Issue60 还是写成折衷的了

gdhdannyUID: 125843

Issue60
“The media—and society in general—mistakenly expect an individual to speak for a particular group, whether or not that individual truly represents the views of the entire group”

With the deepening of social division, an individual, as asserted by the speaker, is considered to speak for a particular group, in which he/she lives and works, regardless of the credibility of the representation of the view. I concede that it is reasonable to rely on representative opinions as an effective method to evaluate the feelings of the total group. Nevertheless, such kind of generalization from minority to the public has its limits, which may lead to false conclusion.

Admittedly, it is reasonable that news reporters or program moderators will resort to the method of choosing individuals to express their regards, evaluations and feelings about certain event, and hope to acquire overall views of groups or public that interviewees represent for. On the one hand, some castes do act as a signal of the social environment, which can well be put into evaluation for a generalization. Take the media itself as an example, in some counties, the television stations and newspapers there are likely to speak out what direction of development the country is going by and how it reacts to certain global issue. Hence, their media counterparts from abroad have a good reason to depend on the domestic media to draw authoritative conclusions of the whole nation. On the other hand, it is almost a ‘mission impossible’ to carry out a complete and integrated survey which contains every single possibility of diversity in attitudes concerning the cost of survey and feasibility of gathering samplings. The CCTV always carries out an annual survey about the most welcomed program it presented in the past year. Considering the 1.3 billion population of the whole country, chances is little to get feed backs from all the citizens. As a substitution, the informants are randomly selected from various provinces in order to make it as even as possible.

However, some social surveys are conducted in quantitative method which lacks the ability to deduce a specific outcome from a few individuals to an entire group result from the composition of the representative group. Because a certain group of people may be divided into three separate factions when confronting a controversial issue: the advocators, the opponents and the eclectics. Each one of the factions is less liable to show inclination, not to mention representations, of the other two. A case in point is the incompatible opinions among people from different walks of lives as to the cloning of human beings. A number of scientists argue for the legalization of human replication as it is a landmark of biochemistry. Meanwhile, opponent response is heard from ethnic community, where the cloning of people is considered to be as demoralization and should be banned without hesitation. However, some people are still pendulous around and don’t know which side to agree with. If a survey is only taken within one of the three groups, we would have completely conflicting results, none of which truly represents the complexity of the problem. Different from conducting a relatively precise and quantitative survey in scientific fields, which usually can calculate sampling error which may circumscribe the accuracy of sampling, social surveys have the inherited disadvantages in the credibility of deduction from the representative to the general.

In sum, conducting quantitative-general deduction is a helpful and economic method to acquire useful information if the informants are selectively chosen. Otherwise, inaccurate responses from the informants may inevitably mislead to a confused conclusion by deduction.

imongUID: 140258

最近太忙了，过来看谁掐的比较欢实我就掐谁好了:D

is considered to speak for a particular group,

However, some social surveys are conducted in quantitative method which lacks the ability to deduce a specific outcome from a few individuals to an entire group result from the composition of the representative group.

文章中例如上面这样的句子我看得比较头大，搞不懂什么意思。第一个 is considered to加上前后的主宾语恐怕不是太搭配，第二个则是完全搞不出结构来，怀疑是写出病句来了，前面的are和后面的result，至少一个问题所在。

应该说这个不是叫作折衷，而是比较具体的分析了condition，还是不错的。 第三段advocator, opponent, 第三个叫做eclectic恐怕不太合适。

分析的有一定的水平了，主要内容都在写这种few for all的效力和真实性（第三段），而第二段主要说明这种expect并非mistakenly.  如果第三段能够加上一两句话，例如“if such simplification is found valid, then it'll be reasonable for one to expect ..."之类的交代，也许更好一些，再进一步回到mistakenly 和expect上面，毕竟这道题的核心关键词就是这两个嘛。当然，仅是个人建议，其实如果不交待应该也基本没问题的，因为你这里前后的topic本身联系得就很紧密。

把那个句子表达的问题搞定，至少是5分的文章。加油吧。同时Keep on 掐ing please. :D

这个题目至少有三篇文章已经收录，可以参考一下。下次发作文的时候注意issue和60中间不要写空格，这次我帮你改了。

gdhdannyUID: 125843

多谢imong老兄

However, some social surveys（主语） are conducted（谓语） in quantitative method （which lacks the ability to deduce a specific outcome from a few individuals to an entire group 定语从句）（result from the composition of the representative group这句主要想解释lack the ability的原因，result 应该用分词，写的时候没注意 :( 。现在想，不如改成“. The reason of the inablility lies in...”）.

an individual, ... is consider to speak for a particular group还是没太明白该怎么改

关于结构还有点问题。这类少数多数的问题除了向这篇这样列举情况（我感觉还是像折衷 :) ），还可以从哪个角度写？

四月的迷迭香UID: 154552

With the deepening of social division, an individual, as asserted (by?) the speaker, is considered to speak for a particular group,(去掉逗号是否更好些？) in which he/she lives and acts, regardless of the credibility of the representation of the view. I concede that it is reasonable to rely on representative opinions as an effective method to evaluate the feelings of the total group. Nevertheless, such kind of generalization from minority to the public has its limits, which may lead to false conclusion.

Admittedly, it is reasonable that news reporters or program moderators will resort to the method of choosing individuals to express their regards, evaluations and feelings about certain event, and hope to acquire overall views of groups or public that interviewees represent for. On the one hand, some castes do act as a signal of the social environment,（这句没太看懂） which can well be put into evaluation for a generalization. Take the media itself as an example, in some counties, the television stations and newspapers there are likely to speak out what direction of development the country is going by and how it reacts to certain global issue. Hence, their media counterparts from abroad have a good reason to depend on the domestic media to draw authoritative conclusions of the whole nation. On the other hand, it is almost a ‘mission impossible’ to carry out a complete and integrated survey which contains every single possibility of diversity（single possibility想表达什么意思？） in attitudes concerning the cost of survey and feasibility of gathering samplings. The CCTV always carries out an annual survey about the most welcomed program it presented in the past year. Considering the 1.3 billion population of the whole country, chances is（are）little to get feed backs (feedbacks?) from all the citizens. As a substitution, the informants are randomly selected from various provinces in order to make it(the survey) as even as possible.

However, some social surveys are conducted in quantitative method which lacks the ability to deduce a specific outcome from a few individuals to an entire group result from(result from 是什么成分？没看明白) the composition of the representative group. Because（原因状语从句，主句在哪儿？） a certain group of people may be divided into three separate factions when confronting a controversial issue: the advocators, the opponents and the eclectics. Each（Any）one of the factions is less(和谁比较？) liable to show inclination, not to mention representations, of the other two. A case in point is the incompatible opinions among people from different walks of lives as to the cloning of human beings. A number of scientists argue for the legalization of human replication as it is a landmark of biochemistry. Meanwhile, opponent response is heard from ethnic community, where the cloning of people is considered to be against demoralization（是不是应该去掉against？不然意思就反了） and should be banned without hesitation. However, some people is still pendulous around and don’t know which side to agree with. If a survey is（were） taken in none(如果是none的话，那么究竟是对谁做调查呢？) of the three groups, we would have completely conflicting results, neither（conflicting results 只指两方面吗？我不太清楚，觉得有点牵强） of which truly represents the complexity of the problem. Different from conducting a relatively precise and quantitative survey in scientific fields, which usually can calculate sampling error which（改成that是不是好点，不然和上面的which重了） may circumscribe the accuracy of sampling, social surveys have the inherited disadvantages in the credibility of deduction from the representative to the general.
这段的论证我看得有点糊涂，作者是不是想说quantitative survey应用在社会问题上有缺陷？我觉得论述得不够清楚

In sum, conducting quantitative-general deduction is a helpful and economic method to acquire useful information if the informants are selectively chosen. Otherwise, inaccurate responses from the informants may inevitably mislead to a confused conclusion by deduction.
看完你的文章后才看到孙远的提纲，是不是多改动一下，万一重复了怎么办呀。而且说实话他的提纲However那段我就没太看懂那个大长句。

gdhdannyUID: 125843

3ks 4 careful checking and perspective advice