Phoenix小组组员11号2010.2.13 issue

xusichuangUID: 2653998

48"The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."



What the author represented with us is a controversial complicated question. I agree with its opinion that we have focused too much on the famous few, while neglecting groups which actually made the history. And I believe that the trends in history can not simply be made by separate individuals.
What we are inoculated in history class at school are mostly the epic story of the hero and heroine that happened hundreds of years ago. We show great interest in their achievement until sometime later, they, human beings who accomplished some achievements, are idolized. For example, a lot of youngsters firmly believe that the dependence of the United States of American belongs to three singular persons---Gorge Washington, Tomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. However, the fact is, according to materialism, the despotism and usurpation of The British Crown and the great mass of the Colony people made the independence. Another example lays in the origin of Macroeconomics, which many people tend to believe that it is the contribution of John Maynard Keynes with the renowned classic “The general theory of employment interest and money”. And the uncontroversial truth is that even before Keynes, a lot economists began to originate some idea where Keynes’s thoughts derive from.
This can lead to mistakable belief that the trends in history, positive or negative, practical or academic, belongs to one or two individual. In his victory speech, the newly elected president Brake Obama, said to its people: I know who this victory truly belongs to, it belongs to you...You are the person who made this happen.... He, as a president, is sober and clear, that a government is of the people, by the people and for the people, and so is the president. Owning the contribution in history to some individual is much more refreshing and stimulating than to the group of people who actually make it happen. What seems like breakthroughs in scientific arena and the monumental turning point in the river of history made by some celebrity is the work made by the relative group, the whole mass, and the people.
To sum up, what we called trend in history is made by a group of people, not individuals; by the whole mass, not some leader. Unluckily, we tend to overemphasize individual’s contribution while neglecting others.

hhfboyUID: 2749089

1# xusichuang
48"The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."


What the author represented with (to) us is a controversial complicated question. I agree with its opinion that we have focused too much on the famous few, while neglecting groups which actually made the history. And (therefore), I believe that the trends in history can not simply be made by separate individuals(觉得表达上有问题).
What we are inoculated(接种疫苗的意思? 是educated吗?) in history class at school are mostly the epic story of the hero and heroine that happened hundreds of years ago.(两段都是同一种格式开头显得有些单调了.)
We(尽量不要用we he she 之类的可以用human等代替) show great interest in their achievements until sometime later, they, human beings who accomplished some achievements, are idolized. For example, a lot of youngsters firmly believe that the dependence of the United States of American belongs to three singular persons---Gorge Washington, Tomas Jefferson and Benjamin Franklin. However, the fact is, according to materialism, the despotism and usurpation of The British Crown and the great mass of the Colony people made the independence. Another example lays in the origin of Macroeconomics, which many people tend to believe that it is the contribution of John Maynard Keynes with the renowned classic “The general theory of employment interest and money”. And the uncontroversial truth is that even before Keynes, a lot economists began to originate some idea where Keynes’s thoughts derive from.

This (It is) can lead to mistakable belief that the trends in history, positive or negative, practical or academic, belongs to one or two individuals. In his (who?) victory speech, the newly elected president Brake Obama, said to its people: I know who this victory truly belongs to, it belongs to you...You are the person who made this happen.... He, as a president, is sober and clear, that a government is of the people, by the people and for the people, and so is the president.(嘿嘿,好例子 收啦!) Owning the contribution in history to some individual is much more refreshing and stimulating than to the group of people who actually make it happen. What seems like breakthroughs in scientific arena and the monumental turning point in the river of history made by some celebrity is the work made by the relative group, the whole mass, and the people.


To sum up, what we called trend in history is made by a group of people, not individuals; by the whole mass, not some leaders. Unluckily, we tend to overemphasize (on) individual’s contribution while neglecting others.(这句结尾句 显得不够丰满)
点评:
1 总体看其来还不错,例子引用的也十分到位,符合了观点-论据-例子的结构,第三段还能举个反面例子会更好.
2 还有上面给你标注的,尽量少用We our之类的,这些好像是在总统等名人演讲的时候才能用到,我们这里用有些不合适.
3 第二段结尾最好再做个小结.

xusichuangUID: 2653998

6号，真的谢谢你的指正，我一定好好修改:)