[i习作temp] 我用中文写了一篇gre的作文，练习下逻辑和思维 [复制链接]

水果的夏天
UID：3022981

荣誉版主

Rank: 9 Rank: 9 Rank: 9

声望: 996
寄托币: 112
注册时间: 2011-3-5
精华: 1
帖子: 1791

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2015-1-27 23:12:26 来自手机 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

本帖最后由水果的夏天于 2015-1-27 11:14 编辑

The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things."

苹果砸在了头上激发了牛顿对事件的兴趣从而根据数年的研究终于发现了万有引力。梵高创作出伟大的画作源于他对向日葵，星星，周围普通事物的热爱以及持续的创作。瓦特对普通人家烧开水壶盖被沸腾的水顶开的事件的巨大好奇心以及细心研究，最后发明了蒸汽机。能出现好的想法或者对于某个事物有着更独特的见解不一定是在某个领域有着大作为人物，但是他们一定会对寻常事物有一颗不寻常的好奇心和热情心和坚持不懈的探索。

无论是发明创新的好观点还是艺术上产生的灵感都来源于普通的生活，同时只有随时都带上一颗会跳动的心。好的想法才会毫不犹豫的占领你的大脑就像圣诞节的糖果塞满了你的水晶瓶一样。热水袋在寒冷的冬天远行并不是一种明智的选择。充电暖手宝的出现比普通热水袋更加方便携带，即使没有热水也一样可以暖手。正是由于这种对未知生活领域不断充满好奇心的大有人在，才有人会联想到用电来加热热水袋来取代传统的热水袋。在平常的事物也一样会变成最大利用价值的宝物。

好的想法的出现有时候一颗好奇和热情的心往往是不够的，还需要持之以恒的行动力。如果说热情心是房屋图纸，那行动力就是砖头和钢材。伟大的发明家和普通人的区别在于发明家敢于把想法变成实践，而普通人仅仅是想法控制在一个空想的层面。Playwright 写出好的剧本源于他对生活不断的细致的观察，包括人物的情感，行为，心理。科学家能想到另一种捷径思路，在于他日复一日在实验室做着重复的对他来说普通的不能再普通的实验了。同时，只有真心热爱这些工作，他们才会认真的去做，细心的去观察，带着好奇心不断的去思考。这样，the best idea也离他们不远了。

在现在与大楼一样高速发展的科技社会中，我们为了让自己立于不败之地，为了好想法才会不请自来，创造力，好奇心，热情，坚持不懈的精神需要伴随我们的一生。还想法的出现同时也是为社会创造出更多的福利，使科技发展的更加快速。

打扰大家了，我用中文写了一篇作文，大家帮忙看看逻辑和层次，说服力，思维，欢迎指正，谢谢

相关帖子

回应
1

使用道具举报

tesolchina
UID：2191404

长老一袋

Rank: 8 Rank: 8

声望: 912
寄托币: 6214
注册时间: 2006-2-26
精华: 4
帖子: 2367

沙发

发表于 2015-1-27 23:55:14 |只看该作者

楼主选的这道题好难啊
从第三段开始就离题了因为题目说的是arise from并不是说只需要这个因此你扯其他的就离题了
至于前两段有没有扣题其实也有待商榷在你的例子没有看到passionate interest

ETS有篇范文可以看看

Sample Issue Topic:
The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things.
Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement above and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how those considerations shape your position.
Note: Sample responses are reproduced exactly as written, including misspellings, wrong choice of words, typographical and grammatical errors, etc., if any.
The following sample issue response received a score of 6:
Passion is clearly necessary for a truly great idea to take hold among a people—passion either on the part of the original thinker, the audience, or ideally both. The claim that the most lucrative subject matter for inspiring great ideas is “commonplace things” may seem initially to be counterintuitive. After all, aren't great ideas usually marked by their extraordinary character? While this is true, their extraordinary character is as often as not directly derived from their insight into things that had theretofore gone unquestioned. While great ideas certainly can arise through seemingly pure innovation . . . say, for example, Big Bang cosmology, which developed nearly all of its own scientific and philosophical precepts through its own process of formation, it is nevertheless equally true that such groundbreaking thought was, and is, still largely a reevaluation of previous assumptions to a radical degree . . . after all, the question of the ultimate nature of the universe, and man's place in it, has been central to human thought since the dawn of time. Commonplace things are, additionally, necessary as material for the generation of “the best ideas” since
certainly the success among an audience must be considered in evaluating the significance and quality of an idea.
The advent of Big Bang cosmology, which occured in rudimentary form almost immediately upon Edwin Hubble's first observations at the Hooker telescope in California during the early 20th century, was the most significant advance inmankind's understanding of the universe in over 400 years. The seemingly simple fact that everything in the universe, on the very large scale, is moving away from everything else in fact betrays nearly all of our scientific knowledge of the origins and mechanics of the universe. This slight, one might even say commonplace, distortion of tint on a handful of photographic plates carried with it the greatest challenge to Man's general, often religiously reinforced, conception of the nature of the world to an extent not seen since the days of Galileo. Not even Charles Darwin's theory, though it created more of a stir than Big Bang cosmology, had such shattering implications for our conceptions of the nature of our reality. Yet it is not significant because it introduced the question of the nature of what lies beyond Man's grasp. A tremendous number of megalithic ruins, including the Pyramids both of Mexico and Egypt, Stonehenge, and others, indicate that this question has been foremost on humankind's collective mind since time immemorial. Big Bang cosmology is so incredibly significant in this line of reasoning exactly because of the degree to which it changed the direction of this generally held, constantly pondered, and very ancient train of thought.
Additionally, there is a diachronic significance to the advent of Big Bang cosmology, which is that, disregarding limitations such as the quality of optical devices available and the state of theoretical math, it could have happened at any point in time. That is to say, all evidence points to roughly the same raw intellectual capacity for homo sapiens throughout our history, our progress has merely depended upon the degree of it that a person happens to inherit, a pace that has been increasing rapidly since the industrial revolution. Yet this discovery had to happen at a certain point in time or another—it cannot have been happening constantly or have never happened yet still be present—and this point in time does have its own significance. That significance is precisely the fact that the aforementioned advent must have occurred at precisely the point in time at which it truly could have occured—that is to say, it marks the point in our history when we had progressed sufficiently to begin examining, with remarkable substantiated acuity, the workings of the universe across distances that would take millions of human lifetimes to reach or to traverse. The point for the success of this advent must necessarily have been, additionally, the point at which the audience concerned was capable and prepared to accept such a radical line of reasoning.
Both factors, a radical, passionate interpretation of the commonplace and the preparedness to accept such an interpretation, are necessary for the formulation of a truly great idea. If the passion is absent from an inquiry by the thinker or by the bulk of an audience, the idea will die out if it comes to fruition at all. If the material is not sufficiently commonplace to be considered by an informed audience of sufficient size, the same two hazards exist. Given these two factors, the idea must still be found palatable and interesting by the audience if it is to hope to gain a foothold and eventually establish itself in a significant fashion.
Comments on sample essay receiving score of 6:
This outstanding response presents a cogent, well-articulated analysis of the complexities of the issue by arguing that (1) great ideas develop from commonplace observations that are interpreted in a radical way; and (2) passion is required of both thinkers and the audience in order for great ideas to take hold.
The argument is based on an extended example (Big Bang cosmology) and has two parts. The first part defines “commonplace things” as universal questions (i.e., the quest to understand the cosmos is commonplace, though complex, because it is an ancient and universal question) and places Big Bang cosmology in context with the scientific breakthroughs of Galileo and the Pyramids of ancient Mexico and Egypt. The second part explains Big Bang as the result of a convergence of factors: both thinkers and the audience must be ready to reevaluate “previous assumptions” and accept “radical, passionate interpretations.”
The argument’s careful line of reasoning is strengthened by appropriate transitions between paragraphs (“Additionally,” “Both factors, a radical, passionate interpretation of the commonplace and the preparedness to accept such an interpretation, are necessary for the formulation of a truly great idea,” etc.) and within paragraphs (“Not even Charles Darwin’s,” “Yet,” “that is to say,” etc.). Fluent and precise language—advent, rudimentary, diachronic, shattering implications, megalithic ruins—and effective sentence variety also characterize this response as outstanding. Finally, despite the presence of minor errors (overuse of comma and inconsistent use of ellipses in paragraph 1), this response demonstrates facility with the conventions of standard written English.

使用道具举报