Issue26 【07-10G Superstar 大帖】第13次作业 by gyyx

gyyxUID: 2290150

I26:"Most people would agree that buildings represent a valuable record of any society's past, but controversy arises when old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes. In such situations, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings so that contemporary needs can be served."

———————————————

Many large cities with a long history are suffering a dilemma, that is, when face the ground that old buildings stand on and that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purpose, which should be given precedence, as one represent a valuable record of past society and the other could serve the contemporary need. In my view, modern planners should search a balance in these two aspects, programming the city beautifully and practicably and preserving the old buildings in the meanwhile, with a crucial principal never making modern development with the costs of losing the old buildings.     

As most people agree, buildings represent a valuable record of any society’s past. It is parts of the culture, due to its easy preservation and long time to be preserved. The building’s existence has too many great functions: for us, common people, from the buildings we could imagine the life our ancestor lived; for archaeologists, judging through these buildings they can tell what period they build, and even identify who built them; for historians, the could do some research on historical events and historical figures with the help of archaeologists’ judgments on these buildings; for sociologists, these buildings are valuable to analyze the living level in order to make a whole image of the development of civilization and culture; for architects , these buildings are the soul of the art, which could give them inspirations and gain a clear view of the past architectonics. So, as a property of our culture, these old buildings should be preserved in good condition.

Today is an era that technology and science lead to the development of society and culture, which urbanization and modernization are much faster than any past eras. As these old buildings are the symbols of our culture, city planners should take the valuable old buildings into consideration, which endowing new functions such as tour and research rather than give the space of modern development in the way of breaking down them, and sometimes they should make compromises and search other places for modern development, Planners of large cities with a long history also can make a two-town plan, which separates the two areas old and new, in order to preserve the buildings and realize the functions of a city. Lots of European historical cities set good examples, take Rome for an instance. As the most historical city in the world, Rome, the capital of Italy, has its ancient and modern city separated. The modern city is 5 kilometer south from the ancient, and is a beautiful city full of flower with the unique style of restaurant shaped like a mushroom and Emanuel Square, while the ancient city is preserved in a good condition, which is famous as the Colosseum, Roman triumphal arch, and so on. This example indicates the two-town plan gains a good balance between these old buildings and urbanization.

Finally, as a conclusion, it is unwise that modern development given precedence over the preservation of historical buildings, the better way is making a balance between the two, and the way of searching the best method will never stop, but the crucial rule never sacrifice the old buildings to urbanization will never change.

huaxinluoboUID: 2326780

Many large cities with a long history are suffering a dilemma, that is, when face the ground that old buildings stand on and that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purpose, [which should be given precedence, as one represent a valuable record of past society and the other could serve the contemporary need.这个从句看起来有点别扭，不如另成一句] In my view, modern planners should search[for] a balance in[between] these two aspects, programming the city beautifully and practicably and preserving the old buildings in the meanwhile, with a crucial principal never making modern development with the costs of losing the old buildings.     

As most people agree, buildings represent a valuable record of any society’s past. It is parts of the culture, due to its easy preservation and long time to be preserved. The building’s existence has [去掉too或者用 does not have too …] many great functions: for us, common people, from the buildings we could imagine the life our ancestor lived; for archaeologists, judging through these buildings they can tell what period they build, and even identify who built them; for historians, the could do some research on historical events and historical figures with the help of archaeologists’ judgments on these buildings; for sociologists, these buildings are valuable to analyze the living level in order to make a whole image of the development of civilization and culture; for architects , these buildings are the soul of the art, which could give them inspirations and gain a clear view of the past architectonics. So, as a property of our culture, these old buildings should be preserved in good condition. [写的很好，赞一个，特别是连续的几个句子，很有说服力]

Today is an era that[where] technology and science lead to the development of society and culture, which urbanization and modernization are much faster than any past eras. As these old buildings are the symbols of our culture, city planners should take the valuable old buildings into consideration, which endowing new functions such as tour[tourism] and research rather than give the space of[for] modern development in the way of breaking down them, and sometimes they should make compromises and search other places for modern development, Planners of large cities with a long history also can make a two-town plan, which separates the two areas old and new, in order to preserve the buildings and realize the functions of a city. Lots of European historical cities set good examples, take Rome for an instance. As the most historical city in the world, Rome, the capital of Italy, has its ancient and modern city separated. The modern city is 5 kilometer south from the ancient, and is a beautiful city full of flower with the unique style of restaurant shaped like a mushroom and Emanuel Square, while the ancient city is preserved in a good condition, which is famous as the Colosseum, Roman triumphal arch, and so on. This example indicates the two-town plan gains a good balance between these old buildings and urbanization. [开头句和后面的连接不是很好，其实这层意思可以另开一段来写，后半部分的解决方法和例子也完全可以写成一整段，这样就能写成三段，思路也更清晰]

Finally, as a conclusion, it is unwise that modern development given precedence over the preservation of historical buildings, the better way is making a balance between the two, and the way of searching the best method will never stop, but the crucial rule never sacrifice the old buildings to urbanization will never change.

总的来说，语言没问题，但是还不够流畅，句子间的连词不够，也影响了论证的说服力。例子举的真的不错，特别是罗马的，非常合适。一起加油吧