2006年06月17日

参见:

小技巧让PDF文件与Word文档之间自由地转换

http://news.newhua.com/html/Skill_Office/2004-6/18/162231304.shtml

2006年05月27日

http://www.mm6.com.cn/upfile/readarticle.asp?fileEname=200210111353240.htm

http://www.fx.edu.sh.cn/jyxgn/gwjylnysj/jxln/1-11.htm

2006年05月23日

The first educational technology was writing, and like every subsequent educational technology, it had its critics. Plato, most famously, denounced the medium for its inability to recreate the give and take of spoken discourse. Writing is analogous to painting, he has Socrates argue in The Phaedrus (a text that, fittingly, depicts an intimate conversation between teacher and student).1

"The painters’ products stand before us as though they were alive, but if you question them, they maintain the most majestic silence. It is the same with written words; they seem to talk to you as though they were intelligent, but if you ask them anything about what they say, from a desire to be instructed, they go on telling you just the same thing forever" (1961, p. 521).

In short, Plato holds that the technology of writing has the power to destroy the dialogic relationship that ought to occur between teacher and student. As he sees it, the medium in which we communicate determines the quality of our interactions. But this is a deeply flawed view, as many contemporary scholars have argued. Rather, the social impact of technology depends on how it is designed and used. Writing can lend itself to ongoing dialogues between teachers and students, and speech can easily become one-sided.

However, while Plato may have made an unfair generalization about writing, his critique still had merit in at least one respect: it’s worth keeping in mind that whenever a new educational technology is introduced, we ought to be wary lest reformers configure it in a way that closes off the process of intellectual exchange. There is something about dialogue, and the active involvement of the teacher, that is fundamental to the educational process and that must be woven into the design of any new instructional tool.

The Deskilling of the Teacher?

In fact, this ideal has inspired many educators since the early 1980s, and considerable progress has been made in using computer technology to develop new forms of dialogic interaction among teachers and students (Harasim, et al., 1995: chap. 3; Berge, 1999). On-line distance learning, in particular, holds tremendous promise in this regard, offering the potential for great improvements over previous models. Correspondence schools, for example, have always achieved some success at using the mail to maintain written interactions, but the process is slow and unwieldy. With the Internet, for the first time, we have an educational technology that supports rapid and convenient communication, and there’s every reason to think that Socratic dialogue can flourish in this medium. 

Unfortunately, though, the current rage for computerized instruction tends to emphasize a quite different set of possibilities for the Internet. We have seen a new round of interest in "teacherless education," or the automation of key parts of the teaching-learning process. Neither television nor stand-alone computers ever managed to accomplish this feat, but many believe that such possibilities wait for us just a few miles down the information superhighway.

To the extent that earlier attempts failed for purely technical reasons, the Internet does show promise. In its ability to transmit graphically exciting materials, programs, and text, it represents a considerable advance over earlier means of delivering information. It can even offer crude imitations of teacher-intensive tasks, such as answering questions using FAQs (Frequently Asked Question lists) and "Ask the Expert" help programs. "Intelligent agents" can adapt computer-based programs to students’ learning styles (Kearsley, 1993). And, incredibly enough, it may even be possible to automate the grading of essay tests, as Peter Foltz and Thomas Landauer claim in describing their "Intelligent Essay Assessor," based on a technique called "Latent Semantic Analysis" (Foltz, 1996). According to a Coopers & Lybrand white paper, this kind of software will soon have a radical impact upon the daily realities of higher education. "[A] mere 25 courses" of packaged instructional software could handle 80% of enrollment in core undergraduate courses; a 24-hour help desk would add a personal touch (Coopers & Lybrand, 1997).

Why would we want to automate highly skilled educational tasks? Some may argue that technology can deliver certain kinds of education more effectively than can faculty. Others would claim that automated instruction offers "consumer-friendly" options for working adults. But in the final analysis, the main reason for automating is obvious: to cut costs. Skilled workers are expensive, and automation is a time-honored strategy for reducing the need for them. The story begins in the early 19th-century, when textile manufacturers in northern England discovered that they could lower costs by mechanizing and replacing skilled with unskilled labor. The whole history of the Industrial Revolution is dominated by this strategy.

Here is how the 19th century "philosopher of manufactures" Andrew Ure described the goal in 1835:

"By the infirmity of human nature it happens, that the more skillful the workman, the more self-willed and intractable he is apt to become, and, of course, the less fit a component of a mechanical system, in which, by occasional irregularities, he may do great damage to the whole. The grand object therefore of the modern manufacturer is, through the union of capital and science, to reduce the task of his work-people to the exercise of vigilance and dexterity" (p. 18).

Attempts to similarly de-skill teaching have never been very successful in the past, but many observers are beginning to believe that new technologies can do the trick. Perhaps it will be possible to create a system whereby a variety of educational tools are delivered over the Internet and supplemented by the recorded performances of a few star professors. Then, low-level staff will perform the last few remaining tasks, such as notifying students of the availability of materials or of tests and deadlines.

Is such a gloomy version of the future really plausible? Is it likely that "self-willed and intractable" professors will disappear as have weavers, shoemakers, and typesetters? Probably not, but whether our uses of technology are about to lead to the wholesale deskilling of the professoriate is less important than the fact that this idea occupies a key place in the imagination of some educational reformers. Much of today’s reform rhetoric, with its appeals to the revolutionary potential of virtual universities and competency-based degrees, hints at the obsolescence of the traditional campus and its teaching methods, arousing suspicion among faculty that technology will be used against them. Perhaps this is what is most at stake in our present debates about the computer’s role in shaping the future of higher education: in making plans for the use of our new media, do we threaten to delegitimate faculty’s control of the educational process?

A Third Way for Educational Technology

Ironically, contemporary thinking (if not always practice) in the business world has long since left behind the industrial era’s fascination with deskilling. Over the last two decades, a good deal of business literature has been devoted to exploring a third way, an alternative to the old opposition of "man" vs. "machine." Starting with Peters and Waterman’s 1982 best seller In Search of Excellence, Frederick Taylor’s old model of de-skilled labor and hierarchical management was blamed for everything that ailed American business. The lesson has been hammered home in dozens of similar books since then.

Harvard business professor Shoshanna Zuboff made a particularly persuasive contribution to the field with her book In the Age of the Smart Machine (1988). As she sees it, we can continue to de-skill and automate production, or we can choose to take a new path, one that leads to what she calls "informating," or the cooperation of skilled workers and computers in ways that enhance the productivity of each. Zuboff’s work emphasizes the complementarity of human and computer capabilities. While humans are best at dealing with unexpected situations and responding to novelty, computers can organize the vast amount of data required by modern production processes. A similar complementarity is at work in education: the teacher manages the complex and unpredictable communication of the classroom, while data is delivered in textbooks (and now by computers as well).

Zuboff’s view contrasts sharply with technological determinism, the belief that innovations cause unique patterns of social change. The determinist view is increasingly challenged in technology studies by social explanations of technological development (Pinch and Bijker, 1987). We now believe that innovations confront us with a choice, not a destiny. The computer is certainly a case in point.

Not long ago, computers were assumed to be mere calculating and information storage devices, and their occasional application to other arenas seemed irrelevant or wasteful in the eyes of most programmers. It was only in the 1980s that electronic communications exploded, first in France, where the Minitel system quickly attracted millions of users, and soon afterwards on the Internet. It was mainly non-professionals (or professionals not associated with the design and management of the systems) who pioneered such uses of the new electronic technologies. And they succeeded because ordinary people wanted computers to serve their personal goals and not just the official functions emphasized by experts (Feenberg, 1995; chap. 7).

Just twenty years ago, few imagined what the future would hold for apparently trivial applications such as email. But it seems obvious today that the computer serves as a vital medium of communication, and not just as a calculating and information storage device. Its definition has changed in a direction determined by a social process. And the story is not yet over. The computer is not yet a finished product. It is still in flux, its evolution subject to a wide range of social influences and demands.

The specifics of the business literature are not always directly relevant to colleges and universities, but Zuboff and others’ emphasis on technological choice is right on the mark. Unfortunately, though, higher education hasn’t entirely gotten the message. Many college presidents continue to sell their constituents on the inevitability of computerization, as though the very existence of these new devices sets the reform agenda in some clear-cut and unambiguous way. And there still exists plenty of faculty opposition to the supposed consequences of the new media, as though their impact were pre-determined (Feenberg, 1999; Farber, 1998).

In reality, though, our technology does not determine whether teaching will be automated or informated. Technology by itself does not hold such power. On the contrary, we must ourselves make the decisions that will steer the future development of educational technology. And this is precisely why it is so very important for higher education to include a wide range of actors in technological design (Wilson, 1999). Students and faculty bring a number of considerations to the table, including the desire to create tools that support human interaction, a desire that has already manifested itself forcefully in the earlier evolution of the computer. To resist the automating trend in education is not simply to wallow in an old-fashioned Mr. Chips sentimentality. Rather, it is to make a case for a potential and important line of technological development. The danger is that we might listen so attentively to our technology gurus that we end up ignoring these other voices.

The Promise of On-line Distance Learning

The need for alternatives to automation may be most pressing in the field of online distance learning, a field that I helped to create in the early 1980s (Feenberg, 1993).

The origins of distance learning lie in the old-fashioned correspondence course, which feeds written documents to isolated students studying from their home. Given the economies of scale in the production of written documents, this model yields tremendous cost savings when compared to classroom education. Essentially, labor costs approach zero as the school acquires a body of reusable materials. But note the social condition for these economies: the isolation of the student.

The Internet promises to raise the level of correspondence education, and it promises to do so inexpensively, by improving the materials available to the student. Not only does it replace the Post Office, television, and radio as means of delivery, but it can also carry out new tasks, delivering film, audio, and automated educational programs quickly and conveniently. However, the Internet can do more than merely improve the traditional correspondence course; it can also be used to add human contact to an educational model that has always been relatively impersonal. Using email and computer conferencing, groups of students can be assembled in online communities where they can participate in classroom discussion with teachers on a regular basis.

There are two alternative models of on-line distance learning here with quite different financial structures. An automated system takes advantage of the economies of scale associated with the distribution of written materials and extends them into the wide range of media supported by the Internet (Agre, 1999). On the other hand a system that also includes live interaction does so at a price: a qualified teacher must be in attendance at every iteration of the course. Institutions may save money on building costs but not on educational labor, the single largest item in most university budgets.

There are further implications for the design of courses. Automated products will tend to be quite elaborate, since they must rely entirely on the computer to dramatize their message and motivate the student. Courseware designers and producers will manage the work of star faculty who can offer a polished performance in the new medium. Predictably, educational technology will evolve to Hollywood levels of complexity.

By contrast, courses animated by a live professor will generally be designed under his or her control in relatively simple and flexible formats. No computer professionals need be involved. As in the conventional classroom, much of the interest of the product will lie in the interaction among students and between students and teachers. As far as techniques of presentation are concerned, a certain healthy amateurism is to be expected. Prepackaged computer-based materials will not replace the teacher but supplement his or her efforts, much as do textbooks today. Software designers will pursue user-friendliness and simplicity to serve faculty needs.

In sum, the field of on-line distance learning faces precisely the same choice between automating and informating that businesses face as they confront the challenge of the computer. And, surely, we ought to make this choice on educational grounds.

Shaping the Future of Educational Technology

We already have a base of experience with interactive forms of on-line education, and the evidence seems clear, at least to those who have tried it: written dialogue works. Using computer conferencing software, faculty in many universities have for years now been working to bring the excitement of classroom discussion to an electronic setting. Such on-line discussions are not the same as face-to-face interactions, of course, but they have their own advantages. For the instantaneous back and forth of real-time discussion, they substitute a slower but still engaging day to day rhythm. With time to think and compose questions and answers, students who might never have participated in a face-to-face setting bring forward their ideas. The use of writing imposes a discipline and helps focus thinking. Faculty learn to grasp students’ ideas at a much deeper level as they engage with them on line. Innovative pedagogical techniques such as collaborative learning have been adapted to the Internet and new forms of interaction invented (Harasim, et al., 1995: chapter 6). From an educational standpoint, there is little doubt that competent teachers under these conditions can be effective at sustaining a true equivalent of classroom interaction.

But in shaping the future of our technologies, economic and political realities now look to play the leading roles. Higher education seems increasingly enamored with corporate rather than professional models of organization. The erosion of traditional faculty status continues apace in innovative institutions serving adult learners, now half the students in higher education. Even the older universities that now teach a declining fraction of students employ more and more part timers in the search for "flexibility." And it is becoming more difficult to resist arguments against tenure, arguments that carry conviction with the public if not with most members of the university community. In short, there exists a great deal of temptation to think of technology as a managerial tool for centralizing the university. And if we are not careful, something like this may actually happen in the confusing environment created by technological change.

Fortunately, how we design our new technologies is still an open question; the answer will decide which benefits and which limitations we end up with. Indeed, that choice will decide who the "we" are that peoples the educational institutions of the future, since our models of computerized instruction will define the future identities and roles of students and teachers. If we can resist simplistic appeals to managerial efficiency and focus our efforts on sustaining the dialogue that has always been at the heart of the educational experience, then technology holds great promise; if not, then we face a great threat

Notes

1. Ironically, Plato used a written text as the vehicle for his critique of writing, setting a precedent that we continue to follow in present-day debates about educational technology: many of the most vociferous attacks on web-based media circulate on the Internet (Noble, 1997).

References

 Agre, Philip (1998). "The Distances of Education: Defining the Role of Information Technology in the University," Academe, September.

Berge, Zane (1999). "Interaction in Post-Secondary Web-based Learning," Educational Technology, vol. 39, no. 1.

Coopers & Lybrand (1997). "The Transformation of Higher Education in the Digital Age." Report based on the Learning Partnership Roundtable, Aspen Institute, Maryland, July 1997.

Farber, Jerry (1998). "The Third Circle: On Education and Distance Learning," Sociological Perspectives, Vol. 41, No. 4, 1998.

Feenberg, Andrew (1993). "Building a Global Network: The WBSI Experience," in L. Harasim, ed., Global Networks: Computerizing the International Community. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Feenberg, Andrew (1995). Alternative Modernity. Berkeley: University of California Press.

Feenberg, Andrew (1999). "Distance Learning: Promise or Threat?" Crosstalk, vol. 7, no. 1.

Foltz, P. W. (1996) Latent Semantic Analysis for Text-based Research. Behavior Research Methods, Instruments and Computers, vol. 28, no. 2.

Harasim, Linda, S. R. Hiltz, L. Teles, and M. Turoff (1995). Learning Networks: A Field Guide to Teaching and Learning Online. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Kearsley, G. (1993). "Intelligent Agents and Instructional Systems: Implications of a New Paradigm," Journal of Artificial Intelligence and Education, vol. 4, no. 4.

Noble, David (1997). "Digital Diploma Mills: The Automation of Higher Education," http://classweb.moorhead.msus.edu/teach/noble.htm.

Pinch, Trevor, Hughes, Thomas, and Bijker, Wiebe (1989). The Social Construction of Technological Systems. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

Plato (1961), Collected Dialgoues. New York: Pantheon Books.

Ure, Andrew (1835). The Philosophy of Manufactures. London: Charles Knight.

Wilson, Brent (1999). "Adoption of Learning Technologies: Toward New Frameworks for Understanding the Link Between Design and Use, " Educational Technology, vol. 39, no. 1.

Zuboff, Shoshana (1988). In the Age of the Smart Machine. New York: Basic Books.

From:http://www-rohan.sdsu.edu/faculty/feenberg/peer4.html

2006年05月15日

Form: http://www.cko.com.cn/web/articles/km/2/20060410/2,2340,0.html

    世界上最杰出的建筑实际上都出自于动物,比如像蜜蜂的蜂巢和蚂蚁的蚁窝。蚂蚁天生就是建筑大师,它们能建造出让人类称奇的居所,那圆型的门拱就像计算机里的三维图形。但这里的蚂蚁指的是一个数量级的群体,而不包括个体,甚至是一小群蚂蚁。

    生物科学家曾做过这样一个实验:将一小群工蚁放到一个适合筑窝的地方,出于本能,这些小蚂蚁会立刻动手建筑蚁穴。但当蚂蚁的数量小于一定级别的时候,这些忙忙碌碌的蚂蚁只会建造半个门拱,它们会反复建筑许多半个门拱,就是建不起一个完整的门。如果不断地增加蚂蚁的数量,在达到一定数量级别的时候,那些乱哄哄的蚂蚁突然好像得到了完整的建筑图纸,一下子变得有序起来,不一会,一个完整的蚁门就会完成。

    从这个事例中可以看出,蚂蚁的世界也有类似知识管理的机制存在着,推而广之,其实不论是有意还是无意,知识管理都普遍存在于世界的各个角落。组织知识一直是群体存在的基础,而组织的发展、变革也首先体现在知识的发展、变革之中。
   
    知识分为两种,一种是个体的知识,一种是组织的知识,知识管理的第一步就是要将个体的知识转化的组织的知识。个体的知识必须与组织知识相接,或者转化为组织知识才能具有更大的社会性。每一个蚂蚁的本能中都有建造拱门的基因(个体知识),但在没有汇集成组织知识时,个体的蚂蚁甚至小群的蚂蚁是不具备建造完整蚁门的能力。

   在美国“曼哈顿计划(原子弹计划)”之前,原子弹的所有建造技术与理论已经存在于许多人的脑海中,但个体的知识并不能最终形成原子弹这个实体。因此,“曼哈顿计划”本身就是一个知识管理的计划,它将理论、工程、设计、材料……等个体知识组合在一起,最终才换来了那一声惊天动地的巨响。

    从这个角度说,任何公司或者医院,在组织构建及实施计划时,最本质的东西并不是组织或者计划的本身,而是知识管理。彼得·杜拉克曾表示,下一个社会是知识社会,未来企业都将充满着知识工作者。而知识工作者犹如游牧民族般地逐水草而居,热爱工作但不一定热爱组织,哪里有知识可以追逐,哪里可享受成就感,就往哪里走。未来的人是独立而有个性的,所以他又说:“管理之道不在管人,而在管理知识。” 

2006年03月22日

好久前便听说“学习型组织”这个词了,尽管自己在一些作业中也曾写道,要创建学习型组织来提高教育教学效果等等。其实,对这个词我是不了解的,自己用的时候也是有“跟风”的嫌疑,炒的热啊,与时俱进啊。想想真是哀悲。是该反省下的!

查到一篇英文的对学习型组织的解释:http://www.albany.edu/sph/Hoff_learning/hpm_tim_learnorg.htm 毕竟这个概念是从大洋彼岸引进过来的,不过要是能到图书馆看看这方面的文献倒是很有意义,可惜啊,七楼的外文书库我只去过2次,借的书都还没怎么看就到期归还了,现在是看纸质资料的时间太少了,Why???

彼得·圣吉在《第五项修炼》(彼翁的这套书在国内应该说是火爆销售的,记得前年得时候我和师姐一起在书店买过一本,哪个版本得记不清了,后来书被师姐借给一个朋友了,去年一次我去书店很想再买本,发现原来得那版已经没了,出了新版本,经过国人吸收本土化了,分成了好几册,唉,初略翻了翻感觉走味了,罢了,省点银子的好)中大概有这些讲述,从他人那取来的,不知有出入否。

所谓学习型组织,是指通过培养弥漫于整个组织的学习气氛、充分发挥员工的创造性思维能力而建立起来的一种有机的、高度柔性的、扁平的,符合人性的、能持续发展的组织。这种组织具有持续学习的能力,具有高于个人绩效总和的综合绩效。学习型组织具有下面几个特征:
  1.组织成员拥有一个共同的愿景
  组织的共同愿景(SharedVi-sion),来源于员工个人的愿景而又高于个人的愿景。朝着组织共同的目标前进。
  2.组织由多个创造性个体组成
  在学习型组织中,团体是最基本的学习单位,团体本身应理解为彼此需要他人配合的一群人。组织的所有目标都是直接或间接地通过团体的努力来达到的。
  3.善于不断学习
  这是学习型组织的本质特征。所谓“善于不断学习”,主要有四点含义:
  一是强调“终身学习”;二是强调“全员学习”;三是强调“全过程学习”;四是强调“团体学习”。
  4.“地方为主”的扁平式结构
  传统的企业组织通常是金字塔式的,学习型组织的组织结构则是扁平
  的,即从最上面的决策层到最下面的操作层,中间相隔层次极少。它尽最大可能将决策权向组织结构的下层移动,让最下层单位拥有充分的自决权,并对产生的结果负责,从而形成以“地方为主”的扁平化组织结构。例如,美国通用电器公司目前的管理层次已由9层减少为4层。只有这样的体制,才能保证上下级的不断沟通,下层才能直接体会到上层的决策思想和智慧光辉,上层也能亲自了解到下层的动态,吸取第一线的营养。
  5.自主管理
  学习型组织理论认为,“自主管理”是使组织成员能边工作边学习并使工作和学习紧密结合的方法。通过自主管理,可由组织成员自己发现工作中的问题,自己选择伙伴组成团队,自己选定改革进取的目标,自己进行现状调查,自己分析原因,自己制定对策,自己组织实施,自己检查效果,自己评定总结。6.组织的边界将被重新界定
  学习型组织的边界的界定,建立在组织要素与外部环境要素互动关系的基础上,超越了传统的根据职能或部门划分的“法定”边界。例如,把销售商的反馈信息作为市场营销决策的固定组成部分,而不是像以前那样只是作为参考。
  7.员工家庭与事业的平衡
  学习型组织努力使员工丰富的家庭生活与充实的工作生活相得益彰。学习型组织对员工承诺支持每位员工充分的自我发展,而员工也以承诺对组织的发展尽心尽力作为回报。这样,个人与组织的界限将变得模糊,工作与家庭之间的界限也将逐渐消失,两者之间的冲突也必将大为减少,从而提高员工家庭生活的质量(满意的家庭关系、良好的子女教育和健全的天伦之乐),达到家庭与事业之间的平衡。
  8.领导者的新角色
  在学习型组织中,领导者是设计师、仆人和教师,领导者的设计工作是一个对组织要素进行整合的过程,他不只是设计组织的结构和组织政策、策略,更重要的是设计组织发展的基本理念。
  学习型组织有着它不同凡响的作用和意义。它的真谛在于:学习一方面是为了保证企业的生存,使企业组织具备不断改进的能力,提高企业组织的竞争力;另一方面学习更是为了实现个人与工作的真正融合,使人们在工作中活出生命的意义。
  尽管学习型组织的前景十分迷人,但如果把它视为一贴万灵药则是危险的。事实上,学习型组织的缔造不应是最终目的,重要的是通过迈向学习型组织的种种努力,引导出一种不断创新、不断进步的新观念,从而使组织日新月异,不断创造未来。

国内学者对学习型组织的定义中,比较典型的是郭咸纲的定义:学习型组织,是指通过培养弥漫于整个组织的学习气氛,充分发挥员工的创造性思维能力而建立起来的一种有机的、高度柔性的、扁平的、符合人性的、能持续发展的组织。这种组织具有持续学习的能力,具有高于个人绩效总和的综合绩效。曹世潮的定义也比较有特色,他认为,所谓学习型组织,即组织是否具有学习的欲望、机制、环境和全体一致的自觉。

2006年03月13日

How come? 为什么? (怎么会这样?)
How come 的用法大部分就等于 why ,但是它的用法没有像 why 那么广, 它通常是用在你觉得奇怪, 而问为什么的时候, 比如说有人早上一大早要去 supermarket 你就会问他.  "How come?" 另外, 当别人问你一个问题, 而你不想回答时可以说 "How come?" 相当于, "Why do you ask that?" 也就是说 "It’s none of your business! "虽然 how come 跟 why 的用法上差不多, 但二者的问法不同, 例如上句, "Why is our oven broken?" 换成 how come 的话, 要说成, "How come our oven is broken?" 注意一下, 这二句的 be 动词位置是不一样的。

2005年12月20日

A Sioux Indian story …
这是苏语系印第安人部落中流传的一个古老的故事……
My grandfather took me to the fish pond on the farm when I was about seven, and he told me to throw a stone into the water. He told me to watch the circles created by the stone. Then he asked me to think of myself as that stone.
在我七岁那年,我的祖父来到田边的一个池塘。他让我丢一颗石子到水中,并嘱咐我仔细观察石子所激起的水波纹。然后他叫我把自己想象成那颗石子。
"You may create lots of splashes in your life, but the waves that come from those splashes will disturb the peace of all your fellow creatures," he said.
他说:“在生命的水面上,你也许能激起许多波纹,而你所激起的波纹也会打破别人的平静,”
"Remember that you are responsible for what you put in your circle and that circle will also touch many other circles."
“要谨记,对你所激起的波纹中所包含的东西负责,因为这些东西会接触、影响到别人的波纹。”
"You will need to live in a way that allows the good that comes from your circle to send the peace of that goodness to others. The splash that comes from anger or jealousy will send those feelings to other circles. You are responsible for both."
“你应当努力使自己波纹中的平和宁静传播给他人。当然,如果你的波纹中携带有愤怒、嫉妒,别人也会受到你的影响,因此,你要对它们负责。”
That was the first time I realized that each person creates the inner peace or discord that flows out into the world. We cannot create world peace if we are riddled with inner conflict, hatred, doubt, or anger.
这是我第一次了解到,每个人心中的平和抑或不和,都会传播给整个世界。如果我们自己内心都被冲突、仇恨、疑虑或者愤怒所纠缠,自然就不能给世界带来平和宁静。
We radiate the feelings and thoughts that we hold inside, whether we speak them or not. Whatever is splashing around inside of us is spilling out into the world, creating beauty or discord with all other circles of life.
无论我们是否说出心中的感觉和思绪,我们都在向外界传播它们。无论我们内心激起的是何种波纹,它们都会被传向他人,与别人的生命波纹共同激起美丽,抑或是不和谐。

From:http://www.52en.com/yy/html/20051118_001.asp

2005年11月28日

A set of five doll mascots for the 2008 Olympic Games were unveiled in Beijing on Nov, 11, exactly 1000 days before the event’s opening ceremony. The mascots embody the natural characteristics of four of China’s popular animals—the Fish, the Panda, the Tibetan Antelope, the Swallow and the Olympic Flame.

Each of the mascots has a rhyming two syllable name—a traditional way of expressing affection for children in China. Beibei is the Fish, Jingjing is the Panda, Huanhuan is the Olympic Flame, Yingying is the Tibetan Antilope, Nini is the Swallow. When you put their name together–Bei Jing Huan Ying Ni–they say “Welcome to Beijing.” offering a warm invitation that reflects the mission of the Five Friendlies as young ambassadors for the Olympic Games.

 In Chinese traditional culture and art, the fish and water designs are symbols of prosperity and harvest. And so Beibei carries the blessing of prosperity. A fish is also a symbol of surplus in Chinese culture, another measure of a good year and a good life. Among the Five Friendlies, Beibei is known to be gentle and pure. Strong in water sports, she reflects the blue Olympic ring.

Jingjing makes children smilehe brings the blessing of happiness. As a national treasure and a protected species, pandas are adored by people everywhere. Jingjing was chosen to represent our desire to protect nature’s gifts–and to preserve the beauty of nature for all generations. Jingjing is charmingly naive and optimistic. He is an athlete noted for strength who represents the black Olympic ring.

In the circle of Friendlies, Huanhuan is the big brother. He is symbolizing the Olympic Flame and the passion of sport. Huanhuan stands in the center of Friendlies as the core embodiment of the Olympic spirit. And while he inspires all with the passion to run faster, jump higher and be stronger, he is also open and inviting. Wherever the light of Huanhuan shines, the inviting warmth of Beijing 2008 and the wishful blessings of the Chinese people can be felt. Huanhuan is outgoing and enthusiastic. He excels at all the ball games and represents the red Olympic ring.

Yingying is fast and agile and can swiftly cover great stretches of land as he races across the earth. A symbol of the vastness of China’s landscape, the antelope carries the blessing of health, the strength of body that comes from harmony with nature. The selection of the Tibetan Antelope reflects Beijing commitment to a Green Olympics. Strong in track and field events, Yingying is a quick-witted and agile boy who represents the yellow Olympic ring.

Nini’s figure is drawn from the grand tradition of kite designs– golden-winged swallow. Swallow is also pronounced "yan" in Chinese, and Yanjing is what Beijing was called as an ancient capital city. Among the Friendlies, Nini is as innocent and joyful as a swallow. She is strong in gymnastics and represents the green Olympic.

In the ancient culture of China, there is a grand tradition of spreading blessings through signs and symbols. Each of the Five Friendlies symbolizes a different blessing. Prosperity, happiness, passion, health and good luck will be spread to every continent as the Five Friendlies carry their invitation to Beijing 2008 to every part of the globe.

The Five Friendlies also embody both the landscape and the dreams and aspirations of people from every part of the vast country of China. In their origins and their headpieces, you can see the five elements of nature–the sea, forest, fire, earth and sky–all stylistic rendered in ways that represent the deep traditional influences of Chinese folk art and ornamentation.

Pam decided to call it a night after dancing for five hours.

潘跳了五个小时的舞后,决定今晚到此为止。
call it a night 可能是从 call it a day 来的,call it a day 意指“今天的活动或工作到此为止(剩下的时间要用来休息)”,因此 call it a night 是指「今晚的活动到此为止」,类似的用法还有 call it quits,表“放弃;不再做事”之意。
From:http://www.52en.net/   Daily English
2005年11月25日

        When we are children, it is natural to cry and get upset when we feel sad. As we get older, we begin to understand cause and effect. By understanding more about the reasons things happen, we begin to feel a sense of control over our lives, and we are less likely to get hurt. At the same time, society pressures teenagers to show less emotion (at least in public) and remain calm and reasonable no matter what the situation. 

      As adults, we try not to lose control over our emotions. There is a limit, however, to how much a person can bear in silence. At some point, the pain becomes too great to bear, resulting in tears and other signs of sadness. It is at such moments that we describe a person as "losing it," meaning losing control over their emotions. Often this is a good thing: after "losing it" a person may feel much better.

主页:http://www.52en.net
天天十分钟,练出棒英语!《天天英语》每周一至周五出版