描述:2012-05-18 15.16.40_副本.jpg

这次作文比较棘手，给的要点基本不会翻译
所以求要点的翻译，不用写全文TAT
速求，写完之后作文发上来求修改~
========我是上作文的分割线=====

     For some of these people agree with this idea. They think that Interview is also a way to select and recruit talented students. So it is without doubt that they use more open-ended questions that are more challenging to elect. People are noticing this thing that a lot of university use opened questions to elect students. These questions usually have no real 'right' or 'wrong' answers, which can be used to examine a candidate's abilities to answer questions as well as think independently and critically.
   But for others disagree with this idea. They considerate that this questions are weird, and far away from candidates' daily lives. Furthermore, these questions confuse the candidates, and cannot examine their real abilities and knowledge.
   As far as I’m concerned, in our developing society, it really needs to have more and more the able. These people are a good start towards a better future of our country.  

支持方可以这么写。

As face-to-face interview has become the most widely applicable method of recruitment, interviewers are increasingly inclined to employ open-ended questions that are by their nature arguable. Unlike old days when interviewees were marked on the basis of simple yes/no and multiple choice questions, those who hold a positive attitude towards using interview for the independent enrolment argue that by employing this approach can universities select candidates who are capable of making their own judgement, independents and critically.

LL 感兴趣的话在下可以尝试写反方

那個，其實我覺得開頭這樣比較好
People who agree with this idea think that interview...........
這樣就不會太累贅

基本同意岚君童鞋的意见，有一些补充的~~

1. For some of these people agree with this idea, they think that Interview is also a way to select and recruit talented students.

people 后面应该加一个 who，定语从句。另外 interview 在句子中间，不需要大写。


2. 第二段开头也一样，But for others disagree with this idea...
others 后面也需要加一个 who


3. These people are a good start towards a better future of our country.  

这句话，读起来怪怪的。建议可以说成，These people can make a good start towards a better future of our country.  

翻译既然希希已经翻译了，我就省了这个功夫，直接看作文里的问题吧：

1. For some of these people agree with this idea, they think that Interview is also a way to select and recruit talented students.
这个实际上是一个句子，把句号去掉，They的大写改掉。

2. So it is without doubt that they use more open-ended questions that are more challenging to elect.
我理解悲催的it is without doubt that总是要出现的原因，但是感觉这里用不是很好。我一会儿看看能给你换个地方插进去。这里的They建议还是用universities，因为前文一直没有出现学校，这里用they会让人感觉在指代那些认为自主招生应该用各种怪异问题的人。然后，more challenging to elect有点不和逻辑，再说学校给自己找麻烦一样似的。还是改成more challenging to answer吧。

3. People are noticing this thing that a lot of university use opened questions to elect students.
a lot of universities
然后thing这个词，虽然意思什么没有问题，但是我自己总是觉得读着不太舒服。建议用phenomenon，fact，reality这类的词。

4. 第二段开头和第一点一样，然后：They considerate that this questions are weird, and far away from candidates' daily lives.
considerate是形容词，动词还是consider。this改为these

5. As far as I’m concerned, in our developing society, it really needs to have more and more the able. These people are a good start towards a better future of our country.  
厄。the 加形容词的确可以表示一类人，但是这个用法貌似比较局限，以前和一个这边英语系的同学讨论过，基本上就是常见的the poor, the rich, the elderly这些，别的用法，不说不对，但是很不常见吧。这里可以说 more and more people equipped with different abilities。
题目里要求你写两点自己的观点。现在这个是没有写完么？

然后，虽然不是高中要求的，但是一般要求你陈述自己观点的话，比较常用的万能格式是：先简单说明一下你的观点（支持/反对/部分支持），然后再写你的两个观点，中间可以用各种顺序性的过渡词连接。【虽然看着很老套，但是很有用，一直到写学术论文还是要基本遵守这个规则的，只不过不是用那些套话写，但是原理是一样的，所以为了将来大学还要继续写各种英语议论文，还是稍微养成一下这个习惯比较好。】

【希希不在的话，你可以QQ上戳我。我基本上隐身，所以，直接戳吧。】

我尝试着翻译了一下，供你参考。另外，这几天正忙着准备回国，可能不能及时回你消息了~

Supporters: Interview is also a way to select and recruit talented people. They use more open-ended questions that are more challenging to answer. These questions usually have no real 'right' or 'wrong' answers, which can be used to examine a candidate's abilities to answer questions as well as think independently and critically.

Opponents: The questions are weird, and far away from candidates' daily lives. Furthermore, these questions confuse the candidates, and cannot examine their real abilities and knowledge.