Issue48 同主题写作

sharon84UID: 2110816

感觉前两段把历史study和分析个人、集体对历史的作用搅在一起了：（。。

The speaker's statement arises topics which involve the impacts produced respectively by famous individuals and the groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten to contribute to the history events, as well as the proper emphasis placed by historians. As I see it, the famous figures and the groups of unknown people do equally to shape history, while as for the study of history, it is necessary to play emphasis on famous individuals.

To begin with, the famous figures indeed play a decisive role in most significant events and trends in history, thus their contribution to the whole history and human society's progress can not be undervalued. For there must be levels of capacities and organizations among marvelous amount of people, the leaders is necessary and desirable. The famous figures with better personal quality, high intellectuality or broad vision outperform the ordinary people and therefore are able to make more sagacious decisions on certain key moments than the mass. That is to say, famous figures do greatly prompt the occurrence of important events and lead the trends of history. In this sense, playing emphasis on them help one to understand history better for these famous figures' lives beyond doubt serves as useful clues and guidance to that episode of history.

On the other hand, history to some extent is also actually shaped by the groups of people, whose identities although may mostly forgotten. Without these unknown mass's endeavor and struggle, the realization of the most significant events is impossible to achieve. After all, the famous figures as an individual can not lead the history to develop in any direction they are willing to choose, the trends of historic development are determined by the overall contemporary historic conditions and also the willingness of the masses, who in turn realize the transformation of society. Merely concentrating on the role of famous figures, hardly can one hold a holistic view of that episode of history. Many examples come to mind. For instance, when studying the history of Civil War, mere emphasis on Abraham Lincoln, as a famous figure who acted as a leader of that war and did great contribution to the emancipation of slaves, will make one neglect to study the function and real situations of groups of unknown people including the Blacks. As a result, one can not hold a comprehensive picture of that integral history of Civil War. Consequently, the equally important role of masses people make it impossible to totally comprehend the history by playing sole emphasis on the famous few.

Whereas when it comes to the study of history, it is usually necessary or perhaps beneficial to emphasize on the individuals. Firstly, it is often the common case that the documentary or records about the famous figures are more affluent compared with the rare records on these unknown masses people, therefore it is natural for historians to play emphasis on them in order to understand that episode of history. In these sense, historians have to do so instead of preferring to. In addition, from the perspective of students, study of the famous figures serves as a means to help them better understand history. Moreover, these famous figures will act as a model for them to emulate giving positive effects to the student's development in the future.

In sum, without the famous figures, the progress of history will be significantly impeded. Without the masses unknown people, the realization of history is also impossible. Although both equally shape the history, it is to some extent necessary to emphasize on the famous individuals when studying history.

godspellUID: 177241

我先占座了:)
和你一样，7月28日北京

godspellUID: 177241

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1
这是我的argu，也帮我看看吧：）

jason0926UID: 200697

结尾不错,值得学习

godspellUID: 177241

The speaker's statement arises topics which involve the impacts produced respectively by famous individuals and the groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten to contribute to the history events, as well as the proper emphasis placed by historians. As I see it, the famous figures and the groups of unknown people do equally to shape history, while as for the study of history, it is necessary to play emphasis on famous individuals.

To begin with, the famous figures indeed play a decisive role in most significant events and trends in history, thus their contribution to the whole history and human society's progress can not be undervalued. For there must be levels of capacities and organizations among marvelous amount of people, the leaders is necessary and desirable. The famous figures with better personal quality, high intellectuality or broad vision outperform the ordinary people and therefore are able to make more sagacious decisions on certain key moments than the mass. That is to say, famous figures do greatly prompt the occurrence of important events and lead the trends of history. In this sense, playing emphasis on them help one to understand history better for these famous figures' lives beyond doubt serves as useful clues and guidance to that episode of history.（能够再举些例子就更好了）

On the other hand, history to some extent is also actually shaped by the groups of people, whose identities although may mostly forgotten. Without these unknown mass's endeavor and struggle, the realization of the most significant events is impossible to achieve. After all, the famous figures as an individual can not lead the history to develop in any direction they are willing to choose, the trends of historic development are determined by the overall contemporary historic conditions and also the willingness of the masses, who in turn realize the transformation of society. Merely concentrating on the role of famous figures, hardly can one hold a holistic view of that episode of history. Many examples come to mind. For instance, when studying the history of Civil War, mere emphasis on Abraham Lincoln, as a famous figure who acted as a leader of that war and did great contribution to the emancipation of slaves, will make one neglect to study the function and real situations of groups of unknown people including the Blacks. As a result, one can not hold a comprehensive picture of that integral history of Civil War. Consequently, the equally important role of masses people make it impossible to totally comprehend the history by playing sole emphasis on the famous few.

Whereas when it comes to the study of history, it is usually necessary or perhaps beneficial to emphasize on the individuals. Firstly, it is often the common case that the documentary or records about the famous figures are more affluent compared with the rare records on these unknown masses people, therefore it is natural for historians to play emphasis on them in order to understand that episode of history. In these sense, historians have to do so instead of preferring to. In addition, from the perspective of students, study of the famous figures serves as a means to help them better understand history. Moreover, these famous figures will act as a model for them to emulate giving positive effects to the student's development in the future.

In sum, without the famous figures, the progress of history will be significantly impeded. Without the masses unknown people, the realization of history is also impossible. Although both equally shape the history, it is to some extent necessary to emphasize on the famous individuals when studying history.
结构清晰，论证也不错，继续加油~~:)

echostateUID: 194935

The speaker's statement arises topics which involve the impacts produced respectively by famous individuals and the groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten to contribute to the history events, as well as the proper emphasis placed by historians. [开头句长，也有点绕，但是却没让我感到精彩，从这个角度看，即使这个句子没有问题，它也没什么优点：P] As I see it, the famous figures and the groups of unknown people [学会文字变换了~~~~弓虽~~] do equally to shape history, while as for the study of history, it is necessary to play emphasis on famous individuals.

To begin with, the famous figures indeed play a decisive role in most significant events and trends in history, thus their contribution to the whole history and human society's progress can not be undervalued. For there must be levels of capacities and organizations among marvelous amount of people, the leaders is necessary and desirable [levels of capa~ and org~? 啥意思？可以看出你是为了证明领导的必要性]. The famous figures with better personal quality, high intellectuality or broad vision outperform the ordinary people and therefore are able to make more sagacious decisions on certain key moments than the mass. That is to say, famous figures do greatly prompt the occurrence of important events and lead the trends of history. In this sense, playing emphasis on them help one to understand history better for these famous figures' lives beyond doubt serves [serve] as useful clues and guidance to that episode of history.
[这段是说，领导牛啊，比一般人牛啊，所以关键时刻做出明智决断的是他们，所以历史许多关键时刻是他们促成的。这个论调很不错，但是，这一段写的可以再好点的。比如，我没看懂的那句话，可以去掉！把篇幅和时间省下来举个例子。比如***将军在某某战役中做出了英明决断，以至于改变了那场战斗乃至于整个战争的结局。或者，林肯华盛顿罗斯福等等哪个鸟人在什么时候做出了英明决断——比如罗斯福新政！多fit啊——使得美国的历史走上了崭新的台阶，and so forth（这个词跟你学的~~~~）……]

On the other hand, history to some extent is also actually shaped by the groups of people, whose identities although may mostly forgotten. Without these unknown mass's endeavor and struggle, the realization of the most significant events is impossible to achieve. After all, the famous figures as an individual can not lead the history to develop in any direction they are willing to choose [willing to choose，别扭，两个词在深层含义上是重叠的吧？], the trends of historic development [develop用过了，换！advancement/evolution/progress] are determined by the overall contemporary historic conditions and also the willingness of the masses, who in turn realize the transformation of society. Merely concentrating on the role of famous figures, hardly can one hold a holistic view of that episode of history [前面就用过一次了，翻译成中文“那段历史”，很顺耳，你不会是从中文译过去的吧？如果确实是西方人经常用的，我收藏~~~~~~]. Many examples come to mind. For instance, when studying the history of Civil War, mere emphasis on Abraham Lincoln, as a famous figure who acted as a leader of that war and did great contribution to the emancipation of slaves, will make one neglect to study the function and real situations of groups of unknown people including the Blacks. As a result, one can not hold a comprehensive picture of that integral history of Civil War. Consequently, the equally important role of masses people make it impossible to totally comprehend the history by playing sole emphasis on the famous few.

Whereas when it comes to the study of history, it is usually necessary or perhaps beneficial to emphasize on the individuals. Firstly, it is often the common case that the documentary or records about the famous figures are more affluent compared with the rare records on these unknown masses people, therefore it is natural for historians to play emphasis on them in order to understand that episode of history. In these [this] sense, historians have to do so instead of preferring to. In addition, from the perspective of students, study of the famous figures serves as a means to help them better understand history. Moreover, these famous figures will act as a model for them to emulate giving positive effects to the student's development in the future [注意噢，这个写法和我一样，但是你帮我改完以后，有人又来看我的作文，说题目中的study应该只是指研究的，那样的话，这段最好只写historian，不要写student].

In sum, without the famous figures, the progress of history will be significantly impeded [换个词吧，应该是延缓等等，不应该是阻止吧。林肯君什么都不做，也不能说是阻碍历史进程吧~~~]. Without the masses unknown people [masses可以是形容词吗？], the realization of history is also impossible. Although both equally shape the history, it is to some extent necessary to emphasize on the famous individuals when studying history.

[感觉写的比我那篇好~~~~~~wuwu~~~~~^O^]

[ Last edited by echostate on 2005-7-18 at 18:54 ]

echostateUID: 194935

我8月底才考呢！
唉，9月份开学，没时间看笔试了~~~~wuwu

echostateUID: 194935

对了，介意改arg吗？
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1
这是一篇arg
要是想改issue就等我写出来再说