Issue26 第四篇,不妨来看看,必回拍!

cloudbirdUID: 208021

Issue26
------题目------
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.

------正文------
Should modern development be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings, as the speaker maintains above? As far as I am concerned, I inclined to hold the standpoint that when the needs of satisfying our contemporary lives conflicted with the preservation of history buildings, it is very necessary for us to consider more about the latter.

Admittedly, it is very reasonable to construct some new buildings to fulfil our contemporary lives. For instance, when there are not enough houses to shelter for the local residents, more new departments should be built immediately; When a factory need to extend its products, it is very necessary to set up another new factory in some place in order to product more and more commodities; And when the local residents found it is not convenience to go shopping in some areas, a new mall is required to be built and serve people what they wanted conveniently.

However, these needs do not mean that we can ignore any other factors and sacrifice old buildings so as to get some new place to build a new department, a new factory or a new mall. As we know, there are two types of old buildings: a few of these with high value of history, culture, architecture, and aesthetics, and a lot of these with little value of history, culture, architecture, and aesthetics. For the most of the latter, such as just an old house for 30 years or an abandoned site of a factory, there are not urgent necessaries for us to protect them form being replaced when these replaces could benefit people much more than letting them where they were. While for a few of these former type of old buildings, such as the Forbidden City or the Great Wall in Beijing, what reasons might be, we should do our best to protect them as well as possible.

First of all, these old building are always the amalgamation of aesthetic value, architecture value, culture value and history value, which have made them to be the very treasures that our ancestors have given to us. The majesty and the spectacularity of the Great wall, the supernatural and the grandeur of the Pyramids, all of these might impress us deeply, enjoy us a lot.

In addition, these old buildings are embodying some unique values about a nation or a people’s culture and history. If they were once substituted and destroyed, it is not possible for us to reconstruct them as well as they have been. The destroy of the old city wall of Beijing that served as a fortification in Ming and Qing dynasties, have taught us a good lesson. Several decades passed by, more and more Chinese were regretting for it’s destroying just as to improve the city’s traffic condition in that time. But these regret always turn out to be vain. In these sense, these old building with high values cannot be destroyed by any reasons.

Finally, these old building can also indeed satisfy people's contemporary need to some extent. Unlike the modern buildings that are usually meeting people's material need, these old buildings fulfil a nation's or a people's mental need. For instance, most of Chinese may not mind whether it is very need to build a new shop center in the middle city of Beijing. While if the new shop center's construction have to replace the site of the Forbidden City, it may be that almost all the Chinese, including those could have benefited from this new shop center, would uncompromisingly protest this improper construction in that the Forbidden city is one of the most important symbols of Chinese history and culture, and it is the forbidden city that gives all Chinese a sense of pride in the world, which a shop center can never offer.

To sum up, old buildings with high value are the unique treasures our forefathers have given to us. They are the most direct records of a nation’s history and culture. It the preservation of historic buildings, not modern development, that should be given precedence of consideration whenever they get conflicts each other.

[ Last edited by cloudbird on 2005-6-25 at 08:27 ]

1900_oneoneUID: 2104750

U  did a good job.

The essay you wrote above have a Chinese Feature. I like it!
I can't pick up the small errors to annoy you, ETS may agree with me so.

cloudbirdUID: 208021

谢谢你的鼓励!!

cloudbirdUID: 208021

期待有人抛砖，必回拍！！

smileofqndUID: 190722

Issue26
------题目------
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.

------正文------
Should modern development be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings, as the speaker maintains above? As far as I am concerned, I inclined to hold the standpoint that when the needs of satisfying our contemporary lives 是否可改为when satisfying the needs of contemporary lives正如上面那位所言这句话有点汉语思维的倾向,当然限时了,可以理解,不知是否这样改改更地道一点,体现的是satisfying动态的冲突conflicted with the preservation of history buildings, it is very necessary是否可改为absolutely/really necessary for us to consider more about the latter.

Admittedly, it is very reasonable to construct some new buildings to fulfil our contemporary lives. For instance, when there are not enough houses to shelter for the local residents, more new departments should be built immediately; When a factory need to extend its products, it is very necessary to set up another new factory in some place in order to product more and more commodities是否可以直接一点,生产更多的产品是为了什么; And when the local residents found it is not convenience to go shop in some areas, a new mall is required to be built被动 and serve主动 people what they wanted conveniently.

However, these needs do not mean that we can ignore any other factors and sacrifice old buildings so as to get some new place to build a new department, a new factory or a new mall. As we know, there are two types of old buildings: a few of these with high value of history, culture, architecture, and aesthetics, and a lot of these with little value of history, culture, architecture, and aesthetics. For the most of the latter, such as just an old house for 30 years or an abandoned site of a factory, there are not urgent necessaries for us to protect them form being replaced when these replaces could benefit people much more than letting them where they were. While for a few of these former type of old buildings, such as the Forbidden City or the Great Wall in Beijing, what reasons might be, we should do our best to protect them as well as possible.

First of all有点突兀,感觉和上面的衔接不是很好, these old building are always the amalgamation of aesthetic value, architecture value, culture value and history value, which have made them to be the very treasures that our ancestors have given to us. The majesty and the spectacularity of the Great wall, the supernatural and the grandeur of the pyramids, all of these might impress us deeply, enjoy us a lot.

In addition, these old buildings are embodying some unique values about a nation or a people’s culture and history. If they were once substituted and destroyed, it is not possible for us to reconstruct them as well as they have been. The destroy of the old city wall of Beijing that served as a fortification in Ming and Qing dynasties, had taught us a good lesson地道,借鉴中. Several decades passed by, more and more Chinese were regretting for it’s destroying just as to improve the city’s traffic condition in that time. But these regret always turn out to be vain. In these sense, these old building with high values cannot be destroyed by any reasons.

Finally, these old building can also indeed satisfy people's contemporary need to some extent. Unlike the modern buildings that are usually meeting people's material need, 地道,再借鉴,呵呵these old buildings fulfil a nation's or a people's mental need. For instance, most of Chinese may not mind whether it is very need to build a new shop center in the middle city of Beijing. While if the new shop center's construction have to replace the site of the Forbidden City, it may be that almost all the Chinese, including those could have benefited from this new shop center, would uncompromisingly protest this improper construction in that the Forbidden city is one of the most important symbols of Chinese history and culture, and it is the forbidden city that gives all Chinese a sense of pride in the world, which a shop center can never offer.

To sum up, old buildings with high value are the unique treasures our forefathers have given to us. They are the most direct records of a nation’s history and culture. It the preservation of historic buildings, not modern development, should be given precedence of consideration whenever they get conflicts each other.

总的来说,是一篇很值得学习的连笔,词汇量和运笔都有很多值得学习的,要我写可能还写不出来,而且改楼主这篇作文我用上了韦氏,朗文,和金山三大词典的,汗ING当然主要是为了对楼主负责,查经据典嘛,呵呵.既然楼主要砖头,我也只好carp一下了.顺便问一句,限时了么?

cloudbirdUID: 208021

谢谢你的拍砖！这还不是限时之作，2个小时左右吧。
至于你认为的那个衔接的不妥，其实原来我有专门的一段两句话起承上启下的作用，后来细看了之后发现，其实以however开头的那一段其实已经起到了这样的作用，而且first of all 这一段正是接上了以however开头的那一段的最后一句话，也就将那两句删了。

[ Last edited by cloudbird on 2005-6-25 at 08:44 ]

iPodUID: 2105485

终于找到你的新作了

我先看看！
加油啊~
两小时太久了哦
要尽早限时~

iPodUID: 2105485

帮忙看看啊
多谢！
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=291350

iPodUID: 2105485

总的来说你的这一篇写得很不错，（所以我也没一句一句的改，也没这个必要）这是我至今在作文综合区看到的最好的文章了之一了（不是恭维）。很值得学习！！
文章的有很好的破题方向，条理清晰。感觉看上去一目了然，很自然，继续保持下去楼主的G途很光明啊。
但是~我也必须转折了~楼主的上下文衔接在however确实让人觉得突兀。用语方面，句子的多样性做的还行，有些词组很地道，美国老很喜欢的哦，但句子结构请注意。多看看NCE4吧，学习里面的精彩句型，推荐！~这也是我得向你学习的！！在例子方面中规中矩，感觉好象总是围绕着紫禁城在说啊（个人第一感觉）。
To be frank 很感谢cloudbird的这篇文章，虽然很朴实无华，但这正是ETS要求的，也正是我没达到的。我在文章结构方面很糟。以后要多向你学习！！十分期待你的新作！！

linakUID: 155465

写的蛮好的,上面帖子也说了,楼主的语言一向都挺好,这点是值得我学习的.所以我也没有逐字逐句的改了,因为基本改不了什么,呵呵.提点意见吧,Admittedly那段最好放到后面去,因为你是完全反对作者观点的写法,一上来当然是肯定自己的了,按照后面的First of all,In addition, Finally,这样深入下去,最后让步一下说明思维的严密性.而且First of all,In addition这两段好像少了点,多用点笔墨就更好.还有,开头可以多点背景,就比较完美了,呵呵.也给我这两篇提点意见吧:
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=292118
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1

cloudbirdUID: 208021

关于Admittedly的布局，我是这样想的：

就像教训一个人，先说说他的一点好处，然后狠狠的批一顿，最后总结结束。这种布局的力度要比先说了他一大堆好处，然后又说人家不足的力度要强，而且一气呵成啦！尤其那种让步说得也比较重的时候，将其放在后面反而有自己打自己的耳光的感觉，如果放在前面，这种现象就会减轻很多。

还有，一篇有让步的文章的论证的深度很关键的一点在于将主体论述与让步论述在不同的层面上，不同的试用条件上区分开来。我的However的这一段就是这个目的。也正是这一段使整篇文章的脉络特别清晰!同时我发现只有在第二段让步，然后马上写However的这一段，才能够更好地达到这一点。因为However的这一段是下面主体详细论述的开始，也是一个承上启下的段落。如果让步段放在最后面，在倒数第三段写However的这一段，则这一段可能又去服务让步论述去了，使让步太强反而不好，尤其在结尾之前！

这是我的想法，非常非常希望得到liank的继续讨论！！看到此贴后一定要回帖啊。

huanghe83075200UID: 2112951

huanghe83075200UID: 2112951

Sigh!