〓DIES IN FLAMS〓 Issue119 by jessicalulu

jessicaluluUID: 2471730

119"When research priorities are being set for science, education, or any other area, the most important question to consider is: How many people's lives will be improved if the results are successful?"

With the development of the society and economic boom, a growing body of technological achievements emerged dealing with a series of problems which were closely associated with our daily lives. A very important aspect of research is investing, including human resources, material resources and so on. The result of that is we should arrange our limited resources reasonable. But, if we evaluate the research priorities by “how many people’s lives improved”, the result is likely to inequitable, because it is hard to define “the improved lives” or accurate statistics on the number of improved lives at all. I think Research priorities should continue in areas that social benefits are clear and immediate, or at least, predictable.

Firstly, we can compare the situation between two different fields. It may difficult to build a standard between them because they often have different research background, methods and aims. For example, in the area of education and medicine, both of them have far-reaching effects on a lot of people. The aim of educational research is to make our education more accepted and reasonable by the public, to give the greatest advantage to the public and so on. They mainly resolve the problems of students who need knowledge to improve their lives. On the other hand, medicine is an area that aims to find the way to cure people's disease and pains, to disclose the mechanism of the diseases, and to sustain the physical and physiological balance of human beings. When they decide to start a research project, both of their aims are always the same, that are ameliorating people's lives. Both of them can help great groups of people, even the past, contemporary and later. So it is impossible to calculate the real number that a research can benefit to。From above, we can see that it is hard to decide which one should be set for priority between them

Secondly, we can survey the status in the same area. When an institution choose to develop a new medicine, one is a new drug which is target to gastritis, and the other is target to gastric cancer. As we all know, the incidence of gastritis is higher than gastric cancer. If we decide to research and produce the former but not the later one, of course we can help more people get rid of the troubles.
But the gastric cancer brings more pains and severe outcomes to people, even death, it badly disturbs people’s living qualities. So, if we can invent a drug which can cure or alleviate the process of the disease to some extent, it may make a great progress not only to people’s lives but also to the whole scientific fields. What’s more, some researches may have little help to their own subject, but it may greatly impact on other areas. So it indirectly impact a lot of people, how can we judge which research takes the most important effect? Above all, the actually number that peoples’ lives improved is hard to calculate, and it depends on what kind of rules you take.

Furthermore, even if the results of researches are progressive, can it be used as a way to decrease the happiness of the people? Environment problems, which become the most significant issues that without handled correctly they will in turn kill the lives of ourselves as a human being, are the contraproductive of the profitable fast development of technology, which ] now threaten the whole species of the biosphere. The Three Mill nuclear leakage is another case in point. Such examples are so numerous that it is impossible for me to list them out. Therefore, it is pointless to set priorities at the researches.

To sum up, research is always an adventure, when we decide which research is a priority, we cannot only depend on the number of people whose lives improved, but also the extent the researches can affect our lives, their potential lasting value, the possibility that can promote social development and so on.

写得太烂了。。。思维是语言来支撑的，越来越明白这个道理。。。

PassonChenUID: 2614331

119"When research priorities are being set for science, education, or any other area, the most important question to consider is: How many people's lives will be improved if the results are successful?"
我先把这个题目翻译一下，看我理解是否有误码：
（无论是在科学，教育，或者其它任何领域，在决定研究的优先顺序时，要考虑的首要问题就是：如果研究成功，有多少人的生活将得到改善。）
红色：很好；
绿色和蓝色：修改的或欠佳的
粉红：标注。
With the development of the society and economic boom, a growing body of technological achievements emerged dealing with a series of problems which were closely associated with our daily lives. A very important aspect of research is investing, including human resources, material resources and so on. The result of that is we should arrange our limited resources reasonable. But, if we evaluate the research priorities by “how many people’s lives will be improved”, the result is likely to be inequitable(这个词不是很通啊), because it is hard to define “the improved lives” or accurate statistics on the number of improved lives at all. I think Research priorities should continue in areas that social benefits are clear and immediate, or at least, predictable.
（提出观点：由于生活的提高质量和数量都不易测评，所以研究最好把锁定在能对人们的生活产生迅速，至少可以预测的影响的领域）
Firstly, we can compare the situation between two different fields. It may be difficult to build a standard between them because they often have different research backgrounds, methods and aims. For example, in the area of education and medicine, both of them can have far-reaching effects on a lot of people. The aim of educational research is to make our education more reasonable and (acceptable) by the public, to give the greatest advantages to the public and so on. They mainly cater to students who need knowledge to improve their lives. On the other hand, medicine is an area that aims to find the way to cure people's diseases and improve their health, to disclose the mechanism of the diseases, and to sustain the physical and physiological balance of human beings. (有点多余)When they decide to start a research project, both of their aims are always the same, that are ameliorating people's lives.（代词用得有点乱） Both of them can help great groups of people, even the past, contemporary and later（有点费解）. So it is impossible to calculate the real number that a research can benefit to(建议省略)。From above, we can see that it is hard to decide which one should be set for priority between them
(通过对医学和教育研究的比较证明：用多少人的生活将提高的标准很难确定研究的优先顺序，因为它们影响不同类，且都深远到难以统计)

Secondly, we can survey the status in the same area. When(Assume that) an institution chooses(plans) to develop a new medicine, one choice is a new drug which is targeted at gastritis, and the other(the other alternative) is targeted at(intended for; aimed at) gastric cancer. As we all know, the incidence of gastritis is higher than gastric cancer. If we decide to research and produce the former but not（instead of; rather than） the later one, of course we can help more people get rid of the troubles.
But the gastric cancer brings to people（提前比较好，因为后面太长） more pains and severe outcomes (pain 与outcome 前者属于后者，不宜并列；省略前者) even death，and (一句话只有一个主语；要不用并列连词)badly disturbs people’s living qualities（不过，这里的几个程度还需要再推敲一下）. So, if we can invent a drug which can cure or alleviate the process of the disease to some extent, it may make a great progress not only to(这个短语没见过这样用啊) people’s lives but also to the whole scientific fields（it will not only make people’s lives go forward but also promote scientific researches）. What’s more, some researches may have（do） little help to their own subject, but it may greatly impact on other areas. AS it indirectly impact a lot of people, how can we judge which research takes the most important effect? Above all, the actually(accurate; exact[/color]; precise) number of people whose lives have been improved( that peoples’ lives improved )is hard to calculate, and it depends on what kind of rules you take.
(句子内部词与词之间的关系处理得不是很好，用词不是很有力，句型没有表现力，语法要注意哟)
（通过考察同一类研究的不同方面来说明研究目标对生活的提高不一定是最好的标准）

Furthermore, even if the results of researches are progressive, can it be used as a way to decrease the happiness of the people? Environment problems, which become the most significant issues that without being handled correctly will in turn kill the lives of ourselves as a human being,and  contradict the profitable purpose of fast development of technology, which will threaten the whole species of the biosphere. The Three Mill nuclear leakage is another case in point. Such examples are so numerous that it is impossible for me to list them out. Therefore, it is pointless to set priorities for such researches.
(有的研究是有害的，也就没有必要给它们优先顺序)

To sum up, research is always an adventure, when we decide which research is a priority, we cannot only depend on the number of people whose lives will be improved, but also the extent the researches can affect our lives, their potential lasting value, the possibility that can promote social development and so on. (主谓不一致：the possibility of that social development and so on can be promoted )
（我现在认真翻译了一下题目才知道：我写跑题了。唉！）
文章批判了以多少人的生活将提高来在确定研究的优先顺序，认为这一标准不足取法，给出了理由，理由是有力的。觉得紧扣题目啊。我那个哪们跑这么远呢？当时没有翻译题目啊。没审好题。
对语言的看法：（1）连词，代词用得不是很好，多关注一下它们；
（2）主谓一致要注意一下；（3）句型的把握不是很好，建议关注一下因果句，并列句（并列成分不要交叉），转折句，递进句的连词的使用技巧；（4）句子的插入，分节可以做为提高语言分析的很好的方面。
（5）推荐一种构造句子成份的技巧：“抽象名词+对其的修饰”，这里的修饰很多，定语从句，分词短语，同位语，状语，介词短语，也可以插入一些成分，这样一个句子就复杂了，也能有节奏）；当然也不要泛滥，自然为好。如：
In this era of rapid social and technological change leading to increasing life complexity and psychological displacement, both positive and negative effects among persons in Westerns society call for a balance in which there are both specialists and generalists.
(这里的抽象名词就很多，足以说明问题：之所以抽象，因为越抽象越接近真理；这所以名词，因为为了客观)
你注意一下会发现这是普遍适用的。
改了很久啊。感觉审题真的很到位。我要重新写这篇啊。到时麻烦再帮我看一下跑没有。谢了。

zzz.321UID: 2600329

〓DIES IN FLAMS〓　Issue119 by jessicalulu
119"Whenresearch priorities are being set for science, education, or any otherarea, the most important question to consider is: How many people'slives will be improved if the results are successful?"

With the development of the society and economic boom, agrowing body of technological achievements emerged dealing with aseries of problems which were closely associated with our daily lives.A very important aspect of research is investing, including humanresources, material resources and so on. The result of that is weshould arrange our limited resources reasonable. But, if we evaluatethe research priorities by “how many people’s lives improved”, theresult is likely to inequitable, because it is hard to define “theimproved lives” or accurate statistics on the number of improved livesat all. I think Research priorities should continue in areas that social benefits are clear and immediate, or at least, predictable.
(题目关键词抓的很到位，观点比较鲜明，就是觉得第一段长了点)

Firstly, we cancompare the situation between two different fields. It may difficult tobuild a standard between them because they often have differentresearch background, methods and aims. For example, in the area ofeducation and medicine, both of them have far-reaching effects on a lotof people. The aim of educational research is to make our educationmore accepted and reasonable by the public, to give the greatestadvantage to the public and so on. They mainly resolve the problems ofstudents who need knowledge to improve their lives. On the other hand,medicine is an area that aims to find the way to cure people's diseaseand pains, to disclose the mechanism of the diseases, and to sustainthe physical and physiological balance of human beings. When theydecide to start a research project, both of their aims are always thesame, that are ameliorating people's lives. Both of them can help greatgroups of people, even the past, contemporary and later. So it isimpossible to calculate the real number that a research can benefit to。From above, we can see that it is hard to decide which one should be set for priority between them

Secondly, we cansurvey the status in the same area. When an institution choose todevelop a new medicine, one is a new drug which is target to gastritis,and the other is target to gastric cancer. As we all know, theincidence of gastritis is higher than gastric cancer. If we decide toresearch and produce the former but not the later one, of course we canhelp more people get rid of the troubles.
But the gastric cancer brings more pains and severe outcomes to people,even death, it badly disturbs people’s living qualities. So, if we caninvent a drug which can cure or alleviate the process of the disease tosome extent, it may make a great progress not only to people’s livesbut also to the whole scientific fields. What’s more, some researchesmay have little help to their own subject, but it may greatly impact onother areas. So it indirectly impact a lot of people, how can we judgewhich research takes the most important effect? Above all, the actuallynumber that peoples’ lives improved is hard to calculate, and itdepends on what kind of rules you take.

Furthermore,even if the results of researches are progressive, can it be used as away to decrease the happiness of the people? Environment problems,which become the most significant issues that without handled correctlythey will in turn kill the lives of ourselves as a human being, are thecontraproductive of the profitable fast development of technology,which ] now threaten the whole species of the biosphere. The Three Millnuclear leakage is another case in point. Such examples are so numerousthat it is impossible for me to list them out. Therefore, it ispointless to set priorities at the researches.

To sum up, researchis always an adventure, when we decide which research is a priority, wecannot only depend on the number of people whose lives improved, butalso the extent the researches can affect our lives, their potentiallasting value, the possibility that can promote social development andso on.

你的观点是：由于生活的提高质量和数量都不易测评，所以研究最好把锁定在能对人们的生活产生迅速，至少可以预测的影响的领域，不过貌似只看到论证前半部分的，没有看到后半部分的，觉得应该两方面都论证一下更好一些，更有说服力。还有就是文章感觉全部都是例子，稍微来点说理论证会更好一些～～文章层次很清晰，结构分明，学习一下～～