寄托家园留学论坛

标题: 0610G同主题写作第八期---argument56 [打印本页]

作者: expire7 时间: 2006-8-2 23:57:55 标题: 0610G同主题写作第八期---argument56

[题目]
56.Collectors prize the ancient life-size clay statues of human figures made on Kali Island but have long wondered how the Kalinese artists were able to depict bodies with such realistic precision. Since archeologists have recently discovered molds of human heads and hands on Kali, we can now conclude that the ancient Kalinese artists used molds of actual bodies, not sculpting tools and techniques, to create these statues. This discovery explains why Kalinese miniature statues were abstract and entirely different in style: molds could only be used for life-size sculptures. It also explains why few ancient Kalinese sculpting tools have been found. In light of this development, collectors should expect the life-size sculptures to decrease in value and the miniatures to increase in value.

[翻译]
收藏家很欣赏Kali岛出产的古代等身泥土雕像，但长期以来不清楚Kali的艺术家如何能够以如此高的精确度刻画人体。由于考古学家最近在Kali发现了人类头部和手的模具，我们现在可以得出结论：古代Kali艺术家使用真人的模子，而不是雕刻工具和技艺来塑造这些雕像。这一发现解释了为什么Kali的缩微雕像是抽象的而且风格迥异：模子只能被用于等身雕像。它同样也解释了为什么很少发现Kali的雕刻工具。由于有了这一研究进展，收藏家应预见到等身雕像的贬值以及缩微雕像的升值。

[出现频率]
06年1-4月出现5次。加上05年一些统计，总共仅17次。相对于去年的7，8和9月看来也一共只考过6次。从机经上看，这个题目出现的不多，算不上高频率的题。不过有一点小小的难度。因此本期我们就这个题目作为argument同主题写作。

[题目分析]
结论很明显：In light of this development, collectors should expect the life-size sculptures to decrease in value and the miniatures to increase in value.由于有了这一研究进展，收藏家应预见到等身雕像的贬值以及缩微雕像的升值。
稍微注意的是，希望大家上考场以后不要紧张到把we can now conclude that作为结论就行。

第一句话，这里只是一个引子。高精度等身人体雕像。
第二句话，前提1和推论1。
第三句话，论据1和推论2。
第四句话，论据2。
第五句话，结论。

[逻辑关系]
（前提1）发现了人类头部和手的模具——〉（推论1）使用真人模型和不使用雕刻工具。
（论据1）等身雕像和缩微雕像风格迥异——〉（推论2）模子只能用于等身雕像。
（论据2）很少发现雕刻工具——〉（推论1）模子只能用于等身雕像。
（推论1）and（推论2）——〉（结论）价格会发生变化。

[详细分析]
1.推论1和论据2不一定成立。
个人认为这里的结论应该分为两层来批评。
第一个是上面的前半句。“古代Kali艺术家使用真人的模子”
作者的前提是这些人头和手的模型是用来塑像的。但是这仅仅是猜测，没有提供任何证据去证明他的论断。就算这些模型的确是这个作用，但并不能得出K的所有人体大小的雕像都是用这种方法制作出来的。毕竟被发现的也只是一些头部和手部的模型，这至少不能排除其它部位不用这种方式制作，或者说可能是和雕刻结合在一起制作。
第二个是后半句，”而不是雕刻工具和技艺来塑造这些雕像”。
攻击如下，因为工具有可能是因各种原因被毁坏了，或者仅仅是考古学家还没有找到而已。

2.论断的论据1没有说服力。
论者认为K的小雕像与大雕像风格迥异，而且都很抽象。这里用到了第一句话的引子，等身雕像特别真实。因此作者认为恰好因为小雕像无法用人体做模型，所以抽象。但是没有资料证明小雕像与大雕像的用途是否一样。

3.论断也没有根据，属于急于概括。
论者认为这个发现将使得大雕像价值下降，小雕像价值上升。这里隐含了首句说的作者自己认为的一个前提，因为人们不清楚如何做的等身高精度雕像所以觉得其价值大。不过也许价值大并不是因为人们对什么方法感兴趣。因为并没有提供任何资料证明用模型做的雕像就不值得研究，或是收藏家们对于人体模型不感兴趣，亦或是因此他们对小雕像的兴趣有所增长。

最后，请不要在这里贴自己的习作,请将习作发表在坛子里面,然后将链接贴进来.除了习作链接之外,更欢迎大家把对于题目的想法拿出来讨论,让大家分享你的独特见地。

发帖请按照置顶帖格式要求发，不然给与删除，不要哭。https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mo ... &extra=page%3D1

坚持不一定会成功，但是不坚持不会成功。预祝大家考个好成绩。

作者: expire7 时间: 2006-8-3 00:01:47

半天没有人坐沙发，自己坐。

作者: wp123 时间: 2006-8-3 00:06:50

晚了一步~

作者: wp123 时间: 2006-8-3 00:12:33

人都疲了~

作者: dicmi 时间: 2006-8-3 00:16:53

那你还抢两层~~~

作者: kito9695 时间: 2006-8-3 00:25:34

UP~辛苦了

作者: pewcg8 时间: 2006-8-3 08:07:52

Taken
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1

=======================================================
同主题第八期
ARGUMENT56. Collectors prize the ancient life-size clay statues of human figures made on Kali Island but have long wondered how the Kalinese artists were able to depict bodies with such realistic precision. Since archeologists have recently discovered molds of human heads and hands on Kali, we can now conclude that the ancient Kalinese artists used molds of actual bodies, not sculpting tools and techniques, to create these statues. This discovery explains why Kalinese miniature statues were abstract and entirely different in style: molds could only be used for life-size sculptures. It also explains why few ancient Kalinese sculpting tools have been found. In light of this development, collectors should expect the life-size sculptures to decrease in value and the miniatures to increase in value.

收藏家很欣赏Kali岛出产的古代等身泥土雕像，但长期以来不清楚Kali的艺术家如何能够以如此高的精确度刻画人体。由于考古学家最近在Kali发现了人类头部和手的模具，我们现在可以得出结论：古代Kali艺术家使用真人的模子，而不是雕刻工具和技艺来塑造这些雕像。这一发现解释了为什么Kali的缩微雕像是抽象的而且风格迥异：模子只能被用于等身雕像。它同样也解释了为什么很少发现Kali的雕刻工具。由于有了这一研究进展，收藏家应预见到等身雕像的贬值以及缩微雕像的升值。
题目分析：
论据１：archeologists have recently discovered molds of human heads and hands on Kali
结论１：the ancient Kalinese artists used molds of actual bodies, not sculpting tools and techniques, to create these statues
暗含假设：molds could only be used for life-size sculptures
推论１：miniature statues were abstract and entirely different in style
推论２：few ancient Kalinese sculpting tools have been found
结论２：collectors should expect the life-size sculptures to decrease in value and the miniatures to increase in value
批驳：
１．考古学家的发现也许只是所有Kali文物的一小部分，众所周知，历史文物由于各种原因，保存的不一定是非常完整的，所以考古学家的发现很可能是少数的情况．有可能很多工具在战乱中被损坏，或者没有发掘出来，（写的时候两个顺序换一下）．还有可能这些molds就不是来做雕塑的，是否可能是医生的模型？是否是从别的地方流传过来的，而不是Kali自己的雕塑？没有排除这些可能性，很难说Kali的雕塑家都是只用这些模型做的雕刻．
２．为什么Kali的缩微雕像是抽象的而且风格迥异，很可能是别的原因造成的．也许这两种的雕刻被用于不同的用途，一种用在皇宫的装饰，一种用在祭祀上边，那么祭祀用的小雕像肯定是比较抽象的．或者这两种雕像出自不同的艺术流派，造成了完全不同的风格．模子只能被用于等身雕像并不能作为这个的原因，而且其实模型的大小并不会影响艺术的创作，那时侯雕刻家也许已经具有了放大模型雕刻的能力．
３．等身雕像的贬值以及缩微雕像的升值不仅仅就能够由这个研究所决定．首先，做出这些研究的机构是否有足够的名气，或者这个研究成果是否被广泛的报道呢？如果这个研究结果很少人知道，那不足以影响这些文物的价值．同时，文物的价值不仅仅是由这些文物的制作手法来决定的，还由文物的数量，曾经的收藏人的名气，决定的．如果等身的雕像数量很少，或者一些著名的历史人物收藏过，或者微缩的雕像是很多的，并且模仿的是其他一些比较有名的艺术风格，艺术价值不如等身塑像高的话，这些价值的变化可能就不会发生．

[ 本帖最后由 pewcg8 于 2006-8-4 11:07 编辑 ]

作者: jojocute 时间: 2006-8-3 08:17:43 标题: seat

seat

作者: zhaobotju 时间: 2006-8-3 09:22:39

seated
虽然下个周二就要考试了，但还是想参加这次:)

作者: jojocute 时间: 2006-8-3 09:31:33 标题: seat

seat

作者: jingjingtous 时间: 2006-8-3 09:52:29

UP^_^

作者: WWWXXX2 时间: 2006-8-3 09:57:15

睡过了5555

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1

1。life－size全身都是用molds做的？
2。molds确实是用来做statues的么
3。style的多样不能说明miniatures不是用工具做的
4。作者的推论过于鲁莽

没有批判那个It also explains why few ancient Kalinese sculpting tools have been found

[ 本帖最后由 WWWXXX2 于 2006-8-4 11:49 编辑 ]

作者: runningpiggy 时间: 2006-8-3 12:41:56

UP。。。

作者: 清新氧气 时间: 2006-8-3 13:03:01

seats taken

作者: yvonnewhu 时间: 2006-8-3 13:25:04

坐一个

作者: hudifeng 时间: 2006-8-3 13:30:57 标题: 严重响应斑竹

早上刚写的
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D2

作者: cpuliuwen 时间: 2006-8-3 13:54:03

seat taken!

作者: 华19860321 时间: 2006-8-3 15:01:23

55555555555555我从还没做过，今天作一个

作者: jalline 时间: 2006-8-3 15:16:46

今天就写这个吧:)

作者: 渡渡鸟 时间: 2006-8-3 15:30:27

这道题挺BT：）

作者: qiwei19852003 时间: 2006-8-3 15:46:14 标题: seat taken

作者: Serendip 时间: 2006-8-3 16:31:55

seat

作者: 只爱小不点 时间: 2006-8-3 17:29:02 标题: 第一次发贴同主题，谢谢！

这是第4篇ARGU，时间还是用了很久，估计训练得还不够。基本是按照版主给的思路写的，请大家看看:) 作文总是被批很多语法错误，不知道这次会不会好点，有时候我真是打着灯笼都看不出来，汗～～:L

提纲：
1.molds的发现不能说明是被用来做statues的；
即便有联系也不能说明这是唯一的方法，从而排除tools和 techniques的可能性
a.被发现的molds只是一部分； b.没发现tools 不代表他们不存在
2.miniature的抽象和风格迥异也不能说明molds用来作statues.
3.认为statue价值会降低是unfair的

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1

作者: yogurt4 时间: 2006-8-3 18:27:41

我的提纲，过来支持一下，呵呵

1．等身塑像是模具做出来的。
发现了人类头部和手的模具——〉等身塑像都是模具做出来的。
很少发现雕刻工具——〉等身塑像不是雕刻出来的，换言之，是用模具做出来的。

攻击：
找到头部和手的模具，这样的模具数量是多少？如果只找到一两个头部或者手部的模具，能断定使用模具在塑像创作中是被广泛采用么？
另外，即使模具是大规模使用，不排除模具和雕刻的结合使用。只找到头部和手的模具，没有其他部位的模具。
雕刻工具的问题，损坏或者未被找到。比如，使用木制工具进行雕刻，时间一长，不能保存下来。

2．小塑像是雕刻出来的。
模具只能用于等身塑像:大小塑像风格不同。

攻击：风格不同是刻意为之。两种塑像得用处不同，所以风格不同。

模具只能用于等身塑像，这一句我觉得是默认。要攻击也可以，小模具做小雕像，小模具没有找到。

3．大小塑像得价格问题
作者认为模具做得雕像没有手工雕刻得值钱。即使大塑像是模具做的，小塑像是雕刻出来得，未必一个贬值一个升值。塑像得目的，最后单个成品得质量，具体得产地，都可能影响一个塑像得收藏价值。

作者: nostrum 时间: 2006-8-3 18:56:02

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1

祝自己考场上抽到这道题哈

作者: irislab 时间: 2006-8-3 20:25:24

提示: 作者被禁止或删除内容自动屏蔽

作者: fenghua9801 时间: 2006-8-3 23:01:14

斑竹，我的理解跟你有一点不同，跟你探讨一下：

（论据1）等身雕像和缩微雕像风格迥异——〉（推论2）模子只能用于等身雕像。

我的理解是两个都是论据，后一个验正了前一个。因为模具只能用来做等身雕像，不能用来做小的，那么小的就只能用别的办法了，这就造成了它的多样性。

如果按照你的推理，我觉得题目应该这么说：Since Kalinese miniature statues were abstract and entirely different in style, we can conclude that molds could only be used for life-size sculptures.那么题目中的explain如何解释呢？？

作者: dowhatdowant 时间: 2006-8-3 23:37:11

楼上的，我个人认为是
This discovery explains why Kalinese miniature statues were abstract and entirely different in style: molds could only be used for life-size sculptures.
你把它看成因果关系，觉得也无可厚非。
也许这里不能说是推论关系，而是是否有因果关系存在。

作者: fenghua9801 时间: 2006-8-4 00:02:17

我觉得如果是因果的话前面的的那个explain就好解释了。

如果是因果的话，那么后面一句我们可以不用看，来分析前面的：

This discovery explains why Kalinese miniature statues were abstract and entirely different in style.

这个发现是什么呢？按照作者的意思应该是等身雕像都是由模具制作出来的，那我们把它带到上面的那个句子，就成了：

等身雕像都是由模具制作出来的发现解释了小雕像的抽象与完全不同的风格。

那就很唐突了，个人认为不能看成因果关系

原帖由 dowhatdowant 于 2006-8-3 23:37 发表
楼上的，我个人认为是
This discovery explains why Kalinese miniature statues were abstract and entirely different in style: molds could only be used for life-size sculptures.
你把它看成因果关系，觉 ...

作者: yogurt4 时间: 2006-8-4 08:44:50

我先看一楼的提纲，觉得
（论据1）等身雕像和缩微雕像风格迥异——〉（推论2）模子只能用于等身雕像。
这个关系应该是反过来的（explain,冒号），但是仔细看原文，正过来反过来都说得通。
落实到攻击的时候问题不大，工具只能用于等身塑像，导致风格不同。或者：
正因为工具只能用于等身塑像，所以大小塑像风格不同。

翻译成中文看，因果关系可逆虽然看上去有点奇怪，但是习作的时候，这个问题可以忽略，抓住本质的东西就好。

作者: fenghua9801 时间: 2006-8-4 09:18:58 标题: 回复 #30 yogurt4 的帖子

工具只能用于等身塑像，导致风格不同。或者：
正因为工具只能用于等身塑像，所以大小塑像风格不同。

你的这两个不是一样的吗？？？

作者: xxxxzoe 时间: 2006-8-4 14:51:07

同意楼上的观点
本人也认为是因工具只能用于等身来导出风格不同的

第一次参加同主题,热切盼望大家的砖砖
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1

[ 本帖最后由 xxxxzoe 于 2006-8-4 14:53 编辑 ]

作者: morallrey 时间: 2006-8-4 22:24:42

敬请指点, 必回拍!

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-508470-1-1.html

[ 本帖最后由 morallrey 于 2006-8-5 23:46 编辑 ]

作者: yogurt4 时间: 2006-8-4 22:46:13

原帖由 fenghua9801 于 2006-8-4 09:18 发表
工具只能用于等身塑像，导致风格不同。或者：
正因为工具只能用于等身塑像，所以大小塑像风格不同。

你的这两个不是一样的吗？？？

恩，我先看77的提纲，觉得问题不大，写起来是一样的。
不过翻译成中文表示因果关系，你说得对，原文也是因果不可逆的。

我都没发现自己写一样的了，hoho，不好意思地说

:o

[ 本帖最后由 yogurt4 于 2006-8-4 23:20 编辑 ]

作者: fenghua9801 时间: 2006-8-4 23:31:23

斑竹忙的事情太多了啊，出现些minor problem 也是满正常的啊:lol

我也来帖我的文章：

提纲：
1 不能由发现了手和脑袋的模具推测出整个雕像都是由模具做出来的。
2 即使是大雕像是由模具制造出来的，不能推出那个时候的雕刻工具很少。
3 不能说大雕像价值会降低，而小雕像则会上升。因为他们存世的数目作者没有告知，而且收藏家的观点是否因为这个发现而改变也不知道

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... e%3D3#pid1768910268

[ 本帖最后由 fenghua9801 于 2006-8-4 23:33 编辑 ]

作者: hoogw2000 时间: 2006-8-8 11:41:44

argument56.

Collectors prize the ancient life-size clay statues of human figures made on Kali Island but have long wondered how the Kalinese artists were able to depict bodies with such realistic precision. Since archeologists have recently discovered molds of human heads and hands on Kali, we can now conclude that the ancient Kalinese artists used molds of actual bodies, not sculpting tools and techniques, to create these statues. This discovery explains why Kalinese miniature statues were abstract and entirely different in style: molds could only be used for life-size sculptures. It also explains why few ancient Kalinese sculpting tools have been found. In light of this development, collectors should expect the life-size sculptures to decrease in value and the miniatures to increase in value.

=======================================

I don’t think life-size sculptures will decrease in value while the miniatures to increase in value. Because of the only development of some archeologist’s discovery is not enough to support the expectation of the collectors. Fist I would doubt on the archeologist’s discovery. Even the archeologist’s conclude is true, however, basically, the value of the life-size sculpture and miniatures are depends on multi-factors, it is not only based on the author’s assumption that is how the sculpture were made, by molds or by tools.

Suppose those archeologist really did find molds of human heads and hands on Kali, did the archeologist date the molds? How old is the molds? Were the molds made in the same time with those life size sculptures? The author failed to answer any of these questions. I simply don’t know. How could I believe the archeologist’s further conclude that the life-size sculptures were made by those molds? What if the mold was made before the age of the life-size sculpture, or after the age of the life-size sculpture? In that case, the mold had nothing to do with life-size sculpture. Even they happened in the same age, only the molds of heads and hands is not enough to convince me that life-size sculpture were made by those molds. Did the archeologist find the exact mold which exact match one of life-size sculpture? We don’t know yet. What about other part of the body, if they were made by molds, then where is the body molds? Without these evidences, it is possible that the body part of the life-size sculpture were not made by molds.

Even the life-size sculpture were made by molds, the author conclude that the miniature were not made by molds is unwarranted. What is the size of the people on Kali? Are they smaller than us? The archeologist failed to provide skeleton of the Kali people to show us the actually size of those people. It is entirely possible that Kali people have the size with the miniature. Or the people of the nearby tribe are smaller than the Kali people, Kali people use their neighbor as molds to made miniature.

Even the life-size sculpture were made by molds, as well as miniature were made by tools, the author failed to examine other factors that could affect the value of the sculptures. Such as the quantity of the available of the life-size sculpture and miniature. Less available of life-size sculpture will increase its value. The good quality of the life-size sculpture also will increase its value. Moreover the age of both the life-size sculpture and miniature will affect its value. The older age of the life-size sculpture will increase its value. Very important is: the culture value of the sculpture represent is a very important factor to determine its value. The author failed to examine any clue of the culture value the life-size sculpture represent and the miniature represent. Without evaluate those factors, it is hardly to say which one’s value will increase or decrease.

作者: yvonnewhu 时间: 2006-8-10 18:45:41

TOPIC: ARGUMENT56 - Collectors prize the ancient life-size clay statues of human figures made on Kali Island but have long wondered how the Kalinese artists were able to depict bodies with such realistic precision. Since archeologists have recently discovered molds of human heads and hands on Kali, we can now conclude that the ancient Kalinese artists used molds of actual bodies, not sculpting tools and techniques, to create these statues. This discovery explains why Kalinese miniature statues were abstract and entirely different in style: molds could only be used for life-size sculptures. It also explains why few ancient Kalinese sculpting tools have been found. In light of this development, collectors should expect the life-size sculptures to decrease in value and the miniatures to increase in value.
WORDS: 515 TIME: 上午 00:36:49 DATE: 2006-8-10

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the life-size sculptures are expected to decrease in value and the miniatures to increase in value. In order to reasoning that, the arguer cited the mold being found on this island and the specific miniature styles together with the few sculpting tools found on the island. The arguer's reasoning seams to be appealing, while clearly examine the author's reasoning, we may find that unconvincing. The argument contains many facets that are questionable.

First of all, the author's evidence are insufficient to support his/her conclusion that the ancient Kalinese artist used molds of actual bodies, not sculpting tools and techniques, to create these statues. The arguer cited archeologists have recently discovered molds of human heads and hands on Kali. No sign to deduce that the molds found on Kali are for sculpture use. The arguers failed to mention any relationship between the molds and sculptures. And no materials are given to illustrate the life-size clay statues are made of molds. It is possible that this the molds are used for some other use such as making scarecrows which is of the same size as mankind to expel birds from eating crops. It also can serve to make models for sculptors to create their own sculptures rather than invite some real models. Moreover, conceded that the molds found this time are for the sculpture use. We can not conclude that all the statures are made of such molds.

In the second, the arguer makes an oversimplified assumption that the life-size sculptures are not made by sculpting tools and techniques for the reason that miniature statues and life-size ones are not with the same style. As we all know, the smaller sculpture is the more sophisticated it should be. So, the phenomenon why miniature statues are abstract is due to difficulty in techniques. Further, the use of these two kinds of sculptures is not clear to us, how can we deduce that the miniature statues are not made by the same measure. In addition, the author attribute the absent of ancient Kalinese sculpture tools to the conclusion that Kalinese use molds for life-size sculptures rather than sculpting tools. In most instances, the sculpting tools are of much value, and they may be stolen by some thieves. And it can also be destroyed due to some reasons.

In addition, the arguer commits "after this, and therefore because of this" fallacy. The casual relationship between the sculpting measures of ancient life-size clay to the increase in value of miniature statues is unwarranted. If the collectors are interested in such life-size sculptures no matter they are made of mold or sculpting tools. And there might be some other forms of sculptures. Therefore, this is a fallacious reasoning unless the author can provide persuasive evidences to rule out any other possibilities.

To sum up, the conclusion lacks of credibility. Regardless of who the author is, he or she has overlooked or chosen to ignore many aspects of his or her conclusion. To strengthen the conclusion, the arguer should give more evidences about the above-mentioned possibilities.

作者: sophia11280 时间: 2006-8-26 23:09:24 标题: 分析得真不错　顶一个

分析得真不错　顶一个

欢迎光临寄托家园留学论坛 (https://bbs.gter.net/)