请德克的猪指正

saspur

Some people spend their entire lives in one place. Others move a number of times throughout their lives, looking for a better job, house, community, or even climate. Which do you prefer: staying in one place or moving in search of another place?

Use reasons and examples to support your opinion.

 

  Moving around is better than settle. Moving to better places helps people see more about the world, brings new challenges and find best place to live.

  When people move to different places, they will open their eyes. They may eat different food, learn different dialect or dress different costume. Moreover, they may have a better understanding of their situation. For example, people in rural areas make an unstable living on growing and selling crops, which can be affected by flood or drought. They are little educated and have little connection with the outside world. They may think that this is the best life they have. But when they go to the city, they see a totally different world: streets filled with shopping malls, restaurants, hotels, automobiles and companies. Most urban citizens are well-educated and have stable living. Some rural people realize that living in city is better life and they will try to achieve that goal. This is because seeing outside motivates people to climb to a higher spot.

  When people move to new places, they have to face challenges. But dealing with challenges matures an individual. When I went to America I faced a lot of challenges, and one of them is language. I never learned English before so I couldn’t understand what others say. It was embarrassing at first because I had to communicate by using gestures. But I was not frustrated by this. I just tried to remember the meaning of each word they said. After several months, I had great improvement. I should say that facing this challenge and eventually solving it made me easier to communicate with Americans.

  Sometimes people move around to find a better place to live. They may want to live in a city with better climate, better environment, have more job opportunities or simply to begin a new life. So they will leave their hometown and travel to another place. They may stay permanently in new place or move again to find an even better place. Many aging people choose to live in warm areas and by the ocean because it is good for their health. Many tourists compared my city to other cities. The thought the climate in my city was great and they liked to settle here in the future. So when people move around and see different places, they compare these places and may select the best place to settle.

  In conclusion, moving around allows people to see more, to cope with challenges and may eventually settle down in the appropriate place. But when they stay in one place, it’s like “a frog in the bottom of well”.

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-6-16 10:51:26编辑过]

saspur

Some people think government should spend as much money as possible exploring outer space (for example, traveling to the Moon and to other planets). Other people disagree and think governments should spend this money for our basic needs on Earth. Which of these two options do you agree with?

Use specific reasons and details to support your answer.

 

  In my opinion, government should spend money for people’s basic needs, such as living necessities, healthy environment and education. It is a more practical way of spending money.

  There are still hundreds of thousands of people living in poor condition. In Africa, many people are dying from starvation or thirst. Others have little access to clean water or susceptible to diseases like malaria. In some developing countries, there is vast difference between the lives of rich and poor. In the poorest rural areas, people don’t have telephone and TV. Even if the government spends a little money to help these people, their situation can greatly improve. Compared with spending the money on space exploration, helping those in need is a more practical way.

  Our living environment also needs improvement. Automobile’s exhaust contains carbon monoxide and nitric oxide are polluting global environment, which affect our health. The sulfuric gases that are pumped out of factories cause acid rain, which erodes buildings and destroys crops. Carbon dioxide and other greenhouse gases weaken the ozone layer, thus allowing ultraviolet rays and other radiation penetrating Earth’s atmosphere and increase the infection rates of skin cancers among people. The government should spend more money to create a healthier environment for people, which is also a practical way of spending.

  And finally, government should spend money on education. Education lays the most fundamental part of our society. There are still people who are illiterate or have low standards of education. In some rural areas in China, some people don’t know how to write their names. They have little idea of current technology. University students also need better education to support themselves. Education is so important that if astronomers are not fully educated, they won’t have the scientific know-how of space exploration, and spending money on it will be totally useless. So, spending money on education is much more practical.

  In conclusion, government should spend money on people’s basic needs, rather than on space exploration.

[此贴子已经被作者于2007-6-16 11:07:21编辑过]

saspur

两篇，不知符不符Toefl independant writing 的要求。

saspur

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?

Playing a game is fun only when you win.

Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.

 

  People like to play games because they like to be winners. But winning is not the only fun in playing games, enjoying and learn from games are big fun.

  Games are great enjoyment. They are fun to play and help us relax after stressful work and study. To me, enjoy myself in an interesting game is most exciting, winning becomes second place. In my hometown, people play Buobing game on mid-fall festival. They roll the dice in a bowl and distribute prizes according to the digits on four dice. It’s very hard to win the biggest prize because the odds are low, but I still enjoy the game. It seems that these small dices are determining our future as they roll and knock in the bowl, and that’s the reason I like this game.

  Games also teach us about something: you have to outsmart your opponent to win games. In chess games and card games, you have to think before making each step: Are there any risks if I put my bishop there? Is there a trap? To think the motive behind one move by the opponent is equally important. The opponent may be setting traps to lure me in. In card games, a slight frown or movement of lips from your opponent may indicate his change in emotions. Perhaps it means that he has “big cards” or “no big cards”. Or he may be showing the opposite to you, just setting a trap. In real life, things are the same: we have to outsmart our competitors to win.

  Also, games teach us that luck is the X factor. In some games, winner does not belong to the most competitive, but to the luckiest. In dice games, luck picks out the winner. In NBA games where two teams are equally matched, luck plays a significant role. A player beats the shot clock with a three pointer when double-teamed is good luck. And when a good free-thrower misses a free-throw? Bad luck. In soccer matches, it takes luck to shoot penalties under great nerve, but it needs more luck for the goalkeeper to stop one. There is and will always be luck in life, and we have to acknowledge that.

  In summary, winning is not the only fun games bring us. Games also give us enjoyment, teach us about tricks and luck in life.