issue110 and argument0(sally)

48778UID: 209221

Issue110
"When we concern ourselves with the study of history, we become storytellers. Because we can never know the past directly but must construct it by interpreting evidence, exploring history is more of a creative enterprise than it is an objective pursuit. All historians are storytellers."
提纲1）对于研究过去历史的应该说是storyteller
     2)对于研究现在历史，而且基于事实的历史学家不能称为storyteller
     3)对于那些研究现在历史，但对历史事件加入自己感情的历史学家也应该叫storyteller.

Are the historians all storytellers? As far as i am concerned the historians who write the things which happened before them belong the storytellers, while those who write the current things are not suitable to be simply called storytellers.
To begin with, as the storytellers, the historians instruct us what happened during the past time according to what they learn from some documents and combining with their own thoughts. That is to say that what they tell us is not always the facts that happened in the past time. As case in point is the viewpoint that what is the first tool that the humane beings used. Some historians tell us it is the stone according to the researches which the archaeologists studied, and at the same time they envisage the basic condition of the primitive society. . While other historians believe that the tool is a stick through their imagination and other massages from the documents. All what they tell us are stories. So the concept "storyteller" is perfect for them.

However those who write down the facts which happened and are happening in their own life should not be named storytellers, due to these facts they depict are what they experienced. In other words, these historians write those information solely relying on the facts and without adding imagination. For instance, the historians who were born in 1900 can tell us what happened in the World War II .The reason, the course and the serious results of the war can all be learned from what they wrote books. From this point what we truly learn is facts, rather than stories .So they are not the storyteller.
Some historians who study the current things tell the things what happed in their time, If he can not write it according to the facts and adding their personal viewpoints to them, they also should be defined to the storytellers. Without writing the objective facts and analyzing these things in their own way distorts the facts to some extent One example in point is the history about the Japan. During the war world the Japan trespassed some counties which are close to it .However due to love to their own country the Japanese can not tell his nesx generation these facts .SO what they write is nothing except for the story.
In conclusion, given the above offered analysis which renders all kinds of historians it is comfortable to reach the conclusion that it is not proper to define every historian as a storyteller. On the basis of different things they devote they can be called in different way. The storyteller is only belonged to those who work for the past things and all these things have not a accurate and consonant view.

The University of Claria is generally considered one of the best universities in the world because of its instructors' reputation, which is based primarily on the extensive research and publishing record of certain faculty members.  In addition, several faculty members are internationally renowned as leaders in their fields.  For example, many of the faculty from the English department are regularly invited to teach at universities in other countries.  Furthermore, two recent graduates of the physics department have gone on to become candidates for the Nobel Prize in Physics.  And 75 percent of the students are able to find employment after graduating.  Therefore, because of the reputation of its faculty, the University of Claria should be the obvious choice for anyone seeking a quality education.




In this article the author cites some information of the college such as eh instructors’ reputation, some famous faculties in some fields and the employment condition to defend its recommendation that anyone who want to seek a quality education should chose the Claria. At first sight it seems reasonable .However careful scrutiny reveals various logical problems which make it unconvincing.
To begin with, the author fails to make a assumption that extensive research and publishing record
Is the basic sign for a better school.  However perhaps the assessment of a good college is according to the environment If there is a beautiful learning surrounding which is more suitable for the students to develop their interest it can be believed as a better college. It is also possible that good employment is the most important for a college in the challenging society .In short without ruling out other alternative possibilities we are not convinced on the basis of the author’s assumption
Another point worth considering is that by relying on several faculties’ reputations to support the college‘s whole level it is unreasonable .Perhaps all these famous professors who are the leaders of the fields devote to the same field. Iit is also possible that English and physics are the leading departments of the college .whether other fields are all better as the English and physics  in this school the author provide no evidences .Since the article does not account for these alternative explanations the author can not make his recommendation sound.
Finally, a 75% employment rate does not necessarily indicate that the college is a better school .It seems a significant rate, but it is possible that most of the students who find a job after graduation do not fell  satisfied with the work .Lacking such a evidence the argument’s conclusion is not justified.
In sum, he assertion that Claria is the best choice is untenable, in light of a variety of alternative explanations. To strengthen it the author must provide the basic information about other fields and the school’s environment. To better evaluate it we would need some surveys about whether the graduation students feel satisfied with the job .In addition the school should offer a long-term plan to the public.

maylUID: 2162549

issue110 and argument0(sally)

Issue110
"When we concern ourselves with the study of history, we become storytellers. Because we can never know the past directly but must construct it by interpreting evidence, exploring history is more of a creative enterprise than it is an objective pursuit. All historians are storytellers."
提纲1）对于研究过去历史的应该说是storyteller
     2)对于研究现在历史，而且基于事实的历史学家不能称为storyteller
     3)对于那些研究现在历史，但对历史事件加入自己感情的历史学家也应该叫storyteller.

Are the historians all storytellers? As far as i（I） am concerned the historians who write the things which happened before them belong (to) the storytellers, while those who write the current things are not suitable to be simply called storytellers.
To begin with, as the storytellers, the historians instruct us what happened during the past time according to what they learn from some documents and (是不是应该去掉 and) combining with their own thoughts. That is to say that what they tell us is not always the facts that happened in the past time. As case in point is the viewpoint that what is the first tool that the humane beings used. Some historians tell us it is the stone according to the researches which the archaeologists studied, and at the same time they envisage the basic condition of the primitive society建议该句调整一下，有些费解).While other historians believe that the tool is a stick through their imagination and other massages from the documents. All what they tell us are stories. So the concept "storyteller" is perfect for them.

However those who write down the facts which happened and are happening in their own life should not be named storytellers, due to these facts they depict are what they experienced. In other words, these historians write those in formations solely relying on the facts and without adding imagination. For instance, the historians who were born in 1900 can tell us what happened in the World War II .The reason, the course and the serious results of the war can all be learned from what they wrote books. From this point what we truly learn is facts, rather than stories .So they are not the storytellers.（感觉加个写例子比较好）Some historians who study the current things tell the things what （that）happed in their time, if he can not write it according to the facts and adding their personal viewpoints to them, they also should be defined to the storytellers. Without writing the objective facts and analyzing these things in their own way distorts the facts to some extent (缺少主语，但distorts用的恰当). One example in point is the attitude towards the history about the Japan. During the war world the Japan trespassed some counties which are close to it .However due to love to their own country the Japanese can not tell his next generation these facts .So what they write is nothing except for the story.
In conclusion, given the above offered analysis which renders all kinds of historians it is comfortable to reach the conclusion that it is not proper to define every historian as a storyteller. On the basis of different things （ways）they devote they can be called in different way. The storyteller is only belonged to those who work for the past things and all these things have not an accurate and consonant view.
用词值得称道，语法建议改进，第二段建议加写例子。改的不好，望见谅，一起努力

The University of Claria is generally considered one of the best universities in the world because of its instructors' reputation, which is based primarily on the extensive research and publishing record of certain faculty members.  In addition, several faculty members are internationally renowned as leaders in their fields.  For example, many of the faculty from the English department are regularly invited to teach at universities in other countries.  Furthermore, two recent graduates of the physics department have gone on to become candidates for the Nobel Prize in Physics.  And 75 percent of the students are able to find employment after graduating.  Therefore, because of the reputation of its faculty, the University of Claria should be the obvious choice for anyone seeking a quality education.




In this article the author cites some information of the college such as the instructors’ reputation, some famous faculties in some fields and the employment condition to defend its recommendation that anyone who want to seek a quality education should choose the Claria. At first sight it seems reasonable .However careful scrutiny reveals various logical problems which make it unconvincing.
To begin with, the author fails to make an assumption that extensive research and publishing record is the basic (enough) sign for a better school.  However perhaps the assessment of a good college is according to the environment, if there is a beautiful learning surrounding which is more suitable for the students to develop their interest it can be believed as a better college. It is also possible that good employment is the most important for a college in the challenging society .In short without ruling out other alternative possibilities we are not convinced on the basis of the author’s assumption. (感觉语言表达不到位，意思没说明白，可否再加工一下)
Another point worth considering is that by relying on several faculties’ reputations to support the college‘s whole level it is unreasonable (建议调整语序).Perhaps all these famous professors who are the leaders of the fields devote to the same field. It is also possible that English and physics are the leading departments of the college .whether other fields are all better as the English and physics  in this school the author provide no evidences （the author provide no evidences about whether other fields are all better as the English and physics  in this school）.Since the article does not account for these alternative explanations the author can not make his recommendation sound.
Finally, a 75% employment rate does not necessarily indicate that the college is a better school .It seems a significant rate, but it is possible that most of the students who find a job after graduation do not fell  satisfied with the work .Lacking such a evidence the argument’s conclusion is not justified.（两局话批判的不是同一逻辑错误，一个是数字的完整和准确，一个是思维的全面型）In sum, he （his） assertion that Claria is the best choice is untenable, in light of a variety of alternative explanations. To strengthen it the author must provide the basic information about other fields and the school’s environment. To better evaluate it we would need some surveys about whether the graduation students feel satisfied with the job .In addition the school should offer a long-term plan to the public.
感觉是不是有事，没时间写，好几个句子的语序不太对，还有建议看一下Argument的逻辑错误批判