Issue185 [synergy小组]polymerwufan第九次作业

polymerwufanUID: 2219535

According to the speaker's claim, scandals have some merits whether in politics, academia, and other areas because they attract our attention to some problems which either speaker or reformer can not do. I concede that scandals revealed to the public might make people aware of some problems in some areas and call for certain reforms to address them. However, in my view, if we concern with scandals to an excessive extent, scandals might bring about some negative influence to not only the roles involved in the scandals but also the society as a whole.

Admittedly, scandals play a significant role in the fairness of many areas, especially when it comes to politics and sports. An apt illustration involves the Watergate event of Nixon, one of the American Presidents. In this scandal, Nixon unjustifiably used his power and interfered with the justice of the law, and led to his failure in his political careers as a result. After this event, the public of America began to realize the President's power should be regulated in certain limits and consequently initiated a revolution in the legislation. Therefore, some scandals in politics might serve to promote the political democracy and the justice in law. Similarly, in sports area, some scandals, particularly about the abuse of certain medicine usually serve to draw attention on the fairness in sports, and the punishment can act as the alarm towards all athletes participate in the games. So, the speaker’s claim is somewhat reasonable with respect to the function of purifying the circumstance of politics and sport fields.

However, over-concentrating on the scandals might lead to some negative influence to the individuals involved in them as well as the society. Firstly, scandals might undermine the celebrities’ privacies. Scandals usually contain the individuals’ private affairs which perhaps have the right to be protected. Thus, the scandals, and the procedure of acquiring evidences about them might unjustifiably interfere with the citizen’s right of privacy, and even with the development of the society in terms of freedom and democracy. Secondly, common sense tells us that the main roles in scandals are usually the leaders or elites in their areas, whether in politics, sports or other endeavors. No one would argue that they have made significant contributions to their own fields and the society as a whole and have the abilities to help other individuals and the society to achieve more progress. If they were over-influenced by scandals, their enthusiasm of devoting themselves and the inspiration of creativity might be frustrated and as a result the society would lose some opportunities to advance. Thus, it is unreasonable for us to over-concentrate the scandals of some celebrities even if they have some flaws in their jobs or their lives.

To sum up, the speaker overestimates the importance of scandals while overlooks some negative effects from them. Although scandals are useful in some cases, we should be aware of the fact that over-concerning with them might undermine the progress both of individuals andthe society as a whole.

[ 本帖最后由 polymerwufan 于 2006-12-25 18:56 编辑 ]

11yaoyaoUID: 177037

According to the speaker's claim, scandals have some some is not necessary, and yet I do think “scandals do have merits” maybe a better choice, what do u think? merits whether in politics, academia, and other areas u’d better indicate what “other areas” exactly are, or maybe that’s a trick u could use in your following parts, it’s ok, but I do like clarity because they attract drawour attention to some“some” is redundant problems which that is better, because you do not use a comma either speaker or reformer can not do neither...nor.... I concede that scandals revealed to the public might make people aware of some problems in some too many “some” areas and call for certain reforms to address them. However, in my view, if we concern with  u’d better look up dictionary and find the usage of “concern” and its related phrases scandals to an excessive extent, scandals might bring about some negative influence to not only the roles involved in the scandals but also the society as a whole.这句话见的太多了，the society as a whole，哎……
开头的问题，句子罗嗦，some重复，观点有，很好，不过我还是觉得用the speaker’s claim引出问题不是很合适，我的观点是，尽量不把ISSUE和ARG的方法混着用。你说呢？

Admittedly, scandals play a significant role in the fairness of many areas, especially when it comes to politics and sports. An apt illustration involves the Watergate event of Nixon, one of the American Presidents. In this scandal, Nixon unjustifiably used his power and interfered with the justice of the law, and主语不对 led to his failure in his political careers as a result. After this event, the public of America American public比较省事 began to realize the President's power should be regulated in certain limits and consequently initiated a revolution in the legislation. Therefore, some scandals in politics might serve to promote the political democracy可以这样用么？这个词很有政治色彩的哦 and the justice in law. Similarly, in sports area, some scandals, particularly about the abuse of certain medicinethe abuse of drugs就可以了 usually serve to draw attention on the fairness in sports, and the punishment can act as the alarm towards all athletes participate in the games. So,SO太口语了 the speaker’s claim is somewhat reasonable with respect to the function of purifying the circumstance of politics and sport fields.
你的第一段已经说了，你的观点是反对，这里一个admittedly这么老长，再看你下段，也差不多，然后再往下看，就OVER了，这个这个……怎么都说不过去哦……
这里我想说一下你例子用的方法，开始的时候用politics and sports然后引出两个例子来，很好，一个并列短语，两个方面，后面两个例子也都是该类别的，不说例子何如，这样一环扣一环的确不错。但是你缺乏说理。其实说理你都有的，但是好象就是方法上可以再多一些。例子不用介绍太多，点明即可，关键是有血有肉，这样就比较丰满。我觉得你可以一个例子用正面反对，另外一个用反面加强。你觉得呢？

However, over-concentrating on the scandals might lead to some negative influence to the individuals involved in them as well as the society.你看，其实你这里就可以再分成两段了，individual一段,society又一段分开讲，内容也会更充实，而且1：2的比例，也让你开头的观点更加突出，你觉得呢？individual还可以再分两个层次，比如可以从public figure 和quotidian masses两个角度。当然，这只是我随便想的，具体你可以自己找角度。那society也是一样的，也可以再分，对某个圈子，以及对整个人类，这样都可以吧，反正我觉得角度很多的，随便找两个就OK了。找不出来也没关系，一个也够了。 Firstly, scandals might undermine the celebrities’ privacies. Scandals usually contain the individuals’ private affairs which that perhaps have the right to be protected. Thus, the scandals, and the procedure of acquiring evidences about them might unjustifiably interfere with the citizen’s right of privacy, and even with the development of the society in terms of freedom and democracy. Secondly, common sense tells us that the main roles in scandals are usually the leaders or elites in their areas, whether in politics, sports or other endeavors. No one would argue that they have made significant contributions to their own fields and the society as a whole and have the abilities to help other individuals and the society to achieve more progress这个词不是这么搭配的，看的很怪哦，查下字典吧. If they were over-influenced by scandals, their enthusiasm of devoting themselves and the inspiration of creativity might这个词太弱了，给人的感觉是你自己都不能保证似的，那你这么说理就根本不能让人心服，何况你又没有例子来佐证 be frustrated and as a result the society would lose some opportunities to advance. Thus, it is unreasonable for us to over-concentrate the scandals of some celebrities even if they have some flaws in their jobs or their lives.

To sum up, the speaker overestimates the importance of scandals while overlooks some 又见SOME……negative effects from them. 这句不错，是自己写的么？很赞哦，句式工整还压了头韵呢Although scandals are useful in some 如果你是这样的反对SCANDAL，那some最好就变成rare或者rare的同义词，比如few，你说呢？cases, we should be awareaware前边也见过几次了，换一个吧of the fact that over-concerning with them might undermine the progress both of individuals andthe society as a whole.
语法错误还可以，不多，读起来比较通顺，用词上需要再讲究一点，SOME太多了……这个词我后来一看就想撞墙，呵呵，开玩笑啦……具体的论证的问题文章中都已经说明白了。我觉得你可以适当的再多发掘几种论证方法，比如反证，而且例子也都是老的了。每次我看185，都是尼克松和兴奋剂……其实丑闻有很多，我介绍你本书，叫《世纪丑闻》，从1900到2000的一堆丑闻，都有的说，你可以找找看看。嘿嘿。加油！