issue235

天地无用UID: 112318

我知道有很多比我厉害的GGJJDDMM,希望不吝赐教!

这是我第一篇Issue, 共599词, 耗时一个多小时,与我所期望的45分钟相去甚远,在时间掌握方面惨不忍睹. 主要是我所举的那些例子好多不会用英语说. 花时间去查.但我想说的意思基本表达了.
给我感觉最大的障碍,不是不知道该写什么,而是知道些什么就是写不出来. 无论是论点的表述还是论据的支持, 汉语我能说的花团锦簇的东西用英语写简直痛苦死我了.
而且写成了以后,有很多地方自己看着不是很正确,或者不是很地道的表达. 但是我不知道该怎么改. 麻烦抽空看一下,顺便给我指一下我那里写的不对,或者那里写得不好,是Chinglish.

下面是自我的概括:
题目是: 大多数人被教育说忠诚是一种美德。但是，忠诚－无论对于朋友、学校、受雇公司或任何机构来说，经常都是一种有害而非积极的力量。

我的观点是大部分反对. 即无论是从深度还是广度上看, 忠诚所给予人类社会的正面影响都远远多于负面影响.
1: 综述,给出看法: 所谓忠诚, 决定是否正确的关键, 在于忠诚的对象
2: 分段论述
A: 历史重大事件方面, 军队对于领导者和人民的忠诚决定了民族的生死.
( 例子: 美国南北战争, 二战时伦敦保卫战.)
B: 日常生活方面,忠诚很重要比如说婚姻.
( 例子:克林顿和莱温斯基)
C: 但在某些方面,忠诚的对象可能不正确,
(例子: 奥姆真理教制造东京地铁沙林毒气)
忠诚的对象可能随着时间的推移不值得的忠诚
(例子: 爱因斯坦推出相对论时,经典物理学的卫道士们)
3: 总结和结尾

我把我的Issue做了一些修改,主要的例子应该用来支持第一个论点,前两个分段论述调换了,而且改了一些时态,拼写小错误,删掉了一些明显Chinglish的句子.

感谢Tress, Xiaobai, Ralph给我的建议, 欢迎别的朋友给我提出意见和建议!

Issue 235:
Most people are taught that loyalty is a virtue. But loyalty—whether to one’s friends, to one’s school or place of employment, or to any institution—is all too often a destructive rather than a positive force.

I fundamentally agree with the speaker’s first sentence: loyalty, as a virtue, handed down from one generation of parents to another, but I strongly disagree with the second contention: that loyalty “is too often a destructive rather than a positive force.” The very nub of this issue lies in the “object of loyalty” not in the “keepings of loyalty”. For instance, a soldier’s swearing fealty to Hitler or to Washington has an absolutely different meaning. To get a full appreciation of what this means we must turn first to some recent human evidence

At first, it is a necessary virtue for every formal and national institution. I concede that applying it to one’s employment is somewhat controversial; however, loyalty is absolutely necessarily to every country’s army. Examples from World War 2 and the War Between the States serve to illustrate these points. Can you imagine what would happen if the absence of loyalty existed in the army of the Washington’s in the period of War Between the States in America; or the Royal Air Force lacked the loyalty to fight against Nazi planes in the battle of Protection of London? In the time of war, it was loyalty which stimulated the fighter who fought for his people, fearlessly, and altruistically. “Never in the field of human’s conflicts, were so much owned by so many to so few”, Said by Winston Churchill, to parse his boys.

In addition, during our daily life, loyalty is necessary. Since the world is becoming an increasingly eventful place, with each passing day it becomes a harder task for a person to stick by his marriage. But loyalty is essential to marriage. The empirical evidence supporting this position is overwhelming; yet one needs look no further than a television set. Clinton and Monica Lewinsky is a typical negative example. The disloyal attitude could do immeasurable harm to one’s family.

When it comes to the other side of the coin, the correctness requires qualification in one respect: you must ferret out the right object. The bigots of AOMU Gospel Sect, who had made the SALIN poison massacre in Tokyo Metro in 1998, were very loyal, but very brutal, and inhuman. Moreover, it is a well know fact that there is nothing changeless except change during this skeptical age. In other word, an organization to which we belonged in the past may have changed its nature and therefore no longer deserves our loyalty. In the every beginning of a period, loyalty means merits and virtues, but at the end of them, it always wiser and safer to face up to reality, however painful it may be at the moment. For instance, when Albert Einstein, a man who despised the prejudices and book learning of the traditional physics, drew his conclusions fearlessly, while there is a book is published named “One Hundred Scientists Confirm That Einstein Was Wrong”. As to this, Einstein sneered: “if I am really wrong, one scientist is enough”. Those poor “one hundred scientists” are loyal, but are very abject and ignoble.

In sum, while it may do something harmful, on the balance I agree that loyalty is more positive and hold more lasting significance. As for the author’s sentence “loyalty is destructive rather than positive”, although this claim is not entirely without support, it runs contrary to common sense and everyday human experience. So, I trust that only through the exercise of loyalty can we continue our life, and thereby fully understand and appreciate life in other times and places.

treesUID: 82785

天地。我觉得你的第1个和第2个理由应该换一下位置。从内容重要性、例子和长短上我都觉得应该换一下

天地无用UID: 112318

我把我的Issue做了一些修改,主要的例子应该用来支持第一个论点,前两个分段论述调换了,而且改了一些时态,拼写小错误,删掉了一些明显Chinglish的句子.

感谢Tress, Xiaobai, Ralph给我的建议, 欢迎别的朋友给我提出意见和建议!

angeikimUID: 4857

同意TREES的，你的第一个例子刚好和你后来提出的例子相反，所以是应该换换。
句子中的表达。。有点问题。感觉好多短语表达都不确切让感觉模糊。。stick on sth, etc.

从ETS的规则上来看，只要表达清楚就好了，重要的是思想。而且你这个ISSUE写的跟A比较相象。开头缺少GENERAL STATEMENT扩展，不是很自然。。。一些表达，句式比较牵强。。

再多看看老外写的书再来写吧。还是不是很有感觉。。

天地无用UID: 112318

Thanks

angeikimUID: 4857

等着看你的下一篇看看是不是有明显的进步。