K开始写作鸟~

kaddish

7.25独立 综合占座~~~

夜游的恶鸟

改
______错误  ______不恰当  _____修改  _____好！

The passage provides three possibletheories to explain the purpose of Chaco, while the professor casts doubt oneach of the point.
to(To) begin with, incontrast to the passage that theChaco serves for residential use , the lecturer claims that this view isungrounded. He points out that there has(are) not enoughfireplaces in the house if it was used for living purpose, because eachhousehold require one fireplace to do daily housework. In fact, the largestfireplace could only be utilized for around ten households, thus it isimpossible to hold hundreds of residents in the Chaco.
The second view mentioned in the passage is that these houses are for foodstorage. However, the professor also rejects this point. According to him,later excavation reveals that no trace of maize, the onemain food at that time, or containers have been found in the Chaco, whichcontradicts the expectation that there should have spills of maize or largercontainers there.
In regard to theceremony function, the professor disagrees with it, either. He says that actuallybuilding material have also been found in the mound which is supposed to be aceremony site. This fact means the mound was originally a construction place. Furthermore,the professor explains that the discarded pots might be traces left behind afterconstruction. In this way, the professor not goes(doesn’tgo) along with the reading passage.

听得内容非常详细全面。语言运用的也很好。只是我发现标点符号的空格总是不对，不知道是不是发帖子时候的原因。如果不是就要注意一下喽。还有一些小的词汇搭配比如there are 而没有there have。 总体很好呢！~   字数也刚好比较合适

kaddish

The passage provides three possible theories to explain the purpose of Chaco, while the professor casts doubt on each of the point.
to begin with, in contrast to the passage that the Chaco serves for residential use , the lecturer claims that this view is ungrounded. He points out that  there has not enough fireplaces in the house if it was used for living purpose, because each household require one fireplace to do daily housework. In fact ,the largest fireplace could only be utilized for around ten households ,thus it is impossible to hold hundreds of residents in the Chaco.
The second view mentioned in the passage is that these houses are for food storage. However, the professor also rejects this point .According to him, later excavation reveals that no trace of maize ,the one main food at that time , or containers have been found in the Chaco, which contradicts the expectation that there should have spills of maize or larger containers there.
In regard to the ceremony function, the professor disagrees with it, either. He says that  actually building material have also been found in the mound which is supposed to be a ceremony site.This fact means the mound was originally a construction place .Furthermore, the professor explains that the discarded pots might be traces left behind after construction. In this way ,the professor not goes along with the reading passage.

freddychan

The reading passage put(puts) forward three possible theories responsible for the decline of yellow cedar trees. However, the professor cast(casts) doubt on each of the point by citing three reasons.

To begin with, the professor says that actually healthy cedar trees are more resistant to insect attacks than other kind of tress(trees), because the barks and leaves are saturated with a poisonous chemical substance that beetles cannot suffer. Thus, these beetles only feed on some dead or sick cedar trees, which will not cause the decline of tress(trees). This view contradicts with what is mentioned in the passage.

Secondly, the professor asserts that bear’s clawing is not the reason of the overall population decline as well. To bolster his argument, he explains that although there is a widespread decrease in North America, some places where no bears exist also face the same problem. Therefore, the point in the passage is rejected which claims that bear attack is mainly responsible for the tree decline.

At last, admittedly, temperature change makes roots more sensitive, but the frozen root damage theory is ungrounded, either. If cedar tress(trees) are easily damaged in freezing conditions, why there is a larger population decline in lower elevation enjoying warmer climate, where is supposed to suffer bigger loss from the reading passage. In this way, the third hypothesis is unconvincing.

楼主打字的时候稍微注意点，不然因为因为打字错误而丢分会很可惜~~加油~~

kaddish

The reading passage put forward three possible theories responsible for the decline of yellow cedar trees. However, the professor cast doubt on each of the point by citing three reasons.

To begin with, the professor says that actually healthy cedar trees are more resistant to insect attacks than other kind of tress, because the barks and leaves are saturated with a poisonous chemical substance that beetles cannot suffer. Thus, these beetles only feed on some dead or sick cedar trees, which will not cause the decline of tress. This view contradicts with what is mentioned in the passage.

Secondly, the professor asserts that bear’s clawing is not the reason of the overall population decline as well. To bolster his argument, he explains that although there is a widespread decrease in North America, some places where no bears exist also face the same problem. Therefore, the point in the passage is rejected which claims that bear attack is mainly responsible for the tree decline.

At last, admittedly, temperature change makes roots more sensitive, but the frozen root damage theory is ungrounded, either. If cedar tress are easily damaged in freezing conditions, why there is a larger population decline in lower elevation enjoying warmer climate, where is supposed to suffer bigger loss from the reading passage. In this way, the third hypothesis is unconvincing.

kchszy061ban

蓝色为意见或建议高亮为精彩绿色为总结红色为错误

The passage is talking about the issue that ethanol is not a good alternative to gasoline ,while the professor argues back this view by citing three specific reasons.

To begin with, the professor admits that burning ethanol will release carbon dioxide ,but it will not add to global warming. In fact , since most raw material of ethanol comes from plants ,which are helpful in removing harmful gases from atmosphere .Thus, observing carbon dioxide from plants actually offset the negative consequence of burning process.（这里总体很好，加点细节就更好了，比如plants need co2 as one kind of nutrition.）

According to the professor ,producing ethanol does not have to reduce a large amount of resources for animals. Producers only take certain parts of corn ,for example ,to satisfy their production. And these parts are not eaten by animals. Therefore , animals still have enough food to feed on. In this way, this point is contradict with the passage .(这段很好，)

At last, the passage asserts that ethanol will have no competing advantage with gasoline on price, if one main support -government subside -discontinues in the future .In contrast, the lecturer disagree with this point. Companies will expend production as a result of an increasing purchase on ethanol ,which will lead to a drop in the price .Besides government will still maintain its subside. In that case, ethanol can keep a low price.

整体很好，不错

kaddish

The passage is talking about the issue that ethanol is not a good alternative to gasoline ,while the professor argues back this view by citing three specific reasons.

To begin with, the professor admits that burning ethanol will release carbon dioxide ,but it will not add to global warming. In fact , since most raw material of ethanol comes from plants ,which are helpful in removing harmful gases from atmosphere .Thus, observing carbon dioxide from plants actually offset the negative consequence of burning process.

According to the professor ,producing ethanol does not have to reduce a large amount of resources for animals. Producers only take certain parts of corn ,for example ,to satisfy their production. And these parts are not eaten by animals. Therefore , animals still have enough food to feed on. In this way, this point is contradict with the passage .

At last, the passage asserts that ethanol will have no competing advantage with gasoline on price, if one main support -government subside -discontinue in the future .In contrast, the lecturer disagree with this point. Companies will expend production as a result of an increasing purchase on ethanol ,which will lead to a drop in the price .Besides government will still maintain its subside. In that case, ethanol can keep a low price.

sherryzhangh

The lecturer contends that forest fire not onlywould not necessarily causes damage, but also creates new opportunities for plants, animals and local economy,(这句话的意思不准确，翻译过来的意思就是说不仅能引起损害，还能创造出新的植被，新的食物链和为当地经济带来发展,这个递进关系的逻辑是不正确的.) which is the opposite in the reading passage.
To begin with, according to the professor, vegetation actually benefit from the big fire. Certain plants are able to geminate in the ruined place where originally existed larger plants, thus contributes to the diversity of forest. For example, smaller plants can survive under open and un-shaded conditions, and seed plants tend to grow in high-level wet (heat 吧)places. Therefore, the view in the passage is refuted.
Moreover, little -sized animals who prey on smaller plants got an opportunity to multiply like rabbits. What's more, preys feeding on these predators also begin to reproduce in this forest. In that case, food chain will be strengthened, also a more diverse species are created. However, the passage asserts that the animals will suffer great loss as well.
At last, the professor claims that only a series of fires will bring negative consequences to local economy, but in fact, there It never occurs  a huge disaster like after the fire in1988 .Hence, tourism will not be damaged because people still come back to visit the park the next year and the years after. In contrast, the passage maintains that local economy will suffer a lot due to a decline on tourism.

kaddish

The lecturer contends that forest fire not only causes damage, but also creates new opportunities for plants, animals and local economy, which is the opposite in the reading passage.
To begin with, according to the professor, vegetation actually benefit from the big fire. Certain plants are able to geminate in the ruined place where originally existed larger plants, thus contributes to the diversity of forest. For example, smaller plants can survive under open and unshaded conditions, and seed plants tend to grow in high-level wet places. Therefore, the view in the passage is refuted.
Moreover, little -sized animals who prey on smaller plants got an opportunity to multiply like rabbits. What's more, preys feeding on these predators also begin to reproduce in this forest. In that case, food chain will be strengthened, also a more diverse species are created. However, the passage asserts that the animals will suffer great loss as well.
At last, the professor claims that only a series of fires will bring negative consequences to local economy, but in fact, there never occurs  a huge disaster like the fire in1988 .Hence, tourism will not be damaged because people still come back to visit the park. In contrast, the passage maintains that local economy will suffer a lot due to a decline on tourism.

瓜瓜不瓜

The reading passage puts forward three ways to deal with the increasing decline of Torreya in the state of Florida, while the professor cast doubt on each of the point.
（开头段简单明了，挺好的，但是有一个问题，算是比较严重的是：综合写作侧重的是听力，而不是阅读。所以你这个开头的侧重点放错了，应该把professor的观点作为主句，阅读的观点作为从句。）
To begin with, the passage contends that reestablishing Torreya in the same location can help recover the its prosperity, because specific microclimate within in the northern part of Florida provide suitable condition for growing.in（In） contrast, the professor asserts that large environment will change the microclimate. For example, global warming increase the local temperature and thus make many wetlands and areas used to be ideal habitats for Torreya,cooler and not favorable for living.
（缺了一个drier和 Florida的点）
Secondly, according to the professor ,recollecting（应该是relocation吧？） tress to a new environment is also not a satisfactory solution .To bolster his view ,he mentions a specie -black locus -which once transplanted to a different place .Unfortunately ,this kind of tree caused huge damage to this new area due to its fast spread ,killing many other native trees,among which some are originally endangered and face a high possibility of extinction.（还差最后一点：老k讲了example，讲的点也全，但是professor举例子的原因是：unpredicted outcome,最关键的一点没有说，临门一脚~）

At last, the professor is of the view that preserving Torreya in research centers will lead to a higher vulnerability to diseases.（体会一下：1.导致T容易感染疾病，2.由于在实验室内T不能survive from disease，这两个观点还是有差别的，而第二个更符合我们要表达的意思） That’s because Torreya can be resistant only in a large and various range. However, labs are unable to offer a capacity of enough large number of trees and variety. In this way, the professor argues this research cannot ensure the survival of Torreya.

要是能有一个结尾就更好了，结尾1-2句，简单收尾就可以，可以参照我的，使文章看起来更完整~

总的来说，文章表达（即老k关注的模版问题不存在，你这样的表达挺好的），重点放在听力内容上哈！加油！