Issue110 敬请各位赐教，请留下链接，方便回拍,谢谢

Archer1123UID：206148

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."
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
基本同意：历史是客观存在的，但是我们所了解的历史中某些存在一定的主观色彩
1. 历史学家所研究的历史通常都不是他们能够亲身经历的，没有机会完全了解事实真相。即使有可能经历，也只是一部分片断，只能通过一些证据进行创造性的工作才能构造完整的历史故事
2. 历史学家所依据的证据也是不完全是客观的，科学的，有可能当时就已经被篡改
3. 历史学家也是人，不可避免的带有一定的主观性，所以对同一个历史事件，有很多不同说法 例如日本侵华
4. 历史学家的任务之一就是记录历史，并告诉人们。从某种意义上说也就是讲故事者
In the river of history, human being only record and learn a small part of it. The function of historian is to find, record and interpret what happened in history exists objectively. Regretfully, not all what historians explain to us is right and objective absolutely. Though all historians, I believe, eager and try their best to find the truth. In fact, some of their statements are veracious or very close to verity, while others are not.

History is a branch of knowledge that records and explains past events. Unfortunately, most historians have not opportunities to experience that period themselves. That is to say, they cannot see, hear or know past events directly. The exclusive way to learn history is depending on other evidence or tools. Even if what historians’ research is modern history and they maybe experience some events, it does not warrantee they can know what happened in all sides. Just according to other evidence or what historians had undergone personally, which is fragmentary, they cannot gain the complete fact. In order to record and interpret the whole and integrated history, historians have done creative description. Just as one famous historian says, there are two important factors for a authoritative historian, one is objectivity, the other is the logical and reasonable creativity.

When historians research the ancient history, the evidence such as documents, remains plays a significant role to help them make a conclusion. Whereas there maybe lie a problem, who can warrant that the evidence, especially documents or other evidence which is controlled by easily, reflects history objectively. The possibility cannot be excluded that some people modified even destroyed the only true evidence in order to cover the truth for their benefits. What is left to current is forgery or falsehood, which may lead historian to wrong way or false conclusion.

Another possibility hampering historians finding truth is the limit of human being. Any historian has subjectivity more or less as a human being even during his or her research, although they try to avoid it. There are numerous backgrounds (different culture, religion, race and so on) would influence them to construct or narrate history events. That is why there are different historical interpretations for the same history event. For example, from 1937 to 1945, Japan invaded China, plundered Chinese resource and enslaved Chinese brutally. Ironically, Japanese historian interpret the record that aggressive war as assistance to China. And till now, Japanese historians have not admitted their crimes in China.  

One function of historians is to find, record history and interpret it to people, because learning history is significant for people. People not only realize the mistakes or errors in history and avoid these occur again, but also abstract the successful experience and make good use of it in modern society. Without the professional knowledge, an ordinary person cannot know what happened in past time based on documents or remains. Historians narrate past events to people through letters, pictures or other media methods. To some extent, historians are narrators or storytellers. One very important thing need to pay attention to is that historians totally different common storytellers. They must narrate the history truth, at least they it is true, without any exaggeration or hiding.

To sum up, the true history like a certain curve, what historian have known like some points, which maybe in the curve, maybe not. Historian construct a curve based on points creatively, of course the curve maybe the history curve exactly, may very closet to it, may far away it. （这个比喻是借鉴别人的，觉得比较好就“拿来主义”了）

yangxingUID：2112368

不要着急阿,网上回来上传:):):)

gtrandUID：2156108

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."


*In the river of history, human being only record and learn a small part of it*(见后注）. The function of historian(s) is to find（understand), record and interpret what happened in *history exists* （the past) objectively. *Regretfully* (Regretably), *not all what historians explain to us is absolutely right and objective absolutely. Though all historians, I believe, eager and try their best to find the truth.* (it is almost impossible for historians to achieve absolute objectivity, no matter how hard they are trying.) *In fact, some of their statements are veracious or very close to verity, while others are not*.(Because of the complicated nature of history study, historians sometimes sound more like storytellers.)      

　　首段表达了作者的立场，即基本同意原主张。没有直接援引或者照抄原主张的话，而是自己加以解释，这是一种好的做法。不过，要与原主张联系得更密切，重复其中的一些核心词汇还是非常必要的，比如: creative, objective, storytellers。这样人家才不至于感到你的文章写得松散，或者跑题。
　　此外，首段的语法有不少错误，须加注意，不能留下一个不好的第一印象。比如第一句就有两大问题。第一，用的比喻不到位。为什么？不对称。既然把历史比做长河，那么人们所纪录的东西也得用相关的比喻来陪衬。比如说：“历史是一条长河，人类纪录下来的只是一些小浪花。”用中文来表达是再生动不过了，但我没在英文中见到过此类的恰当比喻. 第二，语法不通。it无所指。如果用代词，前面肯定有一个相应的名词，但前面的in the river of history是一个介词词组；human being是一个抽象概念，不能等同于能够行动的人，只能用we, historians，people等词来作主语。所以象这种带有文学色彩的话，如果没把握不要轻易用。


　　
History is a branch of knowledge that records and explains past events. Unfortunately, most historians have *not* (no) opportunities to experience *that period themselves* (those events). That is to say, they cannot see, hear or know past events (by themselves) directly. *The exclusive way* (The only way) to learn history is *depending on other* (to make use of secondary) evidence or tools. Even *if what historians’ is modern history and they* (the fact that those studying modern history might have experienced some (significant) events [,] *it does not* (does not) *warrantee* (guarantee that) they can know what happened *in all sides*(from all perspectives). *Just according to other evidence or what historians had undergone personally, which is fragmentary, they cannot gain the complete fact*. (这个意思上面已经说了，删去）In order to record and interpret the whole and integrated history, historians have done creative description(s). Just as one famous historian says, (WHO?)there are two important factors *for*(that make) *a*(an) authoritative historian*,*(:) one is objectivity, (and) the other is the logical and reasonable creativity.（这个引证非常有力和贴切，但如果没有论者的真实名姓，效果会大打折扣。一个即使不太知名但具体的人物比一个匿名的权威更有份量。）

When historians research the ancient history, *the evidence such as documents, remains* （the evidence they use--documents, remains, etc.--)plays a significant role *to help*(in helping) them make [a] conclusion(s). *Whereas there maybe lie a problem,* (However, a problem arises:)who can warrant that the evidence, *especially documents or other evidence which is controlled by easily*(those which can be manipulated readily), *reflects*  (will reflect) history objectively*.*(?) The possibility cannot be excluded that some people *modified even destroyed* (might modify or even destroy) the only true evidence in order to cover the truth for their (own) benefits. (If) *What* (what)  is left [to current] is forgery[ or falsehood], [which may lead ]historian (might be misled ) to (draw) wrong [way or false] conclusion(s).

*Another possibility hampering historians finding truth is the limit of human being. *(Another factor that makes it difficult for historians to keep objectivity in their study is the intrinsic limits they have as human beings.) [Any historian has subjectivity more or less as a human being even during his or her research, although they try to avoid it.] *There are numerous backgrounds different* (The background of a historian -- culture, religion, race and so on --) [would] (might all) influence *them* (him or her) *to construct or narrate* (in reconstructing or narrating) *history* (historical) events. That is why *there are* (have been so many) different [historical] interpretations for [the] same [history] event(s). For example, *from 1937 to 1945, Japan invaded China, plundered* (Japan invaded and occupied China from 1937 to 1945, plundering its ) [Chinese] resource(s) and *enslaved Chinese* (enslaving its people) [brutally]. [Ironically,] (前后矛盾的言行才可以用这个词来表达，日本鬼子歪曲事实对他们来说是自然的事情）(Even though the nature of the war is clear to almost everyone with commom sense, let along historians,) *Japanese historian* (right-wing historians in Japan) *interpret the record that aggressive war* (continue to distort it blatantly, depicting the war as )assistance to China. [And till now, Japanese historians have not admitted their crimes in China].  

****One function of historians is to find, record history and interpret it to people, because learning history is significant for people. People not only realize the mistakes or errors in history and avoid these occur again, but also abstract the successful experience and make good use of it in modern society. Without the professional knowledge, an ordinary person cannot know what happened in past time based on documents or remains. Historians narrate past events to people through letters, pictures or other media methods. To some extent, historians are narrators or storytellers. One very important thing need to pay attention to is that historians totally different common storytellers. They must narrate the history truth, at least they it is true, without any exaggeration or hiding.****
(这段感觉是有点离题了，尤其是前半截好象只是讲历史学家的重要性。愚以为这段应该对上面列举的历史学家面临的限制因素进行概括，说明由于有这些因素的限制，他们不得不将自己的主观意念投射到对历史事实的解释当中，因此他们的研究含有再创造的成份。就像讲故事的人那样，虽然最初的模版也许是一样的，但最终个人有个人的版本。这就把原主张中强调的creative, storytellers都加进去了。当然要强调，考虑到这个问题的复杂性，历史学家虽然不得不在讲故事时加进自己的推测甚至想像，但还是要尽量做到客观，毕竟历史不是传说和神话。）

To sum up, the true history like a certain curve, what historian have known like some points, which maybe in the curve, maybe not. Historian construct a curve based on points creatively, of course the curve maybe the history curve exactly, may very closet to it, may far away it. （这个比喻是借鉴别人的，觉得比较好就“拿来主义”了）（如果是名人的话，可以引用，也很有力。如果只是别的作者的创造，象这样整段地copy就非常危险。因为与前面几段的风格不一致，不协调，有牵强附会的感觉，很容易让人怀疑是抄袭的。我觉得可以将上面的那段拆成两段，将后半部分强调问题复杂性的内容做为结尾就很好。）

总的印象，作者想问题还是比较全面的，考虑了好几个因素，只是在论证方面还可以更为紧凑一些，与主题贴得更近一些。

gtrandUID：2156108

用写字板修改后贴上来，结果发现原来的编辑符号都消失了。比如所有改正的词或句子原来都是有下划线的。我只好在贴子上要改正的原文前加上*号。不过这样看起来会累很多，没办法。
*--*----------要修改的内容
(--)-----------修改后的内容
[--]---------可删掉的内容
****-------只有评论的内容

Archer1123UID：206148

谢谢gtrand的修改，受益颇多
1. 第一段中那个比喻确实我我自己想的，没有看到类似的英文，所以犯了些错误。 有点不解，it指代前面的history不行吗？
2. 其实那个引证是我自己编的，看来下次要连作者也要编出来，呵呵
3. 我后来也觉得第三段有点跑题了，
4. 最后那个比喻不是全部copy，是我自己再加工了一次的，不过以后还是自己的东西保险些，呵呵