Issue57 第一篇,请指教

chameleonUID: 154587

57 The depth of knowledge to be gained from books is much richer and broader than what can be learned from direct experience.


Books and direct experience, they are two medias for us to obtain knowledge. As for the question that which one could give us more, it should depend on the specific circumstances. I agree with the statement that “the depth of knowledge to be gained from books is much richer and broader than what can be learned from direct experience”.

The direct experience is an effective way of learning knowledge and makes complement to what learned from books. People could learn many things from direct experience which will not be involved in the books. For instance, many techniques will only handed down from one's ancestors, because the owner of this technique don’t want too many people know it and use it. You could not learn these techniques if the owner don’t agree to teach you hand by hand. Also, direct experience could give us one way to verify the validity of knowledge we learned from books. There is a maxim in China that (I paraphrase it) experience is the only criterion to test the gospel. The knowledge, learned in books, may difficult to apply in daily life, then those knowledge have no real value. The best way to test whether the knowledge could be used is to use it.

Books, however, is another kind of means to impart knowledge to us, and they are adopted as textbooks in schools from elementary school to university. For the first thing, Books could give us much richer knowledge than from direct experience. It is difficult and impossible for people to learn everything from experience. Books always provide us the theories in brief which are prevalent for generations, and those theories could be used in many cases. For example, if we want to learn something about astronomy, it is impossible that we go to the outer space and investigate the distance from other planets to the earth, and the temperature of planets, and so on. Although you could observe the celestial body by telescope, it is only the superficial knowledge of astronomy. The books, involving the result calculated by many scientists and testified by generations, could give us comprehensive and profound comprehension for this field.

For the second, books could give us broader knowledge than we could gain from direct experience. It is ephemeral for a person’s life when it compared with the history of the world. But we always want to know more, it is a conflict between the limited time, vigor and the encyclopedical knowledge. The best way to solve this problem is resort to books. You could learn not only the history but also the current knowledge, not only the introduction of your own country but also the knowledge of other countries, not only the arts knowledge but also the science knowledge. A good book could give you thorough comprehension and particular angle of view to a question, and you could rethink the world view of you and the attitude to the society. When we are children, our parents and teachers always let us read some famous literatures, because the famous literatures let us know the situation of the time when the book written, what is more, they could help us set correct world view, and this could benefit for the whole life of us.

On conclusion, although the knowledge from direct experience could give us some first hand knowledge and could be a complement for books, I still think people could learn much richer and broader knowledge from books than from direct experience, because some knowledge we could not obtain from the experience.   (592 words)

imongUID: 140258

文法上的错误自己再检查一遍，这样子反省的效果比较深刻。例如medias这种错误绝对要打pp

不少地方的用词组句比较生硬：
experience is the only criterion to test the gospel 为什么要用to test 呢？ 我觉得一个for就可以搞定
It is difficult and impossible for  这怎么可以用and？！严重错误。常见的例如：It is often difficult, sometimes impossible, for...

which are prevalent for generations 这里prevalent恐怕不太合适，意思不对味儿。

简单句结构和简单从句结构使用的比较多，但是注意不要犯弱智错误。应该稍微多用一用插入语，分词引导从句，介词引导从句，比较，倒装，等等。前三个最重要。这样子sentence variety上面就多了一大块，现在这个样子不行。

第一段问题就有问题：最后一句的restate太弱智，看看别人怎么重述原题的。而且刚刚it should depend on the specific circumstances.怎么就不加限定的I agree了？而且后面压根儿都没提到circumstance？

通篇不要用那么多you. 用one/people或者把主语换成其它的东西，中文构思时候的主语不一定（而且往往不是）最好的英文表达的主语。

倒数第二段问题最严重： books could give us broader knowledge than we could gain from direct experience. 这个是ts 然后说了一个什么limited time的问题，紧接着就出来了The best way to solve this problem is resort to books.那好：第一，凭什么？突然就来了这么一句？如果有分析有原因，放到前面。这一点还不是最要命的，主要在于第二：limited time和broader knowledge有什么关系？我觉得你在这里的关于broader的解释不是太常规，需要交待一下。而这一段里面每句话都是彼此独立的内容，什么particular angle，什么current and history，然后又有什么children and literature，散得不成样子。看看人家写得好的段落是怎么组织的。

下次注意issue和57中间不要留空格。