ISSUE13 [REBORN FROM THE ASHES] TASK ONE by pluka（板凳修正版，继续求拍）

plukaUID：2721764

昨天一回来就看到作业通知，看相关帖子和资料折腾到九点，自己动笔……到今早，N个小时才摸到头绪，泪目。如果按这个速度继续下去，我还是撞豆腐吧。

ISSUE13 

Many of the world's lesser-known languages are being lost as fewer and fewer people speak them. The governments of countries in which these languages are spoken should act to prevent such languages from becoming extinct.


Languages experience a life cycle much alike to the evolution of species, which can be succinctly concluded by survival the fittest. It seems an inevitable process that the language, whose host community enjoys economical or political preponderance, occupies the prevailing status, besieging, encroaching and eventually annihilating some other minor ones. The controversial issue, however, is whether, who and how to preserve the dying languages. The governments of countries to which those languages are indigenous is frequently urged to take obligatory action, whose justification and feasibility, however, remains dubious.

Admittedly, the historical and cultural value of those languages weigh a lot in spite of their fading communicational function. In fact, they play substantial roles in fields such as literature, archeology and anthropology. For example, Sanskrit classics arouse lasting attention for their delicate and idiographic style and thought conveyed by complicated construction of Sanskrit language. Sagas of Polynesian peoples, in another case, give anthropologists the hints that their remote ancestors, whose origin has long been a puzzle, came from Indonesia 2,000 years ago. As the progenies of certain social backgrouds and reflection of temporal social consciousness, languages in turn promote the uniqueness of their native culture. Linguists report that a linguistic system embodies a corresponding perspective and cognitive pattern towards the universe, and that the unanimity of languages can possibly leading to a world congested with retrogressive and simplified thinkings. 

However, when confronting the practical question, measures and costs besides the theorietical emphasis must be taken into account. Protecting a language from extinction goes far beyond simply recording balladries and sagas. It involves rebuilding the hereditary bond of the language between generations, especially for youngsters, and continuing specific culture to which the language clings, which means that various of fields and industries, including education, communication, publish, etc., will need adjustments, and, for the purpose of those adjustments, large sums of subsidy. This will justifiably trigger controversy when the hard-earned taxpayers’ money is invested in such an project with highly unsure profits, simply to elongate the life of a dying language, especially in areas suffer from indigence, where the suprior and essential care is nothing abstract but tangible improvement around. Opportunities to have better job in foreign enterprises, seek education and enjoy more living conveniences, on the other hand, can be much more favorable for most of them. As governments by definition concern more about the maintenance of social stability and the improvement of living conditions of their members, which in some cases contradict the cultural benefits, prudent jugdment should always go before the action.

Even if they reach the argeement to preserve those languages, which one take a leave to doubt, the effect can be rather uncertain. Let's firstly get down to fundamentals and agree that since languages’s first function is to satisfy the demand of communication, where there’s no such need, there is no vital force to persuade people of those minor languages to use and revitalize them. Take the Nvshu, the woman writing originated in Jiangyong, Hunan Province, China, for example, it was created against the social backgroud that women had no access to general education to learn common used words, thus they had to find their own way to express themselves. Gradually, however, as the social idea changes and women have no longer the urgent dependence on the Nvshu, fewer and fewer weman speak it, which puts this unique lingustical system on the verge of extinction. No government subsidy can change this objective situation at the heart as long as the common used language besiege and excel the minor language. Another reason can be rather subjective. People in destitute areas sometimes associate their own culture and language with inferior status, naturally turning to other predominate one in the hope of overcoming the discrimination and assimilating to the globe. Let’s suppose governments in this area implement the policy to protect their own languages, which is quite doubtable in reality, seldom will the people follow it. Thus both the objective and the subjective factors reveal that the corollary of government support, compared with its cost, may not be optimistic.

Disadvantages above accepted, it does not deduce a conclusion to let slide and abandon those extincting languages, but the main leader would not be native governments who are in most cases still struggling to gain economical and political thrive rather than cultural flourish. Preserving those languages, and behind them various cultures, require larger effort beyond the power of any single contry but the globe. It’s influence, in the meantime, will spread through the nation’s border, promoting the prosperity of human spirit as a whole.

动笔之前，看了草草给的链接，brainstorm的记录和资料什么的，有启发，但开始动笔之后就感觉到痛苦了，一开始就纠结于字句和表达，效率太低。虽然有想过先写好各段的主题句再慢慢填内容，但因为与一贯的写作习惯不符合所以做得也很挫折。无论怎么说，总算是写完了。还请大家多多指教！

小灵易碎UID：2733622

Languages experience a life cycle much alike to the evolution of species, which can be succinctly concluded by survival the fittest. It seems an inevitable process that the language, whose host community enjoys economical or political preponderance, occupies the prevailing status, besieging, encroaching and eventually annihilating some other minor ones. The controversial issue, however, is whether, who and how to preserve the dying languages. The governments of countries to which those languages are indigenous is (主语是governments? are)frequently urged to take obligatory action, whose justification(不知道你想说的是不是“正当性”？如果是的话斗胆建议用validity,我在韦氏里面查的意思，可能是我对词的理解太粗浅，没感觉有“正当性”的意思1 : the act, process, or state of being justified by God 2 a : the act or an instance of justifying : VINDICATION b : something that justifies 3 : the process or result of justifying lines of text；又问了问在北美的同学，说是不太地道但是凑合，pluka自己看着办吧O(∩_∩)O~) and feasibility, however, remains（主语是不是justification and feasibility?remain） dubious.

Admittedly, the historical and cultural value of those languages weigh(查了一下句酷，value好像是单数的，eg.The value of qualitative studies is not limited to helping support the design process. In our experience, spending the time to understand the user population as human beings can provide valuable business insights that are not revealed through traditional market research.) a lot in spite of their fading communicational function. In fact, they play substantial roles in fields such as literature, archeology and anthropology. For example, Sanskrit classics arouse lasting attention for their delicate and idiographic style and thought（thoughts?） conveyed by complicated construction of Sanskrit language. Sagas of Polynesian peoples, in another case, give anthropologists the hints that their remote ancestors, whose origin has long been a puzzle, came from Indonesia 2,000 years ago. As the progenies of certain social backgrouds and reflection of temporal social consciousness, languages in turn promote the uniqueness of their native culture. Linguists report that a linguistic system embodies a corresponding perspective and cognitive pattern towards the universe, and that the unanimity of languages can possibly leading to a world congested with retrogressive and simplified thinkings.

However, when confronting the practical question, measures and costs besides the theorietical （我怎么没找到这个词什么意思？theoretical？）emphasis must be taken into account. Protecting a language from extinction goes far beyond simply recording balladries and sagas. It involves rebuilding the hereditary bond of the language between generations, especially for youngsters, and continuing specific culture to which the language clings, which means that various of fields and industries, including education, communication, publish(publishing,如果你想表达的是“出版业”的话), etc., will need adjustments, and, for the purpose of those adjustments, large sums of subsidy.（我能力有限，这句话看着有点绕呵呵） This will justifiably trigger (a/the?)controversy when the hard-earned taxpayers’ money is invested in such an（a） project with highly unsure profits, simply to elongate the life of a dying language, especially in areas suffer from indigence, where the suprior and essential care is nothing abstract but tangible improvement around. Opportunities to have better job(jobs) in foreign enterprises, seek education and enjoy more living conveniences, on the other hand, can be much more favorable for most of them. As governments by definition concern more about the maintenance of social stability and the improvement of living conditions of their members, which in some cases contradict the cultural benefits, prudent jugdment should always go before the action.

Even if they reach the argeement to preserve those languages, which one take a leave to doubt, the effect can be rather uncertain. Let's firstly get down to fundamentals and agree that since languages’s first function is to satisfy the demand of communication, where there’s no such need, there is no vital force to persuade people of those minor languages to use and revitalize them. Take the Nvshu, the woman writing originated in Jiangyong, Hunan Province, China, for example, it was created against the social backgroud that women had no access to general education to learn common used words, thus they had to find their own way to express themselves. Gradually, however, as the social idea changes and women have no longer the urgent dependence on the Nvshu, fewer and fewer weman speak it, which puts this unique lingustical system on the verge of extinction. No government subsidy can change this objective situation at the heart as long as the common used language besiege and excel the minor language. Another reason can be rather subjective. People in destitute areas sometimes associate their own culture and language with inferior status, naturally turning to other predominate one in the hope of overcoming the discrimination and assimilating to the globe. Let’s suppose governments in this area implement the policy to protect their own languages, which is quite doubtable in reality, seldom will the people follow it. Thus both the objective and the subjective factors reveal that the corollary of government support, compared with its cost, may not be optimistic.

Disadvantages above accepted, it does not deduce a conclusion to let slide and abandon those extincting languages, but the main leader would not be native governments who are in most cases still struggling to gain economical and political thrive(名词？) rather than cultural flourish. Preserving those languages, and behind them various cultures, require（requires） larger effort beyond the power of any single contry but the globe. It’s (Its)influence, in the meantime, will spread through the nation’s border, promoting the prosperity of human spirit as a whole.

先谢谢pluka帮忙看文章，提出的问题很受用，我会改进的O(∩_∩)O~因为之前开头结尾都不知道贴哪去了，所以只贴了论证部分，现已将我“错误百出”的文章完整贴好~也许现在能有点逻辑了（笑）。
pluka文章写得很好，我进来拜读，斗胆修改。发现pluka喜欢用从句指代前面的一整句话或整个事件，我个人看到后面会觉得产生了“是指代前句中某个名词”的歧义，然后就会回视~看来我的阅读水平要加强了~仅仅是个人建议，我刚刚开始写，希望以后多指教~！

plukaUID：2721764

修正~初稿太多错误了，上次bela和fana帮忙修改过一遍，小灵也指出了“新的”错误= =||| 所以不能待了，把修正后的贴上来。
把语法、拼写、选词之类的改了，尤其是措辞，感谢bela和fana~！不止辛辛苦苦挑出了里面好多叫我惭愧的小刺，还纠正了我在judgment/optimistic/extinct/national border...上的错误。感谢小灵的解释~！居然还问了北美的同学么……不然我还真以为justification可以用呢~还有当初在俺滴窝里留言提醒我survival of the fittest的童鞋（这个都错，太惭愧了啊)~
其次就是把一些长句拆开了。当时确实是写晕了，怎么整出这么多这么长的句子= =|||

改动之处用绿色标出。

Languages experience a life cycle much alike to the evolution of species, which can be succinctly concluded as survival of the fittest. It seems an inevitable process that the language, whose host community enjoys economical or political preponderance, occupies the prevailing status, besieging, encroaching and eventually annihilating some other minor ones. The controversial issue, however, is whether, who and how to preserve the dying languages. The governments of countries to which those languages are indigenous are frequently urged to take obligatory action, whose validity and feasibility, however, remain dubious.

Admittedly, the historical and cultural value of those languages weighs a lot in spite of their fading communicational function. In fact, they play substantial roles in fields such as literature, archeology and anthropology. For example, Sanskrit classics arouse lasting attention for their delicate and idiographic style and thought (thought做思考、考虑不可数；想法、念头可数。这里想表达的是一种思维，大概能归在‘思考’一类吧) conveyed by complicated construction of Sanskrit language. Sagas of Polynesian peoples, in another case, give anthropologists the hints that their remote ancestors, whose origin has long been a puzzle, came from Indonesia 2,000 years ago. In the meantime, as the progenies of certain social backgrounds and reflection of temporal social consciousness, languages in turn promote the uniqueness of their native culture. Linguists report that a linguistic system embodies a corresponding perspective and cognitive pattern towards the universe, and the unanimity of languages can possibly lead to a world congested with retrogressive and simplified thinkings. 

However, when confronting the practical question, measures and costs besides the theoretical emphasis must be taken into account. Protecting a language from extinction goes far beyond simply recording folklores and sagas. It involves rebuilding the hereditary bond of the language between generations, especially for youngsters, and continuing specific culture to which the language clings. Such procedures suggest that various fields and industries, including education, communication, publishing, etc., will need adjustments, and, for the purpose of those adjustments, large sums of subsidy. This will justifiably trigger controversy when the hard-earned taxpayers’ money is invested in such a project with highly unsure profits, simply to elongate the life of a dying language. To be specific, in areas suffering from indigence, the prior and essential care should be nothing abstract but tangible improvement around. For residents of such regions, opportunities to have better job in foreign enterprises, to seek education and to enjoy more living conveniences can be much more favorable. As governments by definition concern more about the maintenance of social stability and the improvement of living conditions of their members, which in some cases contradict the cultural benefits, prudent estimation should always go before the action.

Even if they reach the agreement to preserve those languages, which I take a leave to doubt, the effect can be rather uncertain. Let's firstly get down to fundamentals and agree that since languages’ main function is to satisfy the demand of communication, when there’s no such need, there is no vital force to persuade people who use those minor languages to use and revitalize them. Take the Nvshu, the women writing originated in Jiangyong, Hunan Province, China, for example, it was created against the social background that women had no access to general education to learn common used words, thus they had to find their own way to express themselves. Gradually, however, as the social idea changes and women no longer have the urgent dependence on the Nvshu, a dwindling number of women speak it. Thus this unique linguistic system has been on the verge of extinction. No government subsidy can change this objective situation at the heart as long as the common used language continues to besiege and excel the minor one. Another reason can be rather subjective. People in destitute areas sometimes associate their own culture and language with inferior status, naturally turning to other predominate one in the hope of overcoming the discrimination and being assimilated to the globe. Suppose governments in this area implement the policy to protect their own languages (it is quite doubtable in reality), seldom will people follow it. Thus both the objective and the subjective factors reveal that the corollary of government support, considering its cost, may still await thorough assessment.

Disadvantages above discussed, it does not deduce a conclusion to let slide and abandon those extinguishing languages, but the main leader would not be native governments who are in most cases still struggling to gain economical and political prosperity rather than cultural flourish. Preserving those languages, and behind them, various cultures, requires greater effort beyond the power of any single country but the globe. Its influence, in the meantime, will spread beyond the national border, promoting the prosperity of human spirit as a whole.

嘿嘿算是比较满意的。

继续求拍，请下重手，俺礼尚往来。

NaperyUID：2710990

Languages experience a life cycle[生命循环，一般是说生到死，死后又生。可后面说的大都是生到死这个过程] much alike to the evolution of species, which can be succinctly concluded as survival of the fittest. It seems an inevitable[为什么要说这个过程是inevitable呢？个人认为that后面的内容并不能体现这个过程的“不可避免性”] process that the language, whose host community enjoys economical or political preponderance[韦氏解释1：a superiority in weight, power, importance, or strength，我觉得解释里的power一词涵盖了经济实力或政治力量的说法；解释2： a superiority or excess in number or quantity，数量上的优势，而经济或者政治这种抽象用词，用数量形容貌似不妥。总之，我个人觉得这里还不如用superiority更来得贴切，舒服诶], occupies the prevailing status, then[加个then会不会觉得有连续性一些呢？] besieging[这个词不妥，韦氏： to surround with armed forces/ to press with requests/ to cause worry or distress to，建议可以删除这个词], encroaching and eventually[这里用and even finally/ultimately会不会好些呢？用even来强调主流语言负面影响的程度] anihilating some other minor[用minority如何？一些素材资料上用的都是minority languages] ones. The controversial issue, however, is whether, who and how[后面的句子应该算是回答这个问题吧。但是，指出了who是government，而how只是很抽象的说成take action] to preserve the dying languages. The governments of countries, to which those languages are indigenous[indigenous后面跟to时，意思是土生土长的，但是语言作为文化的分支，这里应该是指“本地的、当地的”，韦氏里用的也是the indigenous culture，因此这里用法错误，要去掉介词to] , [个人觉得加逗号隔开要好一些吧，免得头太重了] are frequently urged to take obligatory[这里有点不确定，韦氏：binding in law or conscience/ MANDATORY, REQUIRED] action, whose[确实是容易让人弄错，分不清到底是指government还是action] validity and feasibility, however, remain dubious. [这句写的感觉很像是argument，个人感觉，呵呵]

恩 应LZ要求，改的甚是挑剔。
读楼主的句子，我就可以感受到别人读我的句子的感受了。长句完了还是长句，喘口气也难。哎，咱俩都要学着长短结合方可。
不过，要注意正确用词吧，有的词用的不贴合语境。
立意上，我个人觉得这个开头写的并不是很出众。
1.whose host community enjoys economical or political preponderance 这句话，让我觉得，这些国家因经济政治实力雄厚，而意图在文化上侵略其他国家。host community
2.我觉得这个题目的关键在于：政府改不改采取措施保护小语种。发散开来后，确实可以说到底是who来保护这些濒危的语种。但是，开头的时候，我觉得直接回应题目会不会更好？文章后面再进行发散。所以，我觉得，文中提出controversial issue貌似不是很贴切。
3.关于inevitable这个词，上面已经提过。其实，这个词用在这里不错的。只是that后面的内容应该要调整一下。lz不妨想想这个语言濒危的社会问题发生的时代背景，或是问题的社会根源。
4.关于适者生存这个的引用，我觉得不是很好，呵呵，楼主有没有想过到底什么是endangered languages呢？不妨思索一下，或许你就会明白我的意思了。

批改的比较慢，也比较细，请见谅。

plukaUID：2721764

太感谢爪子了~~~~~~~~！好仔细呀~~~~~~~~~

关于life cycle，刚查了下M-W：1 : the series of stages in form and functional activity through which an organism passes between successive recurrences of a specified primary stage 2 : LIFE HISTORY 2 3 : a series of stages through which something (as an individual, culture, or manufactured product) passes during its lifetime
而第二项life history指的就是从生命伊始到自然死亡，没有重生的过程，所以life cycle可以单指一个生命历程，不一定轮回。

inevitable和适者生存仔细追究确实有些断层了= =，只提到了现象，没阐述原因，感谢爪子指出来。当时的想法是经济和政治强国也会在文化和语言上影响其他国家。现在回过头来看，这个想法也不够深入，应该具体一点阐明为何影响、如何影响才好。比如日不落帝国的殖民扩张、强迫性质的文化同化，以及全球化带来的弱势经济体必须依附主流集团生存、客观的文化语言同化等。这些社会背景和根源要不要放在首段讲？有点担心首段篇幅太长……

preponderance嘛~摊手，因为刚好前几天才背的这个单词……忍不住就用上了。释义里有”影响力“一项，也给我留下点侵略性的意思，当时觉得挺合适。另，我觉得power虽然也能暗含经济和政治方面，但略显宽泛，实际指出来也是可以的。关于superiority，很贴切。感觉确实很好。然私心看重的“影响力”一项体现的不太多。难以取舍啊……

关于besieging那一串，呵呵，当时写的时候觉得音节很美妙，有种一气呵成的感觉，所以略了连词。但看来加上even更能表现出语气，还是必要^^。besieging这里当时觉得这个词剑拔弩张有侵略性，额，军队啊~


minority languages,记住了~

controversial issue那里的how真是没交代清楚，谢谢爪子提醒~自己也不知道该怎么交代= =|||，看来不如改掉。

indigenous在the indigenous culture里面是做前置定语，在文中的从句里面做的是表语，不要to也没关系么？那就是those languages are indigenous (to) the governments of countries了啊，要不然把这个词改成native/local？be native/local to.
加了逗号看上去比较清爽，恩恩~

obligatory给我的印象是道义感比较重。mandatory好像比较强调”强制“，compulsory貌似是”必要“，于是就选了obligatory。

whose的指代没指清楚，看来得分成两句写。最后那句真是很像argument啊~⊙﹏⊙b汗一个。

长句的问题，唉……老喜欢把所有事情都放在一块解释清楚，要改~！用词方面也要继续提高~！

嗯国家文化侵略的问题，好像文中是有点这个暗示，有些脱离了俺的本意……语境这东西真不好掌握。关于who的问题，我觉得吧ISSUE只要求个人立论，应该可以从任何角度，然后下文连接的一句转到本地政府。不过主题句真是没写好，信息量太少也不贴切，额，都可以说没有主题句……sigh。适者生存部分，我的理解是濒危语言没能在竞争中赢过主流语言，所以不适应客观和主观要求，被淘汰。可以进一步解释一下你的理解吗？

最后再抱一个~！感动ING~

NaperyUID：2710990

关于life cycle，嘿嘿，我没查呢，当时最好再看的时候就觉得好像有问题诶。

当时的想法是经济和政治强国也会在文化和语言上影响其他国家。

恩，你想的是对的，可是我觉得你那里写的就是“侵占，强迫”兴性质，感觉好肆虐诶。
让我觉得，小语种真可怜，被赶到角落里去了，嘿嘿。

比如日不落帝国的殖民扩张、强迫性质的文化同化，以及全球化带来的弱势经济体必须依附主流集团生存、客观的文化语言同化等。

呃 这个确实想的很深刻啊 不过也没必要想的那么深刻啊 会有点偏离了的
想社会背景是为了帮助我们理解这个题目诶 我觉得

这些社会背景和根源要不要放在首段讲？有点担心首段篇幅太长……

我觉得长短看个人吧，论坛里有些精华文章开头也写的很长呢。
但是这个里面，也不一定要写那么长，理由我上面说啦。
重点不在社会背景嘛 只是通过社会背景引出来 嘿嘿

NaperyUID：2710990

preponderance嘛~摊手，因为刚好前几天才背的这个单词……忍不住就用上了。释义里有”影响力“一项，也给我留下点侵略性的意思，当时觉得挺合适。另，我觉得power虽然也能暗含经济和政治方面，但略显宽泛，实际指出来也是可以的。关于superiority，很贴切。感觉确实很好。然私心看重的“影响力”一项体现的不太多。难以取舍啊……

我觉得不一定非得讲侵略性 呃 觉得这个是不是有点夸大了呢 貌似很不“和谐”的样子。
关于power，我是想说preponderance这词本身就已经有“经济或政治实力上有优势”的含义，而你前面又用了political等，会不会有重复的嫌疑？
红宝的词千万不要用太多了，呃，我也有这个坏毛病。
话说我都很久没有背单词了诶。

关于besieging那一串，呵呵，当时写的时候觉得音节很美妙，有种一气呵成的感觉，所以略了连词。但看来加上even更能表现出语气，还是必要^^。besieging这里当时觉得这个词剑拔弩张有侵略性，额，军队啊~

看来，你倾向于社会背景的“侵略性”诶~
那个even，如果是我的话我会加吧，觉着有这么一个读者顺口一些。

indigenous在the indigenous culture里面是做前置定语，在文中的从句里面做的是表语，不要to也没关系么？那就是those languages are indigenous (to) the governments of countries了啊，要不然把这个词改成native/local？be native/local to.

我知道你的意思，但是我觉得一般在名次前用作定语的常见一些，如果是在be动词后用作表语的话，确实后面的native啥的可能好一些。
但是我也不确定呢。

韦氏里面的一个解析：
NATIVE, INDIGENOUS, ENDEMIC, ABORIGINAL mean belonging to a locality. NATIVE implies birth or origin in a place or region and may suggest compatibility with it  *native tribal customs*. INDIGENOUS applies to species or races and adds to NATIVE the implication of not having been introduced from elsewhere  *maize is indigenous to America*. ENDEMIC implies being peculiar to a region  *edelweiss is endemic in the Alps*. ABORIGINAL implies having no known race preceding in occupancy of the region  *the aboriginal peoples of Australia*.

obligatory给我的印象是道义感比较重。mandatory好像比较强调”强制“，compulsory貌似是”必要“，于是就选了obligatory。

从道义感来说，确实是应该保护那些小语种。
但是，例如，为了国家利益，跟发达国家好比美佬等交流合作，就必须学会英语，引进英语学习必然会对小语种有些许影响。
如果为了道义感，而轻视英语，从国家这个大集体来看，从国家的利益出发，这又是不妥的诶。
这是个举例，而且是我个人意见啊，也不知道对不对。

我长句啊，用词啊，问题更多，所以表担心，大家都有问题，都在进步，嘿嘿。