每日独立综合写作，求拍砖！

sh84682 · 发表于 2012-8-12 21:40:29

先上一片综合，tpo14，求指教The reading passage investigates the issue of salvage logging, which helps to deal with the aftermath of disasters such as forest fires and fierce storms. The professor's lecture concentrates on the same topic. Yet, she claims that salvage logging has little benefit to damaged forests and its economic value is small, which contradicts what the reading states. And in the lecture, she reveals three pieces of evidence to buttress her viewpoint.

To begin with, even though the reading passage suggests that removing damaged trees is beneficial to make room for fresh growth and thus forests can recover quickly from the disaster, the professor argues that this behavior is useless for tree growth. This is because the decomposition of trees provides the soil with necessary nutrient and thus creates a suitable environment for new trees. That is to say, salvage logging may lead to the lack of nutrient for the tree to thrive. Apparently, the professor's argument disproves its counterpart in the reading.

For another, contrary to the statement in the reading that decaying wood will be detrimental to the health of forests because of the insects it appealed , the professor contends that decaying wood's advantages outweigh its disadvantages. Thenceforward she supports the point with the fact that insects such as spruce bark beetle have been living in the forests over 100 years. And the decaying wood not only attracts insects but also birds, which contribute to the long-term health of forests. In other words, in the long run, salvage logging may do more harm to forests than harmful insects do.

Lastly, the professor asserts that the monetary benefits of salvage logging are small and the created jobs are not apt to local residents, whereas the author of the passage believes that salvage logging is able to cause both economic benefits and additional jobs. The professor proves that this claim is indefensible by pointing out that the economic benefits brought by salvage are negligible because of the cost of expensive instruments. Further, the additional jobs are contemporary and not suitable for non-trained local people.

stoomtranen · 发表于 2012-8-12 22:09:24

Some people say that advertising encourages us to buy things we really do not need. Others say that advertisements tell us about new products that may improve our lives. Which viewpoint do you agree with? Use specific reasons and examples to support your answers.

Do advertisements promote things we do not need or products that may improve our lives?

As society becomes more and more complicated than ever and the peace for the improvement of technology is fast, how to make their products get more market share is the primary target for the companies. Well, the traditional method----advertising--gets more and more praise and blame. In some people's mind that advertising promotes us waste more money by encourage us buy unfamiliar things, while others' point is it improve our life-level.

ersonal, I prefer the second one.

First of all, advertising is the most efficient way for producers to introduce their products and services, and the most vivid, comprehensive way for consumers to know their products. In order to attract consumers, the companies should provide as much as possible details about their products, such as, the functions, the qualities, the special characters, and the list can go on. From these advertisements, consumers can not only get the information I mentioned above, but also can know their difference from other similar products, help them make more correct chose, which can help them avoid waste money and buy good products and services.

Furthermore, advertising can improve the qualities of the products and service. Based on the fact that costumers can make chose by c watching advertisements for different products, the key to attract new consumers and obtain old consumers is to improve the qualities of their products. Take the shampoo as an example, both A and B companies produce shampoo, but the shampoo produced by A can help consumers grow more beautiful hairs which B's product do not have this function, more consumers would chose A product as their primary chose instead of B's. So in order to catch more share, B company would invest more money to improve their products' qualities, while A company would to do so to keep their status, for this aspect the qualities for the products have been improved, and the advertising improve people's lives.

Admittedly, advertisements, at some extent, enlarge the advantages of the product or the service the advertising and induce its shortcoming. For example, an advertisement for milk product, it has some amount zinc in it but not that much like it said in the advertisement to promote children' intelligence, more people would buy it, when they open the coverage of the milk they find they have be deceived. From this respect we would think that adverting deceived people, but we can not ignore its benefits. Shortly, advertisements’ benefits to us overweight their damages. So I definitely support the opinion that advertising improve people's lives.

请指教

每日独立综合写作，求拍砖！

所属分类: TOEFL / IELTS

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()