issue74 加一点领悟

imongUID: 140258

休息了几天，领悟了一些东西。
人家说到底也是考ANALYTICAL writing，分析还是在第一位的，我们的态度因此不要太偏了（有时候），只是想到作文，这个“作文”是有条件的------***分析性*** 写作。

所以，不一定非得想尽办法紧扣题目。人家写了一个claim以后，想溯源的说起因，想结果的去推断，想就着这个claim来论证的也可以分方面分程度，定性结合定量。死扣一个很容易没话说。（关键词： 原因，结果，方面，程度，定性，定量）

我还觉得自己可以界定一下范围。今天晚上写完了issue74之后才想起来，人家说的是most，完全可以交代一下，说most涉及的东西太多了，无法说清楚，但是就within language&image 而言，的确是image更好（我的position）。这样也可以避免绝对化。

只要人家看出来你会，而且很好的进行逻辑分析，就okay了。

And, 想完了后，看了一看pp3里边的一些说明，正好不谋而合。（说明没有原创性……）

74. "The most effective way to communicate an idea or value to large groups of people is through the use of images, not language."

I strongly agree with the author on the claim that image generally serves to be a better means of communication than language, and this is no exception when the audience is a large group. Though everyday we speak one or several languages to express ourselves, the Achilles' heel of language makes it incompetent in certain critical case.

That Achilles' heel is "misinterpretation", a characteristic of language, particularly conspicuous when it comes to multi-language situations. Among countless misunderstandings in this way ever since people begin to speak, one heartbreaking tragedy can effectively support this claim. The story begins with one American boy who fell in love with a Japanese girl, but neither expressed their feeling for each other at that moment. One day when the boy was to leave the girl for a period of time, he left her a note with the word "shine" on it. The word "shine", initially indicating her shining beauty as the boy later said, shocked the Japanese girl when she see it, and so despaired at the note that she committed suicide three days later. The reason, later discovered, is that the girl with poor English interpreted the word as "shi-ne", which is "go hell" or "die" in Japanese. In the case nobody can deny the crime of language, since the young girl would not have perished were it not for this grievous misinterpretation. Therefore we see the harmful, in this case fatal, consequence that may be brought about by the Achilles' heel of language.

Not only for individual. When it comes to the communication to a large group, as especially indicated in the statement, misinterpretation can be equally disastrous. As a result of globalization, groups of complex constitution are common nowadays. For example, in corporations we can often see people from different nations or cultural backgrounds working together. Therefore misinterpretation becomes inevitable when an idea is expressed in the form of language. For people of different native language, translation is necessary yet possibly deviant, sometimes erroneous. Even for those of the same native language, misinterpretation is still possible in that they may have distinct interpretations of the same word according to their childhood, when their cultural background instilled them with such distinct explanation to their subconscious. The more the people, the more diverse the translation. In this sense, language is hardly capable of carrying ideas or values with no distortion. Thus, especially to large groups, language cannot be recognized as an effective means to communicate.

Now it is time to pay attention to the more favorable method, that is, the use of image. Referring to the love tragedy written above, I believe the result joyful if the boy had drawn a "red heart", the universally acknowledge sign of love, on the note instead of the "shine", or "shi-ne". As a matter of fact, the differences between cultural backgrounds are irresistible, yet image is little restricted by such differences and better accepted by the world. Another compelling example is the universally applied "skull" which stands for "poisonous". It does not matter if a child know nothing about the English on a chemical-containing bottle, as he/she will learn precisely that the bottle is filled with poison the moment he/she sees the "skull". Comparing with language, image is advantageous in this manner. Moreover, with the development of technology, televisions are already widely used for communication. The use of image is promoted by this use itself, as television is one modern form of organizing image. Hence image becomes more influential and fathomable universally comparing with language, by which image is proven to be more effective.

In conclusion, I believe image is better than language when communicating to a large group as misinterpretation of image occurs much rarely. It is advisable for all of us to frequently use image in order to express our ideas explicitly.

00foxUID: 112731

第二段你面的例子可是《名侦探柯南》里面的经典故事呀～～～好像叫“鸟取蜘蛛之怪现象” 悬念迭起最终又是以悲剧打动人心～～～～我很喜欢也。如果阅卷人和我一样是柯南迷的话肯定和你共鸣了.....

还有想请教一下，那个骷髅头翻译成“skull”准不准确呀？

天外飞仙UID: 136821

HH 分析得不错
不过好象这个例子太极端了吧
应该还是反对比较好写点（大部分的ISSUE题都是这样）
Admittedly, images are capable of expressing purposes or interpreting facts more effectively in some cases, while such a function is quite limited in practical use.
1.with the intellectual development of human being, information involved in communication is growing more and more complicated over the capability of images to express meaning precisely.
2.why language have survived over ther long history of human being as a way to express ourselves is that it is both brief and easily undertood than images do. Just in contrast to your opinion that images may bring misinterpretations, I think images produces even more distortions in communication.
语言水平不好，请多指教

cloudburstUID: 136140

第二段的例子很有趣，不过我也觉得极端了点。有太多的前提不确定。

feier521UID: 109747

imong 的意思就是说只要我们提出和issue 题目相关的topic， 自圆其说就可以了？打个“擦边球”也可以？：D
呵呵。我刚开始也是这么认为的，遇到一个题目，就这样考虑：
1 为什么会有这种问题呢？（即你说的“起因”）
2 这种问题的现状是怎样？（存在性）
3 这种问题为什么能存在下去呢？（合理性）
4 这种问题的利弊....
但是ETS 会不会认为我们对issue 分析的深度不够呢？analytical & critical 能力不强呢？
所以后来就尽可能的深度的思考题目。但是脑子的DD太少，依旧没有深到哪里去。
如果在考场上实在是想不深，想不多，就只好打“擦边球”了。

先不说文中的凄惨的爱情故事（呵呵，感动ing），我觉得关于image，电视是不是举的不大好？电视是image 和language 的结合体。难道是哑剧？呵呵

for your sakeUID: 141183

写的不错,这个东西没有极端不极端的说法的,只要能自圆其说啊

这篇文章自圆其说的挺好,不过我觉得否定语言的作用说的太多了,毕竟主要的目的是说画"更"重要啊

白色UID: 142007

好像这几个例子都是个人间的，和public关系不太大，（language那几个，）
  还有，我一个英语系的同学说，英语写作更重逻辑推理，与汉语重事例不同，事例最好一笔代过，起到证明作用就好，不用详细描述，我也觉得这样写好象有凑字数的嫌疑
  呵呵，一点粗浅见解，觉得不好就当没看见好了

lakeqianUID: 157560

所以，不一定非得想尽办法紧扣题目。人家写了一个claim以后，想溯源的说起因，想结果的去推断，想就着这个claim来论证的也可以分方面分程度，定性结合定量。死扣一个很容易没话说。（关键词： 原因，结果，方面，程度，定性，定量）
嗯，很有道理。我以前总是思路太窄，不敢扩展一些。