issue4 [jet小组] 第七次作业

滴滴雨儿UID: 2392741

题目：ISSUE4 - "No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study."

Can any field of study make significant progress without outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field? I believe that any advances of a study cannot be fixed on the help of outsiders, but are complex results of various factors.

Firstly, it is necessary to redefine the word 'field'. A brief browse in the river of human history tells us that people classify their social work when productivity improved to a certain level and so did study. This indicates that though there are so many fields of study today, they may, to some extent, origin from a particular subject and will probably be continually separated with the progress of human society. A case in point is that physics, which was called exactly this name years ago, has already divided into several subjects today such as nuclear physics, astrophysics and classical physics. Each of these fields of study has significant advance and how can you tell it is because of the 'outsider's knowledge or the 'insider's of its own?

Admittedly, it is quite true that many fields such as biochemistry and social psychology have made great progress because of the combination of two or more fields. These hybrids successfully provide the society new investigation of the world for their new angles of view. However, we cannot conclude that every field of study can achieve breakthrough because of these successful examples. For instance, when Newton thought about gravity, did there an ‘outsider’ throw apple to him? What about Einstein’s Theory of Relativity? Even today there are only a few people understand his theory, then who could bring his or her knowledge and experience to Einstein to help him make the significant discovery?

Besides, according to the speaker, if anyone wants to make significant advance in his or her field, what he or she needs to do is only sitting at home, with a cup of hot coffee, and waiting for  ‘outsiders’ to share their knowledge and experience. Isn’t it ridiculous in that way?

What cannot be denied is that without the outsiders' knowledge and experience, making significant advance in the certain field may be delayed or somewhat become more difficult. This can be paralleled as two circles with areas in common. Each of the circles has their own areas but as a whole, the area is larger than any of the one. Absorbing knowledge and experience from an outsider may helpfully reach a higher step.

Actually, making significant advance in a field is not only a matter of knowledge and experience, but more of a cooperation of every cause it may concern. The accumulation of this field statistics, improvements of measuring machines, a new policy from the government, or the appear of another genius, may all help making significant advance.

[ 本帖最后由 滴滴雨儿 于 2008-2-16 23:55 编辑 ]

goldin2008UID: 2140085

原帖由 滴滴雨儿 于 2008-2-20 22:20 发表
嗯~你怎么知道啊?难道是校友?

我会尽快把前面的补上来..之前入门走了不少弯路..很多基础性的工作都没有做好..这篇是我写的第一篇issue,先是限时写的,后来改了些贴上来. 关于这个问题自己的思路乱乱的,后来看 ...

呵呵，不是，我是看你的QQ上写的WHFLS,估计可能是这个学校。我也是Issue写起来很难过，一直都是套巨型，难怪你说感觉像模板，不过我都是自己加工后才写的，我会努力改进，让你看不出是模板的：）

滴滴雨儿UID: 2392741

嗯~你怎么知道啊?难道是校友?

我会尽快把前面的补上来..之前入门走了不少弯路..很多基础性的工作都没有做好..这篇是我写的第一篇issue,先是限时写的,后来改了些贴上来. 关于这个问题自己的思路乱乱的,后来看到一个书上讲的提纲觉得比较有道理,大部分就按照提纲来了.但第二段中定义什么的是自己乱添上去的,看到这个题目的时候总是喜欢揪字眼,想到了觉得需要说明一下,但是现在被你这么一分析好像已经不是我的原意了.. 我本来思维就很跳跃,写作从来都是比较随性的,可能就会导致你指出的内容不符合主题了吧..

这篇我再想想吧.. 现在还不清楚自己真想要表达什么呢..

goldin2008UID: 2140085

你是武汉外语学院的？我看你前几次还没写，我也是前一段事多落下了，希望能互判下: )

goldin2008UID: 2140085

题目：ISSUE4 - "No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study."

Can any field of study make significant progress without outsiders bring(ing) their knowledge and experience to that field? I believe that any advances of a study cannot be fixed on the help of outsiders, but are complex results of various factors.

Firstly, it is necessary to redefine the word 'field'. A brief browse in the river of human history tells us that people classify their social work when productivity (was) improved to a certain level and so did(was) study. This indicates that though there are so many fields of study today, they may, to some extent, origin from a particular subject and will probably be continually separated with the progress of human society. A case in point is that physics, which was called exactly this name years ago, has already divided into several subjects today such as nuclear physics, astrophysics and classical physics.（加and so on因为这些只是对physics的下级学科的一些分类，还有其他。其实这些不是下级学科，比如classical physics只是与相对论，量子物理相对的一种对物理发展阶段的划分，不是什么学科，比如牛顿力学就被划为经典力学。呵呵，吹毛求疵了，我是学物理的，显呗一下，蒙下外行J） Each of these fields of study has significant advance and how can you tell it is because of the 'outsider's knowledge or the 'insider's of its own (这句话有问题，没看懂，你是不是想说没办法区分这些进步是outsiders还是Insiders引起的？如果是，我感觉表达有问题，这么改你觉得如何？And it is hard to distinguish which is the vital factor affecting the advance, outsiders or insiders ？注意句未用问号)?（这段是说学科会发展细化，而这种细化的实现也许源于outsiders也许insiders）

Admittedly, it is quite true that many fields such as biochemistry and social psychology have made great progress because of the combination of two or more fields. These hybrids successfully provide the society new investigation of the world for(with) their new angles of view(能这么说么？感觉怪怪的，像中文翻译过来的，当然也许是对的，如果你是看native speaker这么写的，通知我，我也记一下，呵呵). However, we cannot conclude that every field of study can achieve breakthrough because of these successful examples. For instance, when Newton thought about gravity, did there an ‘outsider’ throw apple to him? What about Einstein’s Theory of Relativity? Even today there are only a few people understand(ing) his theory, then(so) who could bring his or her knowledge and experience to Einstein to help him make the significant discovery（in Einstein’s time）?（这段是说突破有些不来源于outsiders）

Besides, according to the speaker, if anyone wants to make significant advance in his or her field, what he or she needs to do is(是不是应该用are，后面是由and链接的动名词，记不清了，也许是is?) only sitting at home, with a cup of hot coffee, and waiting for  ‘outsiders’ to share their knowledge and experience. Isn’t it ridiculous in that way?（小反问，继续强调outsiders没用）

What cannot be denied is that without the outsiders' knowledge and experience, making significant advance in the certain field may be delayed or somewhat become more difficult. This can be paralleled as two circles with areas in common. Each of the circles has their own areas but as a whole, the area is larger than any of the one.（这段话很文，但我没看出对说明outsiders有用帮助在哪，area大于每个小圈能说明小圈之间有帮助？） Absorbing knowledge and experience from an outsider may helpfully reach a higher step.（这段说outsiders有用）

Actually, making significant advance in a field is not only a matter of knowledge and experience, but more of a cooperation of every cause it may concern. The accumulation of this field statistics, improvements of measuring machines, a new policy from the government, or the appear（appearance） of another genius, may all help making(make) significant advance. (这段说突破源于多方面的综合)

总体评价下，语言总体挺好的，我不知道你写作时是怎么想的，反正我一般都是尽量用以前看过的句型结构来写，尽量不自己瞎编，胡敏说过要是你文章中句子大多是自己编的，对于一般水平的人来说，就离完蛋差不多了，因为中文思维不可避免，你要是感觉跟读中文赛的，那么顺，就说明你的文章不咋地了。我感觉你的问题在思想上（请允许我暂时把它称为问题，呵呵），不知你发现没，我在你每段最后都总结下主要段意，就是为了这个，你从首段说这个问题很复杂，突破由很多决定，不只outsiders。不过后面就出问题了，先用一个大段说不知outsiders还是insiders起作用，然后用了一大一小两段说outsiders没用，然后用了一个小段说outsiders有用，按照这些内容应该得出的结论是outsiders是没什么用的，admittedly 一下有用（但你admittedly用在说outsiders无用上了，而且之后没有however进行转折，让步是为了进一步说明前一论点，而不是强调反面，这就帮了倒忙了），但是你最后的结论为了和首段照应，却说突破是复杂的，有多方面决定，可是纵观全文，你没有写出这种复杂性，应该说outsiders和insiders都有起作用的时候，同时还有一些其他的起作用，而不是你现在这种写法。不知你意下如何。我感觉AW还是关注于思想，我每次写作业都很费劲，总花很多时间在构思上，写起来有总是想怎样遣词造句，很受罪啊，所以作业和评论都有点慢了，请见谅。不过可以在交作业后继续讨论，我觉得多讨论，重写，改写一篇文章，比天天赶着写n篇有价值的多。

[ 本帖最后由 goldin2008 于 2008-2-20 05:21 编辑 ]