Hend'x Original Fragment/Statement - See my comments for my modifications!
Lebanon may be small, but it has a rich history, which has had immeasurable impact on today's world.
Counterarguments and fallacies
-Lebanon's impact cannot be quantifiably measured.
-Lebanon's history is linked to the history of many other nations, and so the impact of Lebanon, herself, is not always clear.
-Lebanon's size is small relative to some nations but it is also large compared to others.
Now in a more coherent manner of expression:
Lebanon may be a small country but it's history is shared if not dependent on the history of many other nations. This [this? what this? replace this pronoun with what it references; even though this might not seem economical, but it provides space, it makes space in face for you to compose. Repetitions are good!leaves Lebanon's impact on the world very obscure. The history may be vibrant but the richness is also called into question when it is realized that the occupation of Lebanon by foreign powers has been part of the history of Lebanon for a very, very, very long time.
Lebanon can and is referred to as a third world country, but lets not place comparison and defintion where it is not necessary. Instead, let us realize that Lebanon has and will continue to be defined by other nations, just as all countries and nations have experienced. The United States and its very short history wasn't created all on its own, but a combination of interjection and interfence of foreign nations and its own creation. [Gutter: Fill the void and realize that United States started in the same zero point of reference that all countries have and will.] We shouldn't focus on the fact that Lebanon's impact on the world is obscure, but rather an addition to an ever diverse culture that we must embrance or it will be swallowed by the post-modern conformity. Your reference to richness and it ambigiouity with relation to the Lebanon shouldn't be placed in question. If Lebanon lacked richness than it wouldn't be Lebanon. Lebanon has richness because it is different from any other country to this day and will continue to until it loses individuality.
Beirut is essentially a city of constant rebuilding and renovation.
Counterarguments and fallacies
-Renovations and rebuilding are aspects that every country, heck any city must do.
-Beirut is a city of perpetual rebuilding for a very good reason which is connected to her history.
-One could argue that Beirut is not really renovating but rather rebuilding up to the new current code. The renovations could be an aspect of the rebuilding rather than a separate category.
Now in a more coherent manner of expression:
Beirut's reasons for rebuilding are key to understanding this sentence. Rebuilding to remain youthful looking versus rebuilding to reconstruct and replace damaged buildings that were leveled during a long, long civil war have very different meanings. The reconstruction of Lebanon would include some form of renovations as people tend to prefer new styles and design as compared to old styles and so without any barriers, why not go for the new sexy style than the antiquated one? Also, rebuilding is something that every city experiences as that is a sign that the city is alive and there are people inside of it.
Forever changing and reinventing itself, Beirut has a lasting legacy in the world today.
Counterarguments and fallacies
-Beirut is not changing on her own urging.
-The legacy of Beirut is linked to the history of Beirut which is tied into the history of many other past "occupying countries."
-The city is not really reinventing itself, but rather solely rebuilding.
Now in a more coherent manner of expression:
Beirut is not changing just for the hey of it. Beirut has been forced into changing due to many issues including foreign occupation and civil disturbances. These events have caused Beirut to change out of necessity rather than out of want. This different is huge because if Beirut has to change solely out of necessity, this is not a good trait as the legacy is more tarnished than anything else. Furthermore, the idea of leaving a lasting legacy without mention of the role that a foreign occupying nation has played, can be very devious if read incorrectly.
Go back to my main page!
Comments (0)
You don't have permission to comment on this page.