issue26 历史遗迹保护问题

指向大海UID: 158737

题目
issue26
Most people would agree that buildings represent a valuable record of any society's past, but controversy arises when old buildings stand on ground that 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.
正文
Many countries have a long history which is companied by old buildings. Because it is a valuable record of past, when faced the dilemma old buildings and modern development which should be satisfied, people's opinion differ. In my opinion, although the preservation of historic buildings may be somewhat important, modern needs should be given precedence.

Undeniably, people especially historic experts might advocate preserving historic buildings for next three reasons: First, historic buildings serve as standing history textbook, they are the amalgamation of aesthetic value, architectural value, cultural value and historical value. There is a famous pavilion--TengWang Pavilion in my hometown Nanchang. The noted poem <<Protasis of TengWang Pavilion>>(滕王阁序俺不知道怎么翻译就勉强这样了望高手指点) was written for this pavilion. The writer WangBo was only a teenager when he write this poem and then he became famous all over the china. Even today, the high school textbook embodies the poem and almost every chinese student can recite it. Second, historic buildings can become valuable tourist resources. Let's take Beijing for example, thousands of tourist visit Beijing for The Great Wall, Gate of Heavenly Peace, The Temple of Heaven and other old buildings. Last but not least, once destroyed, historic buildings can never be restored. For the reasons mentioned above, some people claim that the way out of dilemma is to integrate the preservation of historic buildings with modern development thus the confliction can be solved in a compromising way.

From certain point pf view, these remarks may sound reasonable. But take everything into consideration, there are more reasons for supporting the modern plans.

In the first place, compromising way is hard to find and current events always be our vital interest. Integrating the preservation of historic buildings with modern development is easy to say than to be done. For instance, being one of the huge project in 21st century' China, Three Gorges Project is aim to generate electricity through the torrential flow of Yangzi River, which will surely rise the level of water in Yangzi River and thereby destroy the buildings in both banks. Zhangfei Temple was one of these building. Chinese government decided to continue the project through thoughtful consideration. This illustrate that when the confliction cannot be solved, modern development should always be our first choice.

In the second place, both the protecting of all the old buildings and over-emphasize of protection are unpractical. A large number of the historic buildings are not significant buildings, if we all spend money to preserve them, there are no money and ground left for our development of industry, agriculture and technology. Over-emphasize of protection is also unpractical. For example, the buildings in Tang Dynasty was preserved by the people in Qing Dynasty, the buildings in Qing Dynasty was preserved by contemporary people, therefore the buildings of our generation was preserved by people lived in 22nd century.  This may sound ridiculous, but the truth is that the earth of world was full of "historic buildings" after 500 years. So perhaps we should preserve the most meaningful buildings and let the others be useful resources of modern development.

In conclusion, when controversy arises, everything should be taken into consideration. Contemporary needs should be served under these circumstance and over-emphasize of protection is unrealistic, so modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings. Of course, this does not mean ignore all the old buildings, the most significant ones must be preserved under any circumstance.

你拍一,我拍一,你拍二,我拍三  呵呵

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

seat taken
实在困，明日定改。
要是帖子多了被压下去找不到了，楼主记得发PM提醒我。呵呵、

naiba369UID: 131655

占座

foreverlovesUID: 166930

Many countries have a long history which is companied by old buildings. Because it is a valuable record of past, when faced the dilemma old buildings and modern development which should be satisfied, people's opinion differ. In my opinion, although the preservation of historic buildings may be somewhat important, modern needs should be given precedence.

Undeniably, people especially historic experts might advocate preserving historic buildings for next three reasons: First, historic buildings serve as standing history textbook, they are the amalgamation of aesthetic value, architectural value, cultural value and historical value. There is a famous pavilion--TengWang Pavilion in my hometown Nanchang. The noted poem <<Protasis of TengWang Pavilion>>(滕王阁序俺不知道怎么翻译就勉强这样了望高手指点) 我也不清楚was written for this pavilion. The writer WangBo was only a teenager when he write this poem and then he became famous all over the china. Even today, the high school textbook embodiesembody是体现的意思吧 the poem and almost every chinese student can recite it. Second, historic buildings can become valuable tourist resources. Let's take Beijing for example, thousands of tourist visit Beijing for The Great Wall, Gate of Heavenly Peace, The Temple of Heaven and other old buildings. Last but not least, once destroyed, historic buildings can never be restored. For the reasons mentioned above, some people claim that the way out of dilemma is to integrate the preservation of historic buildings with modern development thus the confliction can be solved in a compromising way.

From certain point pfof view, these remarks may sound reasonable. But take takingeverything绝对了吧 into consideration, there are more reasons for supporting the modern plans.

In the first place, compromising way is hard to find and current events always be our vital interest. Integrating the preservation of historic buildings with modern development is easy to say than to be done. For instance, being one of the huge project in 21st century' China, Three Gorges Project is去掉 aim to generate electricity through the torrential flow of Yangzi River, which will surely rise the level of water in Yangzi River and thereby destroy the buildings in both banks. Zhangfei Temple was one of these building. Chinese government decided to continue the project through thoughtful consideration. This illustrates that when the confliction cannot be solved, modern development should always be our first choice.应该继续深入的论证一下,把三峡好处列举一下,毕竟实践是检验真理的唯一标准,国家的决策不一定对,

In the second place, both the protecting of all the old buildings and over-emphasize of protection are unpractical. A large number of the historic buildings are not significant buildings, if we all spend money to preserve them, there are no money and ground left for our development of industry, agriculture and technology. Over-emphasizeOver-emphasizing of protection is also unpractical. For example, the buildings in Tang Dynasty was preserved by the people in Qing Dynasty, the buildings in Qing Dynasty was preserved by contemporary people, therefore the buildings of our generation was preserved by people lived in 22nd century. This may sound ridiculous, but the truth is that the earth of world was full of "historic buildings" after 500 years. So perhaps we should preserve the most meaningful buildings and let the others be useful resources of modern development.

In conclusion, when controversy arises, everything should be taken into consideration. Contemporary needs should be served under these circumstance and over-emphasizeOver-emphasizing of protection is unrealistic, so modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings. Of course, this does not mean ignore all the old buildings, the most significant ones must be preserved under any circumstance.


觉得写的很不错啊,是限时的吗,语言很流畅啊,还有几个例子都挺不错的,象是学历史的,呵呵
你拍一,我拍一,你拍二,我拍三 呵呵

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

Many countries have a long history which is companied byby?没见过这样用的，with倒是见过 old buildings. Because itit指什么？is a valuable record of past, when facedfacing the dilemma old buildings and modern development which should be satisfied,facing the dilemma that...这句有些不通，像汉语过来的表达，呵呵 people's opinions differ. In my opinion, although the preservation of historic buildings may be somewhat important, modern needs should be given precedence.

Undeniably, people especially historic experts might advocate preserving historic buildings forthenext three reasons: First, historic buildings serve as standing是说代表么？standing for,或者直接serve as history textbooks就可以history textbook, andthey are the amalgamation of aesthetic value, architectural value, cultural value and historical value.这句说的很到位，几个并列结构也挺准确 There is a famous pavilion--TengWang Pavilion in my hometown Nanchang. The noted poem <<Protasis of TengWang Pavilion>>(滕王阁序俺不知道怎么翻译就勉强这样了望高手指点)界个俺也不知道，但是英语貌似没有这样用标点的吧，呵呵 was written for this pavilion. The writer WangBo was only a teenager when he write this poem and then he became famous all over the china. Even today, the high school textbook embodies the poem and almost every chinese student can recite it.例子不错，但是没有说明白你要论证的观点，应该再说说这个建筑怎么体现了文化价值美学价值等，而你过于强调这首词，稍稍有些片面，可以把收入课本大家会背那句换成关于这个建筑的意义。 Second, historic buildings can become valuable tourist resources. Let's take Beijing for example, thousands of tourist visit Beijing for The Great Wall, Gate of Heavenly Peace,界个是哪里啊？俺不知道捏，呵呵 The Temple of Heaven and other old buildings. Last but not least, once destroyed, historic buildings can never be restored.last but not least,确这么简单一句就过去了，建议再论证的具体点，比如中国人民正在怎样努力的修复故宫了什么的 For the reasons mentioned above, some people claim that the way out of dilemma is to integrate the preservation of historic buildings with modern development thus the confliction can be solved in a compromising way.总结句有些偏离你这段的论点，不是说为什么人们坚持要保护古迹么？要给现代建筑妥协了让位了或者说结合的问题忽然冒出来了，还是说为什么历史建筑很重要比较好

From certain point pfof? view, these remarks may sound reasonable. But taketaking everything into consideration, there are more reasons for supporting the modern plans.意思明白，但是这个句读着不顺

In the first place,a compromising way is hard to find and current events always be our vital interests.哦，原来这里有结合了折中什么的意见，但是即便是为了和前面联系起来，P2的结尾还是要说明你的论点然后可以说因此历史学家提出了要两者结合等建议，个人感觉这样可以自然一些 Integrating the preservation of historic buildings with modern development is easy to say than to be done. For instance, being one of the huge projects in 21st century' China, Three Gorges Project is aim to generate electricity through the torrential flow of Yangzi River, which will surely rise the level of water in Yangzi River and thereby destroy the buildings in both banks. Zhangfei Temple was one of these buildings. 张飞庙这句建议换个说法,忽然冒出来有些别扭，可以说什么这里有几千年的古迹，是古代的什么重要地方了等等Chinese government decided to continue the project through thoughtful consideration. This illustrate that when the confliction cannot be solved, modern development should always be our first choice.TS有些模糊，那个vital interests概念不清楚，为啥这样就要放弃保护古迹来发展现代建筑？最好说一下为什么怎么vital。三峡的例子不错，但是转的太快了，前面还在说两者结合比较难，可以说一下在面对这样的情况的时候是怎么考虑的，为什么为了发展要放弃一些古迹，然后说三峡怎么能解决大面积的用电，防洪等功能，在权衡利弊后，为了长远的利益才进行建设。BTW，还有个问题，这个例子是不是有些特殊呢？怎样让它更好的服务你的论证还要再斟酌一下。在建设阿斯旺水坝的时候可是费劲心思保护那些庙宇，石像等，用了世界各国著名的专家。这个我也不知道了，期待高人赐教 ;)

In the second place, both the protecting of all the old buildings and over-emphasize 没说要over emphasis吧？of protection are unpractical. A large number of the historic buildings are not significant buildings, if we all spend money to preserve them, there are no money and ground left for our development of industry, agriculture and technology. Over-emphasize of protection is also unpractical. For example, the buildings in Tang Dynasty was preserved by the people in Qing Dynasty, the buildings in Qing Dynasty was preserved by contemporary people, therefore the buildings of our generation was preserved by people lived in 22nd century. This may sound ridiculous, but the truth is that the earth of world was full of "historic buildings" after 500 years.for example这一串有些罗嗦，语句上再修改一下 So perhaps we should preserve the most meaningful buildings and let the others be useful resources of modern development.题目并没有说要over-emphasis，可以就按你一开始说的保护这些费钱费地与环境也不协调等等

In conclusion, when controversy arises, everything should be taken into consideration.要各方面考虑这个观点又是新冒出来的，可以写最后用来建议，这里conclusion就不太合适了 Contemporary needs should be served under these circumstances these circumstances是指什么 and over-emphasize of protection is unrealistic, so modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings. Of course, this does not mean ignoreignoring all the old buildings, andthe most significant ones must be preserved under any circumstance.最后一句却转折了一下，把你的观点削弱了，建议这个让步写在前面，后面还是说你的观点，要满足当代需要了什么的

1,批评：名词单复数多次用错，复数少S的好几处；句子没有连接词，一个逗号后面就又开始一句的现象也有一两处，考试要是出现这样的语法现象可是很严重地， :mad: 望改正
2，例子都挺好的，只是论证的时候稍微有些浅了，再具体一些说到实质会更好一些。
3，整体思路清晰，但是在每个分论点内的陈述有个别混乱的或者不连贯的地方
4，P2写的不错，但是有个问题就是这段是让步却写了很大篇幅，后面说到你自己的观点时候有些薄弱了，建议再具体深入一些。P4还需要再想想。结尾结的不太好，个人认为结尾应该扣题，但是你最后一句却忽然给转折了
不好意思现在才发上来。继续加油！一起努力！有空去拍拍我的 :p

dezhiUID: 156141

已经有两个人替你改了哈
顺手查了一下， 滕王阁序： Preface to 'Pavilion of Prince Teng'

指向大海UID: 158737

谢谢各位了
victoriazhizhi?我们是不是考完10T后还交流过的?

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

嗯？系嘛？
sorry我这人记性特不好
同努力同努力
看过你在作文版发帖子 感觉你进步比我快呢 有空去拍拍我的作文噢

naiba369UID: 131655

issue26
Most people would agree that buildings represent a valuable record of any society's past, but controversy arises when old buildings stand on ground that 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.

正文
Many countries have a long history which is companied by old buildings. Because it is a valuable record of past, when faced the dilemma old buildings and modern development which should be satisfied, people's opinion differ. In my opinion, although the preservation of historic buildings may be somewhat important, modern needs should be given precedence.

Undeniably, people especially historic experts historian might advocate preserving historic buildings for next three reasons: First, historic 原文说的是old，并非historic是有特定意义的，建议你这里还是要用原文的词buildings serve as standing history textbook, they are the amalgamation of aesthetic value, architectural value, cultural value and historical value.直接说“建筑是凝固的音乐”不是更概括（Architecture is stationary music ?）然后再说明更好点。 There is a famous pavilion--TengWang Pavilion in my hometown Nanchang. The noted poem <<Protasis of TengWang Pavilion>>(滕王阁序俺不知道怎么翻译就勉强这样了望高手指点) was written for this pavilion. The writer WangBo was only a teenager when he write this poem and then he became famous all over the china.关于王勃的介绍有点偏吧，要强调其对文学的深远影响，多余的没必要说 Even today, the high school textbook embodies the poem and almost every chinese student can recite it. Second, historic buildings can become valuable tourist resources. Let's take Beijing for example, thousands of tourist visit Beijing for The Great Wall, Gate of Heavenly Peace 嘿嘿，天安门，长见识了, The Temple of Heaven and other old buildings. Last but not least, once destroyed, historic buildings can never be restored.比如卡米扬大佛（塔里班炸的那个，世界最著名的8世纪前的3尊大佛之一） For the reasons mentioned above, some people claim that the way out of dilemma is to integrate the preservation of historic buildings with modern development thus the confliction can be solved in a compromising way.

From certain point pf view, these remarks may sound reasonable. But take everything into consideration, there are more reasons for supporting the modern plans.

In the first place, compromising way is hard to find and current events always be our vital interest. Integrating the preservation of historic buildings with modern development is easy to say than to be done. For instance, being one of the huge project in 21st century' China, Three Gorges Project is aim to generate electricity through the torrential flow of Yangzi River, which will surely rise the level of water in Yangzi River and thereby destroy the buildings in both banks. Zhangfei Temple was one of these building. Chinese government decided to continue the project through thoughtful consideration. This illustrate that when the confliction cannot be solved, modern development should always be our first choice.还是老毛病了，例子后面的分析还是太短，要往ts句上靠呢.然后还是最好具外国的例子，中国的……怎么说呢。。。就是感觉不好。

In the second place, both the protecting of all the old buildings and over-emphasize of protection are unpractical. A large number of the historic buildings are not significant buildings, if we all spend money to preserve them, there are no money and ground left for our development of industry, agriculture and technology. Over-emphasize of protection is also unpractical. For example, the buildings in Tang Dynasty was preserved by the people in Qing Dynasty, the buildings in Qing Dynasty was preserved by contemporary people, therefore the buildings of our generation was preserved by people lived in 22nd century. This may sound ridiculous, but the truth is that the earth of world was full of "historic buildings" after 500 years. So perhaps we should preserve the most meaningful buildings and let the others be useful resources of modern development.这个立论1。和现实社会的世界潮流不服2。立论之中有明显的问题。可以保护性”开发”呀，这并不会知识现代发展降低，例子很多。

In conclusion, when controversy arises, everything should be taken into consideration. Contemporary needs should be served under these circumstance and over-emphasize of protection is unrealistic, so modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings. Of course, this does not mean ignore all the old buildings, the most significant ones must be preserved under any circumstance.

小结：
1。好话不多说，说大问题。
2。问题1。举例之后的对应分析很不到位。你的老问题了。
   问题2。还是要具世界性的例子，总感觉都是中国的例子，局限性太大。
3。如果我写，提纲如下：
   POSITION:这个观点是不对的，很片面
   B1:首先，要保护
   B2:但是，同时要发展，也很关键。
   B3:可以考虑不动老城区，在新城区进行现代化的建设。

指向大海UID: 158737

说几句
1天安门那个是金山里查的,的确不太合适
2问题1。举例之后的对应分析很不到位。你的老问题了。   这个偶尽量改正谢谢!
3中国的例子我觉得对我更适合,外国的容易错,中国的方正他不知道细节,从某种程度上说更好这个俺不想背N多英文例子了
4 naiba的提纲是大多数人一开始想到的,但我觉得在中国很多老百姓都没有房子住却要保护所谓的古建筑? 所谓的保护性措施也是空中楼阁,很多建筑早已经失去原来的价值所以还是决定写一些新异的东东