=七月流火=小组第2次小组作业 Issue48 by knx1029

knx1029UID: 2609556

TOPIC: ISSUE48 - "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."
WORDS: 549          TIME: 01:11:45          DATE: 2009/8/21 11:31:24
     The speaker claims that the study of history concentrates too much on individuals and neglects the influence of groups of people whose indentities are easily forgotten. In my opinion, I concede that those who have never left their name on the history books should be paid attention to, since they prove to be the actual writers of history. Nonetheless, I think it is essential to focous more on the well-known individuals who have ever played an important roles in history due to their representativeness of that era.
     To discuss this topic, we should first realize the clear definition and significance of history. History, generally referred to all the events took place in the past, has always served as a guidline for the current social development. Thus the purpose of the study of history is mainly to understand why these far-reaching events happened, what attitude people of that time held for these occurence, moreover, what guidance these phenomena provided to us. Considering this, we could evaluate the actual significance of study on both individuals and groups.
     Admittedly, the study on groups should be paid more attention, since far-reaching history events, such as revolution, always involved large number of people. As mentioned above, it is the masses that impel the history trend, that is to say, unless the masses supported governing classes or leaders, or accept the trend, any revolution or social development could not be achieved. An appropriate example is not far to seek. The French Revolution, which is considered as the most complicated revolution in history, has come across several stages, including two empires, three republics, restoration and monarchy. Again and again, repeating similar small insurrection to overthrow the current government has just reflected the internal desire of people. To carefully investigate the complexity of history, historians should not ignore the opinions and attitude held by the majority of the people of that time.
     Nonetheless, the study on individuals, in my opinion, has made much more progress and proved to be effective to educate people of today. It ought to be conducted further research on to continue the achievements. As far as I am concerned, there are three reasons why we should focus on individuals. First, leaders, most of who are of common background, are always representative of ordinary people. Their life experience could reflect the situation of the historical society, and their thought is typical. Thus studying on them can help us better understand the past society. Secondly, more historical record about leaders, rather than ordinary people, is left and discovered, forcing historians to put more attention on them. The final but not the least important, there is no denying that brilliant people in history, such as Napoleon, Aristotle and the like, has served as examples to encourage people to be determined , intrepid and curious, while in contrast the ending of people who violate human morals and ethics, such as Hitler and other leaders in Nazi, has also warned people. For this reason, the study on individuals is necessary and beneficial.
     To sum up, I embrace the idea that study of history should pay attention to ordinary people or groups of people. However, I believe that it is necessary and significant to focus on individuals, since they could provide a brief and representative view of history.

ianking7368UID: 2655993

我觉得整体思路，结构已经很完善了。 只是有些观点缺乏论证和展开。
第二段的修改想法，写在了下边。


TOPIC: ISSUE48 - "The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten."
WORDS: 549          TIME: 01:11:45          DATE: 2009/8/21 11:31:24

     The speaker claims that the study of history concentrates too much on individuals and neglects the influence of groups of people whose indentities are easily forgotten. In my opinion, I concede that those who have never left their name on the history books should be paid attention to, since they prove to be the actual writers of history. Nonetheless, I think it is essential to focous more on the well-known individuals who have ever played
important roles in history due to their representativeness of that era.
     To discuss this topic, we should first realize the clear definition and significance of history. History, generally referred to all the events took place in the past, has always served as a guidline for the current social development. Thus the purpose of the study of history is mainly to understand why these far-reaching events happened, what attitude people of that time held for these occurence, moreover, what guidance these phenomena provided to us. Considering this, we could evaluate the actual significance of study on both individuals and groups.（这里有一点点问题， 本文主旨是更应该重视研究个体，可最后这一句是一个平衡观点。我觉得，可以这样说：从历史要研究的本质问题出发，我们才能更好的决定该把研究重点放在哪方面。接着，在下一段写研究群体重要；在第四段写，然而，研究个人更能够帮助我们达到这个目的，或者说有更大意义，因为：1， 个人更有代表性，2 个人的记录更多更翔实，3，杰出人物领到了潮流。）
     Admittedly, the study on groups should be paid more attention, since far-reaching history events, such as revolution, always involved large number of people(and actually it is the masses that impel the history trend). As mentioned above(换成That’s because), it is the masses that impel the history trend, that is to say, unless the masses supported governing classes or leaders, or accept the trend, any revolution or social development could not be achieved. An appropriate example is not far(difficult) to seek. The French Revolution, which is considered as the most complicated revolution in history, has come across several stages, including two empires, three republics, restoration and monarchy. Again and again, repeating similar small insurrection to overthrow the current government has just reflected the internal desire of people. To carefully investigate the complexity of history, historians should not ignore the opinions and attitude held by the majority of the people of that time.
     Nonetheless, the study on individuals, in my opinion, has made much more progress(could offer us more instructive information from history) and proved to be effective to educate people of today. It ought to be conducted further research on to continue the achievements. As far as I am concerned, there are three reasons why we should focus on individuals. First, leaders, most of who are of common background(这个看不懂，可能有点多余，可以说被大众选举出来的，所以有代表性), are always representative of ordinary people. Their life experience could reflect the situation of the historical society, and their thought is typical. Thus studying on them can help us better understand the past society. Secondly, more historical record about leaders, rather than ordinary people, is left and discovered, forcing historians to put more attention on them.（并且因为有翔实的记录，所以我们也可以更深入的研究从而得到更多有价值的东西，毕竟，泛泛的研究是不能深入了解历史的。） The final but not the least important, there is no denying that brilliant people in history, such as Napoleon, Aristotle and the like, has served as examples to encourage people to be determined , intrepid and curious, while in contrast the ending of people who violate human morals and ethics, such as Hitler and other leaders in Nazi, has also warned people（这个理由不充分，就是在研究个体啊。 可以这样说：尽管大众推动了潮流，然而是个体领到了潮流，而后者在历史学中更有意义）. For this reason, the study on individuals is necessary and beneficial.
     To sum up, I embrace the idea that study of history should pay attention to ordinary people or groups of people（不知道embrace是否可以这样用。）. However, I believe that it is necessary and significant to focus on individuals, since they could provide a brief and representative view of history.
4# 玥娥r

knx1029UID: 2609556

改了一下。但是感觉说的不是特别舒服。。还有就是平衡的观点的问题，我觉得只是为了引出下文，很难说是平衡观点吧。。。

     The speaker claims that the study of history concentrates too much on individuals and neglects the influence of groups of people whose identities are easily forgotten. In my opinion, I concede that those who have never left their name on the history books should be paid attention to, since they prove to be the actual writers of history. Nonetheless, I think it is essential to focus more on the well-known individuals who have ever played important roles in history due to their representativeness of that era.
      To discuss this topic, we should first realize the clear definition and significance of history. History, generally referred to all the events took place in the past, has always served as a guidlinefor the current social development. Thus the purpose of the study of history is mainly to understand why these far-reaching events happened, what attitude people of that time held for these occurrence, moreover, what guidance these phenomena provided to us. Considering this, we could evaluate the actual significance of study on individuals against groups.
    Admittedly, the study on groups should be paid more attention, since far-reaching history events, such as revolution, always involved large number of people. hat’s because, it is the masses that impel the history trend, that is to say, unless the masses supported governing classes or leaders, or accept the trend, any revolution or social development could not be achieved. An appropriate example is not far(difficult) to seek. The French Revolution, which is considered as the most complicated revolution in history, has come across several stages, including two empires, three republics, restoration and monarchy. Again and again, repeating similar small insurrection to overthrow the current government has just reflected the internal desire of people. To carefully investigate the complexity of history, historians should not ignore the opinions and attitude held by the majority of the people of that time.
     Nonetheless, the study on individuals, in my opinion, has made much more progress and proved to be effective to educate people of today. It ought to be conducted further research on to continue the achievements. As far as I am concerned, there are three reasons why we should focus on individuals. First, leaders, most of who are of common background, are always representative of ordinary people. Their life experience could reflect the situation of the historical society, and their thought is typical. Thus studying on them can help us better understand the past society. Secondly, more historical records about leaders, rather than ordinary people, are left and discovered, forcing historians to put more attention on these eminent people. What's more, these detailed records are frequently used to assist further study to seek more valuable observations, since the result of less in-depth research cannot be regarded as history. The final but not the least important, despite the masses impel the trend, it is the individuals, in contrast, that lead the trend. The study on them, who are the leaders of that era, and have more insight view on the future development, should be more emphasized on. For these three reasons, the study on individuals is more necessary and beneficial.
     To sum up, I embrace the idea that study of history should pay attention to ordinary people or groups of people. However, I believe that it is necessary and significant to focus on individuals, since they could provide a brief and representative view of history.