issue87 看大家都很写得很辛苦的一篇(结尾仍然不太传统)

mondiaUID: 193825

大胆尝试一下,希望赐教!!
-------------------------------------------
Issue 87
------------------------------
87. "In any field of inquiry, the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important discoveries."
在所有的研究领域中，新手要比专家更有可能获得重要的发现。
新手和老手
------------------------------
From Faraday to Einstein，and from Einstein to Nash, the history of human's inquiry seems to indicate something of regular pattern. What does she want to tell us? Some history readers may declare that our history implies: the beginners are more likely to make important discoveries.

It is the rule she suggests us? We have almost come up to accept the result, the sudden light shed on the word of "beginner" confused our mind again. Can we call Faraday, or Einstein, or Nash just a beginner in his field? Somehow, we may be able to image what young faces they had when their discoveries were turned up, which made them look like beginners, however can we clearly tell how great effect they ever made for the success, and how many solitary nights they spent looking up to the firmament previously?

In this way, more or less, we will feel they were not normal "beginners' we refer to. In fact, it is quite difficult to define a beginner acceptable by every one. We can only describe a beginner a person has little experiences in his field, which maybe of less disagreement.

With this measure, we turn back to our history of fields of inquiry to search for some real beginners with great discoveries before. Many times, you feel a good example having been held in hands, a deeper observing tells you he or she was not a child came to the beach for the first time either. Newton once said self-effacingly (and I paraphrase):"I was just a child play on the beach,…" Admittedly, he must be an addicted boy searching from morning to night on his beautiful beach day after day. It is difficult for us to find out a new boy or girl played on the beach for several days found the winning secret hidden there in our history, from math to physics, from physics to chemistry…However, there may be some discoverers overlooked and forgot in our count. Granted that we had found some cases to the point, such sporadic light was not enough to cast light on a regular pattern of human's inquiry still, having excluded most great stars we honored in their field.

As my chemistry teacher ever preached to us (and I paraphrase):" Success never call upon a person with no preparation." Specially in the modern society, with the highly professionalizing of every field, the possibility of a tyro to make important discovery either in one field or in the junction of several ones seems to become less and less, which has become acceptable by more and more people as rule. Any way, there are so many preparations a beginner needs to make: the basic methods used in his field; some background of the problem he faces to, such as who succeeded, how and who failed ,why? ; the consciousness of what the important problem is, which is quite necessary for a great discovery. It will be a not short way ahead for their acquirement of those knowledge, and yet the experts have ran anteriorly. When beginners end this way, they are not just "beginners" any longer Moreover, a tyro always lack good opportunities to communicate with other great brain, which will put sand in the wheels during their exploration, in such a society whose peoples' communication becomes so influential in its every field. Undeniably, compared with the experts' being conservative unavoidable day by day, our beginners have more pep and curiosity, which we can only find in a few professors, like Einstein, S.S.Chern, and C.N. Yang, who made their most important discoveries in their life as notability experts at an elder age.

In a word, the word of "beginners" is used a little arbitrary and inaccurate in the readers' declaration set at the beginning. It is "not" likely the beginners will have more opportunities to achieve great discovery. However, rather than the eventual solution above, we had better try to find out the original motivation of the statement some one make in reading the history of human's inquiry. Then we may led to think about another good question: in what degree, can our professional knowledge promote our important discoveries in fields of inquiry? An interesting and constructive question, isn't it?

That's my position, that's my new.

mondiaUID: 193825

结尾仍然不太传统，
不知可行与否？
多谢赐教！！！！！

mondiaUID: 193825

吃得太饱了,
大言不惭一下

我的破题思路:

两个前提:
1)  新手是指很少经验的
2)  以是否是"必然规律"的眼光审视这个问题,
从而排除各案的干扰

还有一点想法:
在表树自己观点的同时,
寻找问题背后的"提问动机",
即:提问者到底想说什么?
(提问者往往表述不当,或错用词语,使我们有"小"辫子可抓的说.)

比如这个问题,提问者的动机可能是想讨论:
专业知识在多大程度上促进或限制我们取得重大的发现;
不知道是不是故意,"beginner"这个词正好用的很极端

当然动机可能不惟一,表述也不尽相同

GrowlywolfUID: 200584

偶觉得，破题的时候关键在于any和more likely，这个太绝对了。beginner倒未必。
不过你的思路也可以。

拍拍偶滴： :D
https://bbs.gter.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=256485

dragondreamUID: 181943

占个座先，有空了再来改

mondiaUID: 193825

谢过！

mondiaUID: 193825

haishi
meiren
gai :(

路过的至少给些评价吧

谢了

dragondreamUID: 181943

恩，看了文章了，可是不会改，似乎很深奥的说。
第一段似乎是支持原论点，后来就不知道怎么就变了，这样好像很危险吧。最起码应该在第一段表明你的论点吧。
而且关键是作者的写法...不是传统的那种，每一段的首尾都不点题，弄得我糊里糊涂的。

水平太次，只会写传统的东西，这样写也许会拿很高分吧，反正我是不会，也不敢，呵呵
个人意见，仅供参考

mondiaUID: 193825

不是吧,
这么明显的疑问句在那儿,
都被误解了......

mondiaUID: 193825

dragondream
帮我侃侃啊狗．．

山坡羊UID: 169978

87. "In any field of inquiry, the beginner is more likely than the expert to make important discoveries."
在所有的研究领域中，新手要比专家更有可能获得重要的发现。
新手和老手
------------------------------
From Faraday to Einstein，and from Einstein to Nash, the history of human's inquiry seems to indicate something of regular pattern. What does she want to tell us? Some history readers may declare that our history implies: the beginners are morelikely to make important discoveries.[比较好的开头，赞]

It is the rule [what]she suggests us? We have almost come up to accept the result, the sudden light shed on the word of "beginner" confused our mind again. Can we call Faraday, or Einstein, or Nash just a beginner in his field? Somehow, we may be able to image what young faces they had when their discoveries were turned up, which made them look like beginners, however can we clearly tell how great effect they ever made for the success, and how many solitary nights they spent looking up to the firmament previously?

In this way, more or less, we will feel they were not normal "beginners'[whom] we refer to. In fact, it is quite difficult to define a beginner acceptable by every one. We can only describe a beginner a person has little experiences in his field, which maybe of less disagreement.

With this measure, we turn back to our history of fields of inquiry to search for some real beginners with great discoveries before. Many times, you feel a good example having been held in hands, a deeper observing tells you he or she was not a child came to the beach for the first time either. Newton once said self-effacingly (and I paraphrase):"I was just a child play on the beach,…" Admittedly, he must be an addicted boy searching from morning to night on his beautiful beach day after day. It is difficult for us to find out a new boy or girl played on the beach for several days found the winning secret hidden there in our history, from math to physics, from physics to chemistry…However, there may be some discoverers overlooked and forgot in our count. Granted that we had found some cases to the point, such sporadic light was not enough to cast light on a regular pattern of human's inquiry still, having excluded most great stars we honored in their field. [语言佩服啊，没有可说的]

As my chemistry teacher ever preached to us (and I paraphrase):" Success never call upon a person with no preparation." Specially in the modern society, with the highly professionalizing of every field, the possibility of a tyro to make important discovery either in one field or in the junction of several ones seems to become less and less, which has become acceptable by more and more people as rule. Any way, there are so many preparations a beginner needs to make: the basic methods used in his field; some background of the problem he faces to, such as who succeeded, how and who failed ,why? ; the consciousness of what the important problem is, which is quite necessary for a great discovery. It will be a not short way ahead for their acquirement of those knowledge, and yet the experts have ran anteriorly. When beginners end this way, they are not just "beginners" any longer Moreover, a tyro always lack good opportunities to communicate with other great brain, which will put sand in the wheels during their exploration, in such a society whose peoples' communication becomes so influential in its every field. Undeniably, compared with the experts' being conservative unavoidable day by day, our beginners have more pep and curiosity, which we can only find in a few professors, like Einstein, S.S.Chern, and C.N. Yang, who made their most important discoveries in their life as notability experts at an elder age.

In a word, the word of "beginners" is used a little arbitrary and inaccurate in the readers' declaration set at the beginning. It is "not" likely the beginners will have more opportunities to achieve great discovery. However, rather than the eventual solution above, we had better try to find out the original motivation of the statement some one make in reading the history of human's inquiry. Then we may led[lead] to think about another good question: in[to] what degree, can our professional knowledge promote our important discoveries in fields of inquiry? An interesting and constructive question, isn't it?

That's my position, that's my new.
[佩服啊，确实不传统！我是做不到的：]而且结构层次分明。语法也很少错误，实在提不出来什么意见了。
还有你提出理解陈述者意图这一点，高！不过阅卷者能明白和赞可吗？我读来有一些吃力——不过我的水平实在不高 ]
还有请教你结尾一句，是有出处的吗？new作何解？]

mondiaUID: 193825

new 就是new idea 吧

从一个教授的口头禅里找来的 :D

多谢多谢！！


可惜不是限时的．．． :(