issue 26 历史类，关于建筑，费了我半天劲呢，请拍砖，谢谢：）

nickaaronleeUID: 183378

------题目------
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------
With the development of cities, the old buildings may restrain the progress of modern development. Some people argue that historic buildings need not be preserved any for more for the sake of modern development, which I partly agree. In my opinion, the major use of buildings is to meet the development of cities. In some cases, however, we should preserve some old buildings.

First of all, I believe that buildings are set up for the benefit of the progress of cities. Buildings should be suitable for the variety of cities. The history proves such idea. For example, thousands of years ago, arenas were set up to provide a place for people to entertain and add vigor to Rome. Furthermore, in order to adapt to the development of cities, buildings have changed a lot since ancient times. For instance, in the Middle Age, the authority built churches to provide education for people. Later, in the twelfth century modern universities came into exist. The speed of building churches decreased; instead, more and more universities were built for people to receive education. Therefore, history provides such vivid examples to conclude that buildings are set up for the purpose to meet the development of cities and adapt to modern progress.

Now that the essential relationship between buildings and cities is clear enough, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings. Nowadays, various new buildings are set up to provide entertainment sites, working offices, and places for spare time for people. For example, since the first movie was shown, up till now, hundreds of cinemas have appeared and become a major popular place for people to relax themselves instead of theaters. Thus, in modern society buildings' essence, which is to meet the development of cities, is not changed.

Admittedly, in some cases those buildings that have a fundamentally historic value should be preserved. Such buildings are our invaluable property and their values exceed the need to accord to the modern development. In this case, we should try every effort to protect them. For example, the odeum of Shanghai was removed 50 meters from its original place in order to prevent it from damage resulted from the construction of subways. By doing so, the municipal government spent much more extra money on the removal. The authorities definitely have the right to dismantle the odeum without taking the trouble to remove it. Nevertheless, they refuse to do so in that they are aware that the odeum has historic values and it is a symbol of Shanghai. The development of the city should give way to the odeum. Hence, sometimes those buildings with a long history and have historic values should be given precedence and preserved thoroughly.

To sum up, whether modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings is a case to case argument. Buildings are set up the meet the demand of the development of cities and accelerate the progress of cities. In some particular cases, however, those buildings with exclusively historic values should be preserved without considering the loss of modern development.

nickaaronleeUID: 183378

捞一下，请拍砖，必回拍，谢谢~~~

nickaaronleeUID: 183378

UP，呵呵

poohUID: 146994

占位献吻

issue 26 历史类，关于建筑，费了我半天劲呢，请拍砖，谢谢：）
------题目------
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------
With the development of cities, the old buildings may restrain the progress of modern development.这句两个development，有些啰嗦 Some people argue that historic buildings need not be preserved any for moreany more之间多了for  for the sake of modern development又一重复 , which I partly agree. In my opinion, the major use of buildings is to meet the development of cities. In some cases, however, we should preserve some old buildings. 说了半天没说出为什么不同意In my opinion, the major use of buildings is to meet the development of cities.这句似乎说了一半，让人不清楚这句到底为了说明什么？为什么要保存old buildings呢？这些都是thesis里面应该说明白的


First of all, I believe that buildings are set up for the benefit of the progress of cities. TC不好！这句没有说明跟thesis的关系，不知道跟题目到底是什么关系。实际上你这段的意思是说建筑应该随着社会的发展而发展，不适合发展的就应该淘汰掉。因此这句里面一定要说上historic building如果不在有用就应该被取代。注意分论点一定不要脱离题目另立一个主题，而要时刻记着你要为证明题目服务Buildings should be suitable for the variety of cities. The history history前面不加the proves such idea. For example, thousands of years ago, arenas were set up to provide a place for people to entertain and add vigor to Rome. Furthermore, in order to adapt to the development of cities, buildings have changed a lot since ancient times. For instance, in the Middle Age, the authority built churches to provide education for people. Later, in the twelfth century modern universities came into exist. The speed of building churches decreased; instead, more and more universities were built for people to receive education. Therefore, history provides such vivid examples to conclude that buildings are set up for the purpose to meet the development of cities and adapt to modern progress.

Now that the essential relationship between buildings and cities is clear enough, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings. Nowadays, various new buildings are set up to provide entertainment sites, working offices, and places for spare time for people. For example, since the first movie was shown, up till now, hundreds of cinemas have appeared and become a major popular place for people to relax themselves instead of theaters. Thus, in modern society buildings' essence, which is to meet the development of cities, is not changed.最后一句话还是没有落到题目的重点，历史建筑是否应该被现代建筑取代，而是落在了你自己令立的论点上了

这段是上段的延续，举例子的时候最好突出old building 不再适应城市的发展需要了，怎么不适应了，要写的具体点，新建筑带来了哪些好处也要写的具体点

Admittedly, in some cases those buildings that have a fundamentally historic value should be preserved. Such buildings are our invaluable property and their values exceed the need to accord to the modern development. In this case, we should try every effort to protect them. For example, the odeum of Shanghai was removed 50 meters from its original place in order to prevent it from damage resulted from the construction of subways. 这个例子很好，不过这个例子也说明了在保留历史建筑和建筑现代建筑之外还有其他的alternative By doing so, the municipal government spent much more extra money on the removal. The authorities definitely have the right to dismantle the odeum without taking the trouble to remove it. Nevertheless, they refuse to do so in that they are aware that the odeum has historic values and it is a symbol of Shanghai. The development of the city should give way to the odeum. Hence, sometimes those buildings with a long history and have historic values should be given precedence and preserved thoroughly.

To sum up, whether modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings is a case to case argument.这句比开头thesis明确多了，开头有点绕 Buildings are set up the meet the demand of the development of cities and accelerate the progress of cities. In some particular cases, however, those buildings with exclusively historic values should be preserved without considering the loss of modern development.

乒乓球爱上九月UID: 162925

up 不要忘记了 ^^

nickaaronleeUID: 183378

昨天有事没上网，非常感谢pooh姐的修改（吻），呵呵，很开心哦~~~我已经把pooh姐的意见都记下来了，然后自己慢慢研究：）