ISSUE48 真难写呀，写出来自我感觉不错，大家拍拍

禾日因心UID: 174510

48        The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten.
         
Seldom, historians make description on common people. From primary school to university, our history books are always replete with the famous few. The brilliant thinkers Socrates, Aristotle, the great military talent, Napoleon, the renowned politician, Lincoln, all of them are the real characters of our history books. Bearing too much curiosity in mind, we want to ask whether the historians place too much emphasis on individuals, who create the history, the famous few or groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten. These questions lead us to speculate more over the history.

  In my view, historians did not place too much emphasis on individuals. On the one hand, as we know, these famous few are center in their own time. They are always on the threshold of the era, with the unique characteristic of their time. Participating the history event, leading their people, they do not merely witness the history, but act very important roles in the course of history. Their whole lives are the truest history. Take Napoleon for example, this military genius conquered all the western and central mainland of Europe, and became the emperor of the French. His establishment of Napoleonic Code brought deep influential on Europe until today. For all the above, how history can ignore these individuals who play so significant roles in history.

Moreover, on the other hand, it seems very difficult for historians to study history through common people. Compared with the famous few, the materials of those forgotten people are left little and generally unavailable. The recordings of their daily lives lacked of preservation, which makes scholars hard to get detailed information to do research. Therefore, much more emphasis on individuals seems reasonable.

Then concerning the speaker’s claim that who made the most significant events and trends in history, it is really a complex question. Every one can create his own history, but referring to the history of society, it must include all the people, no matter who they are, the famous few or groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten. What we can say is just that both act their own corresponding roles in these events. In the course of these significant events, the famous few usually act as leaders, and forgotten people serve as followers. Just like wars, a commander without soldiers can not proceed in the battle, an army without an efficient general can not win. It is known to all that Newton’s classical mechanics has changed the world. However, Newton ever said that all his success was established on the shoulders of the giants who gave him inspirations and enlightened him. Who were the giants, a group of people unknown to us, but they changed Issac Newton, then Newton changed the whole world. The dispute over who made the significant events and trends in history, is likely to discuss the same topic which comes first, egg or hen.

In sum, based on the limited conditions of requiring common people’s materials and importance of the famous few, historians seemingly have to place too much emphasis on individuals. As a society consists of all individuals, the history of it should be made by all its people, no matter who they are, what they act in the events

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-24 at 22:43 ]

TaylorUID: 147672

Originally posted by 禾日因心 at 2005-8-24 19:32
48        The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities ...

语言很好，可以再多加一些语言现象，比如倒装（文中有一处可以用not only，but also的倒装，作者没有意识到），排比（文中有一处用了两个ing形式做主语，可以再添一个ing形式，会语势更强）。

但是作者的逻辑我不太理解。
作者试图给出一些原因来解释题目中所提到的现象：即历史研究是否过分关注了个人。
作者第一段的主题句令人费解In my view, historians did not place too much emphasis on individuals。而这段实际上是在论述个人的重要性，与主题句不符。
第二段其实是给出了一个原因。
第三段又在论述大众的重要性。

如果想要做成解释型的文章，我想应该列出3个理由来解释为什么历史关注了个人。
如果要做成判断型的文章，我想应该分别说出个人，大众在历史中的重要性。

个人认为楼主这样写不是很恰当，仅供参考:)

foreveraUID: 202035

Seldom, historians make description on common people. From primary school to university, our history books are always replete with the famous few. The brilliant thinkers Socrates, Aristotle, the great military talent, Napoleon, the renowned politician, Lincoln, all of them are the real characters of our history books. Bearing too much curiosity in mind, we want to ask whether the historians place too much emphasis on individuals, who create the history, the famous few or groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten. These questions lead us to speculate more over the history.好罗嗦的一段，是开头吗？如果是的话太长了，而且没有自己鲜明的观点，如果是背景论述的话，也有很多和题目不太相关的内容，而且背景之后也要给出观点的。

In my view, historians did not place too much emphasis on individuals. On the one hand, as we know, these famous few are center in their own time. They are always on the threshold of the era, with the unique characteristic of their time.               Participating the history event, leading their people, they do not merely witness the history, but act very important roles in the course of history. Their whole lives are the truest history. Take Napoleon for example, this military genius conquered all the western and central mainland of Europe, and became the emperor of the French. His establishment of Napoleonic Code brought deep influential on Europe until today. For all the above, how history can ignore these individuals who play so significant roles in history.这段写的有点浅，只说了一些现象，而没有深入的讨论一下原因，而且on one hand和on the other 最好在一起

Moreover, on the other hand, it seems very difficult for historians to study history through common people. Compared with the famous few, the materials of those forgotten people are left little and generally unavailable. The recordings of their daily lives lacked of preservation, which makes scholars hard to get detailed information to do research. Therefore, much more emphasis on individuals seems reasonable.这段论述的还是太单薄了

缺少明确的TSThen concerning the speaker’s claim that who made the most significant events and trends in history, it is really a complex question. Every one can create his own history, but referring to the history of society, it must include all the people, no matter who they are, the famous few or groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten. 这个长句感觉结构有点乱What we can say is just that both act playtheir own corresponding roles in these events. In the course of these significant events, the famous few usually act as leaders, and forgotten people serve as followers. Just like wars, a commander without soldiers can not proceed in the battle, an army without an efficient general can not win. It is known to all that Newton’s classical mechanics has changed the world. However, Newton ever said that all his success was established on the shoulders of the giants who gave him inspirations and enlightened him. Who were the giants, a group of people unknown to us, but they changed Issac Newton, then Newton changed the whole world. The dispute over who made the significant events and trends in history, is likely to discuss the same topic which comes first, egg or hen. 感觉这段有点混乱，而且前半部分语言比较罗嗦，也说不到点子上，后面的例子也没有很好的展开。

In sum, based on the limited conditions of requiring common people’s materials and importance of the famous few, historians seemingly have to place too much emphasis on individuals. As a society consists of all individuals, the history of it should be made by all its people, no matter who they are, what they act in the events


论述的很不少，但是没有一个比较明确的提纲式的东西引领读者。而且感觉有的该重点说的地方说的太简单了。。。

可以看看我以前写的48，
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=315677
不过推荐看看最新写的10。。HOHO
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=325483