Issue38[Spring 小组]第２次作业

gloriaguo1986UID: 2232808

ISSUE38: "In the age of television, reading books is not as important as it once was. People can learn as much by watching television as they can by reading books."
WORDS:599  DATE: 2007-11-1　耗时较长，零零碎碎的，有点凑的感觉，欢迎多给建议！谢

     Evolving with the development of technology, we've stepped into an era of television, which influences people's life in many aspects including the way of learning. Since television gives us an option to traditional education through books, can we draw the conclusion that people learn just as much from watching television as by reading books? I don't think so. Books are inherently superior to television in certain respects, which makes the role books play irreplaceable and indispensability.
   First of all, reading books is an active process where we can make a choice of what, when and to which extent we want to learn, while watching television is a passive one. Those television shows in the screen cannot be reviewed or referred to if the viewer wants to. Sometimes, people may take great interests in part of an outstanding speech or a series of vivid images, while it is impossible to turn those back like turning the book back to the page the reader needs. To some extent, people are forced to accept the instant information and culture that television provides because TV programs are arranged according to a certain list that audience have no choice.
     Furthermore, what we view through television usually provides superficial phenomena or one dimension of our life and times, while books will provoke abstract thinking and give reader infinity space of imagination. This is why so many plays adapted from famous novels or movies whose scripts come from those best sellers cannot achieve world-renowned success as books did. Actually, most of the time, they came in for a good deal of criticism for neglect of the sparkle of the original.
  In addition, television may serve better than books do as a means of entertainment rather than education. As far as we know, television programs are profit based. Driven by the profit, the owners and managers of television media will try their best to attract the widest viewing audience. And appealing to more viewers seems to involve focusing on the entertainment-that is, a visual and aural shock or some comedic elements or an amusing super variety show rather than some serious topics and scientific research. The end result is that viewers only have some fun from the programs instead of study, and therefore cannot rely on television as an effective educational source.
  Considering the portability of books, television is also overshadowed by books. As far as we know, without electricity, equipment that receives or transmits TV signals, or cable connections-all of which may or may not be available in any given place at any given time, television cannot work properly. In the other hand, abundant knowledge or experience involving politics, economy, culture, technology and religion may lie waiting in books just an arm's reach away.
    Certainly, when it comes to providing vivid images, temporal events, spatial scenes, visual and aural information, the advantages television holds should not be ignored. Television has enriched our knowledge and broadened our visions in many respects indeed. The vivid images and instant expression television provides do help a lot in the progress of teaching nowadays. Thus, as a media of learning, I am in favor of watching programs which are healthy and beneficial to the development of intelligence or the enrichment of knowledge, "National Geographic", "Discover", and "CNN News" for example.
    As a conclusion, I concede that books promote learning in certain ways that television does not and cannot. Since paper documents and books cannot be easily substituted and television has some merits of its own, we can use books as a main means of learning while television as an accessorial way.


[ 本帖最后由 gloriaguo1986 于 2007-12-9 11:18 编辑 ]

machelleUID: 2348066

Evolving with【1】 the development of technology, we've stepped into an era of television, which influences people's life in many aspects including the way of learning. Since television gives us an option to traditional education through books[3], can we draw the conclusion that people learn just as much from watching television as by reading books? I don't think so. Books are inherently superior to television in certain respects, which makes the role books play irreplaceable and indispensability 【2】这里应该用形容词 indispensable.
   First of all, reading books is an active process where we can make a choice of what, when and to which extent we want to learn, while watching television is a passive one. Those television shows in the screen cannot be reviewed or referred to if the viewer wants to. Sometimes, people may take great interests in part of an outstanding speech or a series of vivid images, while it is impossible to turn those back like turning the book back to the page the reader needs. To some extent, people are forced to accept the instant information and culture that television provides because TV programs are arranged according to a certain list that audience have no choice.
     Furthermore, what we view through television usually provides superficial phenomena or one dimension of our life and times, while books will provoke abstract thinking and give reader infinity space of imagination. This is why so many plays adapted from famous novels or movies whose scripts come from those best sellers cannot achieve world-renowned success as books did. Actually, most of the time, they came in for a good deal of criticism for neglect of the sparkle of the original.
  In addition, television may serve better than books do as a means of entertainment rather than education. As far as we know, television programs are profit based. Driven by the profit, the owners and managers of television media will try their best to attract the widest viewing audience. And appealing to more viewers seems to involve focusing on the entertainment-that is, a visual and aural shock or some comedic elements or an amusing super variety show rather than some serious topics and scientific research. The end result is that viewers only have some fun from the programs instead of study, and therefore cannot rely on television as an effective educational source.
  Considering the portability of books, television is also overshadowed by books. As far as we know, without electricity, equipment that receives or transmits TV signals, or cable connections-all of which may or may not be available in any given place at any given time, television cannot work properly. In the other hand 【4】应该是on the other hand, abundant knowledge or experience involving politics, economy, culture, technology and religion may lie waiting in books just an arm's reach away.
    Certainly, when it comes to providing vivid images, temporal events, spatial scenes, visual and aural information, the advantages television holds should not be ignored. Television has enriched our knowledge and broadened our visions in many respects indeed. The vivid images and instant expression television provides do help a lot in the progress of teaching nowadays. Thus, as a media of learning, I am in favor of watching programs which are healthy and beneficial to the development of intelligence or the enrichment of knowledge, "National Geographic", "Discover", and "CNN News" for example.
    As a conclusion, I concede that books promote learning in certain ways that television does not and cannot. Since paper documents and books cannot be easily substituted and television has some merits of its own, we can use books as a main means of learning while television as an accessorial way.
[1]这样搭配不对吧，evolve 一般跟随from/as/into ,可以换成别的词。考虑一下用as引导
[3]这句表达的意思不清楚。
小结：
逻辑：该篇文章作者的观点突出，例证也比较有深度。很值得我学习
语言：除了一些小地方用词不当。
           整篇文章的语言流畅，用词贴切。

看了楼主的文章，真的觉得自己应该好好努力学习了...