直是economy的例子，最好换换） using in calculating regional trade in regional organizations, comes from a basic theory in physics. This mode seems a fully original creation in economics, but in fact it is only an improvement on the basis of an existing theory referred from another field. Therefore, gaining a real original work, not being discovered by predecessors, becomes so difficult that many original works are nothing more than amendments from existing contributions.
To sum up, the feasible approach to gain an original work is to study others’ work at first in order to get background knowledge and inspirations, and then learn the remaining contributions. (577 words)
我觉得没有跑题阿，论证也很清晰。只是觉得第三段和第四段的论点有些重复。
这么BT的题目，写得很好了，继续努力啊~~~~~~ 楼主自己不参与讨论阿~~~
关于这个题目 猴哥和东方的翻译不一样 ft OK
刚回来，就看见狒狒给我提意见了
我说我的意见吧
首先声明，题目的翻译是我自己翻译的，没有参照别人的，因为我觉得我找到的那个翻译不很准确。
然后，说我的思路吧：
我首先是肯定这个观点，认为要想有原创作品，需要先参阅别人的东西
然后我想以3个分论点来证明为什么是这样的，OK，说我的分论点。
我的分论点是：
1、背景知识的重要性，即为什么要读其他作品。例如：经济学理论在前人基础上发展。
2、以前理论中的缺陷正是新理论产生的基础。例如，经济学理论的前提假设。
3、广义上讲，新作品不一定是全新的，而是继承发展前人的。例如，重力模型，吸取物理学的知识。
至于大家所说的跑题，我想可能是因为对original的理解不同吧，在我看来，这是指原创，但并非是说开拓新领域，因为众所周知，现在开拓新领域很难，所以，只要是继承发展前人的就是original了。
大家继续讨论一下吧，我想通过这道题，包括我前几天发的ISSUE 139那道BT题目
https://bbs.gter.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=172904
我们可以想一想，对于这种BT题目如何破题。 关于original的定义问题，从广义上来说，只要不是全篇引用或者摘抄别人的思想和文章，就属于original。
举个最近讨论的火爆的一个新闻为例子吧，中国的WAPI标准，其实就是在WI-FI上多了一点加密的算法，但这个标准就属于ORIGINAL的，还可以收专利费呢。
所以说，不要把这个original看得太神秘了，这个词也不是题眼。
另外，这个题目所提出来的观点，其实是一种common sense。
文中的观点，我的导师在第一天教我写论文的时候就提到了。如果非要反驳的话，除非是李敖这类人物，否则想要说服读者并不容易。 TO sniper613：
说我一直都用经济学的例子，的确如此，如果你看我的其他文章也会有此感觉，如果举理论，基本都是经济学
原因是这是我的专业，偶熟啊
如果写其他的，估计很难自圆其说的
我认为，举例子一定要举自己熟悉的，即使是编的，也可以编造的像模像样的，你说呢？