☆★InEffable★☆习作一 ISSUE69

漏雨的房子UID: 2300802

首次习作，最后连思路都没有了。。。求狠拍，有拍必回
Issue69: Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.



Scientific research and development which cared about the whole interest of human beings has powered the progress of human society for nearly two hundred years. Willing to keep this trend, government usually restrict scientific activities under somewhat framework, maybe for clone technique gave rise to moral conflict, or even earlier- since the abuse of frontier technology allowed the atom-bomb at Nagasaki in 1945.

When government set up the framework of restrictions for scientific attitude, to what extent, government should authorize the researchers? They stated the forbidden items of researching field one by one and the remaining area were for scientific freedom. One pros of this arrangement is prohibit the real and potential harm toward socity while other unmentioned guaranty the freedom right in much broader situations. As the framework developing, another advantage shows- revisable and adaptive. New method of scientific development, unlike the traditional pattern, sprout rapidly and if something were harmful for us or our belongings, governor just could simply add that into scientific forbidden framework. For instance, government throw O-zone destroy substance straightaway in forbidden trashcan.

In this framework, one can tell the indispensable role that the freedom part has almost at a glance- which flourishes the scientific research and development by not disturbing its natural developing way. Scientific future is unknown and uncertainty, more freedom means maybe one more valuable chance to improve some tiny technical reform. Thus generous freedom coupled with certain restrictions offer a wise option for government, which is always the decision-maker.
Freedom in scientific activities brings us various human resources, if most of people have access to it. People with largely different horizons communicate together would have brand new ideas to solve problems and push the progress in science.


Furthermore, forbidden part should be stated clear and certain. Vague statement would make it impossible for common people to obey them; they would misunderstand what they are permitted to do and how far it goes.


In conclusion, in my opinion, government should pay attention to the percentage arrangement in both restrictions on scientific development and freedom zone that giving science more possibilities.

xiaxiaobing919UID: 2606450

Issue69: Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.



Scientific research and development which cared about the whole interest of human beings has(have) powered(stimulated) the progress of human society for nearly two hundred years. Willing to keep this trend, government usually restricts scientific activities under somewhat framework, maybe for clone technique gave rise to moral conflict, (整个句子的语态表达不清晰，与前句不连贯)or even earlier- since the abuse of frontier technology allowed the atom-bomb at Nagasaki in 1945.

When government set up the framework of restrictions for scientific attitude, to what extent, government should authorize the researchers? They stated the forbidden items of researching field（from one field to another, while still left out the space for freedom） one by one and the remaining area were for scientific freedom. One pros of this arrangement is prohibiting the real and potential harm toward society while other unmentioned guaranty(guarantee) the freedom(free) right in much broader situations. As the framework developing, another advantage shows- revisable and adaptive(建议用名词). New method of scientific development, unlike the traditional pattern, sprout rapidly and if something were harmful for us or our belongings, governor just could simply add that into scientific forbidden framework. For instance, government throw O-zone destroy substance straightaway in forbidden trashcan.

In this framework, one can tell the indispensable role that the freedom（free） part has almost at a glance- which flourishes the scientific research and development by not disturbing its natural developing way. Scientific future is unknown and uncertainty（uncertain）, more freedom means maybe one more valuable （more）chance to improve some tiny technical reform(improve 和reform 不搭配). Thus generous freedom coupled with certain restrictions offer a wise option for government, which is always the decision-maker.
Freedom in scientific activities brings us various human resources, if most of people have access to it. People with largely different horizons communicate together would have brand new ideas to solve problems and push the progress in science. （这段话感觉和主题不相关啊，你说的是政府的限制领域的问题，没有谈到过限制交流的问题。）


Furthermore, forbidden part should be stated clear and certain. Vague statement would make it impossible for common people to obey them; they would misunderstand what they are permitted to do and how far it goes.


In conclusion, in my opinion, government should pay attention to the percentage arrangement（我觉得不是percentage的问题。而是要视问题而论） in both restrictions on scientific development and freedom zone that giving science more possibilities.


总体感觉，文章结构不是很完整，思路有些混乱。先谈政府要限制，为了使science朝我们想要的方向发展，然后写如何建立framework，然后又写自由的重要性，接着是如何规范framework。整个段与段之间的关系基本上是想到哪儿写到哪儿。语言还是不错的，但要注意单复数和词的形式（用形容词还是名词等）。

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1049863-1-1.html
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... 6amp%3Btypeid%3D102
另外，在汇总贴上这个1>2>3的意思是1号给2号改，2号给3号改哇？ 如果是的话就是我给你改。对了，敢问楼主什么时候考试？

漏雨的房子UID: 2300802

我~那个还没报名呐`试试水深浅，要是水平差太远。。。就。。。暂时不考
要是凑合，就努把力，不求考的好，只求提高一下自己
刚接触这个，思路上很吃力呀
---------
还有，，我怎么记得，，是我给你改呀？
---------
我又改了一遍：

Issue69: Government should place few, if any, restrictions on scientific research and development.



Scientific research and development which cared about the whole interest of human beings has stimulated the progress of human society for nearly two hundred years. Willing to keep this trend, government usually restricts scientific activities under somewhat framework, maybe since clone technique gave rise to moral conflict, (整个句子的语态表达不清晰，与前句不连贯)or even earlier- since the abuse of frontier technology allowed the atom-bomb at Nagasaki in 1945. <主语是government,谓语restricts, 后面两个since引导时间状语~ 也可以这样用吧？〉

我开始的想法是Framework 包含①forbidden items ②other area- freedom field. 政府要通过一些文件来管理一件事时，既想进行有效的管理，又同时不想过多地防碍人们的自由。 往往会采取一种方法：将禁止性事项列出；剩下不禁止的即为自由。
When government set up the framework of restrictions for scientific attitude, how to narrow the restriction area? They stated the forbidden items of researching field（from one field to another, while still left out the space for freedom） one by one and the remaining area were for scientific freedom. One pros of this arrangement is prohibiting the real and potential harm toward society while other unmentioned guarantee he free right in much broader situations. As the framework developing, another advantage shows- reliabilities and adaptability
(建议用名词). New method of scientific development, unlike the traditional pattern, sprout rapidly and if something were harmful for us or our belongings, governor just could simply add that into scientific forbidden framework. For instance, government throw O-zone destroy substance straightaway in forbidden trashcan.

In this framework, one can tell the indispensable role that the freedom（free） part has almost at a glance- which flourishes the scientific research and development by not disturbing its natural developing way. Scientific future is unknown and uncertain, more freedom means maybe one more valuable （more）chance to lead to some tiny technical reform(improve 和reform 不搭配). Thus generous freedom coupled with certain restrictions offer a wise option for government, which is always the decision-maker.
Freedom in scientific activities brings us various human resources, if most of people have access to it. People with largely different horizons communicate together would have brand new ideas to solve problems and push the progress in science. （这段话感觉和主题不相关啊，你说的是政府的限制领域的问题，没有谈到过限制交流的问题。）


Furthermore, forbidden part should be stated clear and certain. Vague statement would make it impossible for common people to obey them; they would misunderstand what they are permitted to do and how far it goes.


In conclusion, in my opinion, government should pay attention to the percentage arrangement（我觉得不是percentage的问题。而是要视问题而论??） in both restrictions on scientific development and freedom zone that giving science more possibilities.


总体感觉，文章结构不是很完整，思路有些混乱。先谈政府要限制，为了使science朝我们想要的方向发展，然后写如何建立framework，然后又写自由的重要性，接着是如何规范framework。整个段与段之间的关系基本上是想到哪儿写到哪儿。语言还是不错的，但要注意单复数和词的形式（用形容词还是名词等）。

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1049863-1-1.html
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... 6amp%3Btypeid%3D102
另外，在汇总贴上这个1>2>3的意思是1号给2号改，2号给3号改哇？ 如果是的话就是我给你改。对了，敢问楼主什么时候考试？

词汇总结：
Power: wind powered, sun powered, wave powered battery-powered, powered speaker(音箱)