寄托家园留学论坛 › 论坛 › 寄托学术类备考版 › GRE作文互动版 › issue8 第一次发帖，自认为英语相当不错，敢请牛人指教

返回列表

查看: 1304|回复: 5

[i习作temp] issue8 第一次发帖，自认为英语相当不错，敢请牛人指教 [复制链接]

poohpoohbear
UID: 2295693

新手上路

Rank: 1

声望: 0
寄托币: 11
注册时间: 2007-1-24
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2007-1-24 21:39:12 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

顺便问一句，怎么能缩短写作时间到45分钟以内呢？

8. It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public.

2007-1-24
586 words
13:45---14:49
64 minutes

结构:
开头
第二段Whether要保留信息，主要个人层面
第三段主要国家层面
第四段讲判断是否向公众保留信息的判断标准
结尾

I agree with the speaker that under certain conditions, it is necessary or even desirable for political leaders to withhold information from the public. Whether and when certain information should be revealed to the public depends on its characteristics and the politician's ability to handle the situation and his or her purpose.

Information should be kept only to the stakeholders whose interest are concerned. When some information is not relevant to public interest, completely personal stuff of a politician for example, should not be required or attempted to disclose to the public. For one thing, in the game of politics, opponents of a politician will take advantage of every hint of flaws they can possibly find and thus keeping the privacy to him/herself manifests itself as necessary for self-protection for any prudent politician. For another, public attention can be easily diverted from truly urgent and important issues by the mass media's intense coverage of a politician's personal life. It is consequently wise for a politician to say "no comment" to journalists about his or her personal affairs since this is in the interest of both the politician him/herself and the public.

Another reason why I essentially agree with the speaker is that when it comes to top secrets concerning public safety, diplimatic stategies or even national security, nothing is more crucial than keeping things undercover from the public for at least adequate amount of time to handle the case. If the police are plotting against international terrorists, or the government is trying to reorganize the nation's diplomatic network and building allies before adverse forces could react, their plans can be brought to abortion with ease if any information is revealed to the public before action. Although certain facts will sooner or later be brought to light, it is still crucial to keep it secret until the time is right.

Sure there are certain times when information should not be disclosed to the public, the general judgement of whether that information should be revealed involves the characteristics of the information. As stated above, a politician has the obligation of disclosing certain information if it is in the public benefit to do it. Even if the information in discuss relates public interest, a politician should make appropriate estimation of his ability to handle the situation before deciding whether or not to withhold it so as to avoid unnecessary public panic. The problem of the missile system in Pentagon involving Y2R in the first few hours of the new millennium would aptly illustrate this point. The information of malfunction was not disclosed to the public until later that day when problems had already been solved, which is quite probably a decision made on the base of top elites working at hand and previous experience handling similar crisis. In contrary, what happened in China when SARS first burst out examplifies how an overconfidence of a politician can block the way of important information to public awareness and thus lost control of this epidemic disease until secrets were unveiled.

In sum, it is the politician's judgement that determines whether or not to withhold information, which may consequently serve or threaten the public interest. So it is important that a politician with so much authority granted by the public should have unbiased and prudent judgemental ability and thus make justified decisions about the secrecy of information.

[ 本帖最后由 lastangel 于 2007-1-24 21:55 编辑 ]

回应
0

使用道具举报

最後の使徒
UID: 2257608

元老版主

Rank: 11

声望: 427
寄托币: 22408
注册时间: 2006-9-29
精华: 55
帖子: 644

沙发

发表于 2007-1-24 21:55:52 |只看该作者

发贴格式不对, 帮楼主修改了, 以后记得注意
这篇我定了, 改完回上来

【2025FALL】全站祈福已开放~~来领祈福章，求offer得offer

使用道具举报

buaahzf
UID: 2221540

新手上路

Rank: 1

声望: 0
寄托币: 20
注册时间: 2006-6-13
精华: 0
帖子: 1

板凳

发表于 2007-1-24 22:16:50 |只看该作者

拷贝到Word里先纠正基本的单词和语法误

天下之至柔，驰骋天下之至坚。

使用道具举报

最後の使徒
UID: 2257608

元老版主

Rank: 11

声望: 427
寄托币: 22408
注册时间: 2006-9-29
精华: 55
帖子: 644

地板

发表于 2007-1-24 22:20:18 |只看该作者

I agree with the speaker that under certain conditions, it is necessary or even desirable for political leaders to withhold information from the public. Whether and when certain information should be revealed to the public depends on its characteristics and the politician's ability to handle the situation and his or her (不用特意这么写, 看的正式论文和文章还很少见这么写的) purpose.

Information should be kept only to the stakeholders (这个是借喻手法? - -||| 对象指代不明) whose interest(s) are concerned.(这句话的意思是信息只能向涉及利益的人群公开? 表述得过于间接了) When some information is not relevant to public interest, completely personal stuff of a politician for example, should not be required or attempted to disclose to the public.(why? 论断之后给出分析再具体到实际情况) For one thing, in the game of politics, opponents of a politician will take advantage of every hint of flaws they can possibly find and thus keeping the privacy to him/herself (这个什么意思?怎么所有格还不一样...) manifests itself as necessary for self-protection for any prudent politician.(how does keeping... manifests itself as necessary...? 过于晦涩了) For another, public attention can be easily diverted from truly urgent and important issues by the mass media's intense coverage of a politician's personal life(how? 同样缺乏进一步的解释). It is consequently wise for a politician to say "no comment" to journalists about his or her personal affairs since this is in the interest of both the politician him/herself and the public(why? how does this "no comment" benefit the both? 需要对二者的利益以及拒绝媒体的理由进行进一步论证).(本段的论证过于抽象, 而且句子之间的逻辑关系不够紧密, 另外主题句是信息只应保留给利益牵扯的人, 而到后面展开却集中在政治家的个人信息层面上, 这样的展开对于分论点而言cover not enough, 情况过于特殊化了)

Another reason why I essentially agree with the speaker is that when it comes to top secrets concerning public safety, diplimatic stategies or even national security, nothing is more crucial than keeping things undercover from the public for at least adequate amount of time to handle the case. If the police are plotting against international terrorists, or the government is trying to reorganize the nation's diplomatic network and building allies before adverse forces could react, their plans can be brought to abortion with ease if any information is revealed to the public before action.(还是需要进一步展开, 比如public的成分, 为什么会abortion, 恶劣后果等等, 最好能有具体的例证) Although certain facts will sooner or later be brought to light, it is still crucial to keep it secret until the time is right.(then which time is right? 这句转折之后却没有相应内容论证, 出现在这里缺乏依据)(这段组织得很不错, 只是感觉缺了后半截, 作为段落开头而言很出色)

Sure there are certain times when information should not be disclosed to the public, the general judgement of whether that information should be revealed involves the characteristics of the information.(这段的主题句与之间的内容过度不够平缓, 缺乏一个连贯的逻辑层次. 因为之前对于什么样的内容不该公布已经有所论证了, 这里有重复论证的嫌疑. 如果是作为总览需要一个问句, 或者引导句来进行连接, 比如Then what can be open? 之类的) As stated above, a politician has the obligation of disclosing certain information if it is in the public benefit to do it.(主题句说characteriscs, 这里又说benefit, 二者虽然不矛盾这两句的却显得缺乏逻辑联系, 可以写明benefit是重要的characteristic.) Even if the information in discuss relates public interest, a politician should make appropriate estimation of his ability to handle the situation before deciding whether or not to withhold it so as to avoid unnecessary public panic.(这里这条显得跟BODY前两段是同一平行的逻辑层次的, 我感觉你这段作为概括性论述而言不适合再提出具体的不应该公开的情况, 因为之间两个论点就是在说这个的) The problem of the missile system in Pentagon involving Y2R in the first few hours of the new millennium would aptly illustrate this point. The information of malfunction was not disclosed to the public until later that day when problems had already been solved, which is quite probably a decision made on the base of top elites working at hand and previous experience handling similar crisis.(what will happen if it was revealed? 例证缺乏分析, 与论点不能很好的连接) In contrary, what happened in China when SARS first burst out examplifies how an overconfidence of a politician can block the way of important information to public awareness and thus lost control of this epidemic disease until secrets were unveiled.(例证缺乏具体的叙述, 如何lose control? 错误在哪里? 跟五角大楼的行为有什么不同? 可以指出传染病是涉及公共的无法靠掩盖来度过危机而导弹则是只有政府能解决所以不应该公开, 然后再对其进行总结说as long as the very situation is analyzed enough....来支持你的分论点)

In sum, it is the politician's judgement that determines whether or not to withhold information, which may consequently serve or threaten the public interest. So it is important that a politician with so much authority granted by the public should have unbiased and prudent judgemental ability and thus make justified decisions about the secrecy of information.

(总体而言语言不错, 论证逻辑比较清楚, 但BODY最后一段的展开跟前面有所重复, 缺乏发展, 对具体的例证分析不足, 另外观点的展开也不是很连贯. 加油~)

使用道具举报