issue185 （7月超高频）,等待的第7篇，大家多提意见!

polymathUID：179557

185. "Scandals whether in politics, academia, or other areas can be useful. They focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could." 丑闻，不管是政治、学术还是其他领域，都能发挥有利的作用。它们让我们以不同的角度去看待问题，而这些是演讲者和改革家不能带给我们的。（习作7，2005/07/25）☆☆☆☆

This statement actually raises two claims here: (1)that scandals in all realms can be useful,and(2)scandals play a more effective way in focusing attention on problems than  speaker or reformer ever could. Although ample realistic evidence suggests the first claim,I find this assertion problematic in two respects.First,it ignores that scandals can sometimes distract us from more important central issue; Second,it arbitrarily overestimates the role of scandals for no speaker or reformer could never exceed.

Admitting that scandals are usually useful in revealing unfair phenomena and helping us to recognize the existing problems in many fields. For example, Watergate scandal had profound consequences in the United States. The aftermath of Watergate ushered in changes in campaign finance reform and a more aggressive attitude by the media. Watergate's influence was also felt in the Clinton Impeachment of 1998-99. After the sexual scandal between the US former president Clinton and Lewinsky being exposed to the light of the day,a world-wide discussion on love,duty and honesty has subsequently  arousesd.A more modern example is Enron and the Bush team sandal, Enron's collapse is not just an isolated financial scandal for involving $1.76 million donations to Bush and the Republicans in exchange with the government's support in energy policy.This dual scandal repeatedly recalled a requestion for campaign-finance reform in the U.S public.

On the other hand, although scandals are useful, they are not panacea. First, as a negative impact news,it sometimes distract us from more important central issue.For instance, As Bush and his team once confessed(and I paraphrase), the growing links between the Administration and Enron wiped out the retirement savings of thousands provide the best ground Democrats have had in months for staging fights over issues like tax cuts, the budget and pension reform--the subjects that are increasingly important to people.Secondly,as a appearling stories,the media motivated by profit will possibly fabricate some good scandals that initially does not exist in order to maximize the profits.Common sense tells me,most scandals are fabricated,but with respect to those ,once slandered,the reputation of any public figure is hard to be renewed.Thirdly,some scandal can not only be detriment to the societal moral standards among the citizenry, but also mislead the unmatured teenagers.Take over the Clinton-Lewinsky sexual scandal, Clinton's reckless and immoral behavior and its public dissemination had reinforced the publication of sexual acts over the internet, radio, and television, which would inextricably aggravate the wrongdoings of the adolescence.

Consider next to the speaker’s second claim,I would argue that in some areas, speaker or reformer could focus our attention on problems in ways that no scandals ever could. To be more specific with my arguments, turn first consider to America’s Martin Luther King - the civil rights leader who gave his own life in the cause of freedom,He became the voice of the civil rights movement, and his speech that was later entitled "I Have a Dream" at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on a sweltering day in 1963 touched the conscience of a nation. One year later, the Civil Rights Act（民权法案）of 1964 was passed. It was not the first law of civil rights for Americans, but it was the most thorough and effective.Turn next example to India’s Mahatma Grandhi-the charismatic leader who brought the cause of India's independence from British colonial rule to world attention. His philosophy of non-violence, for which he coined the term satyagraha, has influenced both national and international movements for peaceful change.In short, speaker or reformer can also develop a special way which give us a comprehensive attention on the problems in our society.

In conclusion,scandals to some extent help us to find and solve certain social problems,but overemphasizing its importance is not advisable because when misused, scandals sometimes  can cause tragedies.Since everything has two sides,we should make rational arrangements for them and prevent it from spreading unchecked. (640)


偶的习作寄托链接：望一同拍砖!欢迎交流,统统进步!:handshake
https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=305470              (ISSUE-157)
https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=305082              (ISSUE-131)
https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=304874              (ISSUE-51)
https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=302487              (ISSUE-137)
https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=302834              (ISSUE-137)
https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=303340              (ISSUE-8)

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-30 at 10:07 ]

polymathUID：179557

怎么没人顶!自己来顶一个!大家拍砖呀!不要吝惜!
:lol

anitazyUID：146087

不好意思，今天有点事耽误了，明天一定贴出来哈，见谅见谅

waterlilyUID：2112236

不好意思，我没有细看，但是help 的用法应该是 help sb do sth吧，你再看一下哦。

anitazyUID：146087

185. "Scandals whether in politics, academia, or other areas can be useful. They focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could." 丑闻，不管是政治、学术还是其他领域，都能发挥有利的作用。它们让我们以不同的角度去看待问题，而这些是演讲者和改革家不能带给我们的。（习作7，2005/07/25）☆☆☆☆

This statement actually raises two claims here: (1)that scandals in all realms can be useful, and(2)scandals play a more effective way in focusing attention on problems than  speaker or reformer ever could.  Maybe not more effective but in a different angle when analyzing problems. Although ample realistic evidence suggests the first claim, I find this assertion problematic in two respects. First, it ignores that scandals can sometimes distract us from more important central issue; Second, it arbitrarily overestimates the role of scandals for no speaker or reformer could never exceed.
感觉这个题目分析的不错，恩，学习一下，呵呵，问题还是那个我们讨论过的结构区别，后面详述。
Admitting that scandals are usually useful in revealing unfair phenomena and helping us to recognize the existing problems in many fields. For example, Watergate scandal had profound consequences influence for in the United States. The aftermath of Watergate ushered in changes in campaign finance reform and a more aggressive attitude by the media. Watergate's influence was also felt in the Clinton Impeachment of 1998-99. After the sexual scandal between the US former president Clinton and Lewinsky being exposed to the light of the day, a world-wide discussion on love, duty and honesty has subsequently  arousesd arouse. A more modern example is Enron and the Bush team sandal, Enron's collapse is not just an isolated financial scandal for involving $1.76 million donations to Bush and the Republicans in exchange with the government's support in energy policy. This dual scandal repeatedly recalled a requestion for campaign-finance reform in the U.S public.
好多的例子啊！真爽，不过感觉可以用两个例子，然后按照本段论点展开分析一下，会不会显得内容更有说服力一点呢？
On the other hand, although scandals are useful, they are not panacea. First, as a negative impact news as news negative impact, it sometimes distract us from more important central issue. For instance, As Bush and his team once confessed(and I paraphrase), the growing links between the Administration and Enron wiped out the retirement savings of thousands provide the best ground Democrats have had in months for staging fights over issues like tax cuts, the budget and pension reform--the subjects that are increasingly important to people. Secondly, as a appearling appealing? stories, the media motivated by profit will possibly fabricate some good scandals that initially does not exist in order to maximize the profits. Common sense tells me, most scandals are fabricated, but with respect to those, once slandered, the reputation of any public figure is hard to be renewed. Thirdly, some scandal can not only be detriment to the societal moral standards among the citizenry, but also mislead the unmatured去掉 teenagers. Take over the Clinton-Lewinsky sexual scandal, take … as an example Clinton's reckless and immoral behavior and its public dissemination had reinforced the publication of sexual acts over the internet, radio, and television, which would inextricably aggravate the wrongdoings of the adolescence.
这段的分论点展开的不错，继续学习中……
Consider next to the speaker’s second claim, When considering…… I would argue that in some areas, speaker or reformer +s could focus our attention on problems in ways that no scandals ever could. To be more specific with my arguments, turn first consider to 这么说好像不妥当吧 America’s Martin Luther King - the civil rights leader who gave his own life in the cause of freedom devote his whole life to do sth., He became the voice of the civil rights movement, and his speech that was later entitled "I Have a Dream" at the steps of the Lincoln Memorial on a sweltering day in 1963 touched the conscience of a nation. One year later, the Civil Rights Act（民权法案）of 1964 was passed. It was not the first law of civil rights for Americans, but it was the most thorough and effective one than ever before. Turn next example to India’s Mahatma Grandhi-the charismatic leader who brought the cause of India's independence from British colonial rule to world attention. His philosophy of non-violence, for which he coined the term satyagraha, has influenced both national and international movements for peaceful change. In short, speaker or reformer +s can also develop a special way which that give bring us a comprehensive attention on the problems in our society.
我觉得这段的例子不错，但是分论点有待商量，后面讨论
In conclusion, scandals to some extent help us to find and solve certain social problems, but overemphasizing its importance is not advisable because when misused, scandals sometimes  can cause tragedies. Since everything has two sides, we should make rational arrangements for them and prevent it from spreading unchecked. (640)
这位GG的这篇大作明显好过上次看的那篇，加油加油，^0^ 恩，不过想在这里和你讨论一下“历史遗留问题”——交换一下对结构的看法。最通俗的立场分为3种：1。完全支持或反对。2。有保留的支持或反对。3。中立的看法，拒绝站在任何一边。根据这三种立场，又有相应的结构如下：1。提出看法——支持的分论点1——支持的分论点2——或许还有3——结论。2。提出看法——支持1——支持2（或反对1）——反对1（或反对2）——结论。3。提出看法——支持1——反对1——两者需要兼顾——结论。当然这三种结构只是最典型的，没有严格界限。不过最适用的是2和3。因此，我认为在首段提出观点的时候应该有I agree, I suggest,这种表明立场的东西，而不是指出题目犯了哪些错误，后者更像是argument。觉得第2，3段的论点就比较好，但是4段好像是有点偏了，文章的重点在于scandals，而不是speakers or reformers。最后忍不住感慨一句：这位GG好勤劳啊！而且例子好多，狂羡慕中……向你学习！！！嘻嘻……

polymathUID：179557

谢谢MM的亲情修改！不能不赞赏MM的聪慧和善良了！:victory:

Watergate scandal had profound consequences influence for in the United States.
consequences in是我从美国时代杂志的新闻上学来的，应该没有错，不过换个短语也不错呦！可以避免雷同！:p

arousesd arouse. 我也拿不准啊！就用你的吧！

as a negative impact news as news negative impact,
原句是想说“作为一则负面影响的新闻”，你改的句子比较简单，我觉得在as news negative impact的negative前加with 更保险啊!你觉得呢?

Take over the Clinton-Lewinsky sexual scandal, take … as an example
上文已经提及Clinton-Lewinsky sexual scandal的例子，所以我觉得用Take over（复习，再看）更能够起到承接作用，你觉得呢？再用一个take … as an example 太累赘了！

To be more specific with my arguments, turn first consider to 这么说好像不妥当吧
这是从老外那里学来的，不知道对不对！难道不能举例吗？

gave his own life in the cause of freedom devote his whole life to do sth

我的句子应该没错，在ChinaDaily上看到的一句话！是BUSH纪念Luther King的时候说的

speaker or reformer +s
原题就没加S，所以我也没加呀！要加吗？

In short, speaker or reformer +s can also develop a special way which that give bring us a comprehensive attention on the problems in our society.
我觉得改为“and bring us ”更好点！MM觉得呢？

:)终于答复完毕！MM改的好认真，我就要更认真啊！:victory:
关于“我认为在首段提出观点的时候应该有I agree, I suggest,这种表明立场的东西，而不是指出题目犯了哪些错误，后者更像是argument。觉得第2，3段的论点就比较好，但是4段好像是有点偏了，文章的重点在于scandals，而不是speakers or reformers。”
我的疑惑是我的开头好像和argument的开头是挺像的，但是这样我写的时候思路更清楚，实际上一批一立之中已经把我的观点表露无疑。这样的饿开头，一般都是partly agree的情形。
关于第四段，因为要证明scandal 不是任何时候都比speaker和reformer更有效，所以谈后者多了点，但间接还是在说明我的论点，不是吗？

OK~!最后还是道一是声感谢！和MM交流这么久，觉得自己进步了很多！我要继续加油才行啊！千万不能辜负了MM的一片好意！呵呵！

anitazyUID：146087

终于了解这位GG为什么能举出这么多例子了，看了那么多文章阿！崇拜一下先。。。。。。
嗯，我不记得take over有复习的意思。。。。。。ＧＧ如果确定就好啦：）
关于结构的问题，我只是提出了看到文章后给我的第一感觉，这个问题比较重要，希望ＧＧ和其他人讨论一下，以得到一个既保留自己风格又符合结构要求的结论。
最后提醒ＧＧ尽早开始限时，演练真实的考试环境，非常重要：）
呵呵，改文章是互相提高的过程，一起加油吧

fairy115UID：200324

真真的是受益匪浅阿！斑竹就是斑竹~~~我本想叫你牛牛，呵呵，现在发现不够了，要叫牛魔王~~~嘻嘻