[习作点评] 【NINE小组】第九次作业—by 玉米 [复制链接]

onco
UID：3114426

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 8
寄托币: 435
注册时间: 2011-6-25
精华: 0
帖子: 27

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2011-8-29 21:47:12 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

相关帖子 Updated by 2024.09.20

在跌跌撞撞中寻找前进的方向。

回应
0

使用道具举报

oyxj1551
UID：3150888

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 14
寄托币: 171
注册时间: 2011-8-13
精华: 0
帖子: 8

沙发

发表于 2011-8-29 23:55:22 |只看该作者

No one would deny that a government should take measures to eliminate hunger and unemployment. So when these conditionsinevitably emerge, a responsible government must take actions. The authorbelieves that one proposal would be cutting off the funding for the arts and usingthat money to help those citizens. Clearly, his belief is based on the premisesthat hunger and employment arise from the dearth of money（认为作者的推测是建立在饥饿和失业是由于缺钱造成的。然而这种推测是不令人信服的，因为饥饿和失业完全可能是由于其他的问题造成，但资金的投入是可以帮助解决问题的。）, and the arts aremuch less useful than those two things（艺术比饥饿和失业没有用？）. Those two standpoints sound reasonable,but they are not absolutely right. When in a specific circumstance, they caneven be wrong.（感觉有点像A, 在一个特定的情况下，它们就是错的，那是不是其他的情况就成立了？特定情况不能决定一般状况）

Firstly, hunger and unemployment are twocommon phenomenon that no nation can completely get rid of, whatever（no matter how） prosperousmight it be. Rather than blaming hastily on the funding for the arts, we'dbetter calm down and find the real reason behind the scenes. Most likely, it isnot the funding for the arts, but government policy on welfare or encroachmentof immigrants that leads to less public resources,（可以举最近欧洲的危机的例子，很多欧洲人认为就是因为大量的移民导致它们国家的失业等等问题。） which in turn increases the numbersof hunger and unemployment. In this case, to consider more on policies or lawsseems much wiser.（关于是否该改停止对于艺术的政府资助本身就是policy的考虑，可是按你的意思，减少对于艺术的政府资助和政策法律是不一样的对立的概念。矛盾）

To be honest, the market economy pursues themost efficient way of gaining fortune in a short period of time. In thisregard, the arts sometimes fail to cater to the tendency and therefore a lot ofworks fall into oblivion（因果联系不强）. Historically, true masterpieces, especially those withadvanced thoughts or revolutionary forms, were often hard to be recognized bycontemporary patrons. As a result, those great artists were poorly lived andrevered only long time after their death. Van Gogh, for example, sold only oneof his paintings and struggled all his life in poverty, but now his paintingsare most valuable. If we cut the present funding, we may torture another VanGogh, and perhaps force him to give up his dream of art. 既然你前面说一般大师大作一般难以被当时的人所欣赏，那么我们怎么来通过对于艺术的资助来帮助这些潜在的大师呢。还不如所有人提供食物，救济，更直接更有效，因为这些艺术家也以人民的身份被救济到。
我认为这段立论比较偏，而且论证也挺混乱，最好能从艺术和最基本的社会资助两者联系起来来展开，建议换个角度重写一段。

Additionally, funding for the arts does notactually contradict with improving the quality of life. （按我对于你这句话的理解：艺术其实并不与提高生活质量矛盾。可是，艺术本身就是提升生活质量的一个重要途径，人尽皆知。可你这边给人的感觉是有的人会认为艺术对于提高生活质量没有用处，而你来论证其实它是有用的，有种故弄玄虚的感觉。我想你的主题句是好是表达实际上艺术对于解决饥饿和失业的问题也是有所帮助的。在主题句后面的展开中，去解释，由于艺术帮助提高社会整体的素质，有助于解决饥饿和失业的问题）Although these artworks cannot meet our physiological needs, they can fuel our soul. The arts aremore like a magic that lift up our spirit, or enrich our mind. If everybody islargely benefited from the arts, the whole society would be equipped with goodqualities – a community polite, good-mannered and open-minded. This process worksnot instantly, but it will never work if we do nothing. Besides, the arts nowadayshave changed into an industry. As an industry, the arts can really earn money ina comparatively short time, and offer some jobs that can alleviate high rate ofunemployment.

In all, the arts reflect their value inmultiple aspects, and every citizen cannot live without the arts. Sacrificingthe development of art would be short-sighted and make the society even worse.The effort to eradicate hunger and poverty largely relies on society progress,and society progress, on the other hand, is deeply rooted in rich culture thatthe arts bring along.（结论中是不是应该有提 government funding会更围绕主题）
全文来看，你选的三个论点：对于艺术的资助不是导致社会问题的原因，停止对于艺术的资助会影响艺术的发展，艺术有助于帮助解决社会问题，其实是可以做文章的，但在每一段的论证中还是比较混乱，存在不少问题。

使用道具举报

onco
UID：3114426

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 8
寄托币: 435
注册时间: 2011-6-25
精华: 0
帖子: 27

板凳

发表于 2011-8-30 21:13:26 |只看该作者

2# oyxj1551

谢谢。意见很中肯。

慢慢消化一下。

在跌跌撞撞中寻找前进的方向。

使用道具举报

onco
UID：3114426

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 8
寄托币: 435
注册时间: 2011-6-25
精华: 0
帖子: 27

地板

发表于 2011-8-30 21:13:46 |只看该作者

The author's claim can be easily divided into two parts: (1) the deer populations have declined; (2) the decline is caused by their being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea. Since both of them are only based on assumptions, it is quite justifiable for us to suspect what the author claims.

First, it is dubious to assert that the deer populations indeed decline by simply judging from local hunters' words. Perhaps those hunters have the conclusion only because they see deer less often. But the possible reason might be their changing habitat or more skilled concealment, since hunters, after all, are dangerous to them. Without a scientific counting, it would not be so convincing to draw a conclusion. Even if the number actually declines, we have to focus on the level of decline. Naturally, a small portion of decline may be a normal fluctuation in the population.

The second claim is concerning the reason of decline in deer populations. While there are many other possible environment factors we cannot exclude, it could be rather arbitrary to attribute the reason to the failure of following their traditional migration patterns. The global warming, as it happens, acts as a multiple reason responsible for various phenomena -- the melting sea ice, the changing arctic climate, and the spread of deer's food. For example, it would be possible that the plants on which they feed no longer grow prosperously throughout the arctic regions, thus inducing a severe food shortage, and in turn makes lots of individuals die from hunger. Perhaps the deer populations still have the ability to migrate on ice through the way their ancestors having been going for years, but with the only problem of lacking enough energy. So we need more practical evidences in the status quo of their habitats.

While we simply put the whole incident in the realm of nature, it may easily to ignore the factor of human beings. We may boldly assume that, the decline of deer populations, are in fact largely due to local hunters' undue killing. And global warming acts a very righteous excuse for them to belie their guilt. In order to evaluate the argument, we have to know the approximate number of deer those hunters kill every year.

No one will know the actual fact of deer populations until we really launch a scientific research. Therefore, it would be too hasty to conclude anything without being proved.

在跌跌撞撞中寻找前进的方向。

使用道具举报