issue26，历史类，我的第六篇

lemonlikeUID: 139588

未限时，520字

@Issue 026 历史类
“Most people would agree that buildings represent a valuable record of any society's past, but controversy arises when old buildings stand on ground which modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes. In such situations, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings so that contemporary needs can be served.”

1、开头
2、历史建筑一旦破坏无法修复，历史价值和对青少年的教育意义。
3、历史建筑的实用价值，可以促进旅游的发展。
4、区别对待历史建筑和旧建筑，后者既无历史价值也无实用价值，应当为现在的发展让路。
5、结尾

Can one ever imagine London without the Big Ben, Paris without the Louvre, and Peking without the Great Wall and the Summer Palace? It is true that these metropolis all facing the urgent requirement for the land resources today than anytime ever before, but no one would allow for the sacrifice of the historic buildings, which present not only a valuable record of any society’s past, but more important a symbol of a nation, a culture, even the human civilization.

Apparently, those historic buildings, some of which stood against the abrasion and erosion of the nature and public activities for almost hundreds even thousands of years, look more firm than other society treasures such as the history records, paintings and manuscripts, etc. Actually, they are also as vulnerable in that once destroyed, those buildings would no more be restored even by the most dexterous architects. Moreover, as we know, most of those buildings are located in the centre of the downtown, where the city and the human civilization emanated from. When they are referred to “be better used for the modern purposes”, the modern planners indeed mean that as the political, economic and transportation hub of the city, if those buildings are replaced by the new commercial center, it will bring a great of profits to the society. However, is it really worthy to do that? Wouldn’t it be a tragedy if our offspring were attracted by those historic buildings and relevant stories in their textbooks while they could only find the skyscrapers or some things else standing there instead? And wouldn’t it be a long disappointment if we could only retrieve them in our memory for ever?

Moreover, it is far more enough to describe those buildings as “a valuable record of any society’s past”, for most of them stand for the cities they belong to. Not only citizens local take pride in them as the splendid accomplishments of their history and their ancestors, but the people who have never been there also long for their beauty. Historic buildings are a most essential attract to the travelers, which brings no less profit to the cities compared to any new-building commercial center. We could imagine if the Colosseum was subverted instead of a five-star hotel putting up, not so many people would be interested in Rome any more. It is really short-sighted to give precedence to modern development over preservations of historic buildings without cautious evaluation.

However, it is our responsibility to discern the historic buildings with those merely old ones. The latter refer to those aged buildings which are of neither historic value nor practical value and thus can give way to the contemporary needs of modern development. But when evaluating a building, governments and planners should turn to the professionals. Once certified as of academic, historical or touristic value, a building should be preserved and hand over to our next generation.

In sum, any historic building is not only the heirloom of people in that city, but the treasure of all human beings as well, therefore we should never give up to contemporary needs for any cause.

cynosure007UID: 147992

第一段的you应该为one ,英文中好用one,而不用you的哦

lemonlikeUID: 139588

赶紧捞上来，呵呵，快被冲跑了~~

genie05UID: 30358

@Issue 026 历史类
“Most people would agree that buildings represent a valuable record of any society's past, but controversy arises when old buildings stand on ground which modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes. In such situations, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings so that contemporary needs can be served.”

1、开头
2、历史建筑一旦破坏无法修复，历史价值和对青少年的教育意义。
3、历史建筑的实用价值，可以促进旅游的发展。
4、区别对待历史建筑和旧建筑，后者既无历史价值也无实用价值，应当为现在的发展让路。
5、结尾

Can one ever imagine London without the Big Ben, Paris without the Louvre, and Peking without the Great Wall and the Summer Palace?（其实FORBIDDEN CITY要出名一点吧？：）） It is true that these metropolis all facing the urgent（改成比较级，语法） requirement for the land resources today than anytime ever before, but no one would allow for the sacrifice of the historic buildings, which present not only a（the） valuable record of any society’s past, but more important a symbol of a nation, a culture, even the human civilization.（语法，注意NOT ONLY， BUT 的用法））

Apparently, those historic buildings, some of which stood against the abrasion and erosion of the nature and public activities for almost hundreds（，or） even thousands of years, look more firm than other society treasures such as the history records, paintings and manuscripts, etc. Actually, they are also as vulnerable in that once destroyed, those buildings would no more be restored even by the most dexterous architects.（三峡的张飞庙就是一个例子） Moreover, as we know, most of those buildings are located in the centre of the downtown, where the city and the human civilization emanated from. When they are referred to “be better used for the modern purposes”, the modern planners indeed mean that as the political, economic and transportation hub of the city（MEAN THAT AS？语法）, if those buildings are replaced by the new commercial center,（或者别的什么东西，注意准确） it will bring a great of profits to the society. However, is it really worthy to do that? Wouldn’t it be a tragedy if our offspring were attracted by those historic buildings and relevant stories in their textbooks while they could only find the skyscrapers or some things else standing there instead? And wouldn’t it be a long disappointment if we could only retrieve them in our memory for ever?

Moreover, it is far more enough to describe those buildings as “a valuable record of any society’s past”, for most of them stand for the cities they belong to. Not only citizens local（语法） take pride in them as the splendid accomplishments of their history and their ancestors, but the people who have never been there also long for their beauty. Historic buildings are a （the ）most essential attract to the travelers, which brings no less profit to the cities compared to any new-building commercial center. We could imagine if the Colosseum was subverted instead of a five-star hotel putting up, not so many people would be interested in Rome any more. It is really short-sighted to give precedence to modern development over preservations of historic buildings without cautious evaluation. (这个结尾和开头的TS不是很搭，重点在论证什么？) （可以谈一下那些建筑还可以带来经济效益，发展旅游从而带动餐饮，住宿等许多方面的发展。当然这一段已经够了）


However, it is our responsibility to discern the historic buildings with those merely old ones. The latter refer to those aged buildings which are of neither historic value nor practical value and thus can give way to the contemporary needs of modern development. But when evaluating a building, governments and planners should turn to the professionals. Once certified as of academic, historical or touristic value, a building should be preserved and hand over to our next generation. 论证不够充分。

In sum, any historic building is not only the heirloom of people in that city, but the treasure of all human beings as well, therefore we should never give up to contemporary needs for any cause.

其实我自己的论点是不支持这个的。呵呵。所以有些点评可能不是很客观。抱歉啦。

lemonlikeUID: 139588

呵呵，谢谢genie的点评~~
还有十来天了，好紧张啊，限时写的就更差了：（

木耳UID: 123036

but the people who have never been there also long for
是不是应该but also people…

most essential 重复了
essential attract 这个搭配也不好

Historic buildings are a most essential attract to the travelers, which brings no less profit to the cities compared to any new-building commercial center
Which 指代不清

was subverted instead of这样的搭配我没见过。Subvert是颠覆，暗中破坏的意思

Colosseum was subverted instead of a five-star hotel putting up,这句话也不是很顺。

第一段中写道：but more important a symbol of a nation, a culture, even the human civilization.
但后面没有很好地体现，只是讲了一下historic buildings 对旅游重要影响。一定要注意前后的一致。
逻辑上没什么错误，几个例子也还不错。不过仔细想一下还有许多有名的建筑可以用来说明问题。感觉比前几篇有进步，呵呵。