issue48 决战830tm，第一次限时成功，拍必回

melodyli9361UID: 2121345

48.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.
------正文------
Our history books always highlights kings and bishops, generals and scientists-- the social elites who only stand for a small portion of the total population. Nevertheless, I basically agree with the author that the most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose names have long been forgotten.

In the field of science, the innovative ideas of individuals seem so important that people tend to assign all the glory to the scientists themselves. However, close scrutiny will reveal that those scientists are only the ones who step on the shoulders of crowds of people. Let our highlight be on one of the greatest scientists, Sir Isaac Newton, who was well-known for his contributions to physics and mathematics, yet without enough social preparations for these discoveries, even Newton would attain nothing. Suppose that there were no available glass with eligible quality, how could any one discover the dispersion of sunlight? In fact, when Newton turned his interest to the change in materials, the constrains of the time rendered that even a Newton could not jump out of the circle of alchemy and mysticism. On the contrary, when the conditions already allow the breakthroughs in science, it is unlikely that only one person discover the truth in approximately the same era. For example, calculus was established by Newton and Liebnitz independently at almost the same time. Thus, we can get the conclusion that scientific discoveries cannot be attributed to the intelligent individuals alone.

When we turn our focus to social trends and events, the power of individuals becomes more insignificant. In great social changes and turbidities, the few social elites are only the ones who are on top of it by random effects. According to Tolstoy, the trend of history is just like a moving herd of cattle, and the direction of the herd is not decided by the leading cattle or the flockmaster, but by the direction of the grass. We may see a telling example from the life of President George Washington. During the Seven Years' War, when most colonists on the North American continent was in support of the British regime, he led an army to fight against the French and Indian army as a military officer. Ironically, only about one and a half decades later, when the majority of people of the thirteen colonies wanted to terminate the rule of Britain, it was the ones who had been royal to the Crown (and maybe the ones that had been leaders of royalists) that led the Independence War, having France as their ally. Thus, the conclusion can be drawn that it is the ordinary people, instead of the statesmen, that determine the trend of history.

In sum, when a leaf falls from a tall tree, the random swirls of air may change its path, yet it is the gravitational force that determines its destiny. The famous few are just the swirls of the history path; the innominate people are the gravity that determines where we are going.
510words

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-21 at 14:16 ]

felixyangUID: 199223

Our history books always highlights（highlight） kings and bishops, generals and scientists-- the social elites who only stand for（占有 用account for 吧） a small portion of the total population. Nevertheless, I basically agree with the author that the most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose names have long been forgotten.

In the field of science, the innovative ideas of individuals seem so important that people tend to assign all (the 去掉) glory to the scientists themselves. However, close scrutiny will reveal that those scientists are only the ones who step on the shoulders of crowds of people. Let(Turn) our highlight be on(to) one of the greatest scientists, Sir Isaac Newton, who was well-known (famous) for his contributions to physics and mathematics,（句子成分少点什么吧） yet without enough social preparations for these discoveries, even Newton would attain nothing. Suppose that (if) there were no available glass （这里什么意思） with eligible quality, how could any one discover the dispersion of sunlight? In fact, when Newton turned his interest to the change in materials, the constrains of the time rendered that even （a） Newton could not jump out of the circle of alchemy（炼金术在这里有什么关系么？） and mysticism. On the contrary, when the conditions already allow the breakthroughs in science, it is unlikely that only one person discover the truth in approximately the same era. For example, calculus was established by Newton and Leibniz independently at almost（almost at） the same time. （前面的例子能推出这里的thus么？）Thus, we can get the conclusion that scientific discoveries cannot be attributed to the intelligent individuals alone.

When we turn our focus to social trends and events, the power of individuals becomes more insignificant. In great social changes and turbidities(这里的短语好拗口，你可说in the course of human events), the few social elites are only the ones（those） who are on top of it（it指的什么啊？） by random effects. According to Tolstoy, the trend of history is just like a moving herd of cattle, and the direction of the herd is not decided by the leading cattle or the flockmaster, but by the direction of the grass.(这里的比喻还好) We may see a telling example from the life of President George Washington. During the Seven Years' War, when most colonists on the North American continent was in support of the British regime, he led an army to fight against the French and Indian army as a military officer. Ironically, only about one and a half decades later, when the majority of people of the thirteen colonies wanted to terminate the rule of Britain, it was the ones who had been royal to the Crown (and maybe the ones that had been leaders of royalists) （这个例子有些混乱）that led the Independence War, having France as their ally. Thus, the conclusion can be drawn that it is the ordinary people, instead of the statesmen, that （who）determine the trend of history.

In sum, when a leaf falls from a tall tree, the random swirls of air may change its path, yet it is the gravitational force that determines its destiny. The famous few are just the swirls of the history path; the innominate people are the gravity that determines where we are going.(这里的比喻好像不怎么到位)

大体结构还好，但是问题还不少，句子间的逻辑关系不怎么好，读起来好费劲，加油了，(我水平也不高，呵呵，愚见！)

有空可以帮我看看前一页的ISSUE208

melodyli9361UID: 2121345

关于我举的Newton的例子是这样的：牛顿在条件已经成熟的领域，如物理和数学方面做出了杰出的贡献，但是实际上在同时代有人也做出相似的东西，比如莱布尼兹。牛顿在晚年想研究物质变化的规律，但由于条件不足，他只能在炼金术和神秘主义的圈子里打转。这就是我举牛顿作为例子的原因：他说明了即使是一个天才，也只能在条件成熟的领域取得成就，对于那些条件不成熟的领域无能为力。另外，我说的a Newton在英语里是可以这样用的，指一个像牛顿一样的天才。
华盛顿的例子是：在英法七年战争期间，美国人仍然十分支持英国的统治。华盛顿在这七年中曾一度作为英军军官与法国人和印第安人的联军作战。1763年，战争结束。此后12年间，殖民地居民与英国人之间的不信任日渐增长，此矛盾在Sugar Act 和Stamp Act的催化下升级，导致了1775年的独立战争。华盛顿在独立战争中的作用就世人皆知了。这就是一个伟人在时代的洪流面前转向的例子。
所以我觉得我的例子的问题还不是很大。

melodyli9361UID: 2121345

[size=-2][size=-2][size=-2][size=-2][size=-2]Our history books always highlight kings and bishops, generals and scientists-- the social elites comprising only a small portion of the total population. Nevertheless, I basically agree with the author that the most significant events and trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose names have long been forgotten.

In the field of science, the innovative ideas of individuals seem so important that people tend to assign all glory to the scientists themselves. However, close scrutiny will reveal that those scientists are only the ones who step on the shoulders of crowds of people. Let our highlight be on one of the greatest scientists, Sir Isaac Newton, who was famous for his contributions to physics and mathematics. Yet without enough social preparations for these discoveries, even Newton would attain nothing. Suppose that there were no available glass with eligible quality, how could any one discover the dispersion of sunlight? In fact, when Newton turned his interest to the change in materials in the later period of his life while the society had no groundwork for a breakthrough in chemistry, even a Newton could not jump out of the circle of alchemy and mysticism. In fact, when the conditions already allow the breakthroughs in science, it is unlikely that only one person discover the truth in approximately the same era. For example, calculus was established by Newton and Liebnitz independently at almost the same time. Thus, we can get the conclusion that scientific discoveries cannot be attributed to the intelligent individuals alone.

When we turn our focus to social trends and events, the power of individuals becomes more insignificant. In great social changes and turbidities, the few social elites are just the ones who are on top of the currents by random effects. According to Tolstoy, and I paraphrase, the trend of history is just like a moving herd of cattle, and the direction of the herd is not decided by the leading cattle or the flockmaster, but by the direction of the grass. We may see a telling example from the life of President George Washington. During the Seven Years' War, when most colonists on the North American continent was in support of the British regime and the war against France, he led an army to fight against the French and Indian allies as a military officer. Ironically, only about one and a half decades later, when the majority of people of the thirteen colonies wanted to terminate the rule of Britain, it was the ones who had been leaders of royalists that led the Independence War, having France as their ally. Thus, the conclusion can be drawn that it is the will of ordinary people, instead of that of the statesmen, determines the trend of history.

When a leaf falls from a tall tree, the random swirls of air may change its path, yet it is the gravitational force that determines its destiny. It is often the case that the famous few are only the swirls of the history path, while the innominate people are the gravity that determines where we are going.

[ Last edited by melodyli9361 on 2005-8-23 at 15:54 ]

felixyangUID: 199223

呵呵，哥们，收到短信了
你要是同意作者观点的话，就应该强调 groups of people 的作用
第一个说牛顿的成就建立在别人的基础上，老年以后也迷茫，说明个人不怎么重要，(否定 the famous few 的作用)姑且也说的过去
例子本身都是好例子，但我觉得第二个例子好像还是不怎么到位，能为你的论点服务么？
个人意见！仅供参考！