[每日一评] Issue125 By C。-- 注意论述中的逻辑严密性

irvine666UID: 2575525

本期的每日一评来自C。童鞋的一篇issue,原文在此
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1052283-1-1.html

Issue 125：The past is no predictor of the future

There is an old saying in China that with copper as a mirror can be positive code of dress（这个从句没有主语...）, to people as a mirror can be advantages and disadvantages， to as a mirror can know the rise and fall of ancient.（墙裂怀疑是用翻译软件翻的...介词不能引导主语从句，所以你所有的动词都没主语...）

Indeed, to some degree, past can give future a good lesson. When people are making decisions, they would like to take every possibility into account（跟在ts后面的解释句子应当围绕ts的关键词展开分析，这里我没有看到你对lesson的分析。虽然这句话事实没错，但是写在这里只会让人迷惑你到底要写什么。喜欢发散的论述是Chinese的特点～）. At that moment, looking back is a good choice for that can help them avoid mistakes which have had before. （此处依然前后文联系不紧密，我们翻译成中文来看，前文说的是“追溯过去可以让人避免犯同样的错误”，后文说的是“从这点来看，这是在...的时候的黄金法则”，中间漏掉的是：“由于这种借鉴比起其他方式来说对决策的帮助更为有效”，否则仅仅是一个功能而已，说不定其他很多办法都可以实现类似功能，为什么会被称为golden rule?）From this point, it seems like a golden rule for personal determinations, companies’ politics, and even countries’ diplomacy. However, （仍然是逻辑跳跃，however之前讲的是“别人的”黄金法则，however后直接跳到了“我”的看法，中间缺少过渡，让人感觉到前后不一致，整个段落的连贯性受到影响）I do agree with the acclamation that the past is no predictor of the future.

C。童鞋的立场是赞成题目的观点，在第二段用到了让步反驳，即首先承认past还是对future有点用的，然后用转折强调自己的立场。
这种办法是一种通常的入手方式，但是有一个缺点：你必须在后文同时论述：
1.你坚持你的立场的原因（就是按照一般方法引申，发展你的观点）
2.（最关键的）你对让步的反驳，讲明你为什么用 HOWEVER的原因。 从这篇文章来说，要么就必须论述“past对future的借鉴意义并没有XX对future的意思大”，或者“past对future的借鉴意义可以由XX替代”。 否则既然有好有坏，而且说不定好的还多一点，凭什么第二段快结束的时候你说：HOWEVER,I DO NOT AGREE WITH IT?
这样会使这种论述方式更为复杂

There is a classical example just around us nowadays, which is the Copenhagen meeting hold（小语法错误直接红笔圈出，自己改） in December of 2009. More than 200 countries got together to discuss how to reduce the damage for our planet, which, that the whole world came together to talk an issue connected with each, had never happened before and no one had dexpected that would do. But it did.（COPENHAGEN Climate Conference 2009 已经是第15次缔约方会议了，怎么会had never happened before?）

这一段没有分论点提出，没有推论性的语言，直接扔出一个叙述性的实例，是无法证明任何东西的。

实例实际上是为论述服务，我们说一个观点得到支持，最重要的是这个观点是通过合理的推论来获得，并且有证据支持。打个比方我们论证一个观点就像盖房子一样，实例是柱子，论述是砖瓦。没有实例，最多盖个平房，但是好歹还能住人。没有砖瓦只有柱子，就什么都没用了

When the earth has been hurt badly without recuperative ability, human being（单数？realizes? they don't?） suddenly(when从句引导时间，与主句中的suddenly矛盾) realizes that if they don't take any mearures, the 2012 will come soon. No one can escape from the extinction while people are using the toxic chemical elements to improve the productivities, driving vehicles for going faster and more convenient, cutting forestry to get more mordern enjoyments. They do not know exactly how huge damage are being provided for themselves or, if they do, they have no idea how fast the result can come out.

虽然仍然没有说理性和定义性的文字，依然是叙述性的实例，不过我大概能猜出你的想法了：用一些无法预料的后果来证明过去无法预计未来。老实说，这是诡辩...

我还是举个例子，比如我想证明一个观点：某某身体很差。 然后我举的例子是：他不能单独搬动一座山。你认为合理么？
实际上这只能证明任何人都无法单独搬动一座山，同样的，你的例子也只能证明：任何东西都无法预计未来，而不是“过去不能预测未来”。不知道你能明白我的意思不

Coming back to the meeting, they feel panic even though they are all the elites of their countries. There is no such example that they can find out and follow in the past decades even the whole entire human being’s history. The pathetic thing is that, Maldives is disappearing in the disputes of those countries about who is going to reduce co2 emissions more and pay more money for that.

3段用来讲述环境大会，但是没有你自己的一点观点，这是说明文还是议论文....读者只能从你的描述中推断你的一些倾向。

There is no doubt that human being is the most intelligent species. They create their life from nothing. They walk from earth to other planet.（你是想说：创造能够造就未来？那么深入的论述呢？） Moreover, they see now from the future but not the past.（...这里开始彻底偏题了...这个题应该着眼于“什么东西能够指引未来”，而不是“过去和未来能指引什么”） We know this from seeing the past two most influenced world war.

The first world war had caused ten millions（tens of millions of） death and inconsiderable process and spiritual damage. We see the melancholy in a little child’s eyes when we read the last lesson, therefore the firestorm that leveled Hiroshima after the atomic blast in the World War II comes into our sight all the time. As what I’ve concerned, people still learned nothing from that horrible nightmare(这话说的...太不合常识了吧，尤其是你用的people,泛指) and put it on the show again without asking yesterday’s memory. Besides, people know clearly of war but still would like to take military action as their choice to make more destory. What we had be through last centry are showing all the time in the Middle East now in 21 centry. How can we confess that we can predict the future with seeing the people desiring for peace in the middle east still suffer the pain wars bring to them? （从过去的经验来看，正好相反，现在爆发战争的原因依然和过去一样：利益和宗教冲突。而且这例子和predict future没啥关系）

从你的论述可以看出来，你想推陈出新，这个精神是值得赞赏的。
不过在如何抓住题目本质核心和合理推论上，仍然有很多不足的地方。、
排开这个不说，从第二段来看，逻辑上的漏洞依然比较严重，所谓逻辑跳跃会让自己在考场吃大亏:rater跟不上你的思维跳跃幅度，自然会认为你在瞎说。

For the consideration about the biggest events those in now and the past, either the climate change’s issue or the war problem, I strongly agree that the past is no predictor of the future. When the destory of human’s civilization happens, we can not predict before because we don't mean for our current profits. We choose not sacrifice currency but the future, and the lesson we should have learned from the past.

123runfordreamUID: 2697608

谢谢66老大~
我得慢慢消化。

StefanaUID: 2143510

狂赞66，人工置顶。

ShaylenUID: 2700072

At that moment, looking back is a good choice for that can help them avoid mistakes which have had before.

个人建议for在句中竟然是表原因的话，前面加一个逗号比较好。

搜索了一下 for “因为,由于”表明附加或推断的理由，引导的分句前常有逗号。for分句不放句首，是用来附带解释或说明前一分句的原因和理由。
而且给的例句 如下：
Day breaks, for the cock crows.
It must have rained last night, for the ground is wet.
I won't go in, for my father is there.
He must be ill, for he is absent.

前面多有逗号隔开

这只是一个细微的差误吧 呵呵

个人意见 仅供参考

ringtailbunnyUID: 2579853

实例实际上是为论述服务，我们说一个观点得到支持，最重要的是这个观点是通过合理的推论来获得，并且有证据支持。
打个比方我们论证一个观点就像盖房子一样，实例是柱子，论述是砖瓦。
没有实例，最多盖个平房，但是好歹还能住人。没有砖瓦只有柱子，就什么都没用了

这才是经典的三段论啊。。。
第一句TS，第二句举例，第三句分析。。。

烟蓝纸鸢UID: 2931210

我比较想知道这篇文章能得几分啊？