issue83 rabbitvv 留链接互拍

rabbitvvUID: 2115592

83"Government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state, even though these areas are often extremely remote and thus accessible to only a few people."

1、有人会反对在边远地带建立保护区没有必要，有几点原因
2、考虑到我们已经给自然造成了很大的破坏，我们有责任去保护剩下还未遭破坏的自然空间。事实上也是一种self-preservation.
3、而且我们不能保证距离遥远就能阻碍人们对于那些地方的破坏。
     （ 交通的发达，有利可图）
Is it government's responsibility to preserve those wilderness areas even though they are extremely far away as the speaker
asserts? I basically agree with him. In my opinion, considering so much damage we have caused to our precious nature, it is necessary for us to preserve the remaining natural resources in the earth. In fact, protecting them is also a protection our predecessors. Additionally, stimulated by profits and facilitated by modern transportation means, I doubt how far away any area could be viewed.

Some people may contend that it is unnecessary for our government to protect those remote areas for two reasons. Firstly, there are so many more pressing social problems waiting for our government to address, such as poverty, illiteracy, drug abuse an so on. Given limited money and energy, investing so much on protecting the wilderness areas never have been polluted while overlooking those immediate problems I mentioned above seems to be an unwise choice and may amount to a pure waste. Secondly, because those areas are so remote and have not been accessed and damaged by human beings, we need just keep them there without any extra disturbing.

The above contentions may seem to contain merits at first glance, however, after further reflection, we may make clear that protecting our nature, even those had never been approached, is surely our government' indispensable duty. On the one hand, considering so much damages we have caused upon our nature, those luckily remained wilderness areas especially deserve our attention and protection, which can also be regarded as self-preservation. It is a bitter lesson that we have plundered too much from the nature. People's ceaseless hunting and pollution have caused numerous animals' extinction. Freon and some other waste gases damage the ozonosphere and help raise the global temperature. Facing to those tragedies, people nowadays begin to be clearer about that what the environment crisis means to their own fate. After all, the natural kingdom is an intricate matrix of interdependent relationships, in which each species depends on others for its survival, and any rupture and destroy would cause disaster to the whole system. Human beings, as part of this system, should pay more attention to the environment and their fate. Maybe they could not recuperate the already damages, preserving those undeveloped nature is highly needs. In this sense, governments' plan to protect those wilderness areas is especially meaningful and essential. Although in the short term, this contribution could not be compared with addressing those immediate social problems; in the long run, such action could guarantee human beings' survival.

On the other hand, I question that because those areas are extremely remote, there would be little people try to get there. In fact, it is human nature to pursue profits. As long as certain endangered species are lucrative or establishing a park is profitable, people would try every means to be there, no matter how far away this place may be. At the same time, modern vehicles, such as plane, can make people reach everywhere they want to be very conveniently and therefore distance could
never hinder people’s explorations. History is laden with such cases. Tibet is obviously a remote and wild area in China and few people had ever been there 50 years ago. But when some people learned that the antelopes there were especially profitable, they tried to get there and hunted millions of antelopes. In short, without government's protection and regulation in time, remote wilderness areas would soon be destroyed by greedy human beings.

In sum, it is reasonable and indispensable for government to protect wilderness areas, even those remote ones. Only by protecting our nature and preserving those remaining undeveloped areas could we achieve a sustainable development and create a healthy environment for our offspring.

[ 本帖最后由 rabbitvv 于 2006-2-22 23:50 编辑 ]

爱格UID: 2103778

83"Government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state, even though these areas are often extremely remote and thus accessible to only a few people."

1、有人会反对在边远地带建立保护区没有必要，有几点原因
2、考虑到我们已经给自然造成了很大的破坏，我们有责任去保护剩下还未遭破坏的自然空间。事实上也是一种self-preservation.
3、而且我们不能保证距离遥远就能阻碍人们对于那些地方的破坏。
     （ 交通的发达，有利可图）
Is it government's responsibility to preserve those wilderness areas even though they are extremely far away as the speaker
asserts? I basically agree with him. In my opinion, considering so much damage we have caused to our precious nature, it is necessary for us to preserve the remaining natural resources in the earth. In fact, protecting them is also a protection our predecessors. 什么意思？Additionally, stimulated by profits and facilitated by modern transportation means, I doubt how far away any area could be viewed.又没看懂。楼主这两句写的很诡异哦，呵呵
Some people may contend that it is unnecessary for our government to protect those remote areas for two reasons.（ Firstly, there are so many more pressing social problems waiting for our government to address, such as poverty, illiteracy, drug abuse an so on. Given limited money and energy, investing so much on protecting the wilderness areas never have been polluted while overlooking those immediate problems I mentioned above seems to be an unwise choice and may amount to a pure waste. 反面原因分析的好！
这两段是并列关系吧？可是你把firstly放到了第一段的中间似乎又不能和下一断领起的secondly构成并列了.
Secondly, because those areas are so remote and have not been accessed and damaged by human beings, we need just keep them there without any extra disturbing. The above contentions may seem to contain merits at first glance, ）建议把括号内的合为一段however另起一段however, after further reflection, we may make clear that protecting our nature, even those had never been approached, is surely our government' indispensable duty. On the one hand, considering so much damages we have caused upon our nature, those luckily remained wilderness areas especially deserve our attention and protection, which can also be regarded as self-preservation. It is a bitter lesson that we have plundered too much from the nature.个人认为这句话表达的有问题，教训是我们遭受了什么，也就是你后面所提到的那些，可是你这里用了掠夺了什么有些不搭调 People's ceaseless hunting and pollution have caused numerous animals' extinction. Freon and some other waste gases damage the ozonosphere and help raise the global temperature. Facing to those tragedies, people nowadays begin to be clearer about that what the environment crisis means to their own fate. After all, the natural kingdom is an intricate matrix of interdependent relationships,比喻的妙！ in which each species depends on others for its survival, and any rupture and destroy would cause disaster to the whole system. Human beings, as part of this system, should pay more attention to the environment and their fate. Maybe they could not recuperate the already damages, preserving those undeveloped nature is highly needs. In this sense, governments' plan to protect those wilderness areas is especially meaningful and essential. Although in the short term, this contribution could not be compared with addressing those immediate social problems; in the long run, such action could guarantee human beings' survival. 这里呼应了firstlly,很好！
On the other hand, I question that because those areas are extremely remote, there would be little people try to get there. In fact, it is human nature to pursue profits. As long as certain endangered species are lucrative or establishing a park is profitable, people would try every means to be there, no matter how far away this place may be. At the same time, modern vehicles, such as plane, can make people reach everywhere they want to be very conveniently and therefore distance could
never hinder people’s explorations. History is laden with such cases. Tibet is obviously a remote and wild area in China and few people had ever been there 50 years ago. But when some people learned that the antelopes there were especially profitable, they tried to get there and hunted millions of antelopes. In short, without government's protection and regulation in time, remote wilderness areas would soon be destroyed by greedy human beings. 呼应secondly非常好！

In sum, it is reasonable and indispensable for government to protect wilderness areas, even those remote ones. Only by protecting our nature and preserving those remaining undeveloped areas could we achieve a sustainable development and create a healthy environment for our offspring.
issue43楼主这篇写的很棒！提出两个反面观点，随后逐一批驳，这是我自己没有用过的方法，我也很少见到这种写法，高明！学习之！
语言很流畅，基本没什么错误，用词也很地道，美文美言。
一些小问题上面已经指出，说错了的地方请多指教。

我的一篇习作请指教issue43

[ 本帖最后由 爱格 于 2006-2-22 19:49 编辑 ]

树袋猫UID: 2176286

Is it government's responsibility to preserve those wilderness areas even though they are extremely far away as the speaker
asserts? I basically agree with him. In my opinion, considering so much damage we have caused to our precious nature, it is necessary for us to preserve the remaining natural resources in the earth. In fact, protecting them is also a protection (of) our predecessors. Additionally, stimulated by profits and facilitated by modern transportation means, I doubt how far away any area could be viewed.(解释一下什么意思吧)

Some people may contend that it is unnecessary for our government to protect those remote areas for two reasons. (感觉for two reasons放在后面有点孤单，因为前面是那么长的从句，适当调整结构）Firstly, there are so many more pressing social problems waiting for our government to address, such as poverty, illiteracy, drug abuse an so on. Given limited money and energy, investing so much on protecting the wilderness areas never have been polluted（yet have not been polluted） while overlooking those immediate problems I (可省略，形成分词定语)mentioned above seems to be an unwise choice and may amount to a pure waste.（不清楚amount to 这样用好不好，我以为你想表达的是trigger）
Secondly, because those areas are so remote and have not been accessed and damaged by human beings, we need just keep them there without any extra disturbing. The above contentions may seem to contain merits at first glance, however, after further reflection, we may make clear that protecting our nature, even those had never been approached, is surely our government' indispensable duty. On the one hand, considering so much damages we have caused upon our nature, those luckily remained wilderness areas especially deserve our attention and protection, which can also be regarded as self-preservation. It is a bitter lesson that we have plundered too much from the nature. People's ceaseless hunting and pollution （disafforestation）have caused numerous animals' extinction. （The extinction of numerous animals） Freon and some other waste gases damage the ozonosphere and help raise the global temperature(lead to the increasing global temperature). Facing to (faced with) those tragedies, people nowadays begin to be clearer about that what the environment crisis means to their own fate.(试着换个说法说) After all, the natural kingdom is an intricate matrix of interdependent relationships, in which each species depends on others for its survival, and any rupture and destroy would cause disaster to the whole system. Human beings, as part of this system, should pay more attention to the environment and their fate. Maybe they could not recuperate the already damages, preserving those undeveloped nature is highly needs. In this sense, governments' plan to protect those wilderness areas is especially meaningful and essential. Although in the short term, this contribution could not be compared with addressing those immediate social problems; in the long run, such action could guarantee human beings' survival.

On the other hand, I question that because those areas are extremely remote, there would be little people try to get there.（作者是想表达人性的贪婪不会因距离的遥远而放弃，因此可能要重新组织这两个句子） In fact, it is human nature to pursue profits. As long as certain endangered species are lucrative or establishing a park is profitable, people would try every means to be there, no matter how far away this place may be. At the same time, modern vehicles, such as plane, can make people reach everywhere they want to be very conveniently and therefore distance could
never hinder people’s explorations. History is laden with such cases. Tibet is obviously a remote and wild area in China and few people had ever been there 50 years ago. But when some people learned that the antelopes there were especially profitable, they tried to get there and hunted millions of antelopes. In short, without government's protection and regulation in time, remote wilderness areas would soon be destroyed by greedy human beings.

In sum, it is reasonable and indispensable for government to protect wilderness areas, even those remote ones. Only by protecting our nature and preserving those remaining undeveloped areas could we achieve a sustainable development and create a healthy environment for our offspring.
个人水平有限，看到一些词用得有点别扭，我自己也拿不准，就不敢妄下断语了
建议，段落重新组织，反对意见一段，自己批驳两段，在衔接上，可再次引证，批驳，显得更有力，当然要改写原句Sample Text

[ 本帖最后由 树袋猫 于 2006-2-23 22:59 编辑 ]

树袋猫UID: 2176286

我的第一篇习作，写了很久，请拍砖Issue 1