issue38 第一次作业(no pain no gain 小组)

bravesailerUID: 2177471

38”In the age of television, reading books is not as important as it once was. People can learn as much by watching television as they can by reading books.”
在电视机时代，阅读书籍已经没有原来那样重要了。人们从电视上学到的东西丝毫不比从书本中学来的少
提纲:
-：电视上放的是大多是娱乐大众，真正思想深刻的作品很少能为大众喜欢。而书籍不同，由于一本书的读者群可以是一个社会中极少数的个体，这样那些思想内涵深刻而不被大众所接受的作品就能被读者所欣赏。
-： 为数众多的小说作品不可能一一拍成电视或电影，有的只能以纸质媒介的形式存在。即使拍成电影也会丢失原作的一些精华。
+： 在新闻报道上，声像结合的电视能更加准确地报道事实。
outline:
-: some artworks are really great but few people can enjoy it, as a result they can not been put on the screen just because all television programs for the most public. But books not, even their readers are just several people, they can also exist waiting for the history to discover its real worth. Just as van gogh’s famous paintings.
-: not every novel can been shoot to be a TV program or a movie, some kind of novel can only go round through paper medium(book). And TV program will lost something important in the original works.
+: on the news reporting occasions, TV program coming with sounds and pictures can cover those events more precisely.

I am not so agree with this contention because that people can learn as much from television as from book. Because not every artwork can be put on the screen or made to be a TV program, we can not learn the knowledge absent on the television but we can learn them from books. However, there do be some advantages of television over books when it came to the areas where accurate reports are needed.

In order to attract audiences, the TV stations will obviously play programs appreciated by the public, but there are some artworks really wonderful can not be appreciated by cotemporary people. As a result these part of artworks can not been realized from the television, but we can learn it from books as books are not always published for the public. We can see this truth from the following hypothesis. Van gogh lives in nowadays while there are still nearly no body valued his paintings so there is no possibility his works are put on the television. We will never know his painting from the television, but as an assumption there can be really someone appreciate his works through the album of his paintings.

Some famous novels are shot to be situation comedies, but it does not mean every comedy can be shot to be a situation comedy. If on the later condition, we will never know there exist these novels. To concede, the novel can be shot to be a situation comedy, the sitcom will lost something from the original works. The imagination scenes in a novel can not been put on the screen nor the psychology depictions. Just cited as an example, the popular movie Harry Potter is definitely great, but the director did have cut off some scenes in the original novel just because he can’t shoot these scenes. It is not because of his inability, but nobody can shoot these magic imaginations.

However, on the news reporting occasions, TV program coming with sounds and pictures can depict those events more precisely. In these occasions, the more details are given, the more precisely the reader will learn what has happened in another place. The words are impossible to describe every detail about an occasion, while a TV program can cover the sounds and pictures information of the locale of the occasion. From the above contrast, we can see the TV program has its own advantage in describing a particular event over the book of on-the-spot record or some kinds of paper medium, such as a newspaper.

In conclusion, watching television can not replace the traditional way of learning knowledge. In some degree, through reading books people can get something which can not get through watching the television.

george106UID: 180880

看看~

george106UID: 180880

I (am not so agree )[do not agree?] with this contention because that people can learn as much from television as from book. （Because） [两个because 一起用读起来好象不太舒服？建议换句式]not every artwork can be put on the screen or made to be a TV program, we can not learn the knowledge absent on the television but （we can learn them）[改成一个can 是否更简洁？] from books. However, there do be some advantages of television over books when it(came)[comes?] to the areas where accurate reports are needed.

In order to attract audiences, the TV stations will obviously play programs appreciated by the public, but there are some artworks really wonderful can not be appreciated by cotemporary people. As a result [,] these(par)[parts?]of artworks can not been realized from the television, but we can learn it from books as books are not always published for the public. We can see this truth from the following hypothesis.( Van gogh lives in nowadays while there are still nearly no body valued his paintings so there is no possibility his works are put on the television.)[说实话，看不大懂~~] We will never know his painting from the television, but as an assumption there can be really someone appreciate his works through the album of his paintings.

Some famous novels are shot to be situation comedies, but it does not mean every comedy can be (shot to be)[连续用两个shot to be?换个词？？shot into?]a situation comedy. If (on the later condition) it is the latter condition, we will never know there (exist)[exists?] these novels. To concede, the novel can be shot to be a situation comedy, the sitcom will lost something from the original works. The imagination scenes in a novel can (not been) [neither be…和后面的nor 搭配？] put on the screen nor [on]  the psychology depictions. Just cited as an example, the popular movie Harry Potter is definitely great, but the director did have cut off some scenes in the original novel just because he can’t shoot these scenes. It is not because of his inability, but nobody can shoot these magic imaginations.

However, on the news reporting occasions, TV program coming with sounds and pictures can depict those events more precisely. In these occasions, the more details are given, the more precisely the reader will learn what has happened in another place. The words are impossible to describe every detail about an occasion, while a TV program can cover the sounds and pictures information of the locale of the occasion. From the above contrast, we can see the TV program has its own advantage in describing a particular event over the（ book of on-the-spot record or some kinds of paper medium, such as a newspaper. ）[book…such as newspaper?概念好象有点问题吧。]

In conclusion, watching television can not replace the traditional way of learning knowledge. In some degree, through reading books people can get something which can not get through watching the television


建议：1。加强句式和词汇的多样性。。。我也是的
      2。 个人认为这篇文章的关键词是：LEARN，好象本文没有突出（个人意见，仅供参考）

大家一起加油！

[ 本帖最后由 george106 于 2006-1-22 13:17 编辑 ]

bravesailerUID: 2177471

我也觉得好像有点离题了，而且句式很单一,谢谢建议！

看大家改得都很积极，我也得加快脚步了

[ 本帖最后由 bravesailer 于 2006-1-22 15:15 编辑 ]

lorraineyeUID: 2157370

I am not so agree with this contention because that people can learn as much from television as from book [这句话没大明白，到底同意还是不同意？而且感觉是在说因为同意题目的说法所以同意这个论点，改改吧]. Because not every artwork can be put on the screen or made to be a TV program, we can not learn the knowledge absent on the television but we can learn them from books. However, there do be some advantages of television over books when it came to the areas where accurate reports are needed. [这里千万要注意，however的语气是非常重的，一般它的后面会出现主题和重点。这里电视的优势出现在了however的后面而且是最后一句，就会混淆你真正想要表达的重点了]

In order to attract audiences[这不用加s了], the TV stations will obviously play programs appreciated by the public, but there are some artworks really wonderful can not be appreciated by cotemporary [这个词是说什么意思？同时代的人？] people. As a result these part of artworks can not been realized from the television, but we can learn it from books as books are not always published for the public. We can see this truth from the following hypothesis. Van gogh lives in nowadays while there are still nearly no body valued his paintings so there is no possibility his works are put on the television. We will never know his painting from the television, but as an assumption there can be really someone appreciate his works through the album of his paintings [这个例子有点怪，而且假设得不太有说服力].

Some famous novels are shot to be situation comedies [这是要说情景喜剧？sitcom啊，你下面也用到了，就是那么说的，这个situation让人费解], but it does not mean every comedy can be shot to be a situation comedy. If on the later condition, we will never know there exist these novels. To concede, the novel can be shot to be a situation comedy, the sitcom will lost something from the original works. The imagination scenes in a novel can not been put on the screen nor the psychology depictions. Just cited as an example, the popular movie Harry Potter is definitely great, but the director did have cut off some scenes in the original novel just because he can’t shoot these scenes. It is not because of his inability, but nobody can shoot these magic imaginations.
[这一段感觉有点若即若离，好象在说书有比电视更多的信息，但又似乎没有点出来。关于喜剧的问题有点类似一个例子，所以前面应该还是要有些概述比较合适。还有就是既然题目是电视，就紧扣住电视吧，不要把电影放进来，毕竟还是有些不同的]

However [同上，however在这里不合适。这段是让步吧？那就用admittedly], on the news reporting occasions, TV program coming with sounds and pictures can depict those events more precisely. In these occasions, the more details are given, the more precisely the reader [audience] will learn what has happened in another place. The words are impossible to describe every detail about an occasion, while a TV program can cover the sounds and pictures information of the locale of the occasion. From the above contrast, we can see the TV program has its own advantage in describing a particular event over the book of on-the-spot record or some kinds of paper medium, such as a newspaper [不要再说报纸了，题目让比较的是书！].

In conclusion, watching television can not replace the traditional way of learning knowledge. In some degree, through reading books people can get something which can not get through watching the television.

看完文章，有点不太确定到底论点是怎样的。本来2段反对1段让步是清楚的，但因为两次把however放在了电视这里，再加上开头第一句的意思有点混淆，所以就不清楚了，这一点是致命的，一定要注意！！！
另外全文是有点没有抓住重点的感觉，如果说讨论电视是不是能替代书本那可能还可以，但题目是电视是否能让我们学到和书本一样多的东西。第二段的观点是很对的，而且提到了大众和专业的问题，如果能再清楚明确的论证就好了。
第二段改编的问题其实是比较小的一个点，甚至可以仅仅作为一个小例子。所以还需要补充其他更重要的理由，可以参考一下大家文章里提到的理由哈~~

bravesailerUID: 2177471

拍的真好啊,回头来改一下!

tingting_tUID: 2124800

总体感觉是转折用得太多了，几乎每一句都有，让人有点搞不清楚你真正要表达的意思了。
还有就是全文中都没有特别明确的论点，希望改的时候可以注意一下
我觉得组长同学的词汇和句式应该要加强一下，整篇文章中的重复有些多，建议参考一下大家的作文，看下表达~~

archyUID: 2147748

提纲:
-：电视上放的是大多是娱乐大众，真正思想深刻的作品很少能为大众喜欢。而书籍不同，由于一本书的读者群可以是一个社会中极少数的个体，这样那些思想内涵深刻而不被大众所接受的作品就能被读者所欣赏。
-： 为数众多的小说作品不可能一一拍成电视或电影，有的只能以纸质媒介的形式存在。即使拍成电影也会丢失原作的一些精华。[好象和学习没哈关系吧...... ]
+： 在新闻报道上，声像结合的电视能更加准确地报道事实。
[这—、—、+、+的啥意思？]
outline:
-: some artworks are really great but few people can enjoy it, as a result they can not been put on the screen just because all television programs for the most public. But books not,[真别扭，改改] even their readers are just several people, they can also exist waiting for the history to discover its real worth. Just as van gogh’s famous paintings.
-: not every novel can been shoot to be a TV program or a movie, some kind of novel can only go round through paper medium(book). And TV program will lost something important in the original works.
+: on the news reporting occasions, TV program coming with sounds and pictures can cover those events more precisely.

I am not so[没见过这么用的，而且这里没必要] agree with this contention because[去掉，意思不对了！] that people can learn as much from television as from book. Because not every artwork can be put on the screen or made to be a TV program, we can not learn the knowledge absent on the television but we can learn them from books. However, there do be[？？不明白] some advantages of television over books when it came[comes，注意时态] to the areas where accurate reports are needed.

In order to attract audiences, the TV stations will obviously play programs appreciated by the public, but there are some artworks really wonderful can not be appreciated[flavor, taste等，换个词，新鲜] by cotemporary people. As a result these part of artworks can not been realized from the television, but we can learn it from books as books are not always published for the public. [这个.....有问题吧，出版商也要讲效益的呀]We can see this[the] truth from the following hypothesis[晕！不成立，从假设看真相？！！]. Van gogh lives in nowadays while there are still nearly no body valued his paintings so there is no possibility his works are put on the television. We will never know his painting from the television, but as an assumption there can be really someone appreciate his works through the album of his paintings.

Some famous novels are shot to be situation comedies, but it does not mean every comedy can be shot to be a situation comedy. If on the later condition, we will never know there exist these novels. [这个例子.....跟学习有关吗？]To concede, the novel can be shot to be a situation comedy, the sitcom will lost something from the original works. The imagination scenes in a novel can not been put on the screen nor the psychology depictions. Just cited as an example, the popular movie Harry Potter is definitely great, but the director did have cut off some scenes in the original novel just because he can’t shoot these scenes. It is not because of his inability, but nobody can shoot these magic imaginations.

However, on the news reporting occasions, TV program coming with sounds and pictures can depict those events more precisely. In these occasions, the[去掉] more details are given, the[去掉] more precisely the reader will learn what has happened in another place. The words are impossible to describe every detail about an occasion, while a TV program can cover the sounds and pictures information of the locale of the occasion.[感觉在凑字数.....重复了] From the above contrast, we can see the TV program has its own advantage in describing a particular event over the book of on-the-spot record or some kinds of paper medium, such as a newspaper.

In conclusion, watching television can not replace the traditional way of learning knowledge. In some degree, through reading books people can get something which can not get through watching the television. [这句象样！点题]


[Keke，because太多！哥们你是because控吗？（我是~~~~控.....）全文用了不下6次；
还有，注意结构，TS不突出！]

bravesailerUID: 2177471

虚心接受指正，看来要花一番功夫改改了。

bravesailerUID: 2177471

I don’t agree with this contention that people can learn as much by watching television as they can by reading books. I concede that television has some advantages over books in some respects,  however, it can never be the substitution of books in acquiring knowledge.

Admittedly, television can provide much more information than books in depicting some particular events. Television programs always come out with vivid pictures which can offer audience more details. For an example, the discovery channel shows us a colorful world with plenty of stunning pictures which can help us to acknowledge what strange phenomenon occurs on the earth. As a contrast, books can not offer such adequate information to help us portray the exact pictures occurring in the strange phenomenon. A several second long television program may cost a book to describe in hundreds pages, thus we can affirm television is more efficient than books to reveal some special occasions and provide more information.

However, in order to attract audiences, the TV stations will obviously play programs appreciated by the public, thus some abstract and complex subjects can never been put on the screen. The public people have different educational background, economic incoming, daily work and so on, as a result they will of course have different interests. Under the stimulation of profit, the television station manager will try their best to attract audience. In this procedure, entertainment may be the best choice to achieve this purpose. As to the abstract and complex subjects, most of the public will just find them boring and useless in daily life. So these subjects have no possibility to be favored by the TV station managers.

Some famous novels are shot to be situation comedies, but it does not mean every comedy can be shot to be a situation comedy. If on the later condition, we will never know there exist these novels. To concede, the novel can be shot to be a situation comedy, the sitcom will lost something from the original works. The imagination scenes in a novel can not been put on the screen nor the psychology depictions. Just cited as an example, the popular movie Harry Potter is definitely great, but the director did have cut off some scenes in the original novel just because he can’t shoot these scenes. It is not because of his inability, but nobody can shoot these magic imaginations.这一段先放着，例子不好，估计要全改了，实在改不动了

In conclusion, watching television can not replace the traditional way of acquiring knowledge. In some respects, the particular knowledge can only been seized through reading books.