issue10 写的好痛苦

cwztyo__UID: 2159050

“Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive, because it is primarily in cities that a nation’s cultural traditions are preserved and generated.”
1、        城市是政治、经济中心， 财政支持是必要的
2、        城市由于各种原因，对文化传统的保留方面不如乡村、城镇
3、        当今事态表明：重视对乡村的投入是十分重要的


The speaker is inclined to claim that to promote the major cities, governments should invest much money on cities rather than rural areas. From my point of view, I concede the financial support to needs of cities is helpful to the thriving of the whole countries and therefore deserves considering in the financial budget by governments. However, are cities the main places to remain cultural traditions or should governments ignore the financial support to rural areas?

To begin with, from the history of the rise of the countries, cities have been becoming the centers of politics and economic in the country. Firstly, cities always welcome most of populations in certain countries; secondly, the gather of population brings about the close collection of fund and individuals’ opportunities; in addition, cities are also the pivots of export and import meanwhile are the windows open to the world. Peking in China and London in England are good case of the major cities. Hence, the influx of a great deal of fund from governments to cities is rational. Financial support could generate advance of the whole countries’ politics and economic, and raise states’ international status, which leads to more developed chances such as increase number in import and export and attracts possible other financial support provided by foreign businessmen. This is a good circulation during the countries’ development.

My points of contention with the speaker involve whether or not it is primarily in cities that a nation’s cultural traditions are preserved and generated. Common sense indicates that the smaller the range of certain places, the more and longer time nation’s cultural traditions are kept. The cities always occupy broader areas than do the villages, which declares that most cultural traditions are remained in rural areas. For instance , the minority peoples hardly live in cities ,but settle in the small villages far away from the flouring centers in order to keep and inherit traditional cultural such as folk songs , antique buildings , and a local customs about marriage and so on which represent original cultural traditions. Therefore, to some extent, the financial support on the rural areas’ cultural tradition is more valuable than that of the cities’.

With the development of society in developed countries, the trend that more and more people would like to live in the rural or the border of cities instead of in metropolitans and only work in the center of the cities is obvious and will continue in recent years. For example , “sunshine plans” in the USA, upholds American people ,especially the old , move into the southern villages where there are no pollution but fresh airs and beautiful landscapes from the industrial cities filled with toxic air ,water and solidity. That is, rural areas of a nation deserve more attention from the government. Firstly, money is invested on the protection of a nation’s cultural traditions as long as possible; secondly, fond could improve the rural areas’ society.

In the final analysis, on the respect of financial support ,the government should equally treat rural areas as cities ,for it is primarily in villages that a nation’s cultural traditions are kept and improvement of villages will cause that of cites and whole nation. On the other hand, according the environment of society, the investment of rural areas will be more emphasized in future than that of cities.

yewakyUID: 2193878

The speaker is inclined to claim that to promote the major cities, governments should invest much money on cities rather than rural areas.[rural area作者没提，不过好在有个incline，个人认为换个说法更好，也就是自己把范围定义出来] From my point of view, I concede the financial support to needs of cities is helpful to the thriving of the whole countries[原题是cities thrive范围扩大了] and therefore deserves considering in the financial budget by governments. However, are cities the main places to remain cultural traditions or should governments ignore the financial support to rural areas?

To begin with, from the history of the rise of the countries, cities have been becoming the centers of politics and economic[economy] in the country. Firstly, cities always welcome most of populations in certain countries; secondly, the gather of population brings about the close collection of fund and individuals’ opportunities; in addition, cities are also the pivots of export and import meanwhile are the windows open to the world. Peking in China and London in England are good case of the major cities. Hence, the influx of a great deal of fund[我比较喜欢这种用法] from governments to cities is rational. Financial support could generate advance of the whole countries’ politics and economic, and raise states’ international status, which leads to more developed chances such as increase number in import and export and attracts possible other financial support provided by foreign businessmen. This is a good circulation during the countries’ development.

My points of contention with[contention在这里是disagreement的意思吧，微软字典说应用over搭配，韦氏有contention with的具体解释] the speaker involve whether or not it is primarily in cities that a nation’s cultural traditions are preserved and generated.[这句比第一段的表达的明确] Common sense indicates that the smaller the range of certain places, the more and longer time nation’s cultural traditions are kept. The[去掉] cities always occupy broader areas than do the villages[不太清楚是不是要用倒装], which declares that most cultural traditions are remained in rural areas. For instance , the minority peoples hardly live in cities ,but settle in the small villages far away from the flouring centers in order to keep and inherit traditional cultural such as folk songs , antique buildings , and a local customs about marriage and so on which represent original cultural traditions.[引用例子值得学习，但好像是少数民族因为远离大城市，所以保存和继承了一国的文化传统，即原因和结果颠倒了] Therefore, to some extent, the financial support on the rural areas’ cultural tradition is more valuable than that of the cities’.

With the development of society in developed countries, the trend that more and more people would like to live in the rural or the border[什么意思，郊区的话建议用suburb] of cities instead of in metropolitans and only work in the center of the cities is obvious and will continue in recent years. For example , “sunshine plans” in the USA, upholds American people ,especially the old , move into the southern villages where there are no pollution but fresh airs and beautiful landscapes from the industrial cities filled with toxic air ,water and solidity. That is, rural areas of a nation deserve more attention from the government. Firstly, money is invested on the protection of a nation’s cultural traditions as long as possible; secondly, fond could improve the rural areas’ society.[自我感觉这段的论证比较比较流畅]

In the final analysis, on the respect of financial support, the government should equally treat rural areas as cities ,for it is primarily in villages that a nation’s cultural traditions are kept and improvement of villages will cause that of cites and whole nation. On the other hand, according the environment of society, the investment of rural areas will be more emphasized in future than that of cities.

[ 本帖最后由 yewaky 于 2006-6-2 06:24 编辑 ]

yewakyUID: 2193878

than do the villages[不太清楚是不是要用倒装]，今天问老师了，说可以这么用，呵呵