晨依小超人的写作贴，欢迎拍砖！

Rity

现在还可以加入写作小分队么？真心想好好练练。拖延症是一个大障碍，没有人监督实在不行。谢谢咯

晨依Jacqueline

现在还可以加入写作小分队么？真心想好好练练。拖延症是一个大障碍，没有人监督实在不行。谢谢咯

-- by 会员 Rity (2012/3/18 21:00:10)

欢迎Rity加入~！具体的流程请参考【写作小分队大本营】的帖子~
加入我们的qq群~一起rock toefl吧~！

晨依Jacqueline

3月26日 TPO16
好郁闷。。我没有听明白是怎么回事……而且实在是编不出来呀！
Prodliu大神救救我吧、、

The reading material is concerning about three problems or limitations the archaeology face in Britain. However, the lecture thinks the  construction adopted and changed the whole field of archaeology and contradicted the reading in three areas listed below.

First of all, the construction started as they were examined by the archaeologists, according to the professor. It is said that the construction was found interested and valuable. And then the local government and the builder archaeologists made joint efforts to preserve the construction by documenting and building around them. Unlike what the reading says, the construction was not destroyed with the growing of population.

Secondly, the context states that financial support was inadequate. In contrast, the speaker says that the rule of archaeology work should be paid for construction company but not the government, which should be made conservation plans and provided whole financial support.

Finally, difficulties was pointed out to  have a career in archaeology in the essay. But the professor claims that the project has become a paid work for amateurs which did not existed before. Archaeology value needs preservation plan, which a lot of archaeologists were hired. What they should do was to write articles, scientific researches and collected datas. What is more, the highest cost became the barrier of amateurs making a career.

晨依Jacqueline

3月27日  综合写作 TPO17
A serious problem of the harm to wildlife is debated in the reading material as the increasing population and pesticide use, especially on the number of birds. But that point is considered unconvincing by the lecturer for the following three reasons.

In the first place, the text claims that it is the increasing population and expansion that caused the habitat of birds disappear, which consequently led to the declined number of birds. However, the professor thinks that idea does not hold water. As it is stressed in the lecture, the population increase has provided a better and larger habitat for some birds, for example the pigeons. She favors the bird population is not shrinked though she admits that some kinds of birds like holks are no longer appear in cities.

Secondly, we can conclude from the passage that agricultural activities has increased with the growing of population, which caused further destruction to bird habitat. But the truth, provided by the professor, is that farmland did not expand in the United States. What is more, the crops offer food for birds as well where there is no need to destroy the habitat to convert to farmlands.

In the end, the population settlement and the agricultural use of chemical pesticide mentioned in the reading are seen as the two significant elements that destructed the birds. Also the lecturer holds the opposite point of view. She stresses the public awareness for protecting birds is developing now. Furthermore, with the development of science and technology, the new chemical pesticide which is less toxic is applied. The more important, as we can learn from the listening material, is that the widely growing pest-resist crops make it possible for less pesticide use and then bring no harm to birds.

Crystaljoy

3月27日综合写作 TPO17 修改

A serious problem of the harm to wildlife is debated in the reading material as the increasing population and pesticide use, especially on the number of birds.(as要引导一句完整的话的，而且increasing population and pesticide use不并列吧，都跟后面on the number of birds不搭配) But that point is considered unconvincing by the lecturer for the following three reasons.

In the first place, the text claims that it is the increasing population and （urban）expansion that caused the habitat of birds disappear, which consequently led to the declined number of birds. However, the professor thinks that idea does not hold water.As it is stressed in the lecture, the population increase has provided a better and larger habitat for some birds, for example the pigeons. She favors （that）the bird population is not shrinked ( does not shrink) though she admits that some kinds of birds like holks are no longer appear in cities. （列举好厉害，ETS就喜欢这样的细节）

Secondly, we can conclude from the passage that agricultural activities has（have） increased with the growing of(删) population, which caused further destruction to bird habitat. But the truth, provided by the professor, is that farmland did not expand in the United States. What is more, the crops offer food for birds as well where（？）
there is no need to destroy the habitat to convert to farmlands.

In the end, the population settlement and the agricultural use of chemical pesticide mentioned in the reading are seen as the two significant elements that destructed the birds. Also the lecturer holds the opposite point of view. She stresses the public awareness for protecting birds is developing（heightened）now. Furthermore, with the development of science and technology, the new chemical pesticide which is less toxic is applied. The more important, as we can learn from the listening material, is that the widely growing pest-resistant crops make it possible for less pesticide use and then bring no harm to birds.


前面听的很仔细呢！句子并列衔接要再注意一下，感觉有点绕圈呢。

晨依Jacqueline

谢谢鸟儿姐姐~
今天听写发现我的那个举例子的词语都写错了……囧
应该是hawk falcon rodents……

Crystaljoy

TPO20 Integrated Writing Revised Version

The reading material and the lecture are both concentrated on the "Let it burn" policy, which means not to suppress the big forest fires.Taking (In regard to 感觉不太完整呢) the 1988 fierce fire broke out in Yellowstone park, the reading passage regards it as a destruction, while the professor thinks it creative.

First of all, we can learn from the reading material that the Yellowstone fire caused tremendous damage to plants and trees, which could not grow on the scorched wasteland. However, the listening material holds the idea that after the 1988 fire, new plants were able to grow on the wasteland, which provided the park a diversity of vegetations. For example, a lot of small plants were enabled to grow in an open and unshaded environment and got quickly widespread. Plus（这样可以么？in addition/besides）
, seeds which could survive in a heated area had the opportunity to generate.

In the second place, views promoted by the reading text is（are）that the wildlife have been affected by the fierce fire, consequently the small animals failed to escape from the fire. In contrast, the professor thinks that does not hold water because the animal population recovered after the big fire. For instance, the forest fire created new opportunity for rabbits and hares to have new habitant, and moreover, the food chains in the eco-circle became stronger ever since.

Last but not least, the forest fire might compromise(d) the value of park tourist attraction and what is more(前后加个逗号，做插入语吧) influenced its economy, according to the reading passage. But the professor points out that it is not a problem （，）for the fire in 1988 was caused by the special weather, when there was low rainfalls, strong winds, and even dry areas. Occasionally the fire breaks out, we have(had) no necessity to prevent the fire from breaking out. Hence, we could not draw a hasty conclusion that the fire was detrimental to the tourist attraction.




我觉得你这篇写的比我好多了。听的仔细，句式也流畅！不错不错！

晨依Jacqueline

3月31日 独立写作
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The car (automobile) has greater effect to society than airplane has to.

Automobiles and airplanes are regarded as two typical of greatest inventions during the second industry revolution, which have brought significant impacts on peoples' daily life. As far as I am concerned, cars actually overweigh airplanes when talking about the influences they have made to our society.

First and foremost, automobiles win a more popular use as they are smaller in size and cheaper than airplanes. Larger size airplanes are manufactured than cars, never can they park in small places or at anywhere we want. Accordingly, parking lots are available here and there in our conmmunities(communities) while airports are limited in numbers in a city. What is more, with the rapid development of public transportation, such as the subways and BRTs, cars or buses have almost covered all roads and avenues in cities and rural areas, even cost people only one or two yuan. Plus, shopping malls like Walmart provide parking lots for private cars, which is far more convenient for us driving to do some shopping there. So many factors accounted, automobiles obtain a wide popularity among people.

In the second place, cars have a priority in time-saving than airplanes. As airports are usually far from the center of the city and they are not allowed to have an emergency pause in the halfway during the flight. For instance, getting to the only one airport covers a long distance because it is located in the suburb of my city, which costs us a great deal of money and time. Additionaly (Additionally), people are usually required to arrive at the airport in advance in order to check in and board, occupying one hour or more at average. In contrast, people can drive cars at their convenient and decide what time to start their tour or have a stop at somewhere to satisfy personal needs.

Last but not least, though cars have their limits which really confused people most, for example the increasing number of private cars has led to the lack of parking lots. Though people nowadays complaining much more about the outnumber of cars and air pollution caused by automobiles than they did in the past, no one would deny that cars have indeed become a essential part of people's life. As cars make massive contributions to our society, a majority of people still consider driving cars as their best choice of going to other places.

In one word, since cars are of greater convenience than airplanes, obviously they have more powerful influences to society and bring tremendous impact to people's daily life.

晨依Jacqueline

3月31日的TPO21综合写作
发的好晚。感觉写不出东西来呢。

The reading introduces a new kind of plant-genetic modified tree, which is expected to bring about considerable economic benefit, while the lecturer holds opposite idea that such genetic modified tree species is not as good as it might sound for its hidden cost and serious problems when closely examine it. Three points are provided to contradict to the passage.

Primarily, the lecturer admits the points cast in the reading that genetic modified trees are resistant to some conditions. However, uniform as they are, when faced with undesigned threatening environmental changes, for example the climate change, they may lose their ability of resistance. What is worse, unlike the non-genetic modified trees, all genetic modified trees tend to die out instead of dying out individually.

Besides, contrast to the promised economic profit the genetic modified trees may bring about cast in the passage, the professor claims that the invisible cost of planting that kind of tree is neglected. According to the law, people who grow genetic modified trees are not permitted collecting seeds or using the timbers automatically. They have to pay extra money to the tree company instead.

In the end, the author points out that genetic trees can prevent the overexploitation of wild trees for they can well satisfy people's need for timbers and firewoods. On the contrary, in the speaker's view, genetic modified trees are grown so agressively that they will compete fiercely with the local wild trees. As for this kind of improved trees are planted among natural trees, they will occupy sources such as water, sunlight and soil etc., which will surely cuts the number of other unique tree species.

jasonliu119

The reading introduces a new kind of plant-genetic modified tree, which is expected to bring about considerable economic benefit, while the lecturer holds opposite idea that such genetic modified tree species is not as good as it might sound for its hidden cost and serious problems when closely examine it（建议改为after a closely scrutiny）. Three points are provided to contradict to （不用to）the passage.

Primarily, the lecturer admits the points （改单数）cast in the reading that genetic modified trees are resistant to some conditions. However, uniform as they are, when faced with undesigned threatening environmental changes, for example the climate change, they may lose their ability of resistance. What is worse, unlike the non-genetic modified trees, all genetic modified trees tend to die out instead of dying out individually. （建议加一句点明讲座和听力的关系：This obviously impair the opinion in the passage等等）

Besides, contrast to the promised economic profit the genetic modified trees may bring about cast in the passage, the professor claims that the invisible cost of planting that kind of tree is neglected. According to the law, people who grow genetic modified trees are not permitted collecting seeds or using the timbers automatically（自动地？你的意思是“自发地”吧？automatically不对）. They have to pay extra money to the tree company instead.

In the end, the author points out that genetic trees can prevent the overexploitation of wild trees for they can well satisfy people's need for timbers and firewoods. On the contrary（我觉得这里有个逻辑小问题：前句是说基因树减少野生树的过分利用，后句是说基因树会竞争野生树的养分——你仔细想想，这两者其实不构成反义关系吧？建议把contrary前句再点明基因树有环境效益，这样contrary就成立了——环境效益与竞争养分的contrary，而不是减少利用和竞争养分的contrary；或者我这个是鸡蛋挑骨头了，你看我的意思明白的话就想想吧，否则忽略）, in the speaker's view, genetic modified trees are grown so agressively that they will compete fiercely with the local wild trees. As for this kind of improved trees are planted among natural trees（as for是什么意思？如果是自己发明的就再查查吧，我写的话就写为 Planted among natural trees, this kind of trees will occupy....这样更简洁吧？？？）, they will occupy sources such as water, sunlight and soil etc., which will surely cuts the number of other unique tree species.

不错不错啊！结构清晰，讲座的细节也充分。更难能可贵的是句式复杂多变，摇曳多姿！！！！