@@茶叶蛋炒饭@@ 第十一次作业 Issue48 请组员跟帖

saybia1993UID: 2625112

rt

cycy881125UID: 2625420

written by AlanC

Main thesis:
I strongly support the speaker’s view that the research of history based on the research of the famous individuals is not sufficient enough to reveal the nature of the history and it is necessary to deeply analysis the group of human beings participated in the events in that period. However, although the study of the entire group is more important, it is also indispensable to study the famous individuals.


Arg1: In the modern history study, it is more efficient to study history in a global scale than that of a specific way. On the one hand, We should not only focus on a famous person in one specific domain, instead of it, it seems to be essential to collect the record from all the aspects of that events and then to analysis this data in the thoughts of such other subjects’ disciplines as economics and anthropology, ultimately to integrate them into an compatible compound. Since all these subjects are relative and there are different views from different angles pointing to the same events. It is not comprehensive enough to inspect things from barely one aspect, only to analysis them in a global method could historian have an integrated way to consider the things. The following illustration could better demonstrate this point of view. In the 20th century, French historian Fernand Braudel revolutionized the study of history, by using such outside disciplines as economics, anthropology, and geography in the study of global history. It seems that the global view of the history have been gradually replacing the specific way.

On the other hand, when analysis the accidents of history, the crowd in the events should not be negative, and it is of significance to focus on the crowds. Since the masses have always been the dominant power, every accident of history would be caused by the human, such as the civil war is trigger by the different view of the slavery and the African-American civil rights movements are also triggered by the humans, thus, although the masses is not the outstanding one, they are the core component of the events. So without the analysis of the groups of people, the thoughts would be unilateral and would not convince others.

Arg2: Necessarily through studying the famous few, who has be the representation of the events, can one make sense the major thought of the times. When analyzing the history, it is obvious that the celebrities have always been the leader of the accident in which the people would be instructed by them, and their thoughts lead the populace to the end, thus it is also essential to consider the affection of celebrities and it is the first step for the deep study of the history. The Age of Enlightenment is a term during which new thoughts are bringing in persistently. Voltaire, Montesquieu and Rousseau are the predominant leader and mentor, whose new concepts in philosophy have been the excellent achievements and their thought lead people to follow the collect path and have significant influences on the French Revolution.



In sum, the famous few would be the soul and leader of the times, while the masses have been the dominant power of the events which are conducted by the celebrities and affected by their progressive thoughts. When analyzing, the study of should be firstly stepped, and then to deeply study the events, by research the masses which have an dominant position in the accidents. Thus it seems to be better method to study history to integrate the two aspects into one compatible

shenxianhuUID: 2455394

by SXH
The speaker claims that the study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten, instead of the famous few. However, I don’t think it is not a straightforward issue. Both notable person and public serve to the importance of history.

One thing I have to admit is that it’s public play a key and important role in historical events. Without public any historical event is impossible to finished by the only notable leader. Considering great Chinese admiral Zheng He’s seven voyages to western oceans in the 1400s, It’s only his name and his pioneering contribution to worldwide maritime history and cultural exchange that we keep in our minds. However, without the teamwork of the  crews, without the efforts of any anonymous labors, and without china, silk and other welcomed products made by masses, nothing would had been achieved on his own..

Having recognized the huge and inestimable role of groups of people in the long history, by no means can we deny that without certain notable leader, it is believed that the power of public can not bring a vast majority of reforms, including those big events which changed the course of history. Faced with the whole history, those notable leader we often talked, not only adhere to the certain historical events tightly, but also are considered as indispensable elements. Dating back to typical traditional Chinese society, the whole society went blindly companied with personality cults and even expanding class struggles. Then Deng Xiaoping came to power and called a halt to it. Although it is impossible to attribute all the success of reform and open policies to Deng, we cannot overlook the power leaded by Deng which spur us to fight for hopeful future. It’s elites like Deng that lead people to the better life.

The situation that we prefer to research history rest on those notable people doesn’t mean that we ignore the public. Contrarily, the notable one is just the typical one who come from the public. Rose Parks, as the first black woman in American history, refused to offer her seat to a white man. She was a representative of era’s ideological trend that called racial justice. remembering her name and appreciating her pioneering contribution does not mean to neglect anybody else who also dedicated their lives to fair civil rights movement. Contrarily, her action typically became a markable symbol, from which we easily bring to mind people who devoted themselves decades ago to build the equal and harmonious society we enjoy today. Supposing the history merely records "Alabama citizens in the 1950s", we may not have been so touched and inspired. Isn't that what the study of history seeks for?

In sum, we believe that the aim of the research to the history not only trace the development of society, but also a probe of human nature. The assertion of speaker is not convincing. In fact, we never refer to discard those groups of people. Contrarily, most of people are used to deal with the history from a big event and a notable person, which appear to be in accordance with human nature.
自我评价：结尾太草草，想不出新意

改AlanC
Main thesis:
I strongly support the speaker’s view that the research of history based on the research of the famous individuals is not sufficient enough to reveal the nature of the history and it is necessary to deeply analysis the group of human beings participated in the events in that period. However, although the study of the entire group is more important, it is also indispensable to study the famous individuals.
提出观点，不错
Arg1: In the modern history study, it is more efficient to study history in a global scale than that of（in） a specific way. On the one hand, We should not only focus on a famous person in one specific domain, instead of it, it seems to be essential to collect the record from all the aspects of that events and then to analysis this data in the thoughts of such other subjects’ disciplines as economics and anthropology, ultimately to integrate them into an compatible compound. Since all these subjects are relative and there are different views from different angles pointing to the same events. It is not comprehensive enough to inspect things from barely one aspect, only to analysis them in a global method could historian have an integrated way to consider the things. The following illustration could better demonstrate this point of view. In the 20th century, French historian Fernand Braudel revolutionized the study of history, by using such outside disciplines as economics, anthropology, and geography in the study of global history. It seems that the global view of the history have been gradually replacing the specific way.
这段我怎么看都像离题了，你全段说的都是历史研究需要其他科学的辅助，这个像是在说另外一篇issue。其他的就没怎么看了


On the other hand, when analysis(when we refer to analysis of) the accidents of history, the crowd in the events should not be negative, and it is of significance to focus on the crowds. Since the masses have always been the dominant power, every accident of history would be caused by the human, such as the civil war is trigger by the different view of the slavery and the African-American civil rights movements are also triggered by the humans, thus, although the masses is not the outstanding one (单数和复数不对应), they are the core component of the events. So without the analysis of the groups of people, the thoughts would be unilateral and would not convince others.
这段可以，说没有大众就没有历史。
Arg2: Necessarily through studying the famous few, who has be the representation of the events, can one make sense the major thought of the times. When analyzing the history, it is obvious that the celebrities have always been the leader of the accident in which the people would be instructed by them, and their thoughts lead the populace to the end, thus it is also essential to consider the affection of celebrities and it is the first step for the deep study of the history. The Age of Enlightenment is a term during which new thoughts are bringing in persistently. Voltaire, Montesquieu and Rousseau are the predominant leader and mentor, whose new concepts in philosophy have been the excellent achievements and their thought lead people to follow the collect path and have significant influences on the French Revolution.
少数领导者的作用也很重要。后面那个例子不错。
In sum, the famous few would be the soul and leader of the times, while the masses have been the dominant power of the events which are conducted by the celebrities and affected by their progressive thoughts. When analyzing, the study of notable people should be firstly stepped, and then to deeply study the events, by research the masses which have an dominant position in the accidents. Thus it seems to be better method to study history to integrate the two aspects into one compatible.这句说的很好，我最后一段写的不好，可以借鉴下

除了第二段，其他写的不错。第二段就算是作为引子，也未免太长，同时，也没有过渡句拉回主题上来，所以认为是离题的，建议再写写。
蓝色是我觉得好的。

cycy881125UID: 2625420

晕，寄托数据库出问题了，刚才所有帖子都没看见

Athena.missingUID: 2710486

In the realm of history study, it is often the case that too much emphasis is placed on individuals, while the most significant events and trends in history were the results of efforts of groups of people, who are often overshadowed and forgotten. I agree with it, for these outstanding individuals are easy to be recorded even though the achievements were made by those people behind the scene.

It is human nature to give more attention to these people who outshine others in public activities. Their leadership is often the driving force behind the mass movement, especially in significant historical events concerning about the majority of people, or an entire noticeable crowd, such as women, children or senior citizens in a country. For example, the victory of liberation movement in China, which has decided the destiny of every Chinese people, greatly depends on the wise leadership of Chairman Mao. He drew the blueprint of China’s future, bring hope to ordinary people, and devise out excellent plans which are in line with the reality of China. There is a saying in a wide range of civil spread that without the instruction and leadership of Mao, China’s liberation will be postponed at least 50 years. When there is a person who can greatly push forward the process, he will easily become the center of the whole event and thus, catch most of our attention. Another thing must be admitted is that thanks to their outstanding feats, the historical events find a clearer thread to be analyzed, avoid the tangled relationship.

But this kind of concentration will bring disadvantages as well. The most possible result is the triggering of individualism and heroism in general emotions, for too much praise and honor given to specific individuals. Admittedly, Chairman Mao is the biggest hero, who was adored and honored by common people to an unprecedented level after the rough and hard struggling for 8 years against invaders. However, latterly this crowd mind began to go deviant and abnormal. Most people believed in what he said as code and law, and did his instructions obediently without a minute of hesitation. This worship is nothing less than deification, which brings great disaster to the society, and severely checked the development process of China.

Moreover, without the group efforts, the power of these individuals will be drastically weakened. These famous people are just representatives, and the contributions of the masses are the truly effective strength which makes the change. The realizations of significant historical events are broadly based on common people’s support. It is just like the pyramid, the absence of the foundation bed will lead to the collapse of whole structure, not to mention the sparkling peak. The past remarkable movements all over the world, such as the campaign for gender equality in Iran, the emancipation revolution in China or the movements against the racial discrimination in the US, can all testify that the decisive precondition of the victory is without exception the mass support and participation from the grass roots community. Without these people serve as the background, the final results will not be the same, no matter who command the movements, Mao or Martin Luther King.

To sum up, there is no grand for blame that too much emphasis is placed on several specific figures; for the history is so complex that sometimes we can only reconstruct the past on the basis of individual activities. But when it comes to the problems of historical analysis, we should not ignore the social background and popular trend of thought, namely the devotions made by those people who don’t leave a trace on the historical records.

改424
I strongly agree with the speaker's notion, groups of people who we have not remembered their identities are the most factors(这个地方是不是缺形容词了?) in long history. We can refer this conclusion from the complexity of social, the attribute of social and the factor of special individuals.(这句话是什么意思啊? 没看懂…..)

To begin with, social(society) is a complex system. There is(去掉) no one can determine the history development only by his own strength. Every great event in history accumulates the effort of enormous people. For instance, the Project Apollo is the one of the most significant affairs in twenty-one (21st) century, and I think most people only remember the Neil Alden Armstrong who is the first human walk on the moon. But other airmen and numerous scientists also contribute a lot to this project, and are indispensible in this project. Without this scientist(这是指的who? ) and those airmen who did not walk on the moon, can he(Armstrong这里跟前面离得远了点, 不要用代词了.) be the first human step on the moon. Obviously, he cannot because he would not have the shuttlecraft without scientists, he would not experience such an effective training without those airmen. Hence, only through the whole members of group can the famous accomplish significant events.

In addition, every intricate affair has been divided to different simple things, and attribute (attributes) to lots of people to accomplish them. And then a complicate affair was(为什么要用was呢?) accomplished. The famous may play an important role in the process, such as leadership. The New Deal is an excellent example to illustrate this, and in these great events we perhaps only know that this program is initiated by Franklin D.Roosevelt. He made some complex economic measure(measures) and save America’s economic(economy). However, can we owe the majority of success to him? The answer is no because he only played a leadership role in this program. Other officials, businessmen also contribute a lot to the program. They do some particular affairs which are direct to the economic problem. The total contribution of those officials and businessmen would be more than the Roosevelt’s. Thus every one involves in the program contribute to revitalize America's economic.

这一段的时态, 和主谓一致有些混乱

Finally, the famous stand for lots of people, stand for the affairs other unknown people done. For instance, Martin Luther King is the sprit leader of anti-discriminate campaign, and he gives courage to black people. However, a series success of those campaign should owe to the people we cannot remember, such as the people attend Montgomery Bus Boycott, there will not be any success without these heroes. They are the most important factor in the campaign. Thus, in this example, Martin Luther King was the initiator and the sprit leader, he stand for those campaigns, stand for the people involves in the campaign. These people are the most important.

In general, I concede that famous can accelerate the advance of history, but the people we do not remember decide what the history is.
首段我没怎么看明白.
正文第一段:　 Every great event in history accumulates the effort of enormous people.
正文第二段：The famous may play an important role in the process, such as leadership.
正文第三段：the famous stand for lots of people, stand for the affairs other unknown people done.
可是这三段的区分度好小．．好像都是讲一个意思的．
再注意下细节吧．

imlifewillingUID: 2706999

by 懒蚂蚁

When we discuss the issue that who made the history, the famous few or the mass, it is hard for us to make a perfect assessment about their contributions. In my opinion, while we admit the significant effects of the mass, we should not ignore the important role that individuals play. What's more, when it comes to the history study, we have to turn to the analysis of the famous few for some reasons.

In the first place, there is no denying the fact that the populace are the participants of the most significant events and trends in human history. From the contributions of Great Wall in China to the building of the Pyramid in Egypt; from the invasion to the Europe leading by Napoleon to the Second World War; it is obvious that without the mass all these crucial events, no matter it is good or bad, could never take place. What's more, even in scientific realm, the public also play an important role. Let's take the industrial revolution as an example to illustrate this point. Though it is the Watt who invited the stream engine, without the workers who made this machine available for the users and without the increasing needs of the populace which acquired for automation to improve the efficiency, this machine would never spread all over the world and stimulate the dramatic change of our world. From this point of view, the mass are an indispensable part of the history.

In the second place, while we place emphasis on the mass in our history, we also need to consider the famous fews' effects which are more important. Though the individuals made some important things in history come true, when we think it on a deep level, we would find that the mass were incited or inspired by the famous individuals in realizing those significant things. There would be no Great Wall without the emperor Qinshihuang; the alliance might lose the war without the leadership of Roosevelt, Churchill and Stalin; and the stream engine would come into practice decades or even more late without Watt. It is the famous few who portray the blueprint of the future and the mass who bring this blueprint into fruition. Therefore, when we decide to study the history, it is important for us to learn the important effects of the celebrities.

What's more, why we are placing so much emphasis on individuals in history study has some inevitable reasons. Every historians wants to interpret the history more comprehensively though all respects not only the famous fews but also the important mass. However, on the one hand, the objective situations do not support this plan. Since the historical materials are primarily focus on the famous individual for some reasons, historians can only explain our history by those evidence. Even though they want to learn history from the mass, there is no sufficient materials. On the other hand, it is the famous few who represent the crucial changes of our society. So for the understanding of our history, studying of those celebrities can provide sufficient information, while the studying of the mass can only afford some auxiliary massage. What's more, even there are some materials about the mass available for historians, there may be not so many experts who can research those issues. All in all, being limited by the real circumstances, we have to focus on the famous few for learning the history better.

To sum up, the famous individuals and the mass constructed the history together. However, when it comes to the analysis of history, there is no other way for us to make a full understanding about it except paying more attention to the famous ones.

修改Athena

In the realm of history study, it is often the case that too much emphasis is placed on individuals, while the most significant events and trends in history were the results of efforts of groups of people, who are often overshadowed and forgotten. I agree with it, for these outstanding individuals are easy to be recorded even though the achievements were made by those people behind the scene.
开头强调了两点，一是历史研究的重点放在了个别人上，另外一个就是历史是大众创造的。
It is human nature to give more attention to these people who outshine others in public activities. Their leadership is often the driving force behind the mass movement, especially in significant historical events concerning about the majority of people, or an entire noticeable crowd, such as women, children or senior citizens in a country. For example, the victory of liberation movement in China, which has decided the destiny of every Chinese people, greatly depends on the wise leadership of Chairman Mao. He drew the blueprint of China’s future, bring hope to ordinary people, and devise out excellent plans which are in line with the reality of China. There is a saying in a wide range of civil spread that without the instruction and leadership of Mao, China’s liberation will be postponed at least 50 years. When there is a person who can greatly push forward the process, he will easily become the center of the whole event and thus, catch most of our attention. Another thing must be admitted is that thanks to their outstanding feats, the historical events find a clearer thread to be analyzed, avoid the tangled relationship.
人的本性去研究名人->名人推动主要的历史事件->名人抓住了我们的注意力->名人是研究历史有线索。这是你这段的要点。由第一个到第二个之间的关系是什么？要是解释第一个的话，我觉得应该从研究者说，而不是历史名人说。第二点到第三点联系可以。第三点到第四点也可以，所以第一点是一个累赘。其实这是很多人的通病（包括我），总想在一段里面概括尽可能多的东西， 这样就显得臃肿混乱了。这段里面的三个红色的动词好像时态不一样。
But this kind of concentration will bring disadvantages as well. The most possible result is the triggering of individualism and heroism in general emotions, for too much praise and honor given to specific individuals. Admittedly, Chairman Mao is the biggest hero, who was adored and honored by common people to an unprecedented level after the rough and hard struggling for 8 years against invaders. However, latterly this crowd mind began to go deviant and abnormal. Most people believed in what he said as code and law, and did his instructions obediently without a minute of hesitation. This worship is nothing less than deification, which brings great disaster to the society, and severely checked the development process of China.
说明想相信个人容易导致的危害。但是我觉得和主体没有设么联系啊。既和创造历史连接不上，也和研究历史连接不上。
Moreover, without the group efforts, the power of these individuals will be drastically weakened. These famous people are just representatives, and the contributions of the masses are the truly effective strength which makes the change. The realizations of significant historical events are broadly based on common people’s support. It is just like the pyramid, the absence of the foundation bed will lead to the collapse of whole structure, not to mention the sparkling peak. The past remarkable movements all over the world, such as the campaign for gender equality in Iran, the emancipation revolution in China or the movements against the racial discrimination in the US, can all testify that the decisive precondition of the victory is without exception the mass support and participation from the grass roots community. Without these people serve as the background, the final results will not be the same, no matter who command the movements, Mao or Martin Luther King.
这段说大众的作用，强调大众是主要的，没有大众，名人根本没有什么作用。
To sum up, there is no grand for blame that too much emphasis is placed on several specific figures; for the history is so complex that sometimes we can only reconstruct the past on the basis of individual activities. But when it comes to the problems of historical analysis, we should not ignore the social background and popular trend of thought, namely the devotions made by those people who don’t leave a trace on the historical records.

红色的为我的理解和分析，绿色的为我认为好的词句（我忍整篇文章都很流畅，羡慕中）

最后结尾说两者都有用。

Athena的作文语言很好，我都想当做范文来背了。
简单说下这个作文的问题：
（1）每段独自看起来都很有说服力，但是整篇文章看起来却不是很好。
（2）开头强调了历史的研究重点放在了名人上，还有名人创造了历史。第二段说了名人对历史的作用，问题已经在文中指出；第三段我觉得是个多余，因为和你的中心没有什么联系。第四段说明了大众的作用。由于你文章说明人的有两段，说大众的只有一段，给人的感觉就是你重视名人而不是大众，况且你在第四段也没有说明大众对历史研究的作用，而只是说了对历史的作用。那么这样一方面和你的开头（让人感觉侧重点是大众）不相符，也和结尾（名人和大众对历史研究都有作用）不合。当然我可能有点放大这些问题了。总体来说还是很好的。
个人愚见，望加指正。

cycy881125UID: 2625420

嘿嘿，谢谢你的修改，我再写一次看看。 3# shenxianhu