【G盟心情篇】-V6专用讨论贴 ||考G如养猫-V6的战友看过来-We're back!

esmeirasUID: 202885

Originally posted by mkb57288 at 2005-9-4 12:28
这个也是一篇6分范文的标准开头:L

A recent survey of dental patients showed that people who use Smile-Bright toothpaste are most likely to have capped teeth -- artificial but natural-looking prote ...

我说的1,2,3 关键是语言给人的说服力不太强; first,second...这些信号词没有问题的. 那个6分的开头语言简洁明了, 除了信号词还有 wording,对我门来说一下很难作到.

关于长句,没有绝对的对错,关键在于写得好不好,恰当与否. 海明威也喜欢用一串短句,但人家用的妙啊.  我的意思主要是说你那2个地方用长句应该比短句会好一点.

那个"葱白",大大不能联想一下哈,非要人家点明是" 崇拜"啊.....~~~~~:O  

;P

已经写的很好的啦! :D  :victory:

mkb57288UID: 2105771

今天限时一个劲儿的失败，又超了三分多
------题目------
Society should identify those children who have special talents and abilities and begin training them at an early age so that they can eventually excel in their areas of ability. Otherwise, these talents are likely to remain undeveloped.
------正文------
Although a society cannot develop quickly without certain experts or talents, I strongly disagree on the assertion that children have special talents should be identified and trained to ensure they can excel in given fields. Because by doing so, we actually strive to shape a society admiring elitism at the expense of equality.

In the ever-developing ear, it seems tempting to agree with the speaker that we should cultivate talented children to help our society develop more quickly. After all, these children are so distinguished in given fields that they can accomplish the same achievement with considerable less effort than ordinary ones. In this case, it will be definitely redeemable loss that leaving such talents unexploited. However, I cast doubt on the speaker's assertion that training them at an early age will bring about a better world, by which I mean more equal, more balanced and more harmonious.

One threshold problem with the assertion is that we cannot choose fair criteria to determine which talents and abilities are more worthy cultivating. For better or not, in the society lionizing pragmatism, it is highly possible that talents associated with economic success get preferred. For instance, a children talented in mathematics or physics is usually be given extraordinary attention and training, because his talents are likely to bring about certain direct breakthrough in information technology that can create a mint of money as a result. On the other hand, children talented in folklore study tends to flag into oblivion, for their success seems to be obsolete and can hardly result in any economic success. In fact, by streaming children to two groups separately labeled talented and ordinary, we seem to be encouraging certain elitism. In my observation, the stream can not justify itself by allocating educational resources unequally even at the very beginning of one's life. However, all the children are equal citizens in the future; therefore they should not be excluded from some privileges intended to a handful of people, which will deprive them of the opportunity for self-development.

Furthermore, it seems presumptuous for the speaker to assert that the well-trained children can eventually excel in their areas and benefit our society as a result. In my observation, such training designed for so-called talented is usually featured by intensive inculcation of knowledge, which, too often, take up so much time that prevent the children from enjoying their childhood. Due to such psychological defect, these children are likely to take study as a boring and unfruitful process that brings about little happiness. After all, individuals, who are absent of interest, can hardly work effectively in given fields. Moreover, it is also possible that our educators underscore intellect and so-called talent nurture at the expense of skill in socialization, a valuable characteristic demanded by modern society. Without proper communication and coordination with others, any individual, no matter how talented he is, can never contribute significantly to our society.

In the concern whether the ethic maturity can keep pace with that of intellect, lies another reason why I take exception to the speaker's claim. If the well-trained children can only excel in given technical field while show little maturity in ethics, our society is likely to suffer from the effort of nurturing such talents. Consider the increasingly rampant criminals over Internet. Many of those attribute to some teenagers, who excel at information technology but lack certain maturity or wisdom to discern right from wrong. In this case, nurturing such talents before ethic mature accomplishes little to the well-being of our society and even serves as a backfire.

In final analysis, before fully accepting the author's assertion, we are obliged to make sure that the children are ethically qualified for the training. Moreover, we should also avoid elitism to prevent our society devolving into an unequal one.

[ Last edited by mkb57288 on 2005-9-4 at 18:38 ]

mkb57288UID: 2105771

上面贴上来的是修改后的版本，把一处蹩脚的句子和typo改掉了，看样子考试真的是得留出时间来检查，可是现在限时还不成功，严重汗。。。

[ Last edited by mkb57288 on 2005-9-4 at 15:35 ]

zehuaUID: 199246

Originally posted by xiaowenzi118 at 2005-9-4 09:55


不错不错,今天要做一天实验了。刚刚用王水泡了一大堆东西，好不容易可以歇一下。
晚上可以上来讨论一下。:lol

泡了些啥？泡脚没？;P

mkb57288UID: 2105771

Originally posted by zehua at 2005-9-4 20:05

泡了些啥？泡脚没？;P

这个玩笑开的有一点儿过分了:L

wineyreUID: 2106739

水贴，想问zehua是学什么的啊？

xiaowenzi118UID: 202887

GOD！看来以后：　　P要这样打了

mkb57288UID: 2105771

暗喻是literal 的一种---这个观点极端不同意，literal，就是字面直白的意思，是不会有metaphor的

esmeirasUID: 202885

Originally posted by mkb57288 at 2005-9-4 23:07
暗喻是literal 的一种---这个观点极端不同意，literal，就是字面直白的意思，是不会有metaphor的

恩恩,想想又不对,  理解错了, 看看改后的

esmeirasUID: 202885

今天限时一个劲儿的失败，又超了三分多
------题目------0r x C4g$I#s w ~+}
Society should identify those children who have special talents and abilities and begin training them at an early age so that they can eventually excel in their areas of ability. Otherwise, these talents are likely to remain undeveloped.
------正文------
Although a society cannot develop quickly without certain experts or talents, I strongly disagree on  （disagree on, 不是这么搭配的吧，， with? 还有啊，这么强硬哦。。~~） the assertion that children have special talents （ prodigies , 留着备用，嘿嘿 ）should be identified and trained to ensure they can excel in given fields. Because by doing so, we actually strive to shape a society admiring elitism at the expense of equality.

In the ever-developing ear, (era ,大大) it seems tempting to agree with the speaker that we should cultivate talented children to help our society develop more quickly. After all, these children are so distinguished in given fields that they can accomplish the same achievement with considerable less effort than ordinary ones. In this case, it will be definitely redeemable loss that leaving such talents unexploited. However, I (cast doubt on …这个这个。。简单的意思有必要这么“妖”嘛， cast doubt on…有反面意思哦， cast doubt on 有把不好的言语攻击。。。的意思呢 ) the speaker's assertion that training them at an early age will bring about a better world, （by which I mean more equal, more balanced and more harmonious 一串形容词。。后面的名词呢？ 这样的句子是没有写完整的哦）

One threshold problem with the assertion（ 能不能换个啊 ， position, viewpoint, standpoint….上金山找找  ） is that we cannot choose fair criteria to determine which talents and abilities are more worthy cultivating. For better or not, in the society lionizing pragmatism, it is highly possible （ 你在啊狗里面不会也用了吧。。。~~标准的啊狗  ）that talents associated with economic success get preferred. For instance, a children talented in mathematics or physics is usually be given extraordinary attention and training, because his talents are likely to bring about certain direct breakthrough in information technology that can create a mint of money as a result. On the other hand, children talented in folklore study tends to flag into oblivion, for their success seems to be obsolete and can hardly result in any economic success. In fact, by streaming children to two groups separately labeled talented and ordinary, we seem to be encouraging certain elitism. In my observation, the stream can not justify itself by allocating educational resources unequally even at the very beginning of one's life. However, all the children are equal citizens in the future; therefore they should not be excluded from some privileges intended to a handful of people, which will deprive them of the opportunity for self-development.

Furthermore, it seems presumptuous for the speaker to assert that the well-trained children can eventually excel in their areas and benefit our society as a result. In my observation, （又来了。。~~少一点点重复，外加强调“自己“哦 ）  such training designed for so-called talented is usually featured by intensive inculcation of knowledge, which, too often, take up so much time that prevent the children from enjoying their childhood. Due to such psychological defect, these children are likely to take study as a boring and unfruitful process that brings about little happiness. After all, individuals, who are absent of interest, can hardly work effectively in given fields. Moreover, it is also possible that our educators underscore intellect and so-called talent nurture at the expense of skill in socialization, a valuable characteristic demanded by modern society. Without proper communication and coordination with others, any individual, no matter how talented he is, can never contribute significantly to our society.

In the concern whether the ethic maturity can keep pace with that of intellect, lies another reason why I take exception to the speaker's claim. If the well-trained children can only excel in given technical field while show little maturity in ethics, our society is likely to suffer from the effort of nurturing such talents. Consider the increasingly rampant criminals over Internet. Many of those attribute to some teenagers, who excel at information technology but lack certain maturity or wisdom to discern right from wrong. In this case, nurturing such talents before ethic mature accomplishes little to the well-being of our society and even serves as a backfire.

In final analysis, before fully accepting the author's assertion, we are obliged to make sure that the children are ethically qualified for the training. Moreover, we should also avoid elitism to prevent our society devolving into an unequal one.  （大大，很像啊狗呢）

好长呀。。。~~  着重改了细节一点的地方， 只仍砖了，优点就不用多说了，嘿嘿

有点提醒一下，不知是我老眼昏花了呢还是为什么，整体感觉不是特别鲜明的说。 看看b2 ，那么常，正面说了说反面，但是没有一个例子呀！ 斯皮尔博格好象是属于天才少年，还有莫扎特啊。高而夫Tiger Woods 再好的论证没有例子也会嫌罗嗦的。 到encyclopedia 里面查一下， http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page    这个非常好，我以前准备这个题目查到了好多资料， 打education, or “prodigies “

加油！

xiaowenzi118UID: 202887

esmeiras 是新队员吗？以前没见过。讨论得很热烈呢。欢迎欢迎。:handshake

esmeirasUID: 202885

Originally posted by xiaowenzi118 at 2005-9-4 23:40
宋昊那本上说是不能关系
什么metaphor can't be understood literaly.
The melody can't be spoken out.

看来我似乎对literal这个词理解不够呀.不过这个关系也太不典型了.

对对对,我后面的无赖大法就是这个意思!!!!!!!   不能关系! 开始不知道怎么表达!!!!!

esmeirasUID: 202885

Originally posted by xiaowenzi118 at 2005-9-4 23:42
esmeiras 是新队员吗？以前没见过。讨论得很热烈呢。欢迎欢迎。:handshake

西西,如果还要人的话,我愿意参一个啊:$    现在是没庙的和尚:rolleyes:

xiaowenzi118UID: 202887

Originally posted by esmeiras at 2005-9-4 23:45



西西,如果还要人的话,我愿意参一个啊:$    现在是没庙的和尚:rolleyes:

OK！看你今天的表现不错。:lol

xiaowenzi118UID: 202887

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Main_Page   
莫非就是著名的微软百科全书？自己准备的后期才知道有这个东东的，可惜那时没时间看了，如果一开始就发现这个就好了。不过快考的话还是主要复习一下自己写过的东西吧。