Issue36 历史类。8-03

bridgewalkerUID: 208595

Issue36  第14篇 有拍必回！
------摘要------
作者：BridgeWalker     共用时间：44分（剩50秒检查）   450 words (439words before polish)
从2005年8月3日9时53分到2005年8月3日10时45分
------题目------
The greatness of individuals can be decided only by those who live after them, not by their contemporaries.
------提纲------
Position: 正大负小
B1:It’s太绝对to say只有后人才能认识到伟人的伟大，peer也行。
        Mark Twain和Bill Gates
B2:但是，peer在评价同时代伟人是常犯两个错误：“误解”和“不理解”。
        Mao Zedong和Van Gogh
B3:为了客观起见，后人的评价更可靠。Deng Xiaoping（但没时间举出来）

------正文------
Can the greatness of individuals be objectively evaluated by later generations? The speaker believes so. While I think it’s too bold to conclude that only later generations can decide individuals’ greatness, I strongly agree with the speaker to the extent that in order to make unbiased judgments toward historical people, evaluations from people who live after them are more reliable.

Firstly, it is suspicious to address that only people behind can recognize the greatness of historical figures. In contrast, the greatness of these people can also be judged neutrally by their contemporaries in some cases. For instance, Mark Twain became a household name in his life time. His novels were published around the world, and his humor and writing style were widely favored the populace. Thus, there is no need of confirmation of his books by time to prove his greatness. Likewise, Bill Gates's success has already demonstrated his greatness in our current business and info-technological world. The DOS and Windows operation systems are widely distributed, and have earn reputation among their users. In short, examples show us that the greatness of individuals can be recognized by their peers, not necessarily their successors.

However, in most cases, contemporaries make mistakes when they try to evaluate the great people living in their time. Firstly, they misunderstand these persons’ greatness. For example, Mao Zedong, the Chinese War hero, was totally misunderstood by its followers during the Cultural Revolution. While the independence of China owes a lot to Mao, his ability was exaggerated to an extent that sounds ridiculous by people who live today. His contemporaries treated him as national idol or even divine, which turned out to be wrong after his death. Secondly, they even can not understand great people's true value sometimes. Take the Dutch postimpressionist painter Van Gogh for instance, during his lifetime, he only soled out one painting. This indicates unpopularity and ignorance among his contemporary masses. However, his greatness recognized by people live today shows that these contemporaries actually didn't understand his greatness in art.

Moreover, when it comes to judging individual's greatness, it is more dependable from a successor's view rather than peers’. It is much safer to evaluate people after their deaths, because whether their words and deeds are truly significant in history should be examined by time. And only people live after them have the opportunity to see the result of these examinations. Therefore, successors' judgments are more likely objective in comparing with peers.

In sum, contemporaries sometimes can judge their great people rightly. However, they also make mistakes in their evaluations. In order to assess individual's greatness objectively and more safely, judgments form those who live after them are more reliable.

pigeonsnoopyUID: 2111116

pigeonsnoopyUID: 2111116

Can the greatness of individuals be objectively evaluated by later generations? The speaker believes so. While I think it’s too bold to conclude that only later generations can decide individuals’ greatness,这里的too...to..结构感觉有些别扭 I strongly agree with the speaker to the extent that in order to make unbiased judgments toward historical people, evaluations from people who live after them are more reliable.
感觉开篇的结构比较清楚，但是觉得while之后那句话转折的关系好像有些乱，你的while前后ms是一个意思的说
    Firstly, it is suspicious to address that only people behind can recognize the greatness of historical figures. In contrast, the greatness of these people can also be judged neutrally by their contemporaries in some cases. For instance, Mark Twain became a household name in his life time. His novels were published around the world, and his humor and writing style were widely favored 应该加by吧the populace. Thus, there is no need of confirmation of his books by time to prove his greatness. Likewise, Bill Gates's success has already demonstrated his greatness in our current business and info-technological world. The DOS and Windows operation systems are widely distributed, and have earned reputation among their users. In short, examples show us that the greatness of individuals can be recognized by their peers, not necessarily their successors.
马克吐温那个例子挺好的，但是盖茨那个不妨再换一个，毕竟举的太多，容易雷同，美国知名的企业家挺多的
    However, in most cases, contemporaries make mistakes when they try to evaluate the great people living in their time. Firstly, they misunderstand these persons’ greatness. For example, Mao Zedong, the Chinese War hero, was totally misunderstood by its his followers during the Cultural Revolution. While the independence of China owes a lot to Mao, his ability was exaggerated to an extent that sounds ridiculous by people who live today. 前面这句话用by people介词用的不太合适，用to是不是好一些，btw,我也不是很会用介词His contemporaries treated him as national idol or even divine, which turned out to be wrong after his death. 小结一下前面部分，读过以后感觉misunderstand这个动词不太合适，这部分是在说高估了，不妨用overestimate之类的词语，你说呢？Secondly, they even can not understand great people's true value sometimes. Take the Dutch postimpressionist painter Van Gogh for instance, during his lifetime, he only soled拼错了吧 out one painting. This indicates unpopularity and ignorance这个词用得不太合适，无知一般形容人知识贫乏，是个贬义词，你这里应该想说别人不了解他吧？ among his contemporary masses. However, his greatness recognized by people live living应该是分词结构 today shows that these contemporaries actually didn't understand his greatness in art.
   小结一下这段吧，有些语法错误，pay attention一下。。。另外，不是很建议用毛泽东的例子，毕竟文化大革命那段历史在中国争议性就很大，老美不一定很明白你在说什么，你还得给他们解释清楚了，还是举西方的例子好一些，我帮你想想
    Moreover, when it comes to judging individual's greatness, it is more dependable from a successor's view rather than peers’. It is much safer to evaluate people after their deaths, because whether their words and deeds are truly significant in history should be examined by time. And only people live应该是分词结构 after them have the opportunity to see the result of these examinations. Therefore, successors' judgments are more likely objective in comparing with peers.

    In sum, contemporaries sometimes can judge their great people rightly. However, they also make mistakes in their evaluations. In order to assess individual's greatness objectively and more safely, judgments formfrom those who live after them are more reliable.


总结一下吧，第一次改别人文章，有很多说的不对的地方。。先说文章的结构吧，我读完你这篇文章又回去看了一下，因为没太搞明白你强调的是同代人的作用还是后代人的作用，我是这么想的，如果你想强调后代人的作用更大一些，应该先说后代人的作用，然后再来一小段转折说不能忽视同代人的作用，你说呢？
关于文章的语言，感觉你对于分词结构掌握的不是很好，有几处用错了，注意一下就好了，文章的简单句多了些，可以试着把一些短句合成一个长句；关于举例子我在段中也提到了，一是中国的例子尽量少举些，二是那些大家都爱用的例子可以换一下，把盖茨换成韦尔奇，把微软换成沃尔玛都可以的
先想到这么多了，加油！！一起努力！！！

[ Last edited by pigeonsnoopy on 2005-8-3 at 21:06 ]

bridgewalkerUID: 208595

我是这么想的，如果你想强调后代人的作用更大一些，应该先说后代人的作用，然后再来一小段转折说不能忽视同代人的作用，你说呢？

这个好像有待商榷。

感觉你对于分词结构掌握的不是很好，有几处用错了，注意一下就好了，文章的简单句多了些，可以试着把一些短句合成一个长句；

这个的确是问题。

限时之作，错误百出。消化中。。。

感谢！