Issue8 第三次作业，weixch[中华龙小组]

weixchUID: 2104033

8."It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public."

原本以为很难写，竟然写了这么多，不过得注意时间了，还是老毛病，赛！
正文：
The speaker claims the necessity for political leaders to keep information from public. However, whether political leader should withhold message depend on what the message is. On the one hand, it is not appropriate to open the secret while that is just trivial things not related to public interest, or that publicity of the words would threaten public safety. On the other hand, leaders’ forthrightness is indispensable and it is the right of citizens to know the inside stories for the supervision of government’s policy and execution.

First of all, as the “trivial things” is mentioned above, we can feel it in our common life. In reality, actually the TV and radio are just exposing repeatedly trivial news in favor of pandering to our baser urges and instincts like snoop and jealousy. As the personal life and scandal of the leader spread through our society and become the joke after dinner, we are lost in the clutter of trashy so-called inside stories and have no idea of what the policy is and what we concern. In another word, the scandal revealed about the leader or so-called “the truth we don’t know” is shifting our attention to a strange place and making the citizens apathetic to some serious social problems.

Secondly, some inside information may mention military secret or our strategy to terrorism. If the leader discloses the message to public, the plan to defense our nation would become just a piece of paper; any enemy state would conveniently acquire our military technology and imperil our safety. If the terrorists are aware of the message, the mission to against terrorism would surely fail.

Whereas, in some cases, leaders’ forthrightness is indispensable, it is their duty to tell us the motivation and agenda. History has informed us how important it is to assure leader’s fidelity and integrity. A black hearted leader who uses demagoguery to agitate hatred between nations often has an evil intention unknown to public. As this kind of leader is concerned, Adolf Hitler is notorious and always recalled in our mind. He instigated the hate to Jew with the evil purpose unknown to community. Once he had seized the political power of Germany, the devil ruined the Europe with Germany itself in the World War II. So with the motivation unknown to public, a leader could disguise the truth behind the hatred and utilize the jealousy and instinct rooted in our heart to realize his so-called “political dream” or “racialism” with war and butcher.

Also in some other situation, it is the right of citizens to know the inside stories for the supervision of government’s policy and execution. Take SARS as an example, at first, the epidemic was unknown to citizens of China, government just hided the reports under the desk. Without message from authority, inhabitants had no awareness of the virus and often missed the best time of cure. With more and more patient died of ignorance, kind of panic spread through the society which was worsen by random guess all over the magazines.

In conclusion, it is not likely correct to simply approve or oppose whether leaders should lock the message in steel safe. The answer here is based on a case-by-case analysis to figure out if the information is really that significant to public interest, or there is some content related to national safety better to be covered, and in some situation leader’s fidelity is also necessary and the open of message would help the supervision of leader’s policy and execution from common people.

Ammmy2000UID: 2265680

The speaker claims the necessity for political leaders to keep information from public. However, whether political leader should withhold message depend on what the message is. On the one hand, it is not appropriate to open the secret while that is just trivial things not related to public interest, or that publicity of the words would threaten public safety. On the other hand, leaders’ forthrightness is indispensable and it is the right of citizens to know the inside stories for the supervision of government’s policy and execution.写的很好啊，开头

First of all, as the “trivial things” is mentioned above, we can feel itthem in our common life. In reality, actually和前面重复了吧 ？ the TV and radio are just exposing just exposerepeatedly trivial news in favor of pandering to our baser urges and instincts like snoop and jealousy. As the personal life and scandal of the leader spread through our society and become the joke after dinner, we are lost in the clutter of trashy so-called inside stories and have no idea of what the policy is and what we concern. In another word不清楚这个表达方式有没有, the scandal revealed about the leader or so-called “the truth we don’t know” is shifting our attention to a strange place and making the citizens apathetic to some serious social problems.这段写的很不错，我在北美的文章上也看到过写这个方面的，可以借鉴下， 但是，你写到这里并没有说明leader要withhold information, 是不是应该在延伸一下？

Secondly, some inside information may mention military secret or our strategy to terrorism. If the leader discloses the message to public, the plan to defensedefend our nation would become just a piece of paper我觉得这里用like比较好吧，是一个比喻的修辞; any enemy state would conveniently acquire our military technology and imperil our safety. If the terrorists are aware of the message, the mission to against terrorism would surely fail. 还是应该在强调下要保留information吧，总结下比较好

Whereas, in some cases, leaders’ forthrightness is indispensable, it is their dutyduties to tell us the motivation and agenda. History has informed us how important it is to assure leader’s fidelity and integrity. A black hearted是这么表达的么？是不是有点chinglish的味道？ leader who uses demagoguery to agitate hatred between nations often has an evil intention unknown to public. As this kind of leader is concerned, Adolf Hitler is notorious and always recalled in our minds. He instigated the hate to Jew with the evil purpose unknown to community. Once he had seized the political power of Germany, the devil ruined the Europe with Germany itself in the World War II. So with the motivation unknown to public, a leader could disguise the truth behind the hatred and utilize the jealousy and instinct rooted in our heart to realize his so-called “political dream” or “racialism” with war and butcher.感觉例子不太确切，我理解的是要说明不能隐瞒信息就要说明如果不隐瞒信息可以给我们带来什么好处，感觉Hilter要屠杀犹太人并没有隐瞒信息，不知道理解的正确不请LZ赐教：）

Also in some other situation, it is the right of citizens to know the inside stories for the supervision of government’s policy and execution. Take SARS as an example, at first, the epidemic was unknown to citizens of China, government just hided the reports under the desk. Without message from authority, inhabitants had no awareness of the virus and often missed the best time of cure. With more and more patients died of ignorance, kind of panic spread through the society which was worsen by random guess all over the magazines.还是要总结啊，不能只举例子

In conclusion, it is not likely correct to simply approve or oppose 这句话比较中化，it is inconsiderate to….whether leaders should lock the message in steel safe. The answer here is based on a case-by-case analysis to figure out if the information is really that significant to public interest, or there is some content related to national safety better to be covered, and in some situation leader’s fidelity is also necessary and the open of message would help the supervision of leader’s policy and execution from common people.

weixchUID: 2104033

第四段，是说作为领袖应该做到forthrightness，即使在上台之初也不能用富于挑衅的言语和谎言以转移人民的视线从而掩盖他真正不轨的意图和祸心。Hitler的得势基于德国民众对经济和国家政治境遇的普遍不满，他狡诈的利用这种情绪，并将其转移到对犹太人的民族仇恨上，谎称这是犹太人和共产主义的阴谋，是他们在绞杀雅利安优等民族，只有消灭他们才能复兴德国。这种种族主义的荒谬逻辑和其他谎言用以操纵扭曲民众意志的手段，恰恰是阴谋者篡位的惯用伎俩。

weixchUID: 2104033

不过还是没展开清楚，知道了

weixchUID: 2104033

查了句库，应该是In other words

weixchUID: 2104033

第四段是说隐瞒真相的坏处

lih008UID: 2269470

呵呵，看了一遍你的文章。例子用得很多，值得学习。
提几点自己的看法：
1。感觉开头有点长
2。第一个主段的论述好像没有说到主题上来
3。第二、四主段的论述没有展开。正如Ammmy2000在修改中已经说了，举完例子一定后一定还要分析一下
4。注意四个论述主段之间最好平衡一点

xbullfrogUID: 2180016

这篇文章写得很好，尤其是第一段，无敌了，我喜欢，向你学习。

在这篇文章的总体布局上，我和lih008还有Ammmy的意见一致，感觉是有一些没有展开
我感觉第四段是个好段子，估计是没有写得很确切，所以有时候感觉有点没展开吧
我就只在细节上讨论一下吧


The speaker claims the necessity for political leaders to keep information from public. However, whether political leader should withhold message depend[用depends?] on what the message is. On the one hand, it is not appropriate to open the secret while that is[这里单复数，前面是the secret,后面又是trivial things] just trivial things not related to public interest[用复数interests?], or that publicity of the words would threaten public safety. On the other hand, leaders’ forthrightness is indispensable and it is the right of citizens to know the inside stories for the supervision of government’s policy and execution.

First of all, as the “trivial things” is mentioned above, we can feel it in our common life. In reality, actually[这里语义是不是有点重复呢？前面有了个in reality] the TV and radio are just exposing repeatedly trivial news in favor of pandering to our baser urges and instincts like snoop and jealousy. As the personal life and scandal of the leader spread through our society and become the joke after dinner, we are lost in the clutter of trashy so-called inside stories and have no idea of what the policy is and what we concern. In another word[in other worlds?], the scandal revealed about the leader or so-called “the truth we don’t know” is shifting our attention to a strange place and making the citizens apathetic to some serious social problems.

Secondly, some inside information may mention military secret or our strategy to terrorism. If the leader discloses the message to public, the plan to defense our nation would become just a piece of paper; any enemy state would conveniently acquire our military technology and imperil our safety. If the terrorists are aware of the message, the mission to against terrorism would surely fail.

Whereas, in some cases, leaders’ forthrightness is indispensable, [觉得这里是不是少一个连词?或者说把这个逗号改为句号？因为这前面已经是一句完整的话了啊。]it is their duty to tell us the motivation and agenda. History has informed us how important it is to assure leader’s fidelity and integrity. A black hearted leader who uses demagoguery to agitate hatred between nations often has an evil intention unknown to public. As this kind of leader is concerned, Adolf Hitler is notorious and always recalled in our mind. He instigated the hate to Jew with the evil purpose unknown to community. Once he had seized the political power of Germany, the devil ruined the Europe with Germany itself in the World War II. So with the motivation unknown to public, a leader could disguise the truth behind the hatred and utilize the jealousy and instinct rooted in our heart to realize his so-called “political dream” or “racialism” with war and butcher.

Also in some other situation, it is the right of citizens to know the inside stories for the supervision of government’s policy and execution. Take SARS as an example, at first, the epidemic was unknown to citizens of China, government just hided the reports under the desk. Without message from authority, inhabitants had no awareness of the virus and often missed the best time of cure. With more and more patient died of ignorance, kind of panic spread [这里是不是用kinds of?]through the society which was worsen by random guess all over the magazines.

In conclusion, it is not likely correct to simply approve or oppose whether leaders should lock the message in steel safe[这句中的”whether”是不是有点问题啊？--”不能简单地同意或反对是否应该封锁消息？”是不是应该改whether为”the issue that”]. The answer here is based on a case-by-case analysis to figure out if the information is really that significant to public interest, or there is some content related to national safety better to be covered, and in some situation leader’s fidelity is also necessary and the open of message would help the supervision of leader’s policy and execution from common people.

xbullfrogUID: 2180016

原帖由 weixch 于 2006-11-13 23:15 发表
查了句库，应该是In other words

句库是什么东西？

可以传给我吗？

[ 本帖最后由 xbullfrog 于 2006-11-19 12:54 编辑 ]