issue81 Patriotic reverence for the history of a nation of

turtle24UID: 122933

I personally think issue 81 is very difficult. What do you guys think?

81. “Patriotic reverence for the history of a nation often does more to impede than to encourage progress.”


Nationalism is something easily mistaken for patriotism. Unfortunately, the author of the assertion seems to commit the same fallacy. The author asserts that patriotic reverence will impede a nation’s progress rather than push it advance. I do not agree with his view on the ground that genuine reverence for the history of a nation will enhance a country’s cohesion, forging it ahead for a better tomorrow.

First, I like to distinguish patriotism from nationalism. Patriotism is like family love. people love their families just for being part of the families, not for being “the greatest family on earth” (whatever that might mean) or for being “better” than other families. They don’t feel threatened when other people love their families the same way. On the contrary, they respect their love, and they take comfort in knowing their respect themselves. While patriotism is a form of affection, nationalism, it has often been said, is grounded in exceedingly unconditional, blind, unhealthy and vile.

The patriot differs from the nationalist in this respect too: one can laugh at one’s country, the way members of a family can laugh at each other’s foibles. Affection takes for granted the imperfection of those it loves; the patriotic Irishman thinks Ireland is hilarious, whereas the Irish nationalist sees nothing to laugh about.

Simply put, patriots’ love and appreciation come from learning the history of a nation, learning the inherent values and beliefs that have passed down to the present days throughout thousand generations. This was not either the blind faith in or opposition to the government. For example, patriots Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson found themselves on opposing sides on almost all the big issues of their time, but today neither is more a patriot than the other.

In the second place, reverence for the history of a nation involves an understanding of what had happened in the past and the feats and failures of ancestors. Studying history allows the descendants find a common root among themselves, cultivating national cohesion. It is only through cohesion that people will fight enemy for their country and stand by their nation in times of troubles. Japan’s rapid recovery soon after World War II and South Koreans’ willing to donate valuables after the Asian financial turmoil best demonstrates the people’s attachment to their nations. Japan in the past was subject to severe influence from China. After the Second World War, the Japanese knew their deficiency and thus learnt of American’s spirit of innovation. This is why they have Sony and Honda today. Likewise, South Koreans did not choose to leave their country but stay with it to pass through the difficult times bought by the Asian Financial Crisis. Imagine if citizens do not respect or love a country’s past, be it glorious or gloomy period, they will only care for their interests and flee their motherland in times of crisis.

However, as I have mentioned, genuine reverence does not equal to the fact that its citizens are bound to stick to deep-rooted rules and customs. What a shame it is that, some, including the author of the assertion, come to believe that patriotism will impede a country’s progress. This is not patriotic reverence but national zeal. The nationalists have to prove their country is always right. Unquestioning support for a government or a nation even if it is doing something unjust is wrong. In this sense, their country will not go ahead but only back.

For example, China, India and Egypt are three of the ancient civilizations in the world. Losing their splendid glory in the past, they are now characterized by the wide gap between the rich and the poor, low technological and scientific advances. A reason is that their posterity only remembers the golden times and most importantly dares not to find another way instead of clinging to traditions. History or more specifically achievements of their ancestors are the burdens on their shoulders. If someone tries to do out of the way a society is used to be, they would be blamed by the society. Of course, if viewed from this perspective, such a reverence will only impede than advance a country’s progress.

In conclusion, it must be explained that true reverence for the history of a nation will strengthen citizen’s collective responsibility to a country, realize the advantages and disadvantages of its cultures and find way to improve itself. They admire their country with reasons, but love it without reason. However, blind reverence or so-called nationalism will allow people to see their country is superior to others. They admire their motherland out of superciliousness.

sdc1980818UID: 123625

81. “Patriotic reverence for the history of a nation often does more to impede than to encourage progress.”


Nationalism is something easily mistaken for patriotism. (Unfortunately, the author of the assertion seems to commit the same fallacy.) [It seems that the author commits the very fallacy in the issue. ] ( The author asserts that patriotic reverence will impede a nation’s progress rather than push it advance.) [Rather than push it advance, the arguer regard patriotic reverece, will impede a nation's progress.] I do not agree with his[his/her] view on the ground that genuine reverence for the history of a nation will enhance a country’s cohesion, forging it ahead for a better tomorrow. (Here, it is better to arise your own opinion on the issue, so that readers can grasp tenor of the essay, knowing about what the issue is going to talk about)

First, I like to distinguish patriotism from nationalism. Patriotism is like family love. people love their families just for being part of the families, not for being “the greatest family on earth” (whatever that might mean) or for being “better” than other families. They don’t feel threatened when other people love their families (in) the same way. On the contrary, they respect their love, and they take comfort in knowing their respect themselves. While patriotism is a form of affection, nationalism, it has often been said, is grounded in exceedingly unconditional, blind, unhealthy and vile.
/*difference between patriotism and nationalism*/

(The patriot differs from the nationalist in this respect too:) [Further more, the patriot differs from the nationalist as the following:] one can laugh at one’s country, the way members of a family can laugh at each other’s foibles. Affection takes for granted the imperfection of those it loves; the patriotic Irishman thinks Ireland is hilarious, whereas the Irish nationalist sees nothing to laugh about.
/*It is better to combine this paragraph together with the last paragraph*/

Simply put, patriots’ love and appreciation come from learning the history of a nation, learning the inherent values and beliefs that have passed down to the present days throughout thousand [a thousand/ thousands] generations. This was (not either) [neither] the blind faith in or opposition to the government. For example, patriots Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson found themselves on opposing sides on almost all the big issues of their time (in their era/ times), but today neither is more a patriot than the other.

In the second place, reverence for the history of a nation involves (in) an understanding of what had happened in the past and (the feats and failures of ancestors) [ancestors' feats and failures]. Studying history allows the descendants [to] find a common root among themselves, (cultivating national cohesion) [strengthening national cohesion]. (It is only through cohesion  that people will) [With cohesion only, can people possess the courage to]  fight [with] enemy for their country ( and stand by their nation in times of troubles?). Japan’s rapid recovery soon after World War II and South Koreans’ willing  to donate valuables after the Asian financial turmoil best demonstrates the people’s (attachment to their nations)[affection with their nation]. (Japan in the past was subject to severe influence from China. ??) After the Second World War, the Japanese knew their deficiency and (thus)[then] learnt of American’s spirit of innovation. This is why they have Sony and Honda today. (/*out of the topic, your example certify the benefit from learning foreign country, not about "patriotic"*/) Likewise, South Koreans did not choose to leave their country but stay with it to pass through the difficult times (bought (brought) by) resulting from the Asian Financial Crisis. Imagine that if citizens do not respect or love a country’s past, be it glorious or gloomy period, they will only care for their interests and flee their motherland (in times of crisis) [in crisis].
/*There are two different ideas in this paragraph: at the beginning of the issue, you present that "In the second place, reverence for the history of a nation involves (in) an understanding of what had happened in the past"; later, you state that "It is only through cohesion  that people willfight [with] enemy for their country and stand by their nation in times of troubles", and then turn to the main topic. You had better try to reconstruct this sentence so as to make the paragraph focusing */

However, as I have mentioned, (that) genuine reverence does not equal to the fact that its citizens are bound to stick to deep-rooted rules and customs. What a shame it is that, /*a little serious, isn't it?*/ some (people), including the author of the assertion, come to believe that patriotism will impede a country’s progress. This is not patriotic reverence but national zeal. The nationalists have to prove their country is always right. Unquestioning(ly) support for a government or a nation even if it is doing something unjust is wrong. In this sense, their country will not go (ahead) [forward] but (only back) [get/turn backward].
/*redress some possible misunderstandings*/

For example, China, India and Egypt are [the three of ancient civilizations/ three ancient civilizations] (three of the ancient civilizations) in the world. Losing their splendid glory in the past, they are now characterized by the wide gap between the rich and the poor, low technological and scientific advances. A reason is that their posterity only remembers the golden times and most importantly dares not to find another way instead of clinging to traditions. History or more specifically achievements of their ancestors are the burdens on their shoulders. If someone tries to do out of the way a society is used to be, they would be blamed by the society. Of course, if viewed from this perspective, such a reverence will only impede [other] than (advance) [accelerate] [progress of a country]  (a country’s progress).
/*supplementary of redressing */

In conclusion, it must be explained that [the] true reverence for the history of a nation will strengthen citizen’s collective responsibility to a country, realize the advantages and disadvantages of its cultures and find way to improve itself. They admire their country with reasons, but love it without reason. However, blind reverence or so-called nationalism will (allow people to see their country is superior to others) [mislead people to stare on the advantage of their nation, ignoring the shortage].  (They) admire their motherland out of superciliousness. [This is not real patriotism, because they concern about the superficial facets of patriotism with superciliousness, not delve into the pith.]

/*your central idea is not obtrusive, though quite distinctive already, because the structure is not well organized, and some sometimes goes out of the main topic. The essay is so long, it must have taken you a long time to finish it. Admire your wide knowledge and deep thoughts, if take care about the detail, you will get high mark in the test*/

turtle24UID: 122933

Thank you so much for your comments. Will restructure it. Tks. so much!
我去年11月已考了一次, 但是分數只有3.5, 我覺得因為我們不是NATIVE SPEAKER, 所以考試的臨場水準較平時練習時差, 我沒有報考3月的試, 因我準備飛往別的國家考筆試, 一是筆試的成績已來不及送出去, 二我打字比寫字快, 三聽說機考會較筆考容易取較高分數

tomatoeggsUID: 82073

81. “Patriotic reverence for the history of a nation often does more to impede than to encourage progress.”


Nationalism is something（sometimes） easily (to be) mistaken for(as) patriotism. Unfortunately, the author of the assertion(多余) seems to （have）commit(committed) the same fallacy. The author asserts that patriotic reverence will impede a nation’s progress rather than push it (to)advance. I do not agree with his view on the ground that genuine reverence for the history of a nation will enhance a country’s cohesion, forging it ahead for a better tomorrow. (forge没有这样的表达)

First, I（I’d） like to distinguish patriotism from nationalism. Patriotism is like family love(one’s love of family). people love their families（family） just for being part of the families(family), not for being “the greatest family on earth” (whatever that might mean) or for being “better” than other families. They don’t feel threatened when other people love their families (in) the same way. On the contrary, they respect their love, and they take comfort in knowing their respect themselves. While patriotism is a form of affection, nationalism, it has often been said, is grounded in exceedingly unconditional, blind, unhealthy and vile.

The patriot differs from the nationalist in this respect too: one can laugh at one’s country, the way members of a family can laugh at each other’s foibles. Affection takes for granted the imperfection of those it loves; the patriotic Irishman thinks Ireland is hilarious(好像与后半句没什么联系窝), whereas the Irish nationalist sees nothing to laugh about.

Simply put, patriots’ love and appreciation（admiration） come from learning the history of a nation, learning（多余） the inherent values and beliefs that have passed down to the present days throughout thousand（thousands of ） generations. This was not either the blind faith in or opposition to the government. For example, patriots Alexander Hamilton and Thomas Jefferson found themselves on opposing(opposite) sides on almost all the big issues of their time, but today neither is more a patriot than the other.(这一段的意思不太明瞭)

In the second place, reverence for the history of a nation involves an understanding of what had（has） happened in the past and the feats and failures of ancestors. Studying history allows the descendants(to) find a common root among themselves, cultivating national cohesion. It is only through cohesion that people will fight(against) enemy(enemies) for their country and stand by their nation in times of troubles(trouble). Japan’s rapid recovery soon after World War II and South Koreans’ willing to donate valuables after the Asian financial turmoil best demonstrates(demonstrate) the people’s attachment to their nations. Japan in the past was subject to severe influence from China. After the Second World War, the Japanese knew their deficiency and thus learnt of American’s spirit of innovation. This is why they have Sony and Honda today. Likewise, South Koreans did not choose to leave their country but stay with it to pass through the difficult times bought by the Asian Financial Crisis. Imagine(Suppose) if citizens do not respect or love a country’s past, be it glorious or gloomy period, they will only care for their interests and flee(free) their motherland in times of crisis.

However, as I have mentioned, genuine reverence does not equal to the fact that its citizens are bound to stick to deep-rooted rules and customs. What a shame it is that, some, including the author of the assertion(赘余), come to believe that patriotism will impede a country’s progress. This is not patriotic reverence but national zeal. （That）The nationalists have to prove their country is always right. Unquestioning support for a government or a nation even if it is(多余) doing something unjust is wrong. In this sense, their country will not go ahead but only back（lag behind）.

For example, China, India and Egypt are three of the ancient civilizations in the world. Losing their splendid glory in the past, they are now characterized by the wide gap between the rich and the poor, low technological and scientific advances(development). A reason is that their posterity only remembers(remember) the golden times and most importantly dares(dare) not to(多余) find another way instead of clinging to traditions. History or more specifically（specific） achievements of their ancestors are the burdens on their shoulders. If someone tries to do(go) out of the way a society is used to be, they would be blamed by the society.（实例？） Of course, if viewed from this perspective, such a reverence will only impede(rather) than advance(promote/ facilitate) a country’s progress.

In conclusion, it must be explained that true reverence for the history of a nation will strengthen citizen’s collective responsibility to a country, realize the advantages and disadvantages of its cultures(culture) and find way to improve itself. They admire their country with reasons, but love it without reason. (为什么？)However, blind reverence or so-called nationalism will allow people to see（that） their country is superior to others. They admire their motherland out of superciliousness.

本人愚见：
1.        总的来说写得不错，语言也显现出比较扎实的驾驭能力，但有一点不太好的是，句与句之间比较松散，段与段之间前后联系不够，建议您在写之前写写提纲，提醒自己不要偏离中心；
2.        中心模糊。Nationalism & Patriotism依本人见解区别不太明显，即便如此您似乎在论证中也没有很有力地证明哟。（请恕我直言） ：）
3.        语法错误比较多，这是ETS的大忌，切记哦。
基本上，如果您再在选topic方面多下功夫，凭您的语言功底和遣词造句的能力，上4.5应该没问题的。 ：）