每日一评5。8 --今天是angeikim 来评

angeikimUID：4857

蛋蛋家里有点事情，大概有一阵子要我代她了。可能这其中黑狐狸老大一会出马相助。今天我先暂时贴一个，水平不高，大家见谅吧就，凑合着看吧[/COLOR]
[B]Issue38
"In the age of television, reading books is not as important as it once was. People can learn as much by watching television as they can by reading books." [/B]

这个题目的意思我想大家都知道了也不用我多说了，但是这个题目里面出现一个对比，就是把TV和书也就是传统的阅读方式来进行一个对比。AT THE FIRST GLANCE，好象感觉是没什么深意的，但是其实这个题目涉及到了关于现在的视觉技术运用在现实生活中的对人实际产生的影响，而这个题目提出了一个方面，也就是对传统的阅读方式也就是书籍阅读的影响。这个题目也是主要对两个方式的在学习方面产生的影响，到底是书籍更好还是电视这种方法更好。是可以一个代替另外一个，还是两个可以互补，相得益彰。
下面我们再来看看这篇文章的作者是怎么确立自己的角度来阐述这个题目的。
[/COLOR]
The speaker contends that people learn just as much from watching television as by reading books, and therefore that reading books is not as important for learning as it once was.
作者首先来了个题目的阐述，这个是一般的传统开头的形式。大家写的时候可以不拘泥于某个固定的格式。鼓励创新。但是是有价值有意义的创新。这样比较吸引读者来继续阅读。这个也是ETS看的一个方面。[/COLOR]I strongly disagree. 列出自己的观点了--不同意。[/COLOR]
I concede that in a few respects television, including video, can be a more efficient and effective means of learning. 部分肯定，没有绝对化，好。[/COLOR]In most respects, however, these newer media serve as poor substitutes for books when it comes to learning. 提出自己的看法来了--Poor substitutes。[/COLOR]

总的来说这个开头是个中规中居的开头。也不够新颖也不特别。但是很简洁，直截了当。当你对自己的语言或者写作能力不是很有把握来个创新的时候，这个不失为一种好的办法。[/COLOR]

Admittedly, television holds certain advantages over books for imparting certain types of  knowledge. 来个部分肯定，说是有好处的。其中里面的‘certain type of knowledge ‘就暗示下面会具体展开进行叙述说到底有什么，哪几种影响和好处。[/COLOR]
For the purpose of documenting and conveying temporal, spatial events and experiences, film and video generally provide a more accurate and convincing record than a book or other written account. For example, it is impossible for anyone, no matter how keen an observer and skilled a journalist, to recount in complete and objective detail such events as a
Ballanchine ballet—BALLANCHINE是最负盛名的现代芭蕾编舞家巴兰钦(George Balanchine）[/COLOR], or the scene at the intersection of Florence and Normandy streets during  the 1992 Los Angeles riots---洛杉矶1992年暴乱.[/COLOR] Besides, since the world is becoming an increasingly eventful place—这个大家是不是注意一下，以后又多了一个形容世界的办法。除了MATERIAL WORLD了啥的以外,[/COLOR] with each passing day it becomes a more onerous—这个俺查字典了，不认识本来，有麻烦的有压力的，难以负担的意思--[/COLOR] task for journalists, authors, and book publishers to recount these events, and disseminate them in printed form. Producers of televised broadcasts and videos have an inherent advantage in this respect. TV的优势被引出来了。[/COLOR] Thus the speaker's claim has some merit when it comes to arts education and to learning about modern and current events. 从教学这个方面来说TV还是有好处的。部分肯定。[/COLOR]

However---最普通的转折词，来个个信号。下面要说不同意见也就是作者自己的不同意的原因要出来了--[/COLOR], the speaker overlooks several respects m which books are inherently superior to television as a medium for learning. –从学习的媒介来说起 [/COLOR]Watching television or a video is no indication that any significant learning is taking place; the comparatively passive nature of these media can render them ineffectual in the learning process. Also, books are far more portable than television sets. Moreover, books do not break, and they do not depend on electricity, batteries, or access to airwaves or cable connections--- U of which may or may not be available in a given place. Finally, the effort required to read actively imparts a certain discipline which serves any person well throughout a lifetime of learning.
这一个段落是作者一条一条的罗列书籍在教学方面的好处，没有具体展开。。只是一个概述。[/COLOR]

The speaker also ignores the decided tendency on the part of owners and managers of television media to ffiter information in order to appeal to the widest viewing audience, and thereby maximize profit. And casting the widest possible net seems to involve focusing on the sensational---that is, an appeal to our emotions and baser instincts rather than our intellect and
reasonableness. The end result is that viewers do not receive complete, unfiltered, and balanced information, and therefore cannot rely on television to develop informed and intelligent opinions about important social and political issues.
这个部分是从目的来说的。作者自己的看法是电视的目的就是为了PROFITS，而忽视了人。但是作者的这个逻辑我个人认为太过片面而且又没有例子支持，就得出个结论说通过电视人是无法得到一个非常INTELLIGENT的观点想法的。这个结论太过绝对了。个人不支持这样来写。除非你可以证明自己观点，否则有绝对化的嫌疑。打折扣。[/COLOR]

Another compelling argument against the speaker's claim has to do with how well books and television serve their respective archival functions. Books readily enable readers to review and cross-reference material, while televised broadcasts do not. Even the selective review of
videotape is far more trouble than it is worth, especially if a printed resource is also available. 这个理由不能够绝对成立。
Moreover, the speaker's claim carries the implication that all printed works, fiction and non-fiction alike, not transferred to a medium capable of being televised, are less significance as a result. This implication serves to discredit the invaluable contributions of all the philosophers, scientists, poets, and others of the past, upon whose immense shoulders society
stands today. 这个半个段落是说从题目本身来驳斥。但是我不认为作者理解的非常正确。我们来回顾一下题目，题目中只是说，reading books is not as important as it once was. People can learn as much by watching television as they can by reading books。这里面就出来另外一个问题了，你对题目的理解是不是真的可以达到100%。这个我欢迎大家跟贴说你的自己对题目的理解和对这个作者写的对题目的理解的一个自己的看法。[/COLOR]

A final argument that books are made no less useful by television has to do with the experience of perusing the stacks in a library, or even a bookstore. Switching television channels, or even scanning a video library, simply cannot duplicate this experience. Why not?
Browsing among books allows for serendipity--unexpectedly coming across an interesting and informative book while searching for something else, or for nothing in particular. Moreover, browsing through a library or bookstore is a pleasurable sensory experience for many people--an experience that the speaker would have us forego forever.
这个结论俺不敢苟同，俺就很害怕到图书馆找书，尤其是一个一个书架翻过来脑子都糊了，灰又那么大，好脏的。所以现在不都用电脑来做索引搜索直接就PICK UP就好了。又省时间。[/COLOR]
In sum, television and video can be more efficient than books as a means of staying abreast of current affairs, and for education in the arts that involve moving imagery. However, books facilitate learning in certain ways that television does not and cannot. 这个方面这个作者在行文过程当中没有进行充分的阐述，几乎没什么论证。[/COLOR] In the final analysis, the optimal approach is to use both media side by side--television to keep us informed and to provide moving imagery, along with books to provide perspective and insight on that information and imagery. 这个是说来了联合，两个要结合来做。[/COLOR]

来个小结。这个文章，作者一共写了780多字，要是在考试的时候能写出来600已经算是思维敏捷了，所以这个字数大家不用太在意。
这个文章如果要是我来给分数也就给个4。5就够了，理由很简单，这个文章阐述的不够透彻，思维不够严谨，语言一般，虽然没有语法上大的错误，但是算不上是一篇精彩的文章。也就看看当个参考就够了。而且文章行文里面作者出现了很多绝对化的问题。如果有例子来支持或者来个精彩的论证也可以，但是都是说说就过，这个是绝对对分数有影响的。
我们平时说的思辩，不怕你是错的就是怕你说不清楚说不正确。思辩是什么，是你只要可以说说的好，错的也可以让别人同意是对的那么你就是成功的。但是如果你自己没有这个水准那么就还是老老实实中规中居的写你的文章，来个两面分析最后来个结合。如果语言运用的好，并且里面又能够体现出来你的一定的思维水准那么最起码也会有个5分给你。[/SIZE] [/COLOR]

SMMUID：106624

"In the age of television, reading books is not as important as it once was. People can learn as much by watching television as they can by reading books."

这两句话可不可以理解为是因果关系？因为People can learn as much by watching television as they can by reading books.所以In the age of television, reading books is not as important as it once was。
如果同意，那就是既同意因也同意果。
如果不同意，那可以同意因、不同意果（如本文，可说话多些呢）或者因果都不同意。这样在驳斥时可有针对性地驳斥。

[Moreover, the speaker's claim carries the implication that all printed works, fiction and non-fiction alike, not transferred to a medium capable of being televised, are less significance as a result. This implication serves to discredit the invaluable contributions of all the philosophers, scientists, poets, and others of the past, upon whose immense shoulders society
stands today. 这个半个段落是说从题目本身来驳斥。但是我不认为作者理解的非常正确。我们来回顾一下题目，题目中只是说，reading books is not as important as it once was. People can learn as much by watching television as they can by reading books。这里面就出来另外一个问题了，你对题目的理解是不是真的可以达到100%。这个我欢迎大家跟贴说你的自己对题目的理解和对这个作者写的对题目的理解的一个自己的看法。]

从实际角度出发，这也似乎可以接受了。我觉得对于我而言，考场上能present很多东西已经不易了，很难做到滴水不漏。另外speker首先认为In the age of television, reading books is not as important as it once was为真。也可以说the speaker's claim carries the implication that all printed works are less significance as a result.

thanks to angeikim for your helpful work.

angeikimUID：4857

你对题目的理解，我觉得很好。可以这样部分来驳斥。:)
我个人认为这个题目实际上只是说TV的重要性提高了，而相对的书籍对学习方面的影响似乎是变得less important了。但是并没有否定书籍。所以当这个文章的作者出来类似的否定书籍的看法而且是从题目推出来的时候，我个人认为这个就是有理解上的问题。
关于这个文章我看了以后虽然也给了自己的看法并且给了相应的分数，但是我打的是过低的。因为要考虑到presenting your thoughts还有一个是在testing time 里，所以实际上能出来这个水准已经不错了。
但是如果前期可以进行比较好的预习工作的话，这样的文章也并不是算的好的。而且这个文章的结构，个人认为不是很紧凑。论据不充分，有绝对化，不够客观，不够严谨。如果要追求高分数，一定要超越这个阶段的。

chilliUID：14746

我个人觉得books也应该包括e-books.
Television提供的东西毕竟是非常有限的，远不如books提供的这么多，这么全。另外，Television的时间是受限制的。不知道现在的网络television是不是也算television, 呵呵

angeikimUID：4857

对哦，这个含义定义的很模糊的，界限怎么划，完全看你自己如何理解。
对，E-BOOK也是一个方面;)

大家一起讨论，范围就慢慢扩大了。大家以后多参与哦。:)

angeikimUID：4857

最初由 chilli 发表
[B]我个人觉得books也应该包括e-books.
Television提供的东西毕竟是非常有限的，远不如books提供的这么多，这么全。另外，Television的时间是受限制的。不知道现在的网络television是不是也算television, 呵呵 [/B]

现在不是有网络即时点播嘛，这个也完全不受限制的说。

天地无用UID：112318

题目给出的大前提是In the age of television
而且比较的重点也是People can learn as much... as ...
我觉得重点应该可以展开到 learn 的媒介,不用死抓住television和book这两个单词,computer, media, film 都是很有料,能拽出很多而且也比较好写的.

angeikimUID：4857

你可以自己适当的进行扩展，但是题目的主要限定了方向就是这两个。
所以你可以在主要进行这两个方面的讨论的同时来个扩展。
但是不要偏离中心。

或者你把自己的具体想法/提纲列出来看看是不是可行。但我个人认为，这个题目确实是限定了范围给你的。