issue 48第一篇 求拍

laylaforeverUID：2671943

TOPIC:ISSUE48 - "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."


The author claims that　it should be groups of people who devoted critical efforts in the most　significant events and trends, but not individuals who are famous and　legendary, that be exhibited most attention on by the study of history. However,an opposite point of view I tend to state.

First of all, it　is obviously an efficient method for historians to locate and justified valuable　materials from the ocean of massive information which has accumulated slightly　since we had characteristic history. For instance, we can easily type Abraham　Lincoln, one of the most memorable presidents in the history, like a dazzling　jewel glowed in a murky jumble of other items, in Google if we have an　assignment influence with American Civil War and are lake of detail information to strengthen our essays, as he absolutely can’t be replaced by anyone others at that time. If we typed other words like South America or civil war simply, we will probably search out some texts about events on other continents, in which case we can’t get closer to our destination but go around in circles instead. So does this method work in the study of history which is far less possible for researchers to begin with by aiming at group of people whose identities are mostly alike in the long term of human history.

Moreover, great individuals played vital roles in those significant events and trends on which historians laid force on the purpose of establishing a vision of the time in the past. For example, Voltaire, Napoleon Bonaparte, Gorge Washington, some of the most dazzling individuals in the 17s century, though supported and followed by enormous amounts of people, are key stones in their domains which depend seriously on the outstanding contributions made by them. How could we be apathetic about their greatest minds led wondering people out of the fate of depravity? How could we let their shiny achievements pass directly into oblivion? How could we easily abstain that those memories of the most legendary individuals slightly vanished in the long time of history. What an enormous lost we will have if we manifest little interest in those famous few?

However, we couldn’t simply deny the contributions made by nameless groups according to the fact that human are social creatures ever since we had history. The direction of the most significant events and trends in history could not changed by any powerful individual alone. Without significant works done by nameless groups, those famous few will hardly be able to achieve anything, unless they get support from the nameless ones. Without people against the feudal empire, Voltaire’s work could be nothing but a vain struggle. Without loyal soldiers, Napoleon Bonaparte couldn’t win a single fight. Without the eagerness of independence of people who live in colonies, Gorge Washington could hardly establish US as an independent country.

To sum up, when it comes to whether we should attach more emphasis on historical individuals or groups of people whose names have long been forgotten, I hold the view that learning about key historical figures inspires us to achieve great things ourselves-far more so than learning about the contributions of groups of people.

laylaforeverUID：2671943

觉得写的好绕　不要沉啊～～～～～

部落联盟fiveUID：2602690

The author claimsthat
it should be groupsof people who devoted critical efforts in the most
significant events and trends, but not individuals whoare famous and
legendary, that be exhibited most attention on by thestudy of history. However,
an opposite point of view I tend to state.【建议：直接给出自己的观点会更清晰明确，当然直接改写题目也许会比较省时间，但是我感觉直接坦白的开头也许能够增加形象分】
First of all, it
is obviously an efficient method for historians tolocate and【？】justified valuable
materials from the ocean of massive information whichhas accumulated slightly
since we had characteristic history【句式提议：it is架构会削弱我们陈述的力量，用直接的动词作为谓语也许会更好】. For instance, we can easily type Abraham
Lincoln, one of the most memorable presidents in thehistory, like a dazzling
jewel glowed in a murky jumble of other items, in Googleif we have an
assignment influencewith American Civil War and are lake of detail information to strengthen ouressays, as he absolutely can’t be replaced by anyone others at that time【过长的句子，呃，
感觉上有点小混乱，其实把过多信息放在一个句子中反而更容易错，貌似在考试中不是很实用】. If we typed【重复】 otherwords like South America or civil war simply, we will probably search out sometexts about events on other continents, in which case we can’t get closer toour destination but go around in circles instead. So does this method work inthe study of history which is far less possible for researchers to begin withby aiming at group of people whose identities are mostly alike in the long termof human history.

Moreover, great individuals played vitalroles in those significant events and trends on which historians laid force onthe purpose of establishing a vision of the time in the past. For example,Voltaire, Napoleon Bonaparte, Gorge Washington, some of the most dazzling individualsin the 17s century, though supported and followed by enormous amounts ofpeople, are key stones in their domains which depend seriously on theoutstanding contributions made by them. How could we be apathetic about theirgreatest minds led wondering people out of the fate of depravity? How could welet their shiny achievements pass directly into oblivion? How could we easilyabstain that those memories of the most legendary individuals slightly vanishedin the long time of history. What an enormous lost we will have if we manifestlittle interest in those famous few?
However, we couldn’t simply deny thecontributions made by nameless groups according to the fact that human aresocial creatures ever since we had history. The direction of the most significantevents and trends in history could not changed by any powerful individualalone. Without significant works done by nameless groups, those famous few willhardly be able to achieve anything, unless they get support from the namelessones. Without people against the feudal empire, Voltaire’s work could benothing but a vain struggle. Without loyal soldiers, Napoleon Bonapartecouldn’t win a single fight. Without the eagerness of independence of peoplewho live in colonies, Gorge Washington could hardly establish US as anindependent country.
【排比句的确很强大，但是上一段中连问句也是一种排比，出现两次，而且所占篇幅很大，这样貌似不大好】
To sum up, when it comes to whether weshould attach more emphasis on historical individuals or groups of people whosenames have long been forgotten, I hold the view that learning about keyhistorical figures inspires us to achieve great things ourselves-far more sothan learning about the contributions of groups of people.


以上为个人拙见，希望对楼主有帮助，个人感觉楼主的基础还是比较强大的，只要掌握点行文技巧，调整一下论述结构就可以了。

laylaforeverUID：2671943

感谢非常，思路清晰多了~~~~ 不过时间是个问题，短期内急需解决啊~~~~~

部落联盟fiveUID：2602690

4# laylaforever

楼主sama放宽心啦， 一般写到3篇往后你就会比较淡定了，刚开始总是比较混乱的，头几篇文就是用来找自己的不足的地方的，你每天抽20分钟左右去看看不是范文的文，体会体会比较比较，你就会知道哪种表述方式清晰又强有力了

laylaforeverUID：2671943

懂了~~~~范文太飘逸， 习作看出问题，只觉点评很有道理，最后写的清晰。。。。还是板油给力