issue36 同主题写作NO.5，互拍。

savagettUID: 2134686

TOPIC [36.]The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, but not their contemporaries."
TIME 45:00    DATA 2006-2-13    WORDS 487
限时后改了N多错别字了
第一 后人的评价客观
第二：同时代人的可以及时地评价那些对于后人来说可能被遗忘的重大事件
第三 比较而言，同时代的人可能限于知识和认识，评价不够客观
第四，现代社会，更方便了给当代人做评价。


Can the significance of individuals only be determined by the descendants? The assertion sounds quite reasonable, nevertheless, in retrospect, common knowledge and experience informs us it is not necessarily the same.

Admittedly, the comments from off springs always tend to be more comprehensive and objective. Through the scrutiny of history, when people evaluate individuals' fault or contribution, they will consider the background, the trend and the influence more carefully. Accordingly, their comments on greatness are more objective, especially to those controversial individuals. Take the first emperor of China as an example, Qin Shi Huang, who was thought to be a autocrat in his time, was recognized as an significant individual by historians when they look back into the whole civilization of China. They believes he is the first one to unify China and to set up standards on monetary unit and characters for those who live after him. Form this example, it is clear that under the endurance of time, the descendants can decide whether individuals are great or not with the long time influence.


Nevertheless, sometimes the greatness of individuals might be neglected by those who live after them, so they need their contemporaries to recognize them. To people in the age of technology, does typewrite mean anything to them, does telegram seem to be very important to them? Apparently, no. These inventions which used to be significant creative works are obsolete now. Then, can we say those who invented these tools are less great, since their invention do not facilitate us today? Absolutely, no. Those who live in their times have benefited a lot from these inventions, and they were qualified to decided whether these individuals are great or not. Therefore, individuals' contribution which sometimes might be lose the importance to offspring can be confirmed by their contemporaries.

By comparison, contemporaries are more easily to lose the ability to determine individuals’ meaningful contribution than descendants, so comments from the offspring turn to be more reliable. Public opinion of   Galileo’s age failed to admit his achievements, and people in Anderson's time never regarded him as a great writer. Because contemporaries are limited to the knowledge, technology, ideology that they easily lose the judging ability. While those who live after them, with the development of every dimensions of society, are more qualified in making judgments.

On the hand, in our time of highly developed technology and civilized society, greatness of individuals can be determined in a shorter time. For instance, Hawking's theory is always be regarded as innovative, and Michael Jordan’s basketball career are remembered as extraordinary. More information are available, more approaches are applied to evaluate the greatness of individuals. Hence, nowadays, the greatness of individuals decided by contemporaries is quite reliable.

In sum, whether a individual is great can be decided in many ways, either his contemporary or his offspings are qualified to comment on it. They both have their own advantages and disadvantages. Provided they gave an objective comment, their decision would be understandable.

[ 本帖最后由 savagett 于 2006-2-15 04:08 编辑 ]

leedgenUID: 160823

Can the significance of individuals only be [be only]determined by the descendants? The assertion sounds quite reasonable, nevertheless, in retrospect, common knowledge and experience informs us it is not necessarily the same[the case].

Admittedly, the comments from off springs always tend to be more comprehensive and objective. Through the scrutiny of history, when people[要指明是后人] evaluate individuals' fault or contribution, they will consider the background, the trend and the influence more carefully. Accordingly, their comments on greatness are more objective, especially to those controversial individuals. Take the first emperor of China as an example, Qin Shi Huang, who was thought to be a[an] autocrat in his time, was recognized as an[a] significant individual by historians when they look back into the whole civilization of China. They believes he is the first one to unify China and to set up standards on monetary unit and characters for those who live after him. Form this example, it is clear that under the endurance of time, the descendants can decide whether individuals are great or not with the long time influence.

Nevertheless, sometimes the greatness of individuals might be neglected by those who live after them, so they need their contemporaries to recognize them. To people in the age of technology, does typewrite mean anything to them, does telegram seem to be very important to them? Apparently, no. These inventions which used to be significant creative works are obsolete now. Then, can we say those who invented these tools are less great, since their invention do not facilitate us today? Absolutely, no. Those who live in their times have benefited a lot from these inventions, and they were qualified to decided whether these individuals are great or not. Therefore, individuals' contribution which sometimes might be lose the importance to offspring can be confirmed by their contemporaries. 当代人可以评价，而后人会忽略一些事情，这个点很独特，开始我还理解错了呢，呵呵

By comparison, contemporaries are more easily to lose the ability to determine individuals’ meaningful contribution than descendants, so comments from the offspring turn to be more reliable. Public opinion of Galileo’s age failed to admit his achievements, and people in Anderson's time never regarded him as a great writer. Because contemporaries are limited to the knowledge, technology, ideology that they easily lose the judging ability. While those who live after them, with the development of every dimensions of society, are more qualified in making judgments.这一段是讲当代人不能评价伟人，个人觉得应该放在第三段，不然2，3，4段转折来转折去挺不顺的

On the hand[On the other hand?], in our time of highly developed technology and civilized society, greatness of individuals can be determined in a shorter time. For instance, Hawking's theory is always be regarded as innovative, and Michael Jordan’s basketball career are remembered as extraordinary[缺个名词]. More information are available, more approaches are applied to evaluate the greatness of individuals. Hence, nowadays, the greatness of individuals decided by contemporaries is quite reliable.

In sum, whether a individual is great can be decided in many ways, either his contemporary or his offspings are qualified to comment on it. They both have their own advantages and disadvantages. Provided[Only if] they gave an objective comment, their decision would be understandable[acceptable].

例子很丰富，少量语法错误，赞一下
不过可能我的思维不一样，我觉得整体的段落安排有点不合理，批判接受吧，呵呵

[ 本帖最后由 leedgen 于 2006-2-15 08:58 编辑 ]

savagettUID: 2134686

谢谢修改,接收批评.
少错误是因为已经修改过一遍了....其实很多低级错误的.
我的分段是这样想的,
B1 descendants can give a comment about the greatness
B2 contemporary also can give a comment...
B3 by comparison,generally,  descendants are more reliable.
B4 in this age, however, contmeporary also can give a  justifiable comment.
最后这段是不是有点画蛇添足所以看着结构不清?