In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field.

TOEFL, IELTS, Personal Statement and CV Proofreading Services. › GRE Writing › In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field.

  • TruckersForMe Participant
    Lisa
    University: Northwest University
    Nationality: China
    June 21, 2020 at 3:28 pm

    In any field of endeavor, it is impossible to make a significant contribution without first being strongly influenced by past achievements within that field.

    Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.

    The statement holds true in most cases that we can find in human history, while in others it may not hold true. Although the past achievement within that a field is specifically helpful to a contribution made later within that field, we have to accept that sometimes it is not necessary at all.

    Throughout human history, it’s not difficult for us to find traces of significant contributions built upon the achievements of the past. Thousand of years ago, when there were rarely any subjects, people made good use of their plain observation of our mother nature. Although such empirical amalgamate could barely be termed as great discoveries, they surely were an unignorable influence for later great thoughts on the newborn science. Especially in fields of Physics and Astronomy, such empirical observation was definitely a direct and palpable source for generalization and inducement. After that, could speculations and theories be inspired in great minds. Although the imagination and creativity of the great minds are also indispensable parts to complete the puzzle of science, we cannot neglect the strong influence of the former achievements in that field. Therefore, the statement holds true for the ancient times.

    Now back to 21st century, a modern world with numerous highly developed and complicated  academic field, where there is little chance left for a potential subject to emerge.But that is not to say, we don’t have brilliant ideas or great theories nowadays. All the records of Nobel Prize in recent years are living examples. And if we care enough to scan through the records of each field, we can easily find out that none of these contributions were freshly made yesterday: rather, they are firmly grounded on the contributions made by earlier people. Without these valuable achievements made by experts from the past, revolutionary contributions of new theories or experiment methods could hardly be inspired. So the statement is also true for present time.

    However, with all the evidence above, we cannot deny that there are certainly exceptions in some circumstances. As we all know, the skyscraper of science or any other field started with nothing, and gradually grounded with bricks and embellished with all the ornaments. Obviously, the overture of any field couldn’t base on the achievement from the past:because there was no “past” yet, let alone the important contributions made early those days. Also, for some subjects, especially those interdisciplinary subjects, it is more important to comprehend knowledge from multiple fields to make contributions in its own. It follows that the achievement in its very own field is rather less important. Those were some of the minor conditions in which the statement seem to go to far.

    In a word, the statement holds true in most cases because no matter in ancient times or modern world of 21st century, significant contributions are usually built upon the very knowledge from the field of its own. But we also have to admit that, for a newborn subject or an interdisciplinary subject, the statement is way too absolute.

    TruckersForMe Participant
    Administrator
    June 24, 2020 at 2:11 am

    Score: ungraded

    Issues:

    1. About 70% of the sentences exceed 20 words. Shorten/split them.
    2. About 25% of the sentences are passive. Convert some of them into their active counterparts.

    I will send you screenshots to illustrate specific problems/errors.

    TruckersForMe Participant
    Lisa
    University: Northwest University
    Nationality: China
    June 24, 2020 at 10:08 am

    Why must sentences be less than 20 words?

    TruckersForMe Participant
    Lisa
    University: Northwest University
    Nationality: China
    June 24, 2020 at 10:20 am

    Note that most sentences of  a score 6 passage in OG exceed 20 words (some are about 50 words), could you please explain why you mention that a sentence must contain less than 20 words? Thank you.

    TruckersForMe Participant
    Lisa
    University: Northwest University
    Nationality: China
    June 24, 2020 at 11:37 am

    The statement may hold true in most cases that we can find in human history, while in some it may not. Although the past achievement within a field is helpful to a contribution made later within that same field, we have to accept that sometimes it is not necessary at all.

    Throughout human history, there are a good deal of significant contributions built upon  achievements from the past. Thousands of years ago, where there were rarely any subjects, people made good use of their plain observation of mother nature. Although such empirical amalgamate could barely be termed as great discoveries, they surely were an unignorable influence for later great thoughts on the newborn science. Especially in fields of Physics and Astronomy, such empirical observation was definitely a direct source for generalization and inducement. After that, speculations and theories could be inspired in great minds. Although the imagination and creativity of the great minds are also indispensable parts to complete the puzzle of science, we cannot neglect the strong influence of the former achievements in that field. Therefore, the statement holds true for the ancient times.

    Now back to 21st century, a modern world with numerous highly developed academic fields, where there is little chance left for a potential subject to emerge. But that is not to say, we don’t have brilliant ideas made recently. All the records of Nobel Prize in recent years are living examples. And if we care enough to scan through the records of each field, we can easily find out that none of these contributions were freshly made yesterday: rather, they are firmly grounded in the contributions made by earlier people. Without these valuable achievements made by experts from the past, revolutionary contributions of new theories could hardly be inspired. So the statement is also true for present time.

    However, with all the evidence above, we cannot deny that there are certainly exceptions in some circumstances. As we all know, the skyscraper of science or any other fields started with nothing, and gradually grounded with bricks and embellished with all the ornaments. Obviously, the overture of any field couldn’t base on the achievement from the past: because there was no “past” yet, let alone the important contributions made early those days. Also, for some subjects, especially those interdisciplinary subjects, it is more important to comprehend knowledge from multiple fields to make contributions in its own. It follows that the achievement in its very own field is rather less important. Those were some of the minor conditions in which the statement seem to go to far.

    In a word, the statement holds true in most cases both in ancient times or modern world of 21st century. But we also have to admit that, for a newborn subject or an interdisciplinary subject, the statement is way too absolute.

    TruckersForMe Participant
    Administrator
    June 24, 2020 at 3:46 pm

    Score: 59.3

    Issues:

    1. About 50% of the sentences exceed 20 words. Shorten/split them.
    2. About 20% of the sentences are passive. Convert some of them into their active counterparts.

    The statement may hold[s  ] true in most [ many ] cases that we can find in [during  ]human history, while[but  ] in some [instances,  ] it may[ does ] not. Although the past achievement within a [specific  ]field is helpful to a contribution made later [can inspire latter ones  ]within that[ the ] same field, [I argue that it is not always the case. ]we have to accept that sometimes it is not necessary at all.

    [ Admittedly, ]Throughout human history[ witnessed ], there are[is  ] a good deal of [ a ]significant [ number of ]contributions built upon [ prior ] achievements from the past. Thousands of years ago, [ For millions of years, ](where there were rarely any subjects,)[  unclear] people made good use of their plain observation of [observed  ]mother nature[ with their eyes ]. Although [ the derived knowledge ](such empirical amalgamate)[ unclear ] could barely be termed as great discoveries, [ the wisdom ]they surely were an unignorable influence for later [cultivated ]great thoughts on [for  ]the newborn science. Especially in[ In the ] fields of Physics and Astronomy, [ for instance, ]such empirical observation was definitely [  became] a direct source for generalization and[ , ] inducement[, speculation and theoretical assumption among great minds  ]. After that, speculations and theories could be inspired in great minds. [Although the imagination and creativity of the great minds are also indispensable parts to complete the puzzle of science, we cannot neglect the strong influence of the former achievements in that field. Therefore, the statement holds true for the ancient times.][redundant  ]

    Now back to [ the ] 21st century, (a modern world with numerous highly developed academic fields, where there is little chance left for a potential subject to emerge.)[ unclear ] But that is not to say, [  that]we don’t have [lack preexistent  ]brilliant ideas made recently. [ In fact, all ]All the records of Nobel Prize [ records ] in recent years are living examples [ inspirations for even greater innovations ]. And if [If  ]we care [ cared ] enough to scan [ scanned ]through the records of each field, we can [would  ]easily find out [discover  ]that none of these [ only a small portion of these ]contributions [are newly obtained  ]were freshly made yesterday: [. Rather,  ]rather, they [most of them  ]are firmly grounded[ rooted ] in the contributions made by earlier people. Without these[ such ] valuable achievements made by experts from the past, [many  ]revolutionary [ important scientific]contributions of new theories could hardly be inspired[would not emerge  ]. So the statement is also true for [ the ]present time.

    [ Like skyscrapers that require bricks and cement, ]As we all know, the skyscraper of science [sciences  ]or any other fields started with nothing, and gradually grounded with bricks and embellished with all the ornaments[also need groundwork  ]. [In general, this is true.   ]However, with all the evidence above, we cannot deny that there are certainly [ However, certain]exceptions [still exist  ]in some circumstances. Obviously, the [ The ]overture of any field [many new fields ]couldn’t base on the [ past ]achievement from the past: because there was no “past” yet, let alone (the important contributions made early those days)[  unclear]. Also, for some subjects, especially those interdisciplinary subjects[ones  ], it is more important to comprehend [acquiring  ]knowledge from multiple fields to make contributions in its own[ is crucial ]. (It follows that the achievement in its very own field is rather less important. Those were some of the minor conditions in which the statement seem to go to far.)[ unclear ]

    In a word, the statement (holds true)[ repetition ] in most cases both in ancient times or [ and the]modern [era  ]world of 21st century. But we also have to admit that, for a newborn subject or an interdisciplinary subject, the statement is way too absolute.