issue48 还有5天,写的比较晕

happymichelleUID: 154082

48"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."

Do groups of people play more important role than famous individual to make significant events in history, as the speaker claims?  I concur with the speaker insofar as there are many historic achievements undoubtedly made by groups of people.  Nevertheless, individual efforts should not be neglected in that history is always composed of not only group work but also individual spirit.

In the first place, our collective experience indicates that there are so many inventions and discoveries in natural science's history that was made by "famous individual".  Just look around, we will realize how pivotal role these famous individuals played in improving people's quality of life.  Without Thomas Edison's invention of electric bulb, people might still live in the dark and could do nothing except sleep at night.  Without Wright brothers’ first model of airplane, it might still take nearly a month to cross the Pacific Ocean.  Without Edward Jenner's discovery of vaccine, people might still be suffered from the disease of cowpox.  In fact, all of these scientific and technological breakthroughs were made by famous individual's creativity, passion, conviction, perseverance, without which we can hardly enjoy the efficient, convenient and healthy lives. Consequently, it is just those "famous few" that contribute most to the field of natural science and enhance the quality of our lives.

In the political field, however, both the famous leader and groups of people are of great importance to change reality and kindle the revolution.   On one hand, no one will deny the vital roles played by famous leaders, for example, in commanding a war or establishing a new policy.  Since famous leaders are always come along with important events like Lincoln and “Civil War”, Roosevelt with “Great Depression”, it is natural that people tend to emphasize these famous leaders' role in these momentous events.  On the other hand, contribution from general people are equally significant and should not be neglected when studying history.  As a matter of fact, people can only be led where they want to go.  The leader follows, though a step ahead.  And thus American people wanted to climb out of the “Great Depression” and needed someone to tell them they could do it, and Roosevelt did.  British people still believed they could win the war after the defeat of 1940, and Churchill told them they were right.  In short, when studying history, it is crucial for people not only to keep their eyes on famous individuals, but also take “groups of people” into consideration.

In contemporary history, group-work and cooperation are especially important in that modern events and trends are so complicated and enormous that even the most brilliant and talented individual cannot accomplish by his/her own.  Take the Human Genome Project finished in 2001, for example, thousands of scientists and researchers from six different countries including America, Britain, Germany, Japan, China and France, were included to accomplish this epoch-making projects.  Only with harmonious cooperation and effective group-work, can we humans finish drawing sketches of all human genes so quickly and accurately.

In conclusion, neither famous individuals nor common groups of people can, by themselves, determine significant events and trends in history; any over-emphasis on one side would be detrimental for the study of history.  Only by studying both sides of the two could we have a better and deeper understanding of history.

flyingwindUID: 189320

写的还不错！
比较smooth的
我想rate 4.5 or more

gdhdannyUID: 125843

michelle又考作文了？呵呵

占个座位，我来看看

gdhdannyUID: 125843

Do groups of people play more important role than famous individual to make significant events in history, as the speaker claims? I concur with the speaker insofar as there are many historic achievements undoubtedly made by groups of people. Nevertheless, individual efforts should not be neglected in that history is always composed of not only group work but also individual spirit.
中规中矩的开头。

In the first place, our collective experience indicates that there are so many inventions and discoveries in natural science's history that was（were） made by "famous individual". Just look around, we will realize how pivotal role these famous individuals played in improving people's quality of life（standard of living?）. Without Thomas Edison's invention of electric bulb, people might still live in the dark and could do nothing except（but） sleep at night. Without Wright brothers’ first model of airplane, it might still take nearly a month to cross the Pacific Ocean. Without Edward Jenner's discovery of vaccine, people might still be suffered from the disease of cowpox. In fact, all of these scientific and technological breakthroughs were made by （the）famous individual's creativity, passion, conviction, perseverance, without which we can hardly enjoy the efficient, convenient and healthy lives. Consequently, it is just those "famous few" that contribute most to the field of natural science and enhance the quality of our lives.
意思说的很清楚。有一个问题，正面去叙述个人的重要性讲完以后，可以试着去对比一下如果同样是发明灯泡，一大堆人在一起会怎么样。我们在这里要强调的是个人的作用〉集体的作用

In the political field, however, both the famous leader and groups of people are of great importance to change reality and kindle the revolution. On one hand, no one will deny the vital roles played by famous leaders, for example, in commanding a war or establishing a new policy. Since famous leaders are always come along with important events like Lincoln and “Civil War”, Roosevelt with “Great Depression”, it is natural that people tend to emphasize these famous leaders' role in these momentous events. On the other hand, contribution from general people are equally significant and should not be neglected when studying history. As a matter of fact, people can only be led where they want to go. The leader follows, though a step ahead（这句话没看明白）. And thus American people wanted to climb out of the “Great Depression” and needed someone to tell（ensure that去掉后面的them） them they could do it, and Roosevelt did. British people still believed they could win the war after the defeat of 1940, and Churchill told them they were right. In short, when studying history, it is crucial for people not only to keep their eyes on famous individuals, but also take “groups of people” into consideration.
我觉得这段的正反论证效果好，比较着看，不用说很多话，意思自然就出来了

In contemporary history, group-work and cooperation are especially important in that modern events and trends are so complicated and enormous that even the most brilliant and talented individual cannot accomplish by his/her own. Take the Human Genome Project finished in 2001, for example, thousands of scientists and researchers from six different countries including America, Britain, Germany, Japan, China and France, were included to accomplish this epoch-making projects. Only with harmonious cooperation and effective group-work, can we humans finish drawing sketches of all human genes so quickly and accurately.

In conclusion, neither famous individuals nor common groups of people can, by themselves, determine significant events and trends in history; any over-emphasis on one side would be detrimental for the study of history. Only by studying both sides of the two could we have a better and deeper understanding of history.
写的不错，语言上我就不说什么了。对于这道题目，除了人多人少这个对比以外，还有一个知名和默默无闻，强队比也可以从这个角度考虑。当然二对冲突并不是分开的，融合起来写可能看上去更完整。

剩下的几天还是看看提纲好了，michelle没问题的。

happymichelleUID: 154082

谢谢flyingwind和Danny

最初由 gdhdanny 发布
[B]michelle又考作文了？呵呵

占个座位，我来看看
[/B]

由你们这些老朋友鼓励好感动ing~~

[B]意思说的很清楚。有一个问题，正面去叙述个人的重要性讲完以后，可以试着去对比一下如果同样是发明灯泡，一大堆人在一起会怎么样。我们在这里要强调的是个人的作用〉集体的作用[/B]

你的提议很好，但是灯泡这个例子不合适，没想出来什么例子证明个人>集体作用

[B]As a matter of fact, people can only be led where they want to go. The leader follows, though a step ahead（这句话没看明白）. [/B]

意思就是人民的意志决定领导的方向，尽管他在采取行动上走在前面，不知道说清楚没有？

[B]写的不错，语言上我就不说什么了。对于这道题目，除了人多人少这个对比以外，还有一个知名和默默无闻，强队比也可以从这个角度考虑。当然二对冲突并不是分开的，融合起来写可能看上去更完整。[/B]

你说得很对，知名和默默无闻是个很好的角度，我当时没想到~

THX AGAIN ;P

LSDUID: 157855

48"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."

Do groups of people play more important role than famous individual to make significant events in history, as the speaker claims? I concur with the speaker insofar as insofar通常和 as 连用表示到这个程度; 在...情况下; 在...范围内; 只要...楼主这么用似乎不妥阿 there are many historic achievements undoubtedly made by groups of people. Nevertheless, individual efforts should not be neglected in that history is always composed of not only group work but also individual spirit.这里提出的是什么观点呢？好像意思是说两个都对？

In the first place, our collective experience indicates that there are so many inventions and discoveries in natural science's history that was made by "famous individual". Just look around, we will realize how pivotal role these famous individuals played in improving people's quality of life. Without Thomas Edison's invention of electric bulb, people might still live in the dark and could do nothing except sleep at night. Without Wright brothers’ first model of airplane, it might still take nearly a month to cross the Pacific Ocean. Without Edward Jenner's discovery of vaccine, people might still be suffered from the disease of cowpox. In fact, all of these scientific and technological breakthroughs were made by famous individual's creativity, passion, conviction, perseverance, without which we can hardly enjoy the efficient, convenient and healthy lives. Consequently, it is just those "famous few" that contribute most to the field of natural science and enhance the quality of our lives.个人的作用在历史长河中是不可磨灭的

In the political field, however, both the famous leader and groups of people are of great importance to change reality and kindle the revolution. On one hand, no one will deny the vital roles played by famous leaders, for example, in commanding a war or establishing a new policy. Since famous leaders are always come along with important events like Lincoln and “Civil War”, Roosevelt with “Great Depression”, it is natural that people tend to emphasize these famous leaders' role in these momentous events. On the other hand, contribution from general people are equally significant and should not be neglected when studying history. As a matter of fact, people can only be led where they want to go. The leader follows, though a step ahead. And thus American people wanted to climb out of the “Great Depression” and needed someone to tell them they could do it, and Roosevelt did. British people still believed they could win the war after the defeat of 1940, and Churchill told them they were right. In short, when studying history, it is crucial for people not only to keep their eyes on famous individuals, but also take “groups of people” into consideration.个人和群体的作用同样重要

In contemporary history, group-work and cooperation are especially important in that modern events and trends are so complicated and enormous that even the most brilliant and talented individual cannot accomplish by his/her own. Take the Human Genome Project finished in 2001, for example, thousands of scientists and researchers from six different countries including America, Britain, Germany, Japan, China and France, were included to accomplish this epoch-making projects. Only with harmonious cooperation and effective group-work, can we humans finish drawing sketches of all human genes so quickly and accurately. 现代社会更需要群体

In conclusion, neither famous individuals nor common groups of people can, by themselves, determine significant events and trends in history; any over-emphasis on one side would be detrimental for the study of history. Only by studying both sides of the two could we have a better and deeper understanding of history.
楼主每段的论证都意思比较清晰，但是结构似乎安排得不太好啊，你用的是反，合，正。我觉得最好用正反合或者是反正合。个人意见，仅供参考！

happymichelleUID: 154082

最初由 LSD 发布
[B]  insofar通常和 as 连用表示到这个程度; 在...情况下; 在...范围内; 只要...楼主这么用似乎不妥阿[/B]

这么用的确不对，查字典给的example是insorfar as I can；看老外地范文很喜欢用这个词，就拿来用也没有考证，多谢LSD

Nevertheless, individual efforts should not be neglected in that history is always composed of not only group work but also individual spirit.这里提出的是什么观点呢？好像意思是说两个都对？

我的意思就是历史的研究，既要包括个人的功绩，也不能忽视群众的力量[/QUOTE]

楼主每段的论证都意思比较清晰，但是结构似乎安排得不太好啊，你用的是反，合，正。我觉得最好用正反合或者是反正合。个人意见，仅供参考！

的确，我写的时候BODY3是忽然冒出来的观点，所以结构没有安排好，但是如果把它放在BODY2也似乎不连贯：因为这段重点说近代当代历史，如果放在BODY1又觉得太突然了，所以还是放BODY3
我的理解倒不是正反合，我的角度是：科学史，政治史，即当/近代史

感谢LSD的意见！THANX~