TXT issue48…… 多提提意见啊 感觉我语言和论证都挺有问题 不知道怎么改……

冬木琉璃UID: 2752392

  大家多提意见和改进措施啊~~~谢啦~~

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.

I agree with the speaker to the extent that the study of history places more emphasis on individuals than on groups .But the speaker wrongly concludes that those significant events and trends in history were made only by groups, and had no direct connection with those famous individuals. In my opinion, the speaker might be more accurate by saying that those important events were made possible not only by the famous few, but also by groups of people, that means, individuals and groups both make an indispensible contribution to propel the process of history.

First, I concede that groups really plays an important role in determining the history. Without the help of groups, none of the famous leader could finally achieve his goals. Take Abraham Lincoln, the 16th President of American for example, without the solders that firmly followed his leadership and gave him support, he would never win the Civil War. Hitler, too, couldn’t sponsor the Second World War alone without the loyal adherents. A single person, no matter how intelligent or insightful he is, is minor in strength and can seldom change the development process of history all by himself.

However, it’s presumptuous to judge the inability of outstanding individuals just according to the importance of groups. We also cannot ignore that, extraordinary people, unlike average ones, can efficiently and rightly guide the group to achieve the shared goals. Consider a company without an efficient leader, for example, without management and orders from an overall perspective, the staff would then lost their shared goal and begin to do their own special part of work without thinking about how their work can attribute to the development of the company together with other employees, who also play an crucial part in the function of the company. This would lead to the lose of cohesion, an indispensible staff spirit, and finally result in the disintegration of the company.

Actually, history was changed generally by that individuals came up with an idea and formulated detailed plan, followed by the actively responding groups. For example, the victory of the American War of Independence was attributed to the outstanding leadership of General Washington, as well as the spiritual support given by Thomas Paine, and the hardworking of all American people. As is the case in China, under the leadership of Chairman Mao, the people unified to defeat the Japanese invaders.

The reason for that people tend to study more about individuals is probably that, it’s easier to study one person than study hundreds of thousands of persons at the same time. In addition, a representative person can actually represent his contemporaries, thus by studying typical person, we can get a general situation of the social morality and behavior. For example, by investigating into Confucianism, which is initiated by the 5-th-BC Chinese sage Confucius, we can get an overall impression of the Chinese—diligent, dutiful and stoical.

In sum, history is made by the joint efforts of individual and groups, and we cannot overlook neither of them.

费话先生UID: 2788924

I agree with the speaker to the extent that the study of history places more emphasis on individuals than on groups .But the speaker wrongly concludes that those significant events and trends in history were made only by groups, and had no direct connection with those famous individuals. In my opinion, the speaker might be more accurate by saying that those important events were made possible not only by the famous few, but also by groups of people, that means, individuals and groups both make an indispensible contribution to propel the process of history.

First, I concede that groups really plays an important role in determining the history. Without the help of groups, none of the famous leader could finally achieve his goals. Take Abraham Lincoln, the 16th President of American for example, without the solders that firmly followed his leadership and gave him support, he would never win the Civil War. Hitler, too, couldn’t sponsor the Second World War alone without the loyal adherents. A single person, no matter how intelligent or insightful he is, is minor in strength and can seldom change the development process of history all by himself.

However, it’s presumptuous to judge the inability of outstanding individuals just according to the importance of groups. （这句话没明白）We also cannot ignore that, （诸如什么as far as i concerned 之类的，建议就不要写多了，除了凑字数之外，还真的挺没有信息量的）extraordinary people, unlike average ones, can efficiently and rightly guide the group to achieve the shared goals. Consider a company without an efficient leader, for example, without management and orders from an overall perspective, the staff would then lost their shared goal and begin to do their own special part of work without thinking about how their work can attribute to the development of the company together with other employees, who also play an crucial part in the function of the company. This would lead to the lose of cohesion, an indispensible staff spirit, and finally result in the disintegration of the company.（这段论述太泛，没有leader会丧失共同的目的，why?）

Actually, history was changed generally by that individuals came up with an idea and formulated detailed plan, followed by the actively responding groups. For example, the victory of the American War of Independence was attributed to the outstanding leadership of General Washington, as well as the spiritual support given by Thomas Paine, and the hardworking of all American people. As is the case in China, under the leadership of Chairman Mao, the people unified to defeat the Japanese invaders.

The reason for that people tend to study more about individuals is probably that, it’s easier to study one person than study hundreds of thousands of persons at the same time. In addition, a representative person can actually represent his contemporaries, thus by studying typical person, we can get a general situation of the social morality and behavior. For example, by investigating into Confucianism, which is initiated by the 5-th-BC Chinese sage Confucius, we can get an overall impression of the Chinese—diligent, dutiful and stoical.（这一段挺好，唯一的大问题就是跟前面的一段没有过渡，就突然出现了）

In sum, history is made by the joint efforts of individual and groups, and we cannot overlook neither of them.（这个结尾只能算部分回应题目，对于文中的第一句话没有做出总结）

结构还是很清晰的，body段的第一段言简意赅，还是论证不错滴。但是两个大的部分逻辑顺序组织得不好：一个是你开头说的I concede that the study of history places too much on individuals, 一个是历史是由人民和伟人共同创造的，以致于最后的一段让人很糊涂它的作用在哪里。
  我的建议是，把最后一段提前放在body段的第一段，让步承认，结尾处点明in short,why we emphasis on key individuals when study history is not because individuals play an more important role in creating history; actually both individuals and the mass are all indepensible to .......body段第二段开始第二个意群段，论证人民和领袖对历史的共同作用，结构是：firstly, 群众的力量怎么样，正反举例，然后secondly，领袖的力量怎么样，正反举例，最后来你那个actually， history was changed......
  还有一个问题是：时态有误。。。。。
  楼主。。。这个最近坛子里比较冷清，没人帮改作文是有原因的，不是大家木有人情味哈。。。。因为好多人刚刚考完，看作文都想吐。。。。我就是其中之一。。。。我17号考完滴。。。。今天开始复习笔试了。。。。可是看作文还是想吐。。。。。。楼主加油，其实考作文收获很大的。。。。

冬木琉璃UID: 2752392

2# 费话先生

谢谢谢谢！您说的很对哈 我对这个话题的逻辑安排模式认识又更深了一层~~ 特别是最后那个结尾段的建议 太精辟啦！

考完了作文还帮忙改 真是好人~ 笔试加油哈！~

费话先生UID: 2788924

(*^__^*) 嘻嘻……，不用谢不用谢，好好加油就是了！我当时也是小哀他们启迪的，深受他人恩辉岂有不报之理~ 3# 冬木琉璃

smile_annieUID: 2689995

Iagree with the speaker to the extent that the study of history places moreemphasis on individuals than on groups . But the speaker wrongly concludes thatthose significant events and trends in history were made only by groups, andhad no direct connection with those famous individuals. In my opinion, the speakermight be more accurate by saying that those important events were made possiblenot only by the famous few, but also by groups of people, that means,individuals and groups both make an indispensible contribution to propel theprocess of history.

First, I concede thatgroups really play an important role in determining the history. Without thehelp from groups, none of the famousleader could finally achieve his goals. Take Abraham Lincoln, the 16thPresident of American for example, without the solders that firmly followed hisleadership and gave him support, he would never win the Civil War. Hitler, too,couldn’t sponsor the Second World War alone without the loyal adherents. Asingle person, no matter how intelligent or insightful he is, is minor instrength and can seldom change the development process of history by himself（along）.
(according to your statement in the first paragraph, you’d better state the role of the individual first.)

However, it’spresumptuous (here, this word "presumptuous" is not proper) to judge the inability of outstanding individuals just accordingto the importance of groups. We also cannot ignore that, extraordinary (a great one/ people) people,unlike average ones, can efficiently and rightly (correctly) guide the group to achieve theshared goals. Consider a company without an efficient leader, for example,without management and orders from an overall perspective, the staff would thenlost their shared goal ( common goal) and begin to do their own special part of work withoutthinking about how their work can attribute to the development of the companytogether with other employees, who also play an crucial part in the function ofthe company. (the expression of this case is not very good)This would lead to the lose of cohesion, an indispensible staffspirit, and finally result in the disintegration of the company.



Actually, history waschanged generally by that individuals came up with an idea and formulated detailedplan, followed by the actively responding groups. For example, the victory ofthe American War of Independence was attributed to the outstanding leadershipof General ( George)Washington, as well as the spiritual support given by Thomas Paine,and the hardworking of all American people. As is the case in China, under theleadership of Chairman Mao, the people unified to defeat the Japanese invaders.

here, you want to explain the correlation ship between the leader and the public?)

The reason for thatpeople tend to study more about individuals is probably that, it’s easier tostudy one person than study hundreds of thousands of persons at the same time.In addition, a representative person can actually represent his contemporaries,thus by studying typical person, we can get a general situation of the socialmorality and behavior. (this idea is good)For example, by investigating into Confucianism, whichis initiated by the 5-th-BC Chinese sage Confucius, we can get an overallimpression of the Chinese—diligent, dutiful and stoical.

In sum, history is madeby the joint efforts of individual and groups, and we cannot overlook neitherof them.

觉得前面的观点没有给人很明朗的感觉， 后面观点鲜明一些。
加油！