有空给你们改改ISSUE（含130分析/改完会短信通知/平均排队时间2周）

sinbad_28UID: 2147500

俺没从来没混过作文版，最近估计有点空，来贡献点余热，就把第一次献出来了:$。几个简单规矩说一下：

1. 只改Issue
2. 文章要贴到这里来（跟帖），不要只发个链接。最好把题目也贴进来。
3. 不要把那种刚在记事本里打好的文章贴过来，自己先改3遍。这其实不叫规矩吧？
4. 我不是作文版版主，没给改，水平不高，照顾不周别怪我。
5. 肯定不可能给每个人都改。没改的要么我没时间，要么一样的题目改的烦了，要么就是我觉得你实在需要自己先改改……(sorry)。

解释权规个人所有哈～

＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
130思路提示 (可能观点有重复)
“How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. Unfortunately, we have not yet learned how to raise children who can bring about a better society.”
1).你有没有想过，为什么作者用被动语态(are socialized)呢？为什么不说how children socialize呢？how children are socialized跟后半命题有什么关系呢？还是作者故意把2个关系不很密切的命题放在一起？
2). 我们写的时候，到底应该把笔墨放在children上，还是放在we（即上一辈人）上呢？
下面是我的理解：
用随便哪个英英字典先查下socialize就能知道，前半个命题应该理解为“如何言传身教，潜移默化下一代决定了整个社会的发展方向”，而不是“孩子们如何交往决定未来”！因为只有这样理解才能跟后半个命题紧密联系的起来，才能体现出整个题目是要你写“教育”的重要性。不知道这样的理解大家赞同不赞同。

yogurt4UID: 198389

挖，，，第一次看见你出现在这里，老泪纵横ing

sinbad_28UID: 2147500

挖，，，第一次看见你出现在这里，老泪纵横ing
yogurt4 发表于 2010-7-9 15:12

哈哈，你好像学我说话吧？

声望就不能给我多加点吗！！！

yogurt4UID: 198389

哈哈，你好像学我说话吧？

声望就不能给我多加点吗！！！
sinbad_28 发表于 2010-7-10 05:23

8分／次／贴是我的极限。。。

sinbad_28UID: 2147500

哦，杯具。。。。。。。。

shadow1987UID: 2605840

本人这辈子第一篇ISSUE如下，希望前辈点评。
（下段为题目）
"How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. Unfortunately, we have not yet learned how to raise children who can bring about a better society."

I absolutely agree with the first statement, nevertheless, I find the speaker's second claim is not really persuasive enough. It is obvious that a tribe's future hinges on their children, a nation's future is determined by their children, even our world's future, the answer is the same, hence, how children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. However, the claim that we have not yet learned how to raise children who can bring about a better society just base on some particular conditions and the statement is unilateral.

Before we draw any conclusion about the speaker's assertion, we should at first define the meaning of socialization, it means to fit or train for a social environment. Consequently, we face a controversial query--what is the subject of this definition? Considering the topic which under discussion, I think the subject can be divided into three aspects: the children themselves, their family and the social environment where they live amidst. After that, we should comprehend profoundly the huge influence they affect children and this so-called socialization's retroaction toward the destiny of society.

Consider those great people who have made outstanding contributions to our society, many of these contributions can be traced back to their childhood process of socialization. Take a look at Dante who lost his parents while he was very young and what was worse, throughout his childhood, Dante living in the darkness of preceding period of the Renaissance. However, Dante stuck on his pursuit to pure art by continuous power from inner persistence and finally became one of the three giants of the Renaissance. On the contrary, unhealthy socialization can also let children jeopardize our society, take mass media as an example, violence, drugs and sex from TV programs and other mass media have become a main inducement of adolescent crime.

While agreeing to the rationale of the first statement, I venture to disagree with the speaker's next claim that we have not yet learned how to raise children who can bring about a better society. In fact, I believe our society is on the march all the time. After Industrial revolution, the children of the people who lived in pre-Industrial-revolution-period created steam engine and began to use electric light, afterwards, their children invented computer and established internet, however, at this moment, and the children of their children are driving spacecrafts to explore the outer space! All these evidences prove that each new generation excels the last one! How can people say that we have not yet learned how to raise children who can bring about a better society? We can confidently assert that our children are the best!

In conclusion, our children are closely related to our society, and their process of socialization determines their characteristics, nature, morality and capability. All these factors influence the destiny of our society directly. And, not only in the economic sphere, the field of politics, science but also for the art, human are making progress all the time. Hence, deviate from the speaker's statement, I believe we do raise the children who can better our society.

sinbad_28UID: 2147500

本人这辈子第一篇ISSUE如下，希望前辈点评。
（下段为题目）
"How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. Unfortunately, we have not yet learned how to raise children who can br ...
shadow1987 发表于 2010-7-9 19:25

"How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. Unfortunately, we have not yet learned how to raise children who can bring about a better society." 一个命题可能叫做first half and second half of the statement更合适些。不要说first and second statement。见下。

I absolutely agree with the first half of the statement, nevertheless, whereas I equally find the speaker's second claim half is not really persuasive enough falls short on its persuasiveness. As we all know, It is obvious that a tribe's future hinges on their children,
and that a nation's future is determined by their children., even our world's future, the answer is the same, Likewise, this very theory also applies when it comes to the relationship of children and future of the entire world. hence, how children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. As for the second half of statement, However, the claim that we have not yet learned how to raise children who can bring about a better society just simply base itself on some particular conditions and the thus the statement is to some extent unilateral.

Before we draw any conclusion make any judgement about the speaker's assertion, we should at first define the meaning of socialization - it means to fit or train for a social environment [解释了似乎还是不很明白啊，再说详细点?]. Consequently, That said, we now are facing a controversial query
- what is the subject of this definition? Considering the topic which is under discussion, I think the subject can be divided into three aspects - the children themselves, their family and the social environment where they live amidst [不错！]. After that Altogether, we should comprehend profoundly the huge influence they [they是谁？] affect children and this so-called socialization's retroaction towards the destiny of society.

Consider those great people who have made outstanding contributions to our society, many of these contributions can be traced back to their childhood process of socialization process of their childhood. Take a look at Dante who lost his parents while he was very young [how young?] and what was worse, throughout his childhood, Dante living lived in the darkness of preceding period of the Renaissance [如何黑暗？既然说了就要稍微展开一点]. However, Dante firmly
stuck on his pursuit to the pure art by continuous power from inner persistence with his determination, willingness, and exceptional persistence, and finally he became one of the three giants of the entire Renaissance. On the contrary, unhealthy socialization can also let children jeopardize our society, take mass media as an example, violence, drugs and sex from TV programs and other mass media have become a main inducement of adolescent crime [例子不错].

While agreeing to the rationale of the first half of statement, I venture to disagree with the speaker's next half claim that we have not yet learned how to raise children who can bring about a better society. In fact, I believe our society is on the march all the time throughout the whole time of human's societal evolution. After upon the Industrial revolution, the people who spent their childhood of the people who lived in pre-Industrial-revolution-period created steam engine and began to use electric light, [用句号断开，下句参照上巨这样改] afterwards, their children invented computer and established internet, however [没看懂，为什么要转折呢？], at this moment, and the children of their children are driving spacecrafts to explore the outer space! All these evidences prove that each new the next generation always excels the last previous one! How can people say that we have not yet learned how to raise children who can bring about a better society? We can confidently assert that our children are the best! [这个例子写的不好，上一代发明蒸气机，下一代就航天飞行了，那再下一代呢？发明ipad吗？得想想其他例子，“我们并不是不懂得教育下一代”，因为科技在进步，社会变得更富有，医疗系统在改进，信息接受变得更及时，等等。这都说明社会得总体趋势是一代一代在前进得。]

In conclusion, our children are closely related to our society, and their process of socialization determines their characteristics personality, nature, morality and capability. All these factors influence the destiny of our society directly. And, not only in the economic sphere, the field of politics, science but also for the art, human are making progress all the time. Hence, deviate from the speaker's statement, I believe we do know how to raise the children who can better our society. [结尾写得很好！]

sinbad: 和大多数中国学生一样，逻辑词和连接词（所以，反过来说，这样，但是，尽管……）非常需要改进。像第二段这样的逻辑关系，外国人是不可能看明白你论证的思路的。多读外国人写的paper可以提高。加油！

追梦小木耳UID: 2781857

恳请楼主高手修改作文
刚开始写，不知道这样写结构、逻辑、例证对不对，请楼主指正
17"There are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws."


Word 530

Laws are set to regulate every individual’s behavior and activity in order to guarantee the order of society. Regardless whether they are viewed to be just or not, they should be obeyed by all the citizens.

As views of justice vary from person to person, it is quite difficult to define the type of a law. A just law in one’s eyes, which seems to maintain the benefit of all citizens, could be unfair to other groups of people. Even the most beneficial ones could suffer rebukes of lacking equity. We may cite a single example of the laws that limit the pollution produced by industrial companies, which must be regarded just by most individuals, since they aim to protect the environment. However, the consumers would hold the opposite opinion because they have to pay more for the products, owing to the fees that are used to reduce the pollution are added to the costs. The producers would also object to the rules since the higher prices could reduce the amount of customers.

In addition, if every one was deciding whether or not to follow the laws according to his judgment, there would be a soaring rate of crime, and the society therefore would be running limitlessly. For instance, the rich people may think it unjust for them to pay high taxes, while the poor, who are unemployed or homeless, can enjoy the free accommodation provided by the government. If they disregard and resist the tax laws, where will the government’s money come from? There are tremendous possibilities that the poor have to make a living by stealing, robbing and even killing, and these crimes are believed to be just and reasonable by the poor. Therefore, our society would hardly maintain peace if people are encouraged to violate laws of which they think lacking equity.

Even though one insists that one law is unjust and must be modified, it is not wise for him to resist the law by disobeying it. In modern society, every behavior against laws will bring about punishment and the judge would certainly not evaluate the criminal’s prospective of the law while sentencing upon him. Besides, every individual’s crime can not appeal to attention in society. On the contrary, the more crimes are committed, the severer the punishments will be. For these reasons, other sensible tactics should be adopted to fight against the injustice of laws. Such tactics may include demonstrating or writing articles to call for public attention. Our society is filled with such examples as the government of Belgium modified the law after seeing the movie Rosetta, in which a 18-year-old girl was struggling hard to support her poor family, in order to protect the rights of teenagers.

To conclude, there exists no sense to emphasis that the citizens should resist and disregard laws that they consider to be unjust, not only due to the vague definition of just or unjust laws, but also for the weak function of single individuals. The premature resistance and violence would consequently lead to the disorder of society and therefore, sever punishments. In order to improve the justice of laws, other legitimate and rational measures should be considered.

sinbad_28UID: 2147500

恳请楼主高手修改作文
刚开始写，不知道这样写结构、逻辑、例证对不对，请楼主指正
17"There are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws an ...
追梦小木耳 发表于 2010-7-10 03:32

Laws are set established to regulate every individual’s behavior and activity in order to guarantee the order justice [order是顺序，是中国英语，呵呵] of society. Regardless whether they are viewed to be just or not, they should must be obeyed by all the citizens.

As views of justice vary from person to person, it is quite difficult to define the type of a law. A just law in one’s eyes, which seems to maintain the benefit of all citizens, could be unfair to other groups of people. Even the most beneficial ones could suffer rebukes of lacking equity possible
inequality. We may cite a single example of the laws that limit the pollution produced by industrial companies industries,
which must be regarded appreciated just by most individuals, since they aim to protect the environment. However, the consumers would hold the opposite opinion because they have to pay more for the products, owing to the fees that are used to reduce the pollution are added to the costs. The producers would also object to the rules since the higher prices could reduce the amount of customers. [however以后没给改，应该这样说：反对环保的是商家，因为他们必需化更多的钱在废品回收上，导致产品成本过高。这样一来，要么他们的利润变薄了，要么产品的价格只能抬高，导致销售降低。]

In addition, if every one was deciding whether or not to follow the laws according to his judgment everyone gets to decide whether he is to obey the laws by his own will, there would be a soaring rate of crime, and the society therefore would be running limitlessly [running limitlessly 啥意思？]. For instance, the rich people may think it unjust for them to pay high taxes, while the poor, who are unemployed or homeless, can enjoy the free accommodation benefits [accomodation意思是歇脚的地方或者住处]provided by the government. If they disregard and resist the tax laws, where will the government’s money come from? Also, if the criminal laws can be disobeyed by any people at all, there will be tremendous possibilities that the poor have to [不一定是have to烧杀抢掠吧？呵呵]might start thinking of making a living by stealing, robbing and even killing, and these crimes are believed to be just and reasonable by the poor. Therefore, our society would hardly maintain peace if people are encouraged to violate laws of which they think lacking equity. [这段有那么一点不严密，比如富人上的税不是政府收入的唯一来源啊。政府还可以从机构，商业，消费等其他地方收税的。另外，烧杀抢掠的也不完全的是穷人吧，也有其他原因造成的，仔细想想？]

Even though one insists that one law is unjust and must be modified, it is not wise for him to resist the law by disobeying it as a protest[这个观点很好！]. In modern society, every behavior against laws will bring about punishment and the judge would certainly not evaluate the criminal’s prospective of the law while sentencing upon him. Besides, every individual’s crime can not appeal to attention in society[啥意思？不被社会注意？]. On the contrary, the more crimes are committed, the severer the punishments will be. For these reasons, other sensible tactics should be adopted to fight against the injustice of laws. Such tactics may include demonstrating or writing articles to call for public attention. Our society is filled with such examples as the government of Belgium modified the law after seeing the movie Rosetta, in which a 18-year-old girl was struggling hard to support her poor family, in order to protect the rights of teenagers. [On the contrary以后可以考虑这样说：不公正的法律的确存在，但不是个人的权利去抵制他，而是政府的义务。同时，一个健全良好的政府也完全在孜孜不倦的向好的方向努力，法律制定者的确也在关注人民对法律的意见并及时给予修正，比如你说的比利时电影等。]

To conclude, there exists no sense to emphasis that the citizens should resist and disregard laws that they consider to be unjust, not only due to the vague definition of just or unjust laws, but also for the weak function of single individuals. The premature resistance and violence would consequently lead to the disorder of society and therefore, sever punishments. In order to improve the justice of laws, other legitimate and rational measures should be considered. [结尾写的很不错！]

sinbad: 还有一个观点可以说：法律的本质是用来制约行为，因此世界上完全公正的法律是不存在的——至少对于被制约的一方来说。公正是相对的，对一方的公正完全可能是对另一方的不公正。因此，把法律分成公正和不公正两类是不合理的，判断一个法律的好话应该看他是否合理，是否必要，比如你说的富人上税，穷人免税加福利，而刑法应该一视同仁，等等。你觉得呢？

lingli_xiaoaiUID: 172506

辛苦了啦。。。
不过order那个。。。the order of the society 是正规用法。。没什么问题
如果查字典order下面的词条就包括了
conformity or obedience to law or established authority; absence of disturbance, riot, revolt, unruliness, etc.: A police officer was there to maintain order.

俺不是专门来挑错的，只是昨天查资料的时候 看到其实条文中用proper order。。。来解释justice 结果扫到这个顺便一说而已。。

yogurt4UID: 198389

我真是太佩服你们了。。我是不给网友改语法／表达问题的，我自己表达都差。我也不是语法老师。。。。
我就看看结构内容什么的，既可以互相学习还能隐形灌水:victory:

lingli_xiaoaiUID: 172506

我语法和表达也差。。。所以我也没改过表达问题啊 这个真是碰巧的

追梦小木耳UID: 2781857

9# sinbad_28

十分感谢前辈的指点，收益良多！
我也认为自己举的例子不严密，如果是argument，也肯定会受到很多攻击
交税的例子应该说成是政府会失去一部分财源，不能保障一些穷人的福利。我也不认为犯罪的都是穷人，我想表达的意思是穷人如果没有社会保障，他们会认为法律不公正，没有保障他们的利益。他们生活就很艰难，可能导致他们犯罪，破坏社会的秩序。
当然，这一段是我没有表达清楚。
倒数第二段是想说，应采取其他措施抵抗不公正的法律。因为单个人的违法会受到惩罚，而且很难引起社会的关注，这样是不能改变法律的。就算抵抗的人很多，政府会因犯罪的人越多，惩罚越严厉
你说的那个情况，我也想过，是不是应该讨论法律的相对公正与否
但是我的观点是即使是不公正的法律也应遵守，所以我觉得侧重点应该在讨论人们怎样对待不公正的法律的问题上，而不是法律是否公正上。
解释了这么多，还是自己语言表达方面的欠缺，论证不严密
by the way, 那句society would be running limitless 是社会失去秩序~用词严重失误~
再次感谢修改！

nanfeng25899UID: 2629871

这是我修改后的作文~~请版版请教

题目：
"How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. Unfortunately, we have not yet learned how to raise children who can bring about a better society."

正文：

When it comes to the question: have we learned to raise the children who will bring us a better society? The speaker claims that we haven’t master this crucial “technique”, which will determine the future of our society. Undoubtedly, our society’s destiny might be affected by the socialization of our kids; however, its influence should not be overemphasized as many factors will make a difference to our future.

As for the speaker’s conclusion, if those future’s owners are not socialized , how do they, who lack of the basic communication skills and team spirit, live a better life themselves, not to speak of a better society. As the rapid development of China, “Guanxi”, which is originated from the internet, has become a new word in the English vocabulary. This word pinpoints the essence of Chinese culture, that is, how well you have socialized determines, to large extent, whether your career will succeed ultimately. This fact does illustrate us the importance of socialization in contemporary society.

Moreover, socializing the children does make a great contribution to bettering the society.
In most cases, the considerably meaningful breakthrough is not achieved by individual, but a team. Being a team, negotiation, communication and cooperation play the key role in the activities of the team. For example, the brainstorm is one way to exchange the distinguish ideas and create new views among college students when they needs some inspirations. In this way, they are indeed out of box, and get the innovative results. It’s those seminal perspectives that become the motivation of the society change, a better society. In addition, in today’s society, no matter which field you are delving in, as it is more tough than ever to make any breakthrough, the significance of cooperation is becoming more obvious. If you cast a look at the 2006 Nobel Prize for Medicine, you will find out that it is two biologists---Andrew Fire and Craig Mello---that make the discovery of RNA interference. Therefore, socializing our offspring, admittedly, will be conducive to the progress of a society.

Of course, I concede the speaker’s assertion that society’s fate to some extent depends on how social the children are, but there must also be other factors which decide the prospect of a society, ranging from personal belief to intelligence. For instance, as one of the three global religions, the Christian impart the doctrine of universal love to the adherents who believe they will go to the paradise after death for doing a lot of deeds in their whole life. Hence, the personal conviction, in this sense, is one kind of impulsion to the better society other than the socialization. What is more, we have to admit that intelligence level is still the inevitable limitation to the development, because this internal and physical factor does restrict how much information or knowledge we can absorb. As a result, I deem that even though they are socialized, they cannot guarantee a better society owing to the influence of other elements.

To sum up, the socialization is one of the significant ingredients in the form of our future; yet taking other parameters into consideration are indispensable. As far as I’m concerned, when weighing up the factors affecting the society’s destiny, the speaker should and must consider all of them discreetly.

soarer0474UID: 2665789

4. "No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study."

No other time has so high-leveled science and technology than our modern time. Cars, planes, internet, all of these things are brought to our practical life since they have been significantly advanced studied. What inspired all of these good ideas in studies, knowledge in this field or out of the field? Both, I suppose. Surely, some of the success is due to the knowledge in its own special field.
However, many great advances in study are always brought from the outsiders. Study, especailly the basic theory study, which has been already studied by many intelligent scientists for a considerably long time, always has gone in to a “dark” situation. In this situation, the permanently existing problems in this area have been tried with almost any possible means, and have dispointed all of the challegers. But the changlleging problems, in most time, are the keys to the significant progress of the field and the door of the ultimate truth. So when the key in this field is not fit for the door of truth, try another one in different field. Other sepcial field may have the right means or solutions. Theymay give the specialtists in this samll area a great help, although the knowledge seems simple or useless for the outsiders.
The double spiral structure, regarded as a useless stucture in the nature, has already found by the machimatics scientists in the early days. At the same time, the searchers in life science was wondering what exactly the genes’ structure is, while they ignored the knowledge in other field. Finally with the help of a clever scientist who had studied the double spiral structure, famous nowadays, the right answer was found. This glorious success must attribute to the different knowledge and potentially the different ways of thinking in the different fields.
Although knowledge in different fields could bring much benefit to the others, the one in this special field could not be neglected at all, especailly in the early days of its developing. How deep the study in the field is takes critical role to whether the special science could take progress. If the scientists didn’t study so furtherly that have the idea of studying the genes structure, the famous structure would be still out of the public eyes, and we couldn’t know the beautiful inner structure of our bodies, either.
So, if we say the knowledge in other field helped us find the right key to the truth, the one in this field could benefit us to walk on the right way to the truth. In the way to pursuing for the truth nowadys, knowledge in both of different areas and same areas are playing equal roles to the one in the field. Scientists and the candidates of scientists should remember this and surely in the future, in our coming days, more great advances could be taken because of both these kind of much broader and deeper knowledge.

正在学写issue，非常感谢