- 最后登录
- 2018-7-30
- 在线时间
- 596 小时
- 寄托币
- 22408
- 声望
- 427
- 注册时间
- 2006-9-29
- 阅读权限
- 175
- 帖子
- 644
- 精华
- 55
- 积分
- 23915
- UID
- 2257608
   
- 声望
- 427
- 寄托币
- 22408
- 注册时间
- 2006-9-29
- 精华
- 55
- 帖子
- 644
|
正面观点文章示例
红色为原文有问题的地方
蓝色为我的批注
原贴地址:http://bbs.gter.ce.cn/bbs/thread-605185-1-1.html
习作作者:alive1986
Anyone has his or her own extent to perceive the world, deep or surface, vague or explicit. The views about the world (Such views 与前文衔接,简洁为好) are based on their own knowledge about academic disciplines, people with more knowledge may understand the world more clearly.(这里的因果关系并不强烈, 前面在说不同的人知识不同而眼光不同, 后面却直接跳到了同一人知识不同眼光不同, 对于"studying academic disciplines"这个概念并没有突出, 由于你重复的部分还是作者用了比喻的那句, 所以这种关系就更加隐晦了. 主题句中需要加入从句对"different eyes"进行解释.) So I strongly agree with the author's point of view that through studying academic disciplines, we can see the same world with different eyes.
Before we study academic discipline(s), we can only see the phenomena (what phenomena?) just on surface, but after learning such discipline, we have the ability to understand the principle(what principle? reason? relation? 具体解释) of the phenomena and can see things deeply.(作为主题句而言缺乏补充, 直接从论点跳到论据, 缺少了论证, 这样不利于别人了解你这个论点的出发点, 为什么只能看到表面现象? 学术知识如何让我们看到深层次? 应该说明: 学术知识的研究范围, 没有学术知识的人认识世界的方式等等) For example, without the knowledge about the law of relative motion, hardly can we sense that how funny (这词用得不太妥当, 后面也看不出是funny, 只是错误而已) we had thought before. Formerly, when we were in a car and saw things out of the window were moving, we might consider that they were really motive. Yet now, we are finally wise up the fact that the things moving is just because the car moving, we put the car as the reference. With this law, motion and quiescence are contacted together, moreover, from this theory, Marx summarized an important philosophical principle, which can help people to realize the world and human more explicit. (划线这句过于泛泛, 运动定律的好处解释得并不完全, 特别是没有对应到surface, deep, alter the way, perceive the world这些关键词上, 故显得缺乏说服力.)
And the study of an academic discipline not only can deep our thoughts, but also has the ability to alter our angle of seeing the same case, and in this way, to be helpful for the society.(前后逻辑关系不明, 前面在说视角, 后面跳到了因无知而恐惧, 这二者得关系是?) Sometimes, we are afraid of something just for our ignorance.(对于主题句展开得不够而且不恰当, 什么视角? 它们与深度的区别是什么? 跟无知造成恐惧又有什么关系? 都缺乏说明, 这时引用例子, 例子也会显得支持点不明而无所适从.) Here we can cite a normal phenomenon as an example. Many people fear death, as for them, that is inacceptable. Actually, people who have studied principle of biology are able to know that death is merely a usual thing of the nature, just as an ordinary flu for people. In this case, with the academic disciplines, we can see death in a completely different angle (what angle? 这里说得并不明确, 也看不出和deep and surface的区别) and solve many problems existing in the society, such as finding a kind of medicine which can make people live forever (这个能算是solve social problems么? 人都不死了恐怕社会问题才会更加严重吧...). People's opinions are the signal about the standard of society (这句太晦涩了, signal指什么? standard是指什么? 跟之前的角度又有什么关系?), if all people have a calm and scientific attitude for anything, it is possible for the society to develop with a rapid pace. (总的来说这段的定位不够明确, 因为采用什么样的角度跟认识到怎样的深度严格来讲并没有太明显的差异, 论证的时候需要小心区分, 结果你却没有区分开来, 所以这段的论述就显得没有方向, 到最后又说到态度上去了. 这段与body第一段可以说是内容有所重叠, 我们可以说, 从学术的角度来认识事物就是把事物认识得更深入更正确才对.)
In addition, it is likely for us to foresee the trend of development in the field of such discipline correctly due to plenty information about it. The earth has developed from only a planet (现在就不是a planet了么? 从后面写的来看这里应该是uncivilized planet) to today's beautiful hometown, including many creations and inventions (发生创造? 跟美丽家园又有什么关系? 所指不清, 用manmade wonders and implements这种具象的词指代会比较好). Such creations and inventions must base on the study of relative academic discipline. Such as with the physical knowledge about the air, we could invent plane; with the chemic information about the nuclear, we had the ability to invent nuclear weapon.(主题句与例证不对应. 主题句在说我们可以预知未来的发展, 例子却在说新发明新创造, 这是在改变而不是预知, 二者的逻辑关系断裂. 对于例证的事物也缺乏分析, plane如何改变世界, nuclear weapon如何改变世界, 用一两句同位语就可以说清楚) So everything in the modern world should inspire by the knowledge of relative discipline, with such discipline, we can see the same world with a long view or plan.(这段的论点比较独立, 但内部的论证却显得很凌乱, 论点得不到有力的支持, 也缺乏具体的解释.)
Above all, academic disciplines are just like a key, to open the scientific gate and bring us a brighter world. With studying of academic disciplines, we can see the world deeply and explicitly, which is beneficial for us to understand and develop our society. And at the same time, we can use a scientific eye to measure existed deed, which may give us a healthier and better mood.
|
总评:
文章的语言过关, 层次比较清楚, 但在论证的过程中有很多问题:
1, 段落之间的结构关系不明确, 没有并列, 递进之类的逻辑关系, 也没有相互补充, 深入的联系, 每段与中心论点都缺乏点题的句子, 所以文章整体比较散乱.
2, 段落中的论证, 例证不能很好地发挥作用, 因为对它缺乏分析, 加上有些例子跟主题句本来就对不上, 结果是分论点也缺乏说服力.
3, 出现了很多指代不明的名词和说法, 象social problem, angle, 由于之后的例证也没有把它们说清楚, 所以使文章显得比较空泛.
|
这篇文章也反映出采用正面观点容易犯的错误:
1, 同总评中的1, 分论点间差异不清晰, 取的论点之间有相互的重合, 导致车轱辘话来回说, 不同的段落在说同一个问题
2, 对于academic descipline缺乏分析, 使文章缺乏深度. 通常情况下对于ISSUE中概念比较明确的元素我们可以采用直接使用的方法来处理, 但对于一些涉及到论证而概念比较庞大的元素, 就需要进行一定分析. 比如这里的academic descipline, 说明了它是干什么的才能论证它怎样改变我们看世界的角度.
3, 对于the same world没有对应, 没有强调认识改变而世界不变的对比. 这样导致的后果就是本文BODY第三部分中那样的例证偏离主题句的问题, 里面已经开始改变世界了, 但中心论点里世界还没变.
感谢alive1986同学的文章, 希望以上做的点评对大家都能有所帮助. 也希望各位看下别人的文章, 有什么优点该怎么学习, 有什么缺点该如何避免, 只有这样才能提高自己的作文水平, 单纯地埋头把习作写出来贴出来是没有什么意义地.
[ 本帖最后由 lastangel 于 2007-2-8 10:37 编辑 ] |
|