[YB-1] 7月11号作业 by weenbopper

weenbopperUID: 2423595

TOPIC: ISSUE26 - "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."
WORDS: 564
TIME: 00:45:00
DATE: 2009-7-11 12:20:58

1、
同意在反应过去的作用（1）反应人和事（2）人们的生活习惯和水平（3）cultural identity
2、
同时它也有教育和研究意义
3、
同时这些建筑往往拆了就没了，同时，现代的发展不systematical and planful.(时间关系在规定时间内省了)
4、
但是在牵涉一些特殊情况时，应该给现代的需求让路
When choice has to be made between old buildings and modern development, the speaker chooses the latter even though the historical buildings record the past. However, I can hardly agree with the statement since the significant role of historical buildings on reflecting the past and conducting education and research.

The old buildings provide some priceless methods to get familiar with our past. At first, they remind us of those historical figures or events that should always carved onto our heart; after all, it is the person and events that compose our human history. Mount Rushmore National Memorial, for instance, represents the first brilliant 150 years of the history of the United States of America with the heads of former United States most notable and accomplished presidents. And the still standing 8 columns of Yuan mingyuan always remind us the blackest page of the Chinese recent history and stimulate to constructing and dedicate to our homeland. Subsequently, they, taken on a mass scale, demonstrate the past living condition and habit. The well-known quadrangle in China musters all members of families: the children, parents and even grandparents. However, things totally changed in American in which the children and parents generally live separately even in the same town. In this sense, the Chinese children used to rely on their parents; while the American counterparts are much more independent. Moreover, the historical buildings represent the national culture and distinction. We glimpse at the enthusiasm of Italian from Colosseum, the Versailles Palace stands to show the romance of French; the Statue of Liberty aptly reflect the unparallel pride of American; also the Great Wall is so long that just resemble the history of China. In a word, the peerless position of historical building on recording and representing the past denies any doubt.

Moreover, the historical building is too precious and unique to be raved simply for modern use. An alternative explanation may be that those buildings are irreversible, once deconstructed; no matter how advanced and delicate our modern technology is, we have no means to build another identical one to possess the same cultural and historical importance; but to recover or just poorly copy their appearance. On the other side, our modern development is stretching indiscriminately. Although this claim boards to hyperbole, it can be exemplified by the usually canceled plans. All too often, we can observe some brand-new buildings were pushed down for another new plan.

As I try to enumerate the merits of modern buildings over their historical counterpart; I think it is only when the choice come to fulfilling the basic human need and the old buildings; we should build more modern architecture. Hypothetically, at stake are the homeless and fatigue victims of disasters such as earthquake, tornado or flood, it is ironical to rigidly insist on the preservation of a historical building.

In a nutshell, by reflecting cultural identity, momentous events and figures and mass living standard and by facilitating education and research; historical buildings have no reasons to give way to modern development. However, undue importance put on them would only discard the most basic need of human. Actually, any decisions should be for the sake of better future and better life of people.

weenbopperUID: 2423595

TOPIC: ARGUMENT35 - The following appeared in the summary of a study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia
1
"Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches. Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates, for the past several decades food-processing companies have also been adding salicylates to foods as preservatives. This rise in the commercial use of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants in our twenty-year study. Recently, food-processing companies have found that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods. With this new use for salicylates, we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia."
WORDS: 281
TIME: 00:30:00
DATE: 2009-7-11 18:13:08


通过一个化学族的而断定S在治疗头痛的作用
2、
通过study，headache decline和salicylates的使用有关
3、
驳斥使用的数量和疗效有关

Grounding on a factor that salicylates and aspirin is the same chemical family, synthesizing a study shows a steady decline in headaches and the increase and more utilize in food of salicylates and then supposing the more salicylates we take, the less we suffer from headaches; the arguer accordingly predict another steady decline in the number of headaches in Mentia with the adoption of flavor additive composed by salicylates. A careful analysis would reveal how groundless this prediction is.

At first, the arguer indiscriminately judges the function of salicylates in curing headaches from its identity in same chemical family with aspirin. Apart from series of carful experiments and insightful analysis, we can not get material's characteristic only from its chemical family. Even the members of the same family member possess some similarity; it is still too imprudent to decide that salicylates and aspirin is so accidentally share the same function in the treatment of headache. Therefore, this reference is groundless.

Secondly, the arguer reluctantly correlates a steady decline in the number of headaches with the increasing use of salicylates. It is highly possible these two cases are just coincidences without any concrete relationships. As for the decline in the twenty-year study, I am more willing to attribute it to the advancement of medical treatment and apparatus in local hospital; to the more and more leisure life; or to the increasing desire for exercising and importance on health. And thus this decline and increase has not necessary relationship.

Thirdly, the arguer makes a ironical reference that the greater amount of salicylates we take, the less we will suffer headaches. As we all know that, all the use of medicine would engender some antibiotics that adverse affect its effectiveness. In this sense, even salicylates has some curing function, we can not continue another steady decline in the number of headaches as the increasing use of salicylates.

In sum, in order to substantiate this claim, the arguer should provide scientific and concrete data to prove salicylates's function in declining the number of headaches, as well as effective methods to fight against antibiotics.

weenbopperUID: 2423595

看了一天范文,恩恩
接下来任务加强段落的逻辑联系...

3071001007UID: 2662009

When choice has to be made between old buildings and modern development, the speaker chooses the latter even though the historical buildings record the past. However, I can hardly agree with the statement since the significant role of historical buildings to reflect (reflecting) the past and to conduct (conducting我觉得这里to do用的很别扭，如果你觉得动名词也不对的话，最好改成从句比较保险)
educate (education) and research.
The old buildings provide some priceless methods and（and去掉） to know (是不是加上about好点？) our past. At first, they remind us
（加上of）those historical figures or events that should always carved onto your（our不然前后不一致了） heart; after all, it is the person and events that compose our human history. Mount Rushmore National Memorial, for instance, represents the first brilliant 150 years （of the history去掉吧，累赘了） of the United States of America with the heads of former United States most notable and accomplished presidents:
（George Washington Thomas Jefferson, Theodore Roosevelt and Abraham Lincoln.个人觉得没必要说他们是谁，对文章的逻辑结构没有作用，反而有炫耀的感觉）And the still standing 8 columns of Yuan mingyuan（这里明显是中式英语了） always remind us the blackest page of the Chinese recent history（Modern History of China这个有专有名词的） and stimulate to constructing and dedicate to our homeland（这个没太读懂 - -0 ）. Subsequently, they, taken on a mass scale（这个我也不懂）, demonstrate the past living condition and habit. The well-known quadrangle in China musters all members of every family: the children, parents and even grandparents. However, things totally changed in American in which the children and parents generally live separately even（前边刚刚用过这个，换成though也行） in the same town. In this sense, the Chinese children used to rely on their parents; while the American counterparts are much more independent. Moreover, the historical bodings（buildings笔误了吧） represent us the national culture and distinction. We glimpse at the enthusiasm of Italian from Colosseum, the Versailles Palace stands to show the romance of French; the Statue of Liberty aptly reflect the unparallel pride of American; also the Great Wall is so long as（这个词组是只要的意思，你要表达什么意思呢？） the history of China. In a word, the peerless position of historical building on recording and representing the past denies any doubt.
Just from the above strengths, we don't have any reasons to mandatorily（查不到这个词） make the old buildings（to去掉可以）
give way to modern development; （，）not to mention their considerable function in education and research. In the first place, the historical buildings are didactic. We like to hear（hearing动名词表一贯的喜爱） the educational stories that lie behind every historical building; we enjoy being reminded of the brilliant moment and events of our history and we also feel shocked and robust when exposed to the nightmare of the history. In the second place, old construction is also an important medium for research（researching） on our culture, language, identity and esthetics; all of which（those）can be comprehensively demonstrated by the buildings in the past. And this point can be proved by the aforementioned examples like Great wall, Statue of Liberty and Versailles Palace.
Moreover, the historical building is too precious and unique to be raved（这个词用写错了吧？） simply for modern use. An alternative explanation may be that those buildings are irreversible（去掉,） once deconstructed; no matter how advanced and delicate our modern technology is, we have no means to build another identical one to possess the same cultural and historical importance; but to recover or just poorly copy their appearance. On the other side, our modern development is stretching indiscriminately. Although this claim boards to hyperbole（这句我不懂是什么意思，但可能没错误）, it can be exemplified by the usually canceled plans. All too often, we can observe some brand-new buildings were（are） pushed down for another new plan.
As I try to enumerate the merits of modern buildings over their historical counterpart; I think it is only when the problem comes to fulfilling the basic human need; we should build more modern architecture（前后半句是什么逻辑关系？还是我句子没读懂，这个你再自己看看）. Hypothetically, at stake are（没有主语，如果想用倒装句式，我觉得你用错了） the homeless and fatigue victims of disasters such as earthquake, tornado or flood, it is ironical to still rigidly（去掉换个地方） insist

on the preservation of a historical building（rigidly加在这里） that may possibly owns some historical or cultural significance.
In a nutshell, by reflecting cultural identity, momentous events and figures and mass living standard and by facilitating education and research; historical buildings have no reasons to give way to modern development. However, undue importance put on them would only discard the most basic need of human. Actually, any decisions should be （made）
for the sake of better future and better life of people.


这个这个。。。我狠点拍希望作者不要介意，都是为了你能做得更好。
首先作者的语言有非常大的问题。作者的词汇量是不错的，但是如何正确运用很多词汇是一个很大的问题。我通篇看下来，感觉是一台翻译机把中文逐字翻译下来的文章，很多词的位置放的很不地道，缺少英语的感觉。整个行文非常生硬，这个文章拿给外国人看他们可能根本不能理解很多句子的意思。希望作者以后尽量避免刻意使用某些词汇或者某种句型，一定要让文章读起来很顺畅，不能为了长句而长句。这是很多过来人总结的经验教训。Issue最看重的还是逻辑，语言上先做到能把问题清楚又不重复的讲出来就不错了。
然后再说说逻辑，作者这个行文主线也并不是非常清楚，论述的过程中缺少一些条理性。我第一次看你这个文章就基本没有把握到整个思路的主线。当然这和我的水平也有关，但是真正逻辑性强的文章即使语言上比较晦涩，看下来还是能给人连贯的感觉的。
给作者几点建议。写的时候可以先不卡时间，以保证质量为主，这是很多人和我说过的经验。当文章的质量上去了，再提高速度，反正你还有很长的准备时间，把速度提上去肯定是绰绰有余。然后就是用尽量简单的语言来说明问题，不要想把自己脑海里的中文句子的全部意思完全翻译成英语，否则写出来会非常别扭。
队长加油！

3071001007UID: 2662009

Grounding on a factor that salicylates and aspirin is (in) the same chemical family, synthesizing (这个词放在这是啥意思？) a study shows a steady decline in headaches and the increase and more utilize in food of salicylates and（前面那句说得乱七八糟哦 改成the increasing utilize of alicylates in food） then supposing the more salicylates we take, the less we suffer from headaches; the arguer accordingly predict another steady decline in the number of headaches in Mentia with the adoption of flavor additive composed by salicylates. A careful analysis would reveal how groundless this prediction is.（这句话读起来有点不太友好，想想换个温和一点的说法吧？）

At first, the arguer indiscriminately judges the function of salicylates in curing headaches from its identity（我又看不懂了） in same chemical family with aspirin.（前边这句改成the arguer indiscriminately judges that the function of salicylates is the same to aspirin, bacause they belong to the same chemical family会不会读起来更清楚一点？） Apart from series of carful（scientific） experiments and insightful analysis, we can not get material's characteristic only from its chemical family. Even(Although) the members of the same family (member) possess(share) some similarity; it is still too imprudent to decide(take it granted) that salicylates and aspirin (is so accidentally) share(have 前边改过share了) the same function in the treatment of headache. Therefore, this reference is groundless.

Secondly, the arguer reluctantly correlates（relates） a steady decline in the number of headaches with the increasing use of salicylates. It is highly possible (that) these two cases are just coincidences without any concrete relationships. (这里不能只说有可能，还要说出别的可能是什么)As for the decline in the twenty-year study, I am more willing to attribute it to the advancement of medical treatment and apparatus in local hospitals; to the more and more leisure life; or to the increasing desire for exercising and importance on health.（这个to，to，or to的排比最好不要用，首先这里不带任何感情，不需要排比烘托意境，其次这类风格的文章语言朴实表达清楚才是关键，最好不要整这些花哨的） And thus this decline and increase has not（no） necessary relationship.

Thirdly, the arguer makes a ironical reference that the greater amount of salicylates we take, the less we will suffer headaches. As we all know that, all the use of medicine would engender some antibiotics that adverse affect its effectiveness（cause resistance to drugs or even adverse affect）. In this sense, even salicylates has some curing function, we can not continue (there won't come) another steady decline in the number of headaches as the increasing use of salicylates.

In sum, in order to substantiate this claim, the arguer should provide scientific and concrete data to prove salicylates's function in declining the number of headaches, as well as effective methods to fight against antibiotics.

改完不容易啊。。。作者一定要改你的写作习惯，这篇文章实在有很多让人没法理解的中式英语说法。建议作者最近有空多多阅读一些地道的英文文章，学一下地道的英语表达方法。还是那句话，句式简单、用词简单都没关系，首先要把它说对才行。加油！！
逻辑上几个点找的都还不错

weenbopperUID: 2423595

Grounding on a factor that salicylates and aspirin shares the same chemical family, synthesizing (综合)a study that shows a steady decline in headaches and the increasing use of alicylates in food, then supposing the more salicylates we take, the less we suffer from headaches; the arguer accordingly predict another steady decline in the number of headaches in Mentia with the adoption of flavor additive composed by salicylates.
At first, the arguer indiscriminately judges the function of salicylates from its chemical identity-- it shares one chemical family with aspirin. Apart from series of carful（scientific） experiments and insightful analysis, we can not get material's characteristic only from its chemical family. Although the members of the same family possess some similarity; it is still too imprudent to decide that salicylates and aspirin accidentally share the same function in the treatment of headache. Therefore, this reference is groundless.

Secondly, the arguer reluctantly correlates a steady decline in the number of headaches with the increasing use of salicylates. It is highly possible that these two cases are just coincidences without any concrete relationships. As for the decline in the twenty-year study, I am more willing to attribute it to the advancement of medical treatment and apparatus in local hospitals; to the more and more leisure life; or to the increasing desire for exercising and importance on health. And thus this decline and increase has no necessary relationship.

Thirdly, the arguer makes a ironical reference that the greater amount of salicylates we take, the less we will suffer headaches. As we all know that, all the use of medicine would engender some antibiotics that adverse affect its effectiveness（cause resistance to drugs or even adverse affect）. In this sense, even salicylates has some curing function, we can not continue another steady decline in the number of headaches as the increasing use of salicylates.

In sum, in order to substantiate this claim, the arguer should provide scientific and concrete data to prove salicylates's function in declining the number of headaches, as well as effective methods to fight against antibiotics.