【红尘笑看沧桑】互改小组 第二次作业 BY 立刻拿上

立刻马上UID: 2737860

issue 48
     The speaker asserts that as the most significant events and trends in history were made not by the famous few, but by groups of ordinary people, history study ought to place more emphasis on ordinary people. I do agree that the study of history places too much emphasis on individuals, but I don’t think we should just place ordinary people as a major one. i think the study of history should have a balance between famous few and groups of ordinary people, because historical trends are usually decided both by famous few and groups of people.
      It is understandable to agree that some famous leads and groups of unknown people together made the most significant events happen. The events in human history is just like a series of football games, in the games there are 22 players, but only few of them can shot the goal and influence the progress of the game.they are the person we called famous few, people can only remember them, but it is the whole team-both the shooter and the other 10 unknown players -that made the win possible. It is the same in human history. To illustrate this point, let's take the industrial revolution as an example. Newton, Watt are generally regarded as the leader who lay the foundation of both science and technology to this grate ear, but without millions of protestants who seek the fortune as a way to go to the heaven, and found so many industry companies, the industrialization will not be possible. The same goes for the Renaissance, French Revolution, in these events groups of people were leaded by several brilliant talents, and they together changed the world.
     Although it is not all-inclusive, there are some key reasons for historians to put much attention on the few famous individuals, which is a more effective and efficient way to get a conclusion. Firstly, ordinary people usually have similar experience. It is a waste of time to go through millions of lives which have similar stories most of which are trivial things. On the contrary, famous individuals, who experience the main events in a particular historical period, are often represents of the masses of different classes. Secondly, compared with lives of ordinary people, more historical resources such documents, literature works are available, so that academic historical research tends to be convincing and detailed. The contemporaries of a historical period usually pay more attention on the individuals who are famous with great feats. As a result, different records, documents and comments are produced to help descendants get a comprehensive understanding of that person, and further understand that history.
     However the method have some fatal drawbacks. Firstly, it does not acknowledge groups of individuals who were equally important. it means that the history told by teachers and the books may be not the whole truth of history, which may result in the people’s overrate of famous people’s ability and mistakenly estimate the trend of future. Secondly, it ignores the importance of society’s influences. Because of this people may cannot find the true reason behind the problem and cannot solve it. Thirdly, it does not acknowledge the full extent of difficulty and conflict that occurred.What’s more, the process of math and technology is possible for us to take another method to study the truth behind the history, and the accumulation of generations’’ record and study will also be helpful. Although it will be a little hard in the beginning, it is very valuable to do so.
     To sum up, history is created by famous few and millions of ordinary people forgotten over time. However, compared with just emphasizing on significant ones ,keep a balance between focusing on the lives of groups of people and emphasizing is reasonable considering about its efficiency, accuracy of academic research, and the concentration on trends of history as a whole.

立刻马上UID: 2737860

Argument 97
     In the memo, the manager recommend that KICK, a television station, should revise its broadcast schedule to include more sports coverage, thus can gain a larger audience share and increase profits. To support his argument, the author cites a nationwide survey showing that a lot of men would like to see additional sports programs on TV. And he also gives an example of WACK, whose share of the TV audience doubled after increasing its sports broadcasts. As discussed below, the argument suffers from several critical flaws and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.
     To begin with, the recommendation is based on the assumption that the nationwide survey also fits for KICK's viewing area. But this is not necessarily the case. It is entirely possible that men in this area have a different favor of TV program; maybe they like politics programs more. And perhaps there are more women than men here, and thus the scale of men audience is not big enough. Without ruling out this and other possibilities, the author cannot persuade me that KICK should change its program arrangements.
     In addition, the author assumes too hastily that the result in WACK will also happen in KICK if similar sports programs have been made. However, there is no evidence to support this assumption. First, the author concludes that increasing in its sports broadcasts results in WACK's doubled share based on the mere fact that the later occurred after the former. However, WACK might take other measures, like to improve the program's quality, to add salaries for the employees to raise their activities in the same time, which maybe mainly lead to the success. Secondly, even if increasing sports broadcasts is the only reason for WACK's doubled share, KICK have different audience and different culture from WACK, and it is also likely that the same measure will have distinct effects.
     Finally, even if the number of audience has increased due to the sports broadcasts, the argument's conclusion that company profits will increase is unwarranted. Profit is a factor of not only revenue but also costs. If additional sports programs are made, KICK will employ more sports journalists, and more sports hosts, it is entirely possible that this cost will offset additional revenue. Besides, it is also possible that the profit from advertisements will not gain rapidly after the revision, because the share of audience is not the only factor that companies concern, they will also take other factors, like marketing size, and purchasing ability of consumers in this area into consideration.
     To sum up, the argument mentioned above is not based on valid evidence or sound reasoning. To strengthen the argument, the author must provide dear evidence that the KICK’s viewing area has a sizeable majority of men liking to see sports, and if the broadcast schedule has changed, the share will increase dramatically. To better assess the argument, I need to know more about the cost for the change, a cost-benefit analysis is needed for the evaluation.

立刻马上UID: 2737860

不好意思，昨天发得比较急，argument弄错了一个版本所以会错这么多，现在这个是对的，如果还没改的话可以用这个;已经改完了的话就算了

forevarsenalUID: 2737856

issue 48
     The speaker asserts that as （as不要吧？） the most significant events and trends in history were made not（were not made） by the famous few, but by groups of ordinary people (觉得改为were made by groups of ordinary people rather than the famous few), (and thus)history study ought to place more emphasis on ordinary people. I do agree that the study of history places too much emphasis on individuals, but I don’t think we should just place ordinary people as a major one. I think the study of history should have a balance between (the) famous few and groups of ordinary people, because historical trends are usually decided both by famous few and groups of people.
      It is understandable to agree that some famous leads and groups of unknown people together made the most significant events happen. The events in human history is just like a series of football games, in the games there are 22 players（觉得没必要用复数，game同样能表示足球比赛）, but only few of them can shot the goal and influence the progress (process) of the game. They are the person（s） we called famous few, people can only remember them, but it is the whole team-both the shooter and the other 10 unknown players -that made the win possible.(足球老美不是很懂，虽然我喜欢，但还是劝你改个运动，比如篮球什么的) It is the same in human history(好像有问题，不太确定). To illustrate this point（加个more clearly更好，你前面已经说明了）, let's take the industrial revolution as an example. Newton, Watt are generally regarded as the leader who lay the foundation of both science and technology to this grate ear（grate ear 是什么？我真不明白，你写错了吗？见笑了）, but without millions of protestants who seek the fortune as a way to go to the heaven, and found so many industry companies, the industrialization will not be possible. The same goes for the Renaissance, French Revolution, in these events groups of people were leaded by several brilliant talents, and they together changed the world.
     Although it is not all-inclusive, there are some key reasons for historians to put much attention on the few famous individuals, which is a more effective and efficient way to get a conclusion. Firstly, ordinary people usually have similar experience. It is a waste of time to go through millions of lives which have similar stories most of which are trivial things. On the contrary, famous individuals, who experience the main events in a particular historical period, are often represents of the masses of different classes. Secondly, compared with lives of ordinary people, more historical resources such （as）documents, literature works are available, so that academic historical research tends to be convincing and detailed. The contemporaries of a historical period usually pay more attention on(to?) the individuals who are famous with(for) great feats. As a result, different records, documents and comments are produced to help descendants get a comprehensive understanding of that person, and further understand that history.
     However the method have （has）some fatal drawbacks. Firstly, it does not acknowledge groups of individuals who were equally important. it means that the history told by teachers and the books may be not the whole truth of history, which may result in the people’s overrate of famous people’s ability and mistakenly estimate the trend of future. Secondly, it ignores the importance of society’s influences. Because of this people may cannot(may not) find the true reason behind the problem and cannot solve it. Thirdly, it does not acknowledge the full extent of difficulty and conflict that occurred.What’s more, the process of math and technology is possible for us to take another method to study the truth behind the history, and the accumulation of generations’’ record and study will also be helpful. Although it will be a little hard in the beginning, it is very valuable(worthy) to do so.
     To sum up, history is created by the famous few and millions of ordinary people forgotten over time. However, compared with just emphasizing on significant ones, keep a balance between focusing on the lives of groups of people and emphasizing is reasonable considering about its efficiency, accuracy of academic research, and the concentration on trends of history as a whole.

forevarsenalUID: 2737856

呃？颜色呢？

forevarsenalUID: 2737856

argument97
     In the memo, the manager recommend that KICK, a television station, should revise its broadcast schedule to include more sports coverage, thus can gain a larger audience share and increase profits. To support his argument, the author cites a nationwide survey showing that a lot of men would like to see additional sports programs on TV. And he also give an example of  WACK, whose share of the TV audience doubled after increasing its sports broadcasts. As discussed below, the argument suffers from several critical flaws and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.
     To begin with, the recommendation is based on the assumption that the nationwide survey also fits for KICK's viewing area. But this is not necessarily the case. It is entirely possible that men in this area have a different favor of TV program maybe they like politics programs more. And perhaps there are more women than men here, and thus the scale of men audience is not big enough. Without ruling out this and other possibilities, the author cannot persuade me that KICK should change its program arrangements.
(另起一段)in addition, the author assumes too hastily that the result in WACK will also happen in KICK if similar sports programs have been made. However, there is no evidence to support this assumption. First, the author concludes that increasing in its sports broadcasts results in WACK's doubled share based on the mere fact that the later occurred after the former. However, WACK might take other measures, like to improve the program's quality, to add salaries for the employees to raise their activities in(at) the same time, which maybe mainly lead to the success. Secondly, even if increasing sports broadcasts is the only reason for WACK's doubled share, KICK have different audience and different culture from WACK, and it is also likely that the same measure will have distinct effects.
     Finally, even if the audience share have increased due to the sports broadcasts, the argument's conclusion that company profits will increase is unwarranted. Profit is a factor of not only revenue but also costs.if additional sports programs are made, KICK will employ more sports journalists, and more sports hosts,it is entirely possible that this cost will offset additional revenue.besides,it is also possible that the the profit from advertisements will not gain rapidly after the revision,because the share of audience is not the only factor that companies concern, they will also take other factors,like marketing size,and purchasing ability of consumers in this area into consideration.
     To sum up,the argument mentioned above is not based on vaild evidence or sound reasoning.To strengthen the argument, the author must provide dear evidence that the area KICK’s viewing area has a sizeable majority of men liking to see sports, and if the broadcast schedule have changed,the share will increase dramatically. To better assess the argument,I need to know more about the cost for the change,a cost-benefit analysis is needed for the evaluation.
（写的不错，没大错误）

forevarsenalUID: 2737856

哦，英文的段首不空的，顶格写，段落之间空一行

立刻马上UID: 2737860

哦，英文的段首不空的，顶格写，段落之间空一行
forevarsenal 发表于 2009-12-15 22:40

好的明白，土了，呵呵

立刻马上UID: 2737860

那句话是 Newton, Watt are generally regarded as the leader who lay the foundation of both science and technology to this great era.是我写错了，呵呵