标题: ISSUE7 K战队作业 2.13 by thumit [打印本页] 作者: thumit 时间: 2006-2-14 19:39:16 标题: ISSUE7 K战队作业 2.13 by thumit
Issue007
"The video camera provides such an accurate and convincing record of contemporary life that it has become a more important form of documentation than written records."
一个问题：关于documentation的理解
VIEWPOINT: 在当前情况下，video camera 还没有发展到比written records还重要。
1. Admittedly, video camera 提供了一种比written records更加生动、准确、可信的记录生活的方式：可以记录下活生生vivid的影象video，是传统的纸介质所不能比拟的；例如：婚礼的记录，历史事件的记录
2. video并不总是那么准确和可信
3. video camera的记录还存在很多的问题：阅读和实现需要一定的条件，远不及写的方便（如穷苦山区）；video camera不能很好的提供一种艺术上的感受；文学作品更加需要的是手写，而不是硬生生的拍摄。 相比说来纸介质具有很多video camera不能比拟的优点：书籍可以很系统的记录一些东西，比如一个学科的历史；书籍可以提供video之外的一些东西。
拍摄/摄像
With the development of science and technology, now people have more alternative forms of documentation, such as written records, video records, tapes for sound records. Video camera, as a form of documentation, is widely used in the world. Are video records, as the speaker asserts, now more important than written records, for the reason that video cameras can provide an accurate and convincing record of contemporary life? I strongly disagree with the speaker's view.
Admittedly, to a certain extent, now video cameras provide us with an accurate and convincing record of contemporary life. The video camera is a way to record moving pictures of life. Compared with written records, videos are much more vivid and visual. Thus they provide us a more real world, letting our eyes to look on the world. For instant, we can use a video camera to record the full process of a wedding, the wonderful competition in the World Cup, the visual introduction of a new president candidate. All these are visual, not flavourless letters, at most adding few pictures, which is watched, thought and written by others on a paper. In this way, written records are indirect, while videos are more direct. In this sense, video cameras are a more accurate and convincing record of contemporary life than written records.
However, what video cameras provide us is not so accurate and convincing as someone thinks. As a form of documentation, video records inevitably involve some subjective elements of the cameraman. Thus sometimes what videos exhibit to us may be the comprehension or of the cameraman himself, sometimes even an intended perspective. As is shown in the movie "Forrest Gump", people can see that Forrest shakes hands with Nixon and Kennedy, which never happened in history. This fact shows that what we see in videos is not always accurate and convincing.
Furthermore, compared with written records, video records also own some disadvantages. Restricted by contemporary technology, record materials of videos have limited nature lives. As a professor of computer science of our university once said (and I paraphrase) that electronic storage could be preserved for at most 50 years. As to written records, we all know that now we can still see the documentation of 2000 years ago. Also, videos need very complex instruments to record, to preserve, to read. On the contrast, a paper and a pencil are enough to write, and anyone can preserve it and read it with almost nothing else. What's more, video cameras can only record those things that are visual. If Andrew Wiles wants to record the proof of Fermat Theory, he would choose none other than written records. It is almost impossible for video cameras to record what in the proof.
To conclude, it is true that video cameras provide a more accurate and convincing record of contemporary life. Yet this form of documentation has also lots of disadvantages. Written records could not be replaced, at least in this era.
(492words)作者: miraclesue 时间: 2006-2-15 11:03:02
一个问题：关于documentation的理解
我的理解就是records，不知道对不对
With the development of science and technology, now people have more alternative forms of documentation, such as written records, video records, tapes for sound records（audio records）. Video camera, as a form of documentation这个词我的理解是记录、文件，不知道有没有记录工具的意思, is widely used in the world. Are video records, as the speaker asserts, now more important than written records, for the reason that video cameras can provide an accurate and convincing record of contemporary life? I strongly disagree with the speaker's view. 建议把Are video records…以后的部分放在前面，把前部分作为speaker提出assertion的原因，这样入题感觉更快一些。
Admittedly, to a certain extent, now video cameras provide us with an accurate and convincing record of contemporary life, by the way of recording moving pictures. 删掉（The video camera is a way to record moving pictures of life）. Compared with written records, videos are much more vivid and visual. Thus they provide us a more real world, letting our eyes to look on the world 改为 helping us see the world directly. For instant, we can use a video camera to record the full process of a wedding, the wonderful competition in the World Cup, the visual introduction of a new president candidate. All these are visual, not flavorless letters, at most adding few pictures, which is watched, thought and written by others on a paper. 建议改为 All these are visual, not like flavorless letters, which are at most supported by few pictures and could only be read, thought and written by others on a piece of paper. In this way, written records are indirect, while videos are more direct. In this sense, video cameras are a more accurate and convincing record of contemporary life than written records.
建议将后两句合为一句：In this way, videos are more direct than written records, which offer a more accurate and convincing record of contemporary life to the audience.
However, what video cameras provide us is not so accurate and convincing as someone thinks.这一句读上去感觉有点像自我否定，建议改为，However, there are some factors affecting the accuracy and credibility of video records. The biggest problem is that as a form of documentation, video records inevitably involve some subjective elements of the cameraman. Thus sometimes what videos exhibit to us may be the comprehension or of the cameraman himself, sometimes even an intended perspective. As is shown in the movie "Forrest Gump", people can see that Forrest shakes hands with Nixon and Kennedy, which never happened in history. This fact shows that what we see in videos is not always accurate and convincing.这一段主要是讲拍摄时的主观因素问题。我觉得这个问题涉及两个层次：一是主观无意，即因为一些现场条件限制，记者不可能拍到所有发生的事情；二是主观故意，也就是设计、导演甚至是合成。建议作者在这里论述时分一下层次，阿甘的例子是属于第二个层次的，所以看上去有些突兀。
Furthermore, compared with written records, video records also own some disadvantages. Restricted by contemporary technology, recording materials of videos have limited nature lives这一句我不怎么理解，是指lasting time吗. As a professor of computer science of (in) our university once said (and I paraphrase) that electronic storage could be preserved for at most 50 years. As to written records, we all know that now we can still see the documentation of 2000 years ago. Also, videos need very complex instruments to record, to preserve, to read. On the contrast, a paper and a pencil are enough to write, and anyone can preserve it and read it with almost nothing else. What's more, video cameras can only record those things that are visual. If Andrew Wiles wants to record the proof of Fermat Theory, he would choose none other than written records. It is almost impossible for video cameras to record what in the proof. 这一段虽然内容较多，但每一条都明确简洁，赞一下。
To conclude, it is true that video cameras provide a more accurate and convincing record of contemporary life. Yet this form of documentation has also lots of disadvantages. Written records could not be replaced, at least in this era.
Issue007
"The video camera provides such an accurate and convincing record of contemporary life that it has become a more important form of documentation than written records."
一个问题：关于documentation的理解
VIEWPOINT: 在当前情况下，video camera 还没有发展到比written records还重要。
1. Admittedly, video camera 提供了一种比written records更加生动、准确、可信的记录生活的方式：可以记录下活生生vivid的影象video，是传统的纸介质所不能比拟的；例如：婚礼的记录，历史事件的记录
2. video并不总是那么准确和可信
3. video camera的记录还存在很多的问题：阅读和实现需要一定的条件，远不及写的方便（如穷苦山区）；video camera不能很好的提供一种艺术上的感受；文学作品更加需要的是手写，而不是硬生生的拍摄。 相比说来纸介质具有很多video camera不能比拟的优点：书籍可以很系统的记录一些东西，比如一个学科的历史；书籍可以提供video之外的一些东西。
拍摄/摄像
With the development of science and technology, now people have more alternative forms of documentation, such as written records, video records, tapes for sound records. Video camera, as a form of documentation, is widely used in the world. Are video records, as the speaker asserts, now more important than written records, for the reason that video cameras can provide an accurate and convincing record of contemporary life? I strongly disagree with the speaker's view.
Admittedly, to a certain extent, now video cameras provide us with an accurate and convincing record of contemporary life. The video camera is a way to record moving pictures of life. Compared with written records, videos are much more vivid and visual. Thus they provide us a more real world, letting our eyes to look on the world. For instant, we can use a video camera to record the full process of a wedding, the wonderful competition in the World Cup, the visual introduction of a new president candidate. All these are visual, not flavourless letters, at most adding few pictures, which is watched, thought and written by others on a paper. In this way, written records are indirect, while videos are more direct. In this sense, video cameras are a more accurate and convincing record of contemporary life than written records.
However, what video cameras provide us is not so accurate and convincing as someone thinks. As a form of documentation, video records inevitably involve some subjective elements of the cameraman. Thus sometimes what videos exhibit to us may be the comprehension or of the cameraman himself, sometimes even an intended perspective. As is shown in the movie "Forrest Gump", people can see that Forrest shakes hands with Nixon and Kennedy, which never happened in history. This fact shows that what we see in videos is not always accurate and convincing.这是艺术，是再创作，与真实准确没有什么联系，需换个例子
Furthermore, compared with written records, video records also own some disadvantages. Restricted by contemporary technology, record materials of videos have limited nature lives. As a professor of computer science of our university once said (and I paraphrase) that electronic storage could be preserved for at most 50 years. As to written records, we all know that now we can still see the documentation of 2000 years ago. Also, videos need very complex instruments to record, to preserve, to read. On the contrast, a paper and a pencil are enough to write, and anyone can preserve it and read it with almost nothing else. What's more, video cameras can only record those things that are visual. If Andrew Wiles wants to record the proof of Fermat Theory, he would choose none other than written records. It is almost impossible for video cameras to record what in the proof. 这段不错。但是好像只有阅读和实现需要一定的条件，其余的，例如，远不及写的方便（如穷苦山区）；video camera不能很好的提供一种艺术上的感受；文学作品更加需要的是手写，而不是硬生生的拍摄， 好像都没写么。这段应该是重点吧。应该多写一些把，深入一些把
To conclude, it is true that video cameras provide a more accurate and convincing record of contemporary life. Yet this form of documentation has also lots of disadvantages. Written records could not be replaced, at least in this era.
(492words)