wglxh的写作建议中篇：以修改galaxysong糟糕的ISSUE88为例

wglxhUID：152604

（文章帖：https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/showthread.php?s=&threadid=165694）

总体看来，这篇文章很差。但比我看到的论坛中的其他文章要好得多。观点比较清楚，逻辑也算顺畅。但是众多语言上的不足使这篇文章到处都有表义不清的地方。我敢肯定的一点是，在老外眼里，这是一篇让人摸不着头脑的文章，我也是凭借着汉语的逻辑才算弄明白作者的意图。
  但是，这是一篇值得仔细修改的文章。从中可以看出具备一定语言功底的G友在写作时存在的很多问题。其实只要多多练习和修改，作者起码可以写出5分的文章。斑竹的评价是过高了，毕竟这篇文章和ETS的六分范文的差距是本质上的。
  以下是我的一些不成熟的建议，希望给诸位G友做个参考。逐字逐句的“拍砖”还望作者不要见怪。个人水平有限，请大家指正。

1。In my opinion, the question whether technologies determine social customs and ethics can not be answered by a simple "yes" or "no". The key to its answer is how to interpret or define the word "determine".
第一段在意思上是个不错的开头，但作者的表达实在是不敢恭维。我想，如果是我的英文老师（老外，博士，出版过英文小说，英语报纸专栏作家）来改的话，他多半会划掉整段话，然后标一个大大的“Vague".
一。"yes or no"的说法很多余，注意whether的意思，并且看起来一点都不生动，十分别扭。
二。 “The key..."一句纯属”CHINGLISH“，根本不符合英文的表达，况且完全表达不出作者想表达的意思。建议修改：To answer this question, we must define the term "determine" clearly.

2.If the claim of the speaker just means that "the domains of technologies set the boundaries of the customs and ethics," I will present my agreement with little reserve. Just take sexism once overwhelmed throughout the main civilizations of the world for example.
In a long period before the industrialization, burdensome and risky manual labor is equired in most sorts of jobs and thus men, who had the advantage of women in this aspect, dominated the open world outdoors. The invention and application of spinning machine made a path to the modern society, in which skills have surpassed sheer
labors, and opened a gate to women who have become competent in many new kinds of work offered by developed technologies. In the process of this propound economic and social change, more and more womem found their power to claim new rights commensurate with their new contributions. So the domination of men in customs and ethics now declines in many of he countries who have passed the industrialization.

一、I will present my agreement with little reserve.首先，正确的表达应该是"reservation",其次，这样说没什么意义，整个段落都是显然的支持，改为更直接明确的说法会好很多。比如“I will agree with him."
二.时刻要注意时态，这在英语中极其重要：In a long period before the industrialization, burdensome and risky manual labor is (改was)required in most sorts of (去掉 “sorts of")jobs and thus men, who had (have)the advantage of women in this aspect, dominated the open world outdoors.除了括号中的修改外：
   "burdensome" 应改为“onerous",因为前者更强调精神上的负担。
   ”in this aspect" 指代不清，如果直译意思荒谬。改为：“ who have the advantage over women in strength and....(类似的词都可以）"
   ”dominated the open world outdoors.“ 什么意思？
三。句子的真正含义：一个句子当去掉其修饰成分（包括各种修饰补充类从句）后，应当表达一个明确的意思。The invention and application of spinning machine made a path to the modern society, in
which skills have surpassed sheer labors, and opened a gate to women who have become competent in many new kinds of work offered by developed technologies. 这句话表达了多少个意思，哪个是重点？两个主要意思都放在不起眼的从句中，能看得舒服才怪。
四.In the process of this propound economic and social change, more and more womem found their power to claim new rights commensurate with their new contributions。类似process,system这种词在句中出现时，所起的作用往往只有一个“凑字数”---即“废话”。改成“in  
this change"多简单明了。
五。So the domination of men in customs and ethics now declines in many of the countries who have passed the industrialization.
  四五两句话之间看不出什么明显的转折关系，两个可能的原因是：要不中间缺东西，要不四句应该表达“确实获得了相应的权利”这样一个意思而不仅仅是“found the power"
    "so"在正规的英文写作中几乎不用，想想吧，改成”as a result"会是什么效果。此外therefore等词都可用，所以不要SO来SO去，看着别扭。
  最后一个从句简直搞笑，“in many industrialized contries"难道不够么？


  太长了，所以分开写。作者无须难过，当初我自认为写的好的文章叫给老师批改后，从500多字删的剩下了50多字。继续努力吧。
  
  记住：It is more difficult to write simply, directly, and effectively than to employ flowery but vague expressions that only obscure one’s meaning。

wglxhUID：152604

再次重申,虽然这篇文章几乎句句别扭,但是是值得认真修改和总结的,只要继续努力,不久作者将会有一个飞跃.

If the assertion of the speaker amounts to that "given a certain set of technologies, a nation, race or group must has a single corresponding set of customs and ethics," however, it will exceed my support. In my observation, technologies provide options of ethics and customs for a society, but what choices the society takes depends on other factors.
  这段没有大毛病，因为太短。
  1、must has？？这是笔误吧。
  2、technologies provide options of ethics and customs for a society, but what choices the society takes depends on other factors.
   一、介词的使用稍欠火候，建议“provide options in ethics and options to a society"
   二、能用动词不用名词，改" but what the society chooses depends...."

"Science, by itself, cannot supply us with an ethic. It can show us how to achieve a given end, and it may show us that some ends cannot be achieved." This quotation from Bertrand Russell well illuminates the influence of the technology, the application of science, on ethics. Within the range of technologies, a society chooses what ends it wants. Since all nations share common basic needs lying in human's natures,we can easily find similar customs and ethics between  countries having similar technologies. Yet the other customs and ethics are selected for the sake of each nation's preference and character  
  Russell的话引的恰如其分。精彩！
1.Within the range of technologies, a society chooses what ends it wants.
  "what ends it wants"??唉。。。改！“a society chooses its desirable ends"
  
  2.Since all nations share common basic needs lying in human's natures, we can easily find similar customs and ethics between  countries having similar technologies.
  单数和复数的区别对英文很重要，有时候不止是量的差别。想想为什么电影《英雄》的英文名叫”HERO“而不是”HEROES“。所以:
  一、natures 应该是 nature.
  二、between 应该是 among.
  此外，这句话逻辑有问题。既然前句说是人类共有，后句为何要限制”共同技术“

3。Yet the other customs and ethics are selected for the sake of each nation's preference and character.
  一、用转折问题不大，但这个句子的结构使整个转折语气显得极其怪异。建议修改 yet 变成at the same time.应该还有其他改法。
  二、preference and character 应为 preferences and characteristics.查一下WEBSTER体会一下后边两个词的区别。

  还有,中间两段的不足之处仍然是处处存在,今天不改了.下次再说.

wglxhUID：152604

作者言重了.我也只是因为老被老师修理,所以就忍不住爱挑毛病.以后有文章多交流就是了.事实是这样的,"当局者迷,旁观者清",我自己写文章也老犯错误,但是坚持多写,多被拍.过一段时间后,回首自己以前写的自认为写的好的东东就有一种想上吊的感觉.不管怎么说,看得出你底子很好,多多练习,最好能找个有学问的老外多改改,将来一定大有可观.
   记住:这篇文章观点很好,但是再好的观点也要让人看懂.用简单的句子和词,千万千万!

wglxhUID：152604

对了,有些几乎是废词的词你觉得好(system,process)是因为你被汉语的思路限制住了,尤其是这个人们老爱甩文词的年代,好多人离了这些词就不会说话似的.当然不是一定不能用,但是不到万不得以还是免了.我一时想不到合适的例子,但起码你这句话用PROCESS是多余的.我老师的教诲:不要用general的词,尽量specific

wglxhUID：152604

作者多看WEBSTER,英文单词的用法恐怕要比汉语复杂的多.你想表达的意思对应的应该是这一条意思： one that is preferred,所以用复数

wglxhUID：152604

不好意思,昨天时间紧,没有仔细看原作者的回帖.现解释如下
1.1 “provide options in ethics and options to a society"? 为什么有两个option？我的本意是technologies provide a society with options of ethics and customs. 好像没有"provide...for"这个用法，真不知自己当时再想什么。
笔误笔误!provide options in ethics and customs to a society才对
2. between是为了强调两两之间的关系，至少初中时教材上有专门的一道填空题就是考这一点。莫非教材错了？或者是我推广得过头了？
一 正因为你的文章不是想表达仅仅两两之间的比较,尤其不是想表达"单对单"的比较,而是只要满足一定条件大家都可以放在一起"集体"比,所以不主张用between.
二 掌握不好beteen&among用法并不怪你,首先肯定的告诉你,如果你的引述没错的话,你的教材是错了,BETWEEN无论如何不表示数目上的"两个",十个放在一起用BETWEEN都没问题(顺便说一声这在老外中也是常见的误解),它突出的另一个意思,看一下WEBSTER吧:
   There is a persistent but unfounded notion that between can be used only of two items and that among must be used for more than two. Between has been used of more than two since Old English; it is especially appropriate to denote a one-to-one relationship, regardless of the number of items. It can be used when the number is unspecified *economic cooperation between nations*, when more than two are enumerated *between you and me and the lamppost* *partitioned between Austria, Prussia, and Russia Nathaniel Benchley*, and even when only one item is mentioned (but repetition is implied) *pausing between every sentence to rap the floor George Eliot*. Among is more appropriate where the emphasis is on distribution rather than individual relationships *discontent among the peasants*. When among is automatically chosen for more than two, English idiom may be strained *a worthy book that nevertheless falls among many stools John Simon* *the author alternates among mod slang, clich*s and quotes from literary giants A. H. Johnston*

3.we can easily find similar customs and ethics between countries having similar technologies.”看来这句有歧义。改为：we can easily find similar customs and ethics between two countries given similar technologies. 如何？
关键在于依据上下文,相同技术的出现是完全多余的,而不在于他以什么方式出现.

最后,建议不要使用金山词霸,除非查一些名词(比如花花草草,阿猫阿狗啊),有些汉语意思你一旦记住,写作时就想用,一用就发现驴头不对马嘴.那上面的解释错误实在太多了.

wglxhUID：152604

没想到刷新这么快,呵呵.关于我自己的文章,有两个主要原因我不发.一是因为我自己看着自己写的很恶心,所以不能拿出来恶心人.二是因为确实还有很多不错的范文值得大家学习,所以不要在我的文章上浪费大家时间.孙远的工具箱,ETS范文中很多都是非常好的文章,多读几遍比看我的破烂强多了.

wglxhUID：152604

观点之争,呵呵.实际上我同意你的观点,只是觉得这么写会削弱该句与上文的联系.只是语言问题.