如何看待社会泛滥的小三现象？
韩寒：世界上没有小三，这个说辞是源于局外人的一种莫名其妙的仇恨。无论我们把所谓的第三者描绘得多么难听，都不能抹灭爱。当然，你可以说责任是比爱更重要的东西，但并不是在一起就是责任，或者死死地必须和一个人在一起就是责任，否则就是不负责任，我觉得这是对感情的错误粗暴概括。我觉得很多人的感情都是从第三者开始的，尤其是眼界高的人，你能看上的男人或者女人，他(她)没有什么理由和概率是单身的，要么你战胜，要么你共享。我也不觉得共享有什么败坏道德的，婚姻应该是开放的，也就是说，在获得了前配偶的理解和许可的情况下，你应当是可以叠加重复婚姻的，男女都应当是这样。你也许觉得这是对爱情的亵渎，我倒是觉得你也许不懂爱情，你不知道爱情的整个生命历程。我认为这是爱情的升华。世上唯有爱情，唯有想在一起的两个人，两个想在一起的人，便是最大，便是最正，他人皆是第三者。
Friday, March 18, 2011
Monday, January 31, 2011
愛上了 看見你 如何不懂謙卑
去講心中理想 不會俗氣
猶如看得見晨曦 才能歡天喜地
抱著你 我每次 回來多少驚喜
也許一生太短 陪著你
情感有若行李 仍然沉重待我整理
天氣不似如期 但要走 總要飛
道別不可再等你 不管有沒有機
給我體貼入微 但你手 如明日便要遠離
願你可以 留下共我曾愉快的憶記
當世事再沒完美 可遠在歲月如歌中找你
再見了 背向你 回頭多少傷悲
也許不必再講 所有道理
何時放鬆我自己 才能花天酒地
抱著你 我說過 如何一起高飛
這天只想帶走 還是你
如重溫往日郵寄 但會否疲倦了嬉戲
天氣不似如期 但要走 總要飛
道別不可再等你 不管有沒有機
給我體貼入微 但你手 如明日便要遠離
願你可以 留下共我曾愉快的憶記
當世事再沒完美 可遠在歲月如歌中找你
去講心中理想 不會俗氣
猶如看得見晨曦 才能歡天喜地
抱著你 我每次 回來多少驚喜
也許一生太短 陪著你
情感有若行李 仍然沉重待我整理
天氣不似如期 但要走 總要飛
道別不可再等你 不管有沒有機
給我體貼入微 但你手 如明日便要遠離
願你可以 留下共我曾愉快的憶記
當世事再沒完美 可遠在歲月如歌中找你
再見了 背向你 回頭多少傷悲
也許不必再講 所有道理
何時放鬆我自己 才能花天酒地
抱著你 我說過 如何一起高飛
這天只想帶走 還是你
如重溫往日郵寄 但會否疲倦了嬉戲
天氣不似如期 但要走 總要飛
道別不可再等你 不管有沒有機
給我體貼入微 但你手 如明日便要遠離
願你可以 留下共我曾愉快的憶記
當世事再沒完美 可遠在歲月如歌中找你
new start
someone who sees like a child
give like a saint
feel like an angel
never mind the broken wings
and speak like a picture
cry like the rain
shine like the star
as long as the fire remains
give like a saint
feel like an angel
never mind the broken wings
and speak like a picture
cry like the rain
shine like the star
as long as the fire remains
Sunday, April 12, 2009
My Difficulties in University Writing
During the whole semester, I have been blessed with lots of opportunities to practice university writing. Every writing task has been a struggle in arduous efforts yet with unsatisfactory results. I am still struggling and I am going to struggle with wiring for the rest of my college life or even my life.
One obvious excuse is that I have learned English as foreign language whose target is to pass English exams through education in China. However, it is absolutely not fair nor objective to attribute my troubles to this factor. I have been in an English-learning atmosphere for nearly one year and there is enough space on this campus for me to improve English. Putting aside the problem of language itself, I am still trapped by the process of formal writing, even in my mother tongue. More serious reason goes to my stubborn attitude.
Writing in university class further requires formality, logic, clarity and order, at which I am weakest at. Sometimes, I would rather believe I am born to think in a random way. Though I love the feeling of expressing myself in inspiration and freedom, in the form of language, this emanative habit also gives me huge problems faced with all the writing requirements at a university level. Step by step, I have been forcing myself to conform to “academic writing”, painstakingly hoping someday I am able to accustom to being responsible for my writing, that is to say, not to write for my own pleasure or will, but to write to serve a certain purpose or take on a particular task in a responsible, strict, logical, formal, acceptable, sensible, reader-friendly, clear and conventional “university” manner. To achieve this ambition requires a total change of mindset. I have realized my writing now has some assigned roles supposed to perform, figuratively speaking, roles of presenters or reporters whose findings, discoveries, research results are waiting to be approved or acknowledged, and I must bear these roles in heart all the time. Otherwise, I will easily forget the identity of writing as assignment, and thus easily digress from the designated range within which my topics are supposed to be confined.
One pattern I have often followed in the semester turns out unwise yet persistent: the more time I spend on research, the more unsure where my point lies in I feel. Threatened by approaching deadline, I start writing somewhere I am a bit confident in. The sad truth is such intuition always leads nowhere, and I have to start from scratch again. It seems the research on various sources limits and directs my writing, instead of making use of the information to support my point of view. The whole process of writing inevitably becomes passive, helpless, miserable and struggling. My current ability to handle a large amount of information is rather insufficient for university research. This ability can hardly be developed fast in any technique. Only through accumulated experience day by day, it can grow to need the meets of university writing. I should collect my determination and patience.
Patience, with frustration in the air, is knocking down the doors, because determination won't take no for an answer.
One obvious excuse is that I have learned English as foreign language whose target is to pass English exams through education in China. However, it is absolutely not fair nor objective to attribute my troubles to this factor. I have been in an English-learning atmosphere for nearly one year and there is enough space on this campus for me to improve English. Putting aside the problem of language itself, I am still trapped by the process of formal writing, even in my mother tongue. More serious reason goes to my stubborn attitude.
Writing in university class further requires formality, logic, clarity and order, at which I am weakest at. Sometimes, I would rather believe I am born to think in a random way. Though I love the feeling of expressing myself in inspiration and freedom, in the form of language, this emanative habit also gives me huge problems faced with all the writing requirements at a university level. Step by step, I have been forcing myself to conform to “academic writing”, painstakingly hoping someday I am able to accustom to being responsible for my writing, that is to say, not to write for my own pleasure or will, but to write to serve a certain purpose or take on a particular task in a responsible, strict, logical, formal, acceptable, sensible, reader-friendly, clear and conventional “university” manner. To achieve this ambition requires a total change of mindset. I have realized my writing now has some assigned roles supposed to perform, figuratively speaking, roles of presenters or reporters whose findings, discoveries, research results are waiting to be approved or acknowledged, and I must bear these roles in heart all the time. Otherwise, I will easily forget the identity of writing as assignment, and thus easily digress from the designated range within which my topics are supposed to be confined.
One pattern I have often followed in the semester turns out unwise yet persistent: the more time I spend on research, the more unsure where my point lies in I feel. Threatened by approaching deadline, I start writing somewhere I am a bit confident in. The sad truth is such intuition always leads nowhere, and I have to start from scratch again. It seems the research on various sources limits and directs my writing, instead of making use of the information to support my point of view. The whole process of writing inevitably becomes passive, helpless, miserable and struggling. My current ability to handle a large amount of information is rather insufficient for university research. This ability can hardly be developed fast in any technique. Only through accumulated experience day by day, it can grow to need the meets of university writing. I should collect my determination and patience.
Patience, with frustration in the air, is knocking down the doors, because determination won't take no for an answer.
Saturday, April 11, 2009
grammar mistake series
My deep-rooted grammar mistake series are listed as following.
Corrections are made in ( ).
1. Modal
Eg1. Dr Jane has found that the development of new pathways should (might/may could) be the key.
Eg 2. It should (would) also be true for other people who have strong habit(habits) towards (the) existing practice.
A projection or prediction should use low possibility: may/might/ could
Possibility: Low moderate high
may/might/ could < should < must
Stronger certainty or human intention: will / would
Wether sth is a good idea, advisability: should (an advisable did not occur in the past: should have done) , ought to
Necessity : must , have to
Ability: can, could, could have done( a past situation in which the ability for something to happen existed, but the reverse happened)
2. Subject - verb agreement
Eg1. Aphasia – communication problems caused by damage to the brain--- were (was) very common.
The verb must agree with the head word of a noun phrase, rather than the part that acts as explanation
3. Articles: important to refer to the context
Eg 1. It should (would) also be true for other people who have strong habit(habits) towards (the) existing practice.
A singular countable noun should never appear without any articles !!!
Specific reference: the
1. The noun is recognizable through shared knowledge.
2. Used after a general reference is made.
3. When the noun has been modified by an adjective phrase or clause: the suitability of using NEWater; in the vicinity of Washington DC
Nonspecific and generic reference: not identified as sth know, unique or familiar
1. a/an + singular countable noun: a large amount of, a thorough analysis of,
Eg. Cost an estimated $1.4bn
2. zero article+ plural countable noun: renewable power sources.
3. zero article + uncountable noun : drinking water; without doubt; throughout education
Eg2. the Endangered Species Act; the US; supply to the public; the HDB
Eg3. The highest mountain, the third factory, the main/chief/sole reason
Eg4. The particularly interesting aspect of
the is always used with superlatives, ordinals and sole references
but comparative better use “a”: a more skyrocketing level; a higher requirement
4. Preposition phrases:
Eg1. Work in isolation
Eg2. It may not be considered as(delete) (a) new practice
=> No need prep in this case: consider sth sth/ adj.
Eg3. Bulid sth (from) scratch
Eg4. Add…to…; link… to…; akin (similar) to ; prefer…to..
Eg5 above approach
Eg6. At the entry point of
. one step IN that direction
. put into use
.spend… on…
5. Pronoun: important to understand the context
Eg1. The government want its(their) citizens to support it(them).
Eg.2 Spurred on by concerns that species and ecosystems may not survive such shifts, conservationists began to talk seriously about relocating species to help it adapt
Some collective nouns need plural pronouns. important to understand the context
Eg3. … almost without they( them) realizing it
=> them should be used after preposition
6. Misuse/use of that, those
Eg1. That(This) is worrying because…
Eg2. mentioned for the first time : Those(delete) people who….
That/those is used only to refer to the distant object. Generally in writing, this/ these is used to show STRONG coherence instead of that/ those to refer to what mentioned previously.
However, in the structure of comparison ... than that/those… should be used.
Eg3. For instance, pages which( that) sell books or music…
Only “That” to definite noun clause.
7. Verb tense
Eg1. In July, scientists have( delete) first proposed that… was likely to become…
simple past tense to indicate that an action took place at a specific time in the past, especially with the signal word: first.
Eg2. Such difficulties are faced by up to a quarter of people who (have) suffered a stroke.
Present Perfect to express an action or state that began in the past and continues to the present; occurred more than once in the past(specific times are not given). Signal words : until recently, several times, for 4 years now, just
Eg3. Nobody has( had) dreamt that cloning was possible in the 1990s.
Eg4. By the time …. the waters had reached…
=> Past perfect: an event that that was COMPLETED by a definite past time or before ANOTHER action was COMPLETED in the past. ( if stress the duration of an activity, perfect progressive) TWO actions involved <= consider CONTEXT
8. Verb forms:
Eg1. Perserve(d) soft tissues; promote the emerging technology
Attention ! be careful. Understand the meaning
Eg2. The user has to follow the same rules and going ( go) through the same analysis, thus take ( taking) the same amount of time.
Identify parallel structure: keep the verbs in the same form
Thus + doing indicates subsequent results.
9. word forms:
Economic downturn --- an economical car
10. Transitions: so/hence ---but, however- moreover -- thus, therefore
Understand the CONTEXT!!!
Corrections are made in ( ).
1. Modal
Eg1. Dr Jane has found that the development of new pathways should (might/may could) be the key.
Eg 2. It should (would) also be true for other people who have strong habit(habits) towards (the) existing practice.
A projection or prediction should use low possibility: may/might/ could
Possibility: Low moderate high
may/might/ could < should < must
Stronger certainty or human intention: will / would
Wether sth is a good idea, advisability: should (an advisable did not occur in the past: should have done) , ought to
Necessity : must , have to
Ability: can, could, could have done( a past situation in which the ability for something to happen existed, but the reverse happened)
2. Subject - verb agreement
Eg1. Aphasia – communication problems caused by damage to the brain--- were (was) very common.
The verb must agree with the head word of a noun phrase, rather than the part that acts as explanation
3. Articles: important to refer to the context
Eg 1. It should (would) also be true for other people who have strong habit(habits) towards (the) existing practice.
A singular countable noun should never appear without any articles !!!
Specific reference: the
1. The noun is recognizable through shared knowledge.
2. Used after a general reference is made.
3. When the noun has been modified by an adjective phrase or clause: the suitability of using NEWater; in the vicinity of Washington DC
Nonspecific and generic reference: not identified as sth know, unique or familiar
1. a/an + singular countable noun: a large amount of, a thorough analysis of,
Eg. Cost an estimated $1.4bn
2. zero article+ plural countable noun: renewable power sources.
3. zero article + uncountable noun : drinking water; without doubt; throughout education
Eg2. the Endangered Species Act; the US; supply to the public; the HDB
Eg3. The highest mountain, the third factory, the main/chief/sole reason
Eg4. The particularly interesting aspect of
the is always used with superlatives, ordinals and sole references
but comparative better use “a”: a more skyrocketing level; a higher requirement
4. Preposition phrases:
Eg1. Work in isolation
Eg2. It may not be considered as(delete) (a) new practice
=> No need prep in this case: consider sth sth/ adj.
Eg3. Bulid sth (from) scratch
Eg4. Add…to…; link… to…; akin (similar) to ; prefer…to..
Eg5 above approach
Eg6. At the entry point of
. one step IN that direction
. put into use
.spend… on…
5. Pronoun: important to understand the context
Eg1. The government want its(their) citizens to support it(them).
Eg.2 Spurred on by concerns that species and ecosystems may not survive such shifts, conservationists began to talk seriously about relocating species to help it adapt
Some collective nouns need plural pronouns. important to understand the context
Eg3. … almost without they( them) realizing it
=> them should be used after preposition
6. Misuse/use of that, those
Eg1. That(This) is worrying because…
Eg2. mentioned for the first time : Those(delete) people who….
That/those is used only to refer to the distant object. Generally in writing, this/ these is used to show STRONG coherence instead of that/ those to refer to what mentioned previously.
However, in the structure of comparison ... than that/those… should be used.
Eg3. For instance, pages which( that) sell books or music…
Only “That” to definite noun clause.
7. Verb tense
Eg1. In July, scientists have( delete) first proposed that… was likely to become…
simple past tense to indicate that an action took place at a specific time in the past, especially with the signal word: first.
Eg2. Such difficulties are faced by up to a quarter of people who (have) suffered a stroke.
Present Perfect to express an action or state that began in the past and continues to the present; occurred more than once in the past(specific times are not given). Signal words : until recently, several times, for 4 years now, just
Eg3. Nobody has( had) dreamt that cloning was possible in the 1990s.
Eg4. By the time …. the waters had reached…
=> Past perfect: an event that that was COMPLETED by a definite past time or before ANOTHER action was COMPLETED in the past. ( if stress the duration of an activity, perfect progressive) TWO actions involved <= consider CONTEXT
8. Verb forms:
Eg1. Perserve(d) soft tissues; promote the emerging technology
Attention ! be careful. Understand the meaning
Eg2. The user has to follow the same rules and going ( go) through the same analysis, thus take ( taking) the same amount of time.
Identify parallel structure: keep the verbs in the same form
Thus + doing indicates subsequent results.
9. word forms:
Economic downturn --- an economical car
10. Transitions: so/hence ---but, however- moreover -- thus, therefore
Understand the CONTEXT!!!
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Roundtable discussion
Four groups covered four hot topics in modern technology during roundtable discussions.
The first group discussed hybrid electric vehicles (HEV), in terms of its advantages, costs and feasibility. Apparently, the supporting side illustrated the benefits HEV brings and its promising future: less greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, expected cheaper energy cost compared to the continuously rising oil price, hopeful large-scale manufacturing to guarantee affordable vehicles. Unsurprisingly, these arguments were rebutted by opponents with the current financial pressure and inconvenience caused by HEV. They argued that apart from HEV’s price which remains challenging to majority (not to mention the wide disparity between rich and poor), unavailable transportation infrastructure including “charging stations” in most of places at present would cause even greater cost to HEV travelling, let alone inconvenience of extra time consumption to reach those sporadic charging points. Furthermore, they pointed out the technology to produce safe HEV is centered in developed countries, which limits the wide adoption of HEV in global scale.
I don’t think the evidence offered by the opposite is persuasive enough, because they view the use of HEV as a still process. Their main emphasis is on the “present” situations HEV is faced with, including the unavailability of affordable price, infrastructure and widespread technology. In fact, every process of popularization is dynamic and time-demanding. In retrospect, those historic inventions, which were once doubted and rejected due to “present inconvenience” at that time, have turn out successful in facilitating the growth of society in all directions, and even revolutionizing the way people work and live. Without taking the initiative in HEV, in the context of global climate change, none could tell whether a decisive revolution of transportation would take place in the future and change the way human interact with the nature. However, to simplify the opposite argument, they implied that society should give up the attempt at making HEV widespread purely due to current restrictions. This is fallacious reasoning.
The summary of second group’s discussion is skipped here as it is my own group.
The third group debated over the promotion of green chemistry in Singapore. One side for green chemistry listed possible and advantageous conditions for Singapore to develop this field, including sufficient financial funding, research institute and manpower. To the contrary, the other side asserted Singapore lacks talent pools for this field. He added Singapore as a small dot on the map doesn’t have to take the risk of leading the world in technological innovation and Singapore had better borrow mature and successful experience from other countries. He indicated it would be more practical to invest in other familiar technology and existing practices.
It is perceivable that the opposite side just debated for the debate without justified reasoning. He seemed to be forced to take one side, and unfortunately, this side is against investment in green chemistry, which is undeniably one of the largest fields of technological development. This stand he had to take goes against common sense. Thus whatever he argued appeared artificial, unnatural and consequently not quite reasonable. Actually, I sympathize with his difficulty much since I am not sure about the specific role of green chemistry. I feel that this general term includes every technological improvement wherever chemistry is made use of. If so, obviously and automatically, this should be encouraged and hardly any counterargument would stand up.
The fourth group targeted at stem cell research. The affirmative side claimed resulting gains in medical progress outweigh the loss in other aspects. The other side stressed a lack of moral standard if only profitable gains are valued. Furthermore, when a life starts sharing the right to survive and grow remains a controversial issue, which hinders the usage of embryos from being ethical.
I recommend that the opposite side should develop their argument further with concrete data and facts, rather than arguing in a general way with the sentences like “Man cannot play God”. The latter is less suitable for “university-level” debate.
Overall, all the roundtable discussions are interesting and worth of consideration. Still, more logical reasoning would lead to more persuasive arguments.
The first group discussed hybrid electric vehicles (HEV), in terms of its advantages, costs and feasibility. Apparently, the supporting side illustrated the benefits HEV brings and its promising future: less greenhouse gas emissions from transportation, expected cheaper energy cost compared to the continuously rising oil price, hopeful large-scale manufacturing to guarantee affordable vehicles. Unsurprisingly, these arguments were rebutted by opponents with the current financial pressure and inconvenience caused by HEV. They argued that apart from HEV’s price which remains challenging to majority (not to mention the wide disparity between rich and poor), unavailable transportation infrastructure including “charging stations” in most of places at present would cause even greater cost to HEV travelling, let alone inconvenience of extra time consumption to reach those sporadic charging points. Furthermore, they pointed out the technology to produce safe HEV is centered in developed countries, which limits the wide adoption of HEV in global scale.
I don’t think the evidence offered by the opposite is persuasive enough, because they view the use of HEV as a still process. Their main emphasis is on the “present” situations HEV is faced with, including the unavailability of affordable price, infrastructure and widespread technology. In fact, every process of popularization is dynamic and time-demanding. In retrospect, those historic inventions, which were once doubted and rejected due to “present inconvenience” at that time, have turn out successful in facilitating the growth of society in all directions, and even revolutionizing the way people work and live. Without taking the initiative in HEV, in the context of global climate change, none could tell whether a decisive revolution of transportation would take place in the future and change the way human interact with the nature. However, to simplify the opposite argument, they implied that society should give up the attempt at making HEV widespread purely due to current restrictions. This is fallacious reasoning.
The summary of second group’s discussion is skipped here as it is my own group.
The third group debated over the promotion of green chemistry in Singapore. One side for green chemistry listed possible and advantageous conditions for Singapore to develop this field, including sufficient financial funding, research institute and manpower. To the contrary, the other side asserted Singapore lacks talent pools for this field. He added Singapore as a small dot on the map doesn’t have to take the risk of leading the world in technological innovation and Singapore had better borrow mature and successful experience from other countries. He indicated it would be more practical to invest in other familiar technology and existing practices.
It is perceivable that the opposite side just debated for the debate without justified reasoning. He seemed to be forced to take one side, and unfortunately, this side is against investment in green chemistry, which is undeniably one of the largest fields of technological development. This stand he had to take goes against common sense. Thus whatever he argued appeared artificial, unnatural and consequently not quite reasonable. Actually, I sympathize with his difficulty much since I am not sure about the specific role of green chemistry. I feel that this general term includes every technological improvement wherever chemistry is made use of. If so, obviously and automatically, this should be encouraged and hardly any counterargument would stand up.
The fourth group targeted at stem cell research. The affirmative side claimed resulting gains in medical progress outweigh the loss in other aspects. The other side stressed a lack of moral standard if only profitable gains are valued. Furthermore, when a life starts sharing the right to survive and grow remains a controversial issue, which hinders the usage of embryos from being ethical.
I recommend that the opposite side should develop their argument further with concrete data and facts, rather than arguing in a general way with the sentences like “Man cannot play God”. The latter is less suitable for “university-level” debate.
Overall, all the roundtable discussions are interesting and worth of consideration. Still, more logical reasoning would lead to more persuasive arguments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)