issue同主题写作第五类 8月20-21日

东扯扯UID：3763369

50) Government officials should rely on their own judgment rather than unquestioningly carry out the will of the people they serve.

Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.


Intro
The Government who has the responsibility for the development and harmony of society is required to make decisions and formulate policies mainly in three aspects—namely foreign affairs, resources distribution and livelihood issues. Given the fact that people do not have a comprehensive understanding about the first two cases and they cannot reach a consensus even on livelihood policies which they are closely associated with, I agree that government officials should make a final decision based on their own judgment instead of blindly follow the will of the public who are likely to lack long-term vision.

Ts1
Foreign affairs are inevitable for a country to face, which is so crucial that the Government need to depend on their own judgement with long-term vison rather than refer to the people unquestioningly.
e.g. sovereignty issues; international affairs such as economic cooperation and cultural interaction
Ts2
In addition to the politic issue, resources distribution is likewise of paramount importance and it is well-qualified officials of the government but the public who can consider it holistically.
e.g. funding distribution for researches; educational resources distribution; natural resources allocation
Ts3
While decision-makers are obliged to consider properly the voice of the public who are directly associated with livelihood issues, they should still take it as reference and rely on their own judgement to make a sagacious decision instead of blindly adopting people’s diverse and inconsistent advice.
e.g. rich people want more private clinics regardless of cost, while indigent ones desire public hospital and well-covered health insurance; similar conflict between public & private school; house issues


Ts3
While decision-makers are obliged to consider properly the voice of the public who are directly associated with livelihood issues, they should still take it as reference and rely on their own judgement to make a sagacious decision instead of blindly adopting people’s diverse and inconsistent advice. That is to say, farsighted government officials are supposed to integrate the public’s opinions with actual conditions and full consideration and finally make decisions and formulate policies based on their own professional judgement on such livelihood issues. If the Government unquestioningly follow individual’s will, they cannot make any decision at all, since that people from different background have dissimilar needs and it is almost impossible to reach a consensus. For example, upper-class people desire more private clinics regardless of cost, while indigent ones only want affordable public hospitals and well-covered health insurance. Similar cases such as public and private schools and house issues also put the government into a dilemma. Only government officials glean information from the public and then make a decision by their own judgement, can these knotty problems be well tackled.



Coherence & Cohesion Analysis
Model Paragraph
To begin with, I strongly believe that government officials should consult the public frequently and systematically before introducing important policies. For one thing, the government officials should always take into account the people’s opinions when developing relevant policies in order to better meet the needs of the people.  For example, before the Hong Kong government decides to tighten the ban on smoking in public space, it has run a public consultation for over 3 months to collect people’s opinions on this issue. A better understanding of what people think about the issue can inform the policy-making process. In addition, hearing people’s voices on the proposed policy will further legitimize the policy and make it easy for the government to later enforce the policy.  The ban of smoking, for example, would be much easier if the society has reached a consensus about the issue.

其实在看别人的文章和自己写作时都会下意识的注意cohesion和coherence，看下来也知道是否连贯流畅，是如何做到的，但真的要细细去挖具体怎么连贯的，去列lexical chains时就有点痛苦，不知道怎么去拆解这些。所以这篇model paragraph其实心里已经能把握它的C&C，但是实在不会像Simon那样列。。。就不瞎列了

点评楼下

首先，写了全文，赞一个。以及谢谢你的点评。

接下来，先按照格式点评一下。
1）提纲的框架是否合理？
框架没有问题

2）提纲所用的例子是否合适？
感觉ts1touch id例子不是很恰当，这个技术是科技公司把军方的技术应用到日常设备以及政府对军事保不保密是单方面决定的，和民众的关系不大。ts3没有例子，但对应的道理论证也有点单薄。

3）开头段语言方面有哪些问题？
个人认为，可以增加complex sentences的使用，这样看起来会比较简洁且连贯一些。比如intro的前两句话可以合并起来。同时可以考虑让句式丰富点，比如最后两句都是用while的句式，略显单调。当然其实问题不大。

p.s. 第一段中mundane的用法感觉怪怪的，可能不太对，这个词通常用作贬义且形容事物，你可以查一下，个人认为换成normal people可能会更恰当点。还有些细节上的我猜可能是打错了，比如Ts1中的w/o bcz和ts2中的prospective和后面的for government count on，ts3中第一句最后两个单句间缺了连接词，end没有adj的用法换成final/ultimate可能是你想表达的？
关于你指出的我的语法问题，我觉得应该是没有错误，Google里也不乏有这样的表述，不过你自己也使用了。（Ts2第二句）

看的比较匆忙，有说的不对的还请指正。