2006年8月队请进！欢迎大家来讨论

jessiebetty

给个面子,评以下,第一篇ISSUE

The author claims that individuals have the responsibility for preserving the natural environment rather than the government. The argument involves an conflict between the government and the individuals. It gives us a either-or choice about the duty to conserve the environment. But in my opinion, neither take precedence over the other, both government and individuals contribute to the honored obligations.

       First, we are all familiar with the saying "everyone deserves the obligation to preserve the environment around us." As it is known, public advertising and other ways have been used to punctuate the environmental idea into our lives. Just as the ads say, each simple thing such as picking up gabbages, consuming less energy and saving more water will lead to a better life.

       Second, the government actually plays a privital role in conserving the nature. The environmental problems are in deed the ones in large scope. Simply depending on an individual’s power will not solve the problem. Common sense tells us that every individual acts to his own benefits, so nothing can guarantee individuals will destroy the nature or waste resources to maximize his profits. Now the importance of the government has been recognized .Government will make a long-term plan according to the specific problems and impose the duty on the individuals regardless of the reluctance of others.

       Third, the best way to preserve the environment is combine the power of government and the duty of individuals together. We all know that the pollution has become word-wide, international cooperation among each nation has been necessary. Governments take a leading role in regulating the behavior of wasting and polluting in an overall perspective. Moreover, individuals form the basic elements of carrying out the plan.

      In sum, we can never conclude that which part is more important than the other. Because integrating the duty of individuals into the planning of government can provide us a surprise result, efficient combination will be the best way to preserve our natural environment.

jessiebetty

题目 39

Responsibility for preserving the natural environment ultimately belongs to the individuals, not government

顾风

以下是引用jdmg在2006-7-12 14:01:00的发言：

ETS 蒸题, 大家赶快做！晚上公布答案

The members in Aug. Echelon r mainly discussing problems of CR here. It was said by some NNs that CR r just 4 relaxition, so it will be quite reasonable to induce that members in Aug. echelon will turn out to emerge less NNs than echelons of other months. 

 

Which of following will substantially weaken the argument above?

a. nns' suggestion is sometimes not typical

b.the Cr questions raised here r typically convoluted even to super NN

c.the real nn never raises CR questions

d.there r perhaps more members in Aug. echelon than those in other echelons

e. members in Aug. echelons r stronger in CR than those of other echelons

 

哥们儿真逗。。。

顾风

以下是引用jessiebetty在2006-7-12 14:08:00的发言：

题目 39

Responsibility for preserving the natural environment ultimately belongs to the individuals, not government

我还没准备作文，惊叹MM的水平，不过是不是举一个环保比较成功的国家的例子，或者扯上一些环保组织包括一些环保游行能把文章造得更长一点。。。

jdmg

我也觉得MM的水平很高了，以后你给我改吧

lingfanglove

请教一下这道题目

In January 1994 an oil barge ran afround off the coast of San Juan,Puerto Rico, leaking its cargo of 750000 gallons into the ocean, while causing the pollution of the city's beaches.

A

B with its cargo of 750000 gallons leaking into ocean ,and it polluted

C and its cargo of 750000 gallons leaked into the ocean ,polluting

Dwhile it leaked its cargo of 750000 gallons into the ocean and caused the pollution of

Eso that its cargo of 750000 gallons leaked into the ocean ,and they were polluting

lingfanglove

还有一道啊，谢谢拉

Currently 26 billion barrels a year, wolrd consumption of oil is rising at a rate of 2 percent annually

A

B the world is consuming oil at an increasing rate of

C the world's oil is being consumed at the increasing rate of

Dthe rise in the rate of the world's oil consumption is

Eoil is consumed by the world at an increasing rate of

哈佛情人

以下是引用jessiebetty在2006-7-12 14:05:00的发言：

给个面子,评以下,第一篇ISSUE

The author claims that individuals have the responsibility for preserving the natural environment rather than the government. The argument involves an conflict between the government and the individuals. It gives us a either-or choice about the duty to conserve the environment. But in my opinion, neither take precedence over the other, both government and individuals contribute to the honored obligations.

       First, we are all familiar with the saying "everyone deserves the obligation to preserve the environment around us." As it is known, public advertising and other ways have been used to punctuate the environmental idea into our lives. Just as the ads say, each simple thing such as picking up gabbages, consuming less energy and saving more water will lead to a better life.

       Second, the government actually plays a privital role in conserving the nature. The environmental problems are in deed the ones in large scope. Simply depending on an individual’s power will not solve the problem. Common sense tells us that every individual acts to his own benefits, so nothing can guarantee individuals will destroy the nature or waste resources to maximize his profits. Now the importance of the government has been recognized .Government will make a long-term plan according to the specific problems and impose the duty on the individuals regardless of the reluctance of others.

       Third, the best way to preserve the environment is combine the power of government and the duty of individuals together. We all know that the pollution has become word-wide, international cooperation among each nation has been necessary. Governments take a leading role in regulating the behavior of wasting and polluting in an overall perspective. Moreover, individuals form the basic elements of carrying out the plan.

      In sum, we can never conclude that which part is more important than the other. Because integrating the duty of individuals into the planning of government can provide us a surprise result, efficient combination will be the best way to preserve our natural environment.

MM写得很好啊，加油，争取6分！

babypace

以下是引用lingfanglove在2006-7-12 20:58:00的发言：

请教一下这道题目

In January 1994 an oil barge ran afround off the coast of San Juan,Puerto Rico, leaking its cargo of 750000 gallons into the ocean, while causing the pollution of the city's beaches.

A

B with its cargo of 750000 gallons leaking into ocean ,and it polluted

C and its cargo of 750000 gallons leaked into the ocean ,polluting

Dwhile it leaked its cargo of 750000 gallons into the ocean and caused the pollution of

Eso that its cargo of 750000 gallons leaked into the ocean ,and they were polluting

是不是C呢？前后并列，最后用状语修饰了一下。

allen0018

以下是引用lexie在2006-7-11 23:46:00的发言：

Allen哥哥不要生气　偶如果没有说清楚　偶apologize

not to worry...

decrease by是减少了多少　如果用介词to是减少到多少　exceed by 超过了的量　超过了５００％　就是比原来多５倍　超出量的计算如下：１５００－２５０＝１２５０　１２５０／２５０＝５＝５００％　不知道解释清楚了没有？

这里５００％跟　２５％的基数不一样的　前者对应的是standard recommanded daily allowance

后者的基数是　incidence of serious cases of flu...

其他有好心人愿意帮忙解释一下么？　其实C不是正确答案　用gufeng  gg的模糊逻辑做题　绝对是正路　偶只是想分析一下错误选项为什么错了　没有别的意思　did my post sound offending to you, Allen? I was wondering....

我没生气，都是考试一族，别多想琐事啊

我数学弱智，我就是想知道，

“exceed by 超过了的量　超过了５００％　就是比原来多５倍　超出量的计算如下：１５００－２５０＝１２５０　１２５０／２５０＝５＝５００％”

我当然知道这么做，否则那不就完蛋了？

但是，请你仔细的看看我的问题，我就是想知道，为什么介词一样的情况下，一个 是“末态-初态”/初态  

另一个直接就“末态-初态”  了

“decrease by是减少了多少 ” ，你为什么不用（34%-9%）/9% 呢？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？？

我都不知道你现在看懂我想说什么了没有