The restoration of old buildings in major cities in the world costs numerous governments’ expenditure. This money should be used in new housing and road development. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

 

本题是2013年7月27日的原题重现，与2017年12月2日的题目（城市里的旧建筑应该被拆除吗？）也有相似之处，都是关于老建筑是否该保留或者拆除的问题。

 

本题其实也是要求烤鸭们论证，到底该不该对老建筑进行重新修缮？因为重修老建筑需要花费很多钱，那么到底值不值得呢？这些钱是不是该用于建新的住房，或者新的道路呢？因此，这里还涉及一个小小的比较：到底老建筑重要，还是新的住房和道路更重要？

 

我们当然可以这样来论证本题：很多老的建筑物既危险，也影响城市面貌，因此完全没有必要重修，可以拆除它们，而节约下来的钱用于改善我们现实的住房和道路条件；但也有很多建筑物具有历史文化价值，是我们民族记忆的一部分，因此应该保留，花再多钱修缮都是值得的。这是两边论证的思路。

 

我们也可以这样来论证：老建筑物虽然有价值，但毕竟只是与生活无关的价值。我们现实生活中需要更好的住房条件和道路条件，这样才能使城市居民生活更幸福，更和谐。因此，用于修缮老建筑物的钱完全应该用于改善住房和道路条件。这是一边倒论证的思路。

 

 

 

老师笔记

 

01

 

Every city has old buildings. Every year the governments around the world spend large sums of money restoring them. Some people consider this a huge waste of money and they believe the governments’ budget should go to building new houses and roads, while others insist that the restoration of old buildings in cities is well worth the money.

 

每个城市都有旧建筑。每年全世界的政府都花大笔的钱来修缮它们。有些人认为这是对金钱的极大浪费，他们相信政府的预算应该投去建造新的房子和道路，而其他人则坚持认为修缮城市的旧建筑是值得花钱的。

 

解析

（1）本段为开头段，直接引入旧建筑的话题，然后提出两类观点。这里的核心问题是：修缮这些旧建筑需要投入巨资，这是否值得？因此在引入话题时一定要提出“巨资”的问题。

（2）restore 修复；恢复

（3）a huge waste of money 金钱的极大浪费

（4）budget 预算

（5）be well worth 完全值得......

 

02

 

There are a host of reasons why some urban old buildings should not be restored. To start with, the old buildings are no longer suitable for people to live in, therefore they should be destroyed and give way to new buildings so that people, especially young people in the cities have more living spaces. Secondly, the old buildings can cause inconveniences for the city dwellers. Since there is not a direct route through the old buildings, people sometimes have to go to and off work by making along detour around them, and in this way much of their time is wasted. Finally, the old buildings may give rise to safety problems. More than 100 people, for example, are killed or injured each year in my city, just because of the collapse of some ancient buildings.

 

有些市区旧楼不应修复，原因很多。首先，这些旧建筑物不再适合人们居住，因此它们应该被摧毁，让位给新的建筑，这样人们，特别是城市的年轻人有更多的居住空间。第二，旧建筑物会给城市居民带来不便。因为没有直接穿过旧建筑的道路，人们有时不得不绕道上下班，这样就浪费了很多时间。最后，这些老建筑也许引起安全问题。例如，每年有100多人在我住的城市丧生或受伤，就是因为一些古老建筑倒塌。

 

解析

 （1）本段论述部分人的观点：老建筑不应修缮，而应该拆除。主要提出三个原因：空间问题、交通问题、安全问题。当然，也可以论述市容市貌问题。

（2）a host of reasons 众多理由

（3）give way to... 让位于......

（4）city dweller 城市居民

（5）make a detour 绕道

（6）give rise to 产生，引起

（7）collapse 倒塌

 

 

03

 

Yet old buildings - at least some of them - are significant historically and culturally, and hence should be restored for that reason. They carry some important messages about the city or even the whole nation. The Summer Palace, for instance, is a perfect reminder of how the imperial family in the Qing Dynasty in feudal China were living and so has great cultural significance. Such old buildings, if well preserved, can become tourist spots and attract thousands of visitors from allaround the globe.

 

然而，旧建筑--至少其中一些--在历史上和文化上都是重要的，因此应该予以修复。它们传递一些关于这个城市，甚至整个国家的重要信息。例如颐和园就很好地提醒我们，封建中国的清朝皇族是如何生活的，因此有重要的文化意义。这些古老的建筑，如果保存完好，可以成为旅游景点，吸引成千上万来自世界各地的游客。

 

解析

（1）本段论述老建筑物的价值：主要从文化角度讲，顺便提及旅游价值。本段使用了举例的论述方法。

（2）significant 重要的

（3）reminder 提醒物

（4）imperial 帝王的

（5）around the globe 全球

 

04

 

We all need a memory of our past. Many old buildings do have historical and cultural value which tells us who we were. We need to take good care of these buildings and keep them as long as possible, however much money it may involve, so that they can tell the stories of the city or the nation to our future generations. Of course, the money squandered on those old buildings with little value should be used to solve more practical problems such as housing and traffic. 

 

我们都需要过去的记忆。许多老建筑确实具有历史和文化价值，告诉我们我们是谁。我们需要照顾好这些建筑物，并尽可能长时间地保存它们，不管这会涉及多少金钱，这样它们就可以向我们的后代讲述城市或国家的故事。当然，浪费在那些价值不大的旧建筑物上的钱应该用于解决更实际的问题，如住房和交通。

 

解析

（1）结尾段，提出自己的观点：应该修缮有文化历史价值的老建筑，同时不应在没有价值的老建筑物花钱。

（2）memory 记忆

（3）value 价值

（4）involve 涉及；包含

（5）generation 代；辈

（6）squander 浪费

（7）practical 实际的

 

 

 

本场考试范文

Every city has old buildings. Every year the governments around the world spend large sums of money restoring them. Some people consider this a huge waste of money and they believe the governments’ budget should go to building new houses and roads, while others insist that the restoration of old buildings in cities is well worth the money.

 

There are a host of reasons why some urban old buildings should not be restored. To start with, the old buildings are no longer suitable for people to live in, therefore they should be destroyed and give way to new buildings so that people, especially young people in the cities have more living spaces. Secondly, the old buildings can cause inconveniences for the city dwellers. Since there is not a direct route through the old buildings, people sometimes have to go to and off work by making a long detour around them, and in this way much of their time is wasted. Finally, the old buildings may give rise to safety problems. More than 100 people, for example, are killed or injured each year in my city, just because of the collapse of some ancient buildings.

 

Yet old buildings - at least some of them - are significant historically and culturally, and hence should be restored for that reason. They carry some important messages about the city or even the whole nation. The Summer Palace, for instance, is a perfect reminder of how the imperial family in the Qing Dynasty in feudal China were living and so has great cultural significance. Such old buildings, if well preserved, can become tourist spots and attract thousands of visitors from all around the globe.

 

We all need a memory of our past. Many old buildings do have historical and cultural value which tells us who we were. We need to take good care of these buildings and keep them as long as possible, however much money it may involve, so that they can tell the stories of the city or the nation to our future generations. Of course, the money squandered on those old buildings with little value should be used to solve more practical problems such as housing and traffic.

(367 words)