issue36 [color=#1200ff]同主题写作

龙非UID: 193190

The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries.
***************************************************************************************

Our mankind’s history of thousands of years is filled with numerous giants in all kinds of areas. But who on earth can decide whether the great are great? And what in hell is the criterion of greatness? I believe that a great man is great for his great contributions in his realm. Therefore, the greatness of individuals can be decided by no matter the contemporaries or the posterities as long as their great contributions are recognized.

In the first place, the contemporaries can always decide the greatness of a politician because of whose obvious contributions that can be recognized immediately. A great politician might lead the people to fight against aggression, create a great nation, or do significant contributions to the peace of world and so forth. Obviously, all these contributions can be recognized immediately by the people live in the same time. Hence, the contemporaries can decide the greatness of a politician. For supporting examples we need look no further than U.S. President Washington who built a great democratic nation. Isn't the greatness of President Washington was acknowledged during his lifetime? His people even named their capital with his name. Also consider South Africa's Nelson Mandela, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, we can decide that he is one of the greatest man of the time now. Thus it can be see that in politics, the contributions of the great man can be almost recognized and be decided by their contemporaries.

Moreover, the contemporaries can also decide the greatness of artists by the simple reason that art can be evaluated at face value. Whether in music, visual art or literature, there is nothing to be proved or be disproved and people can judge the artists' contributions easily. The history is replete with such examples that artistic greatness is recognized immediately. Through his symphony, European recognized Beethoven's musical greatness, while the greatness of Picasso was recognized in his prime of life, and Shakespeare became household name even during his lifetime. By these convincing examples, the history tells us that the greatness of individuals can be decided by their contemporaries.

At the same time, when we come to science, thing becomes something complex that whether the contemporaries can decide the greatness of individuals. Sometimes the people living in the same time can judge the value of individual's work and decide his greatness. For instance, Thomas Edison is called one of the greatest inventors who patented more than one thousand inventions by his contemporaries and he really is deserved. And we consider Einstein the greatest physical scientist of the twentieth century. But sometimes we can hardly to evaluate the contributions of the scientists. Let us think about Paul Muller who wined the Nobel Prize for the invention of DDT that is the pronoun of environment disaster made by people's misconduct. Half of a century ago, we take him as one of the great scientist and award prize to him, yet today we have to admit that we were wrong. Because of the complexity of the science, any scientific theory may be disproved tomorrow, thereby demoting the theorist's contributions so that the contemporaries may have wrong decision of the greatness of individuals. In a word, if the contributions of a scientist can be proved immediately by his contemporaries that can decide the greatness, otherwise, only the people who live after him can do it.

In conclusion, it is the standard to decide whether a person is a great one that if he has do significant contributions to his realm, thus whether in politics, art or science, not only the posterity could decide the greatness of individuals, but also the contemporaries by whom if the contributions can be disproved.

so猫UID: 148633

The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries.
***************************************************************************************

Our mankind’s history of thousands of years is filled with numerous giants in all kinds of areas. But who on earth can decide whether the great are great? And what in hell is the criterion of greatness? I believe that a great man is great for his great contributions in his realm. 多次great啊~天~~~ Therefore, the greatness of individuals can be decided by no matter the contemporaries or the posterities as long as their great contributions are recognized. 很清晰的开头~~不错 但是看你后面怎么展开吧~

In the first place, the contemporaries can always decide the greatness of a politician because of whose obvious contributions that can be recognized immediately. A great politician might lead the people to fight against aggression, create a great nation, or do significant contributions to the peace of world and so forth.这句有点孤立 为什么我说不出 但是觉得出来有点突兀~ Obviously, all these contributions can be recognized immediately by the people live in the same time. Hence, the contemporaries can decide the greatness of a politician. For supporting examples we need look no further than U.S. President Washington who built a great democratic nation. Isn't the greatness of President Washington was acknowledged during his lifetime? His people even named their capital with his name. Also consider South Africa's Nelson Mandela, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, we can decide that he is one of the greatest man of the time now. Thus it can be see that in politics, the contributions of the great man can be almost recognized and be decided by their contemporaries.

Moreover, the contemporaries can also decide the greatness of artists by the simple reason that art can be evaluated at face value. Whether in music, visual art or literature, there is nothing to be proved or be disproved and people can judge the artists' contributions easily. The history is replete with such examples that artistic greatness is recognized immediately. Through his symphony, European recognized Beethoven's musical greatness, while the greatness of Picasso was recognized in his prime of life, and Shakespeare became household name even during his lifetime. By these convincing examples, the history tells us that the greatness of individuals 为什么突然就把范围说大了？？？你从哪跳到了individual啊？？？ can be decided by their contemporaries. 这一段 我觉得写得不好 我不会拐弯抹角的说 我觉得这样的说法一点说服力都没有 如果你的出发点是 现代社会也能确定艺术家的伟大与否 那么你的例子都应该很严密的围绕contemporary 可惜 我没发现你的重点在此 那些例子虽然用了 但没有惊艳到我眼睛一亮的感觉 没什么展开

At the same time, when we come to science, thing becomes something complex that whether the contemporaries can decide the greatness of individuals. Sometimes the people living in the same time can judge the value of individual's work and decide his greatness. For instance, Thomas Edison is called one of the greatest inventors who patented more than one thousand inventions by his contemporaries and he really is deserved. And we consider Einstein the greatest physical scientist of the twentieth century. But sometimes we can hardly to evaluate the contributions of the scientists. Let us think about Paul Muller who wined the Nobel Prize for the invention of DDT that is the pronoun of environment disaster made by people's misconduct. Half of a century ago, we take him as one of the great scientist and award prize to him, yet today we have to admit that we were wrong. Because of the complexity of the science, any scientific theory may be disproved tomorrow, thereby demoting the theorist's contributions so that the contemporaries may have wrong decision of the greatness of individuals. 好 问题出来了 例子用了 但是是不是忽略了一点 这个地方 这个greatness of individual体现在哪里？ 如果说一个人在学术上犯了错误就否定了他的greatness是不是太残忍了 如果你认为greatness是指学术上的成就 那是不是应该在最前面搞一个定义呢 前两个body的例子也有这样的问题 因为在我看来 最重要决定greatness的不是contribution 而是dedication 当然 这是我的定义 但如果之前你没下定义或者定义vague的话 肯定会给人落下把柄 In a word, if the contributions of a scientist can be proved immediately by his contemporaries that can decide the greatness, otherwise, only the people who live after him can do it.最后一句话太深奥了我完全不懂 把我绕昏了 如果说一个科学家的贡献可以很快由有能力决定伟大与否的当代社会决定 这什么意思呢？？？

In conclusion, it is the standard to decide whether a person is a great one that if he has do significant contributions to his realm, thus whether in politics, art or science, not only the posterity could decide the greatness of individuals, but also the contemporaries by whom if the contributions can be disproved.
这篇文章非常难写我必须说
不单单是抽象的问题
例子很难针对得非常完美
说理一下子弄不好就把自己给绕糊涂~~~

而且我认为你有一个致命的错误
Not…but…我认为 多少存在一定的比较意义
而你只是说了现代可能怎么样 能够怎么怎么样
你在开头说一个人的伟大与否由其本身决定 而后面没有给出任何证明
这点非常可惜 本来文章能够更上个层次的~

加油写啊~~~
你曾经看过我的文 我就来给你改改罗~

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

Our mankind’s history of thousands of years is filled with numerous giants in all kinds of areas. But who on earth can decide whether the great are great? And what in hell is the criterion of greatness? I believe that a great man is great for his great contributions in his realm. 好多个great，汗Therefore, the greatness of individuals can be decided by no matter the contemporaries or the posterities as long as their great contributions are recognized.

In the first place, the contemporaries can always decide the greatness of a politician because of whose obvious contributions that can be recognized immediately. A great politician might lead the people to fight against aggression, create create不恰当，establish, found之类好些a great又great！一会我要数数你一共用多少个 nation, or do makesignificant contributions to the peace of world and so forth.我觉得你要是没说你要举例，又这样写例子，最好能多两三个方面排比一下，毕竟greatness有很多方面呀。不然觉得有些单调，下面你就obviously又hence了 Obviously, all these contributions can be recognized immediately by the people live in the same time. Hence, the contemporaries can decide the greatness of a politician. For supporting examples we need look no further than U.S. President Washington who built a great …这些great和greatness离的太近了，重复的太明显，建议来回倒一下democratic nation. Isn't the greatness of President Washington was acknowledged during his lifetime? His people even named their capital with his name. Also consider South Africa's Nelson Mandela, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, we can decide that he is one of the greatest man of the time now. Thus it can be see that in politics, the contributions of the great man can be almost recognized and be decided by their contemporaries.

Moreover, the contemporaries can also decide the greatness of artists by the simple reason that art can be evaluated at face value. Whether in music, visual art or literature, there is nothing to be proved or be disproved and people can judge the artists' contributions easily. 嗯？这句看的糊涂，请赐教The history is replete with such examples that artistic greatness is recognized immediately. Through his 先冒出个代词后面才说谁，我觉得这样的表达不太好symphony, European recognized Beethoven's musical greatness, while the greatness of Picasso was recognized in his prime of life, and Shakespeare became household name even during his lifetime. By these convincing examples, the history tells us that the greatness of individuals can be decided by their contemporaries.感觉还是要分析一下例子的人物的伟大在哪里，为当代人做出了虾米贡献，为虾米有同时代的人会接受和尊敬，因此才能得到你的结论，当代人也可以评论一个人物的伟大。单纯列几个现象就说他们都在生前都得到了社会的承认怕是有些不深入捏

At the same time, when we come to science, thing becomes something complex that whether the contemporaries can decide the greatness of individuals. Sometimes the people living in the same time can judge the value of individual's work and decide his greatness. For instance, Thomas Edison is called one of the greatest inventors who patented more than one thousand inventions by his contemporaries and he really is deserved. And we consider Einstein the greatest physical scientist of the twentieth century. But sometimes we can hardly to evaluate the contributions of the scientists. Let us think let us think 这样的句我总觉得有些口语about Paul Muller who wined wonthe Nobel Prize for the invention of DDT that is the pronoun of environment disaster made by people's misconduct. Half of a century ago, we take him as one of the great scientist and award prize to him, yet today we have to admit that we were wrong.那么界个银算不算great？我觉得你这个例子可以但是没有很好的服务你的论点。你要分析为虾米有的greatness需要后人来评断，因为有的科学成果的验证需要N多年，不能马上做出结论，比如这个米勒虽然一时为杀虫做了大贡献，但是经过N多年的检验发觉他发明的这个东东的弊更多，因此对整个社会生态环境了人类健康了其实是有害的。所以对于一些试验结果不明确的新成果不能马上下结论。你对这个例子的表述给我的感觉就是，只说明了这个人发明了个好玩意，N年后被人们发现是错的。没有说明有无greatness也没说明为虾米要后人来鉴别 Because of the complexity of the science, any scientific theory may be disproved tomorrow, thereby demoting the theorist's contributions so that the contemporaries may have wrong decision of the greatness of individuals. ft,我狂打了一堆字，发觉你后面也有这方面解释。不过我觉得你的解释不够明确，so that前后不是因果吧？因为成果有可能被证明为误，那么当代人就可能做出错误的判断，关于greatness。这里的greatness太不明确了，正如你那个例子，那获奖不是因为杀虫剂的效果大嘛，不也算greatnessIn a word, if the contributions of a scientist can be proved immediately by his contemporaries that can decide the greatness, otherwise, only the people who live after him can do it.

In conclusion, it is the standard to decide whether a person is a great one that if he has do significant contributions to his realm,standard的问题好像一直没说过吧，忽然就出来了 thus whether in politics, art or science, not only the posterity could decide the greatness of individuals, but also the contemporaries by whom if the contributions can be disproved.最后半句的概念也是你B3结尾才说到的，用于全文的观点不合适，而且是不是被disprove才能被decide？

龙非GG的的条理一直都很清楚，我就论一会就乱套了。
不过有几个地方要指出：
1，用了很多的great, greatness, recognize 单调
2，B2的例子有些像流水帐，么有实质的东东，觉得加以分析会比较好
3，B3后面的论述有些乱套了，关于greatness的概念让我很疑惑，请赐教。
4，结尾总有新观念冒出来，从你的意思看不是那样提建议喊口号的，还是对你全文的总结，最好不要总蹦出来前面都没说过的问题。这个是个人意见，欢迎讨论
不过，整体还好啦！尤其龙非GG工作那么忙 还这么努力学G，赞一个！

walterechoUID: 198230

我觉得论证中之第一段有些问题，你是想说政治家，可是politician更多是指政客。而且，政治人物的贡献不一定立刻就能被recognize.

walterechoUID: 198230

另外，问问两位修改者，如果不用great，用什么替换合适？

ivyshoulUID: 195537

占坐先

ivyshoulUID: 195537

Our mankind’s history of thousands of years is filled with numerous giants in all kinds of areas. But who on earth can decide whether the great are great? And what in hell is the criterion of greatness? I believe that a great man is great for his great contributions in his realm. [楼上两高人说要替换great,我也想知道换什么…] Therefore, the greatness of individuals can be decided by no matter the contemporaries or the posterities as long as their great contributions are recognized. [明确简洁的开头]

In the first place, the contemporaries can always decide the greatness of a politician because of  whose obvious [and easily recognized]  contributions [that can be recognized immediately]. [觉得话有点绕喃. ] A great politician might lead the people to fight against aggression, create a great nation, or do significant contributions to the peace of world and so forth. Obviously, all these contributions can be recognized immediately by the people live in the same time. Hence, the contemporaries can decide the greatness of a politician. For supporting examples we need look no further than [U.S. President Washington who built a great democratic nation. Isn't the greatness of President Washington was acknowledged during his lifetime? His people even named their capital with [after] his name. Also consider South Africa's Nelson Mandela, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, we can decide that he is one of the greatest man [men] of the time now. Thus it can be see that in politics, the contributions of the great man can be almost recognized and be decided by their contemporaries.

Moreover, the contemporaries can also decide the greatness of artists by the simple reason that art can be evaluated at face value. Whether in music, visual art or literature, there is nothing to be proved or be disproved and people can judge the artists' contributions easily. The history is replete with such examples that artistic greatness is recognized immediately. Through his symphony, European recognized Beethoven's musical greatness, while the greatness of Picasso was recognized in his prime of life, and Shakespeare became household name even during his lifetime. By these convincing examples, the history tells us that the greatness of individuals can be decided by their contemporaries.

At the same time, when we come to science, thing becomes something [somewhat] complex that whether the contemporaries can decide the greatness of individuals. Sometimes [the] people living in the same time can judge the value of individual's work and decide his greatness. For instance, Thomas Edison is called one of the greatest inventors who patented more than one thousand inventions by his contemporaries and he really is deserved. And we consider Einstein the greatest physical scientist of the twentieth century. But sometimes we can hardly to evaluate the contributions of the scientists. Let us think about Paul Muller who wined the Nobel Prize for the invention of DDT that is the pronoun of environment disaster made by people's misconduct. Half of a century ago, we take him as one of the great scientist and award prize to him, yet today we have to admit that we were wrong. [能这样就否定他的greatness么?其他人一样有责任,他的成就是great的,只是用得过度了] Because of the complexity of the science, any scientific theory may be disproved tomorrow, thereby demoting the theorist's contributions so that the contemporaries may have wrong decision of the greatness of individuals. [我觉得就算理论以后证明是错的, 科学家在当时的环境下做出那样的成果, 也可能是有阶段性的重要意义的,就算证明某研究方向不可行那也是一种成就嘛] In a word, if the contributions of a scientist can be proved immediately by his contemporaries that can decide the greatness, otherwise, only the people who live after him can do it.

In conclusion, it is the standard to decide whether a person is a great one that if he has do significant contributions to his realm, thus whether in politics, art or science, not only the posterity could decide the greatness of individuals, but also the contemporaries by whom if the contributions can be disproved.

龙非UID: 193190

呼呼，下午工作忙没上来，一下子就这么多同学给俺改了，谢一个先:D，然后再搬个沙发过来慢慢学习。
这篇真的很难写，想了很久一直没能说服自己，无论是全面肯定还是全面否定，或是骑墙，都没能找到可以说服自己的理由。最后只能挑了一个马马虎虎能说服自己的观点起笔，可惜又语言不过关，没能很好的表达自己的思想。仔细想想，主要问题还是出在观点上，不够明确，名不正言不顺，看来要重写了。

说了这么多废话，开始学习，下面一一回复。

wsm1103UID: 158327

我觉得great可以用significant，marvelous代替
呵呵，仅作参考

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

great contribution 可以换呀 虾米significant, impressive, large, prominent, remarkable云云 来回倒一下就好看啦
说一个person  great还没想好怎么换捏 貌似不能换

龙非UID: 193190

感谢猫猫同学头个捧场

Our mankind’s history of thousands of years is filled with numerous giants in all kinds of areas. But who on earth can decide whether the great are great? And what in hell is the criterion of greatness? I believe that a great man is great for his great contributions in his realm. 多次great啊~天~~~ sigh，一不小心就暴露出语言不过关，写的时候还真没发觉得great多:DTherefore, the greatness of individuals can be decided by no matter the contemporaries or the posterities as long as their great contributions are recognized. 很清晰的开头~~不错 但是看你后面怎么展开吧~

In the first place, the contemporaries can always decide the greatness of a politician because of whose obvious contributions that can be recognized immediately. A great politician might lead the people to fight against aggression, create a great nation, or do significant contributions to the peace of world and so forth.这句有点孤立 为什么我说不出 但是觉得出来有点突兀~ 我明白你的意思，一路看下来到这句话会有个跳跃，只有看了下一句才能明白这句话用来干嘛，所以有点突兀，我再想想法子Obviously, all these contributions can be recognized immediately by the people live in the same time. Hence, the contemporaries can decide the greatness of a politician. For supporting examples we need look no further than U.S. President Washington who built a great democratic nation. Isn't the greatness of President Washington was acknowledged during his lifetime? His people even named their capital with his name. Also consider South Africa's Nelson Mandela, the Nobel Peace Prize winner, we can decide that he is one of the greatest man of the time now. Thus it can be see that in politics, the contributions of the great man can be almost recognized and be decided by their contemporaries.

Moreover, the contemporaries can also decide the greatness of artists by the simple reason that art can be evaluated at face value. Whether in music, visual art or literature, there is nothing to be proved or be disproved and people can judge the artists' contributions easily. The history is replete with such examples that artistic greatness is recognized immediately. Through his symphony, European recognized Beethoven's musical greatness, while the greatness of Picasso was recognized in his prime of life, and Shakespeare became household name even during his lifetime. By these convincing examples, the history tells us that the greatness of individuals 汗，这里怎么就变成individuals啦-_-||，检查过都没有发觉为什么突然就把范围说大了？？？你从哪跳到了individual啊？？？ can be decided by their contemporaries. 这一段 我觉得写得不好 我不会拐弯抹角的说 我觉得这样的说法一点说服力都没有 如果你的出发点是 现代社会也能确定艺术家的伟大与否 那么你的例子都应该很严密的围绕contemporary 可惜 我没发现你的重点在此 那些例子虽然用了 但没有惊艳到我眼睛一亮的感觉 没什么展开 这里跟猫猫同学有点不同的看法，contemporary指的是当代而不是现代，也就是说是跟牛牛们同时代的银，三个例子都是要说明他们在自己的时代就已经被承认了，不过第一个例子没有写好，加个时间壮语应该好一点。而整一段的大意是想说明在艺术领域，因为艺术家的价值可以很明显地被判断，所以可以由contemporaries来决定

At the same time, when we come to science, thing becomes something complex that whether the contemporaries can decide the greatness of individuals. Sometimes the people living in the same time can judge the value of individual's work and decide his greatness. For instance, Thomas Edison is called one of the greatest inventors who patented more than one thousand inventions by his contemporaries and he really is deserved. And we consider Einstein the greatest physical scientist of the twentieth century. But sometimes we can hardly to evaluate the contributions of the scientists. Let us think about Paul Muller who wined the Nobel Prize for the invention of DDT that is the pronoun of environment disaster made by people's misconduct. Half of a century ago, we take him as one of the great scientist and award prize to him, yet today we have to admit that we were wrong. Because of the complexity of the science, any scientific theory may be disproved tomorrow, thereby demoting the theorist's contributions so that the contemporaries may have wrong decision of the greatness of individuals. 好 问题出来了 例子用了 但是是不是忽略了一点 这个地方 这个greatness of individual体现在哪里？ 如果说一个人在学术上犯了错误就否定了他的greatness是不是太残忍了 如果你认为greatness是指学术上的成就 那是不是应该在最前面搞一个定义呢 前两个body的例子也有这样的问题 因为在我看来 最重要决定greatness的不是contribution 而是dedication 当然 这是我的定义 但如果之前你没下定义或者定义vague的话 肯定会给人落下把柄 其实。。。，我的论点是不管当代还是后代都可以决定greatness，只要这些牛牛的贡献可以被确定，也就是说如果当代可以prove他们的贡献，那么就可以decide，否则就只能由后代来决定了In a word, if the contributions of a scientist can be proved immediately by his contemporaries that can decide the greatness, otherwise, only the people who live after him can do it.最后一句话太深奥了我完全不懂 把我绕昏了 如果说一个科学家的贡献可以很快由有能力决定伟大与否的当代社会决定 这什么意思呢？？？ 呵呵，病句，前半句缺少主语，见笑了

In conclusion, it is the standard to decide whether a person is a great one that if he has do significant contributions to his realm, thus whether in politics, art or science, not only the posterity could decide the greatness of individuals, but also the contemporaries by whom if the contributions can be disproved.
这篇文章非常难写我必须说
不单单是抽象的问题
例子很难针对得非常完美
同感
说理一下子弄不好就把自己给绕糊涂~~~

而且我认为你有一个致命的错误
Not…but…我认为 多少存在一定的比较意义
而你只是说了现代可能怎么样 能够怎么怎么样
你在开头说一个人的伟大与否由其本身决定 而后面没有给出任何证明 开头其实也不是说伟大由本身决定，而是说谁能明确伟人的贡献，谁就可以决定，应该是表述不清楚
这点非常可惜 本来文章能够更上个层次的~

加油写啊~~~
你曾经看过我的文 我就来给你改改罗~
总的来说，这篇是一篇比较失败的文章，问题还是出在自己下笔的时候观点还是不够明确，勉强为之，失败。。。

龙非UID: 193190

感谢吱吱的连续捧场，最近系统上线，忙得一塌糊涂，你写的两篇作文我都看到了，就是没有时间去细看，下次啦:D，稍微喘口气，一会再回复你的意见

龙非UID: 193190

还有三位同学，walterecho，ivyshoul和wsm1103。谢谢你们的意见，我会仔细学习，待会奉上我的看法。你们的文章我也会尽我的力量的

龙非UID: 193190

吱吱，翻了几页都没有你的作文捏？不跟着同主题走啊？

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

不是不跟着，是当我做出来计划的时候，同主题刚好和我的很不一致，然后我就看同主题的讨论，一看不打紧，思路都跟着大家跑，不敢下笔了 诶
而且上次限时开始后 写的东东自己都很恶的 有的就撇了 也没发
下次一定走在时代前沿 娃哈哈哈