不以30分为目标的行为都是耍，流，氓！

Serena0710

The readingpassage examines the topic that young people, in general, are reading lessliterature, negatively affecting the reading public. The professor's speechconcerns with the same topic. However, she contends that reading lessliterature does not mean a unfortunate future of literature, which is oppositeto what the reading passage says. And in the lecture, she offers plenty ofevidence to buttress her idea.

First, even thoughthe reading passage indicates that there is no better thing to stimulate intellectualthan reading literature does. The professor argues in the lecture that not onlythe literature, but also the science books, history and political analysis areof high quality and creative. Reading these kinds of books can also provide us accessibilitiesto intellectual stimulation. Apparently, the professor's argument raises doubtsabout the relevant point in the reading passage.

Second, thestatement in the reading passage shows that the replacements of literature readby pubic nowadays are poorly written and meaningless. However, the professorstates that plenty of materials, such as music and movie do not lower theculture standard. Except literature, there are plenty forms of culture toexpress. Listening to brilliant music or watching an excellent movie can haveequal effect with literature.

Finally, theprofessor believes that readers can not be blamed for reading less literaturewhile the professor claims that current writers are less motivated to make newworks because of the absence of audience. The professor verifies this point bystating that the authors make their novels much more difficult for the readersto understand than before.

To sum up, theprofessor precisely finds the flaws in the reading passage and compellingproves that people reading literature far less has negative effects on both thereader and writer in the future.

E月羽

The reading passage examines the topic that young people, in general, are reading less literature, negatively affecting the reading public. The professor's speech concerns with the same topic. However, she contends that reading less literature does not mean a unfortunate future of literature, which is opposite to what the reading passage says. And in the lecture, she offers plenty of evidence to buttress her idea.

First, even though the reading passage indicates that there is no better thing to stimulate intellectual than reading literature does. The professor argues in the lecture that not only the literature, but also the science books, history and political analysis are of high quality and creative. Reading these kinds of books can also provide us accessibilities to intellectual stimulation. Apparently, the professor's argument raises doubts about the relevant point in the reading passage.

Second, the statement in the reading passage shows that the replacements (我觉得可以加个activities, such as watching TV ,)of literature read by pubic(public) nowadays are poorly written and meaningless. However, the professor states that plenty of materials, such as music and movie do not lower the culture standard. Except literature, there are plenty forms of culture to express. Listening to brilliant music or watching an excellent movie can have equal effect with literature.

Finally, the professor believes that readers can not be blamed for reading less literature while the professor claims that current writers are less motivated to make new works because of the absence of audience. The professor verifies this point by stating that the authors make their novels much more difficult for the readers to understand than before.

To sum up, the professor precisely finds the flaws in the reading passage and compelling proves that people reading literature far less has negative effects on both the reader and writer in the future.

大牛，写的非常perfect，听力各个点都到位，表达完美