【写作小分队】越人歌的作文楼子~~

sunnylyvoune

The focus of the article and lecture is about the whether the ethanol fuel can replace the gasoline. The reading raises three reasons to indicate that the  ethanol is not a possible replacement, while the speaker in the lecture thinks none of them（The professor believes that the growing of the raw material - the corn - will counteract the carbon dioxide it releases during burning这个嘛原文里的说法其实照搬会很好，嘿嘿） are convincible.

The first reason, as the reading mentions, is that the increase of ethanol fuel cannot help reduce the amount the carbon dioxide released to the environment. That is to say, the replacement will have nothing to do with the global warming. However, the speaker argues that the ethanol fuel is made of plants, which can absorb carbon dioxide when growing up. In this way, no extra greenhouse gas is produced when the fuel is burned.

Secondly, the speaker asserts that the using of fuel will not decrease the crops used to feed the animals. To illustrate his idea, he cites an example of a kind of plant,(这个貌似是a part of the plants ) which can be used to made ethanol fuel but cannot be eaten by animals. So the production of ethanol fuel will not threaten the food supplement of animals.

Furthermore, the writer is quite confident that the ethanol fuel will never be able to compete with gasoline on price, considering that this new industry is profitable（听力里是able to compete with gasoline，我也不清楚能不能说profitable） only because of the tax subsidies in the past 30 years. Unfortunately,（这个== 用however nevertheless nonetheless albeit 都可以，但是记得不要用unfortunately这种主观意愿比较强的词汇）the speaker refutes his opinion, criticizing that when more people are using and producing the ethanol fuel, the cost will decrease dramatically, giving competitive advantage to the ethanol fuel.



写作功底相当好啊==至少比我好很多，没有语法错误，不过可能要注意一下听力，有两个地方一个是文中说的是一个叫ceullos的东西是植物的一部分是用来做ethanol 的但是不会被食用



另一个是文中说的是3倍的产能，我当初没想出怎么写就直接说enhance productivity ，然后减少40个点的价格

越人歌

3月12日 独立
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Can two people be good friends if one people has more money than the other?

Nowadays, with the fast developing economy, the issue of whether two people can be good friends if one of them has more money than the other has been a heated debate in our contemporary society. Different people hold different ideas according to their distinguished backgrounds. Some people think that friendship is a kind of emotional experience, which has nothing to do with money, while other people asserts that the economic basis is a very important part of an individual's relationship. In my point of view, although the former argument is not whole unreasonable, it is not borne out of careful consideration.

To begin with, the growing environment of rich people and poor are always different, for example, the educational experience and social relationship. Most rich people are born rich; they can go to the best personal school and hang out with rich friends, while the poor children even may not afford to go to the collage. So it's very hard for them to have some interests or experience in common.

Moreover, to talk about those rich adults, there is no need for them to worry about food and clothes, while at the same time, poor people have to work very hard to get rid of starving. As a consequence, those two kinds of people are very likely to have different view of value. They can be colleagues, teammates and even relatives, but there is little possibility for them to become friends.

Finally, some people may argue that it is possible for people to become good friends before one of them become richer than the other. Nevertheless, their friendship may not be as stable as before. Consider about a situation, when the poor man is in need of large number of money for emergency, he will absolutely ask his rich friend for help. Although the rich man is very generous and cherish their friendship very much, the poor man will feel uncomfortable because of the shame. He may even feel unconfident and try not to meet his friend, so eventually their friendship will come to an end.  

All in all, although some people may still remain unconvinced, the factors and reasons I have analyzed could at least make them more aware of the various dimensions of the issue under discussion.

越人歌

TPO3
The focus of the article and the lecture is about whether a specific painting, called Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet, is actually painted by Rembrandt. The reading material lists three reasons to support its idea that the painting could not be a work by Rembrandt, while the speaker think all of them need more consideration.

To begin with, the reading says that the woman in the picture is wearing a luxurious fur collar which is inconsistent with her servant coat.  The writer is very confident to say that Rembrandt cannot make such mistake. Unfortunately, the speaker refutes his idea by pointing out a fact that the painting was once redecorated by someone, who covered something on the top of fur and changed its color, probably in order to sell it for a better price.

Secondly, the speaker also doubts that light reflected on the face cannot be proper evidence, because when we uncover the added painting, the woman is actually wearing a light-colored collar.

Finally, according to the reading material, the wood used to carry the painting is made of several pieces of wood, which cannot be done by Rembrandt. But the speaker said that it is because the original wood was enlarged when the painting was redecorated. What's more, the original wood of the painting is nearly the same as another painting of Rembrandt.

越人歌

3月13日 独立
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is more enjoyable to have a job, and you work only three days a week with long hours rather than work five days a week with shorter hours.

The issue of whether it is more enjoyable to work only three days a week with long hours than work five days a week with shorter hours has been a heated dabated in our contemporary society. Different people hold different ideas according to their distinguished backgrounds. Some people may say that working too many hours a day will be very tired and have harmful effects on people's health, while others assets that our life will be much more happier if we have four days off every week. In my point of view, although the former statement is not wholly unsupportive, the latter idea is more reasonable for certain reasons.

To begin with, people can live a meaningful life by arranging their leisure time, if they can enjoy a longer weekend. For example, my mother, who is a very busy business woman, always dreams about taking a dancing class with my father. If she can rest for four days a week, she can spend more time with our family and enjoy music and art to relax. What's more, she can even go to the college in her spare time and learn more about her business. This example maybe quite small, but since it is common in all around the world, it does make sense to support my opinion.

Furthermore, having a longer weekend can do good to the employers too, by stimulate the employees to work more efficiently. This is not only because people will have to work for long hours a day, but also because people will work very hard if there is a long holiday waiting for them. And for those who love their jobs, they will finish their work at home and thus increase the working hours.

Finally, even the whole society can benefit from the long weekend. That is because an increasing number of people will spend more time on shopping and traveling, and this will stimulate the economy of the country, and make more people wealthy.

To conclude, given the reasons I discussed above, which sometimes correlated with each other and thus become more persuasive, we can safely arrived at the conclusion that if people only have to work three days a week, not only  workers but also employees, and even the society as a whole will benefit a lot.

chasedreamabc

Nowadays, with the fast developing economy, the issue of whether two people can be good friends if one of them has more money than the other has been a heated debate in our contemporary society. Different people hold different ideas according to their distinguished backgrounds. Some people think that friendship is a kind of emotional experience, which has nothing to do with money, while other people asserts(单数) that the economic basis is a very important part of an individual's（individual本身就是adj.）relationship. In my point of view（稍微啰嗦）, although the former argument is not whole unreasonable, it is not borne out of careful consideration.

To begin with, the growing environment of rich people and poor are always differen(主语是the growing environment吧，那样的话be 动词不应该是复数；似乎是rich and poor people更通顺一点), for example(such as), the educational experience and social relationship. Most rich people are born rich; they can go to the best personal school and hang out with rich friends, while the poor children even may not afford to go to the collage. So it's very hard for them to have some interests or experience in common. （很好的开头，较为强大的例证，可是结尾似乎有点more open了，段末点一下题似乎更高）

Moreover, to talk about those rich adults, there is no need（awkward）for them to worry about food and clothes, while at the same time, poor people have to work very hard to get rid of starving. As a consequence, those two kinds of people are very likely to have different view of value. They can be colleagues, teammates and even relatives, but there is little possibility for them to become friends. （似乎在说服性上勉强了一点点）

Finally, some people may argue that it is possible for people to become good friends before one of them become richer than the other. Nevertheless, their friendship may not be as stable as before. Consider about a situation, when the poor man is in need of large number of money for emergency, he will absolutely ask his rich friend for help（to do 表示目的）. Although the rich man is very generous and cherish their friendship very much（and 前后不并列吧）, the poor man will feel uncomfortable because of the shame. He may even feel unconfident and try not to meet his friend, so eventually their friendship will come to an end.  

All in all, although some people may still remain unconvinced, the factors and reasons I have analyzed could at least（表示谨慎说明，严谨） make them more aware of the various dimensions of the issue under discussion



Tips：

个人感觉关于第一个例子，我argument一下，山区也有清华的呢。

单就文章的逻辑，我似乎很难信服，不过行文写作已经属于一流，起码比我好很多

婷婷connie

3月13日 独立
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? It is more enjoyable to have a job, and you work only three days a week with long hours rather than work five days a week with shorter hours.
红色错误，蓝色疑问，黄色精彩
The issue of （这个有点多余？）whether it is more enjoyable to work only three days a week with long hours than work five days a week with shorter hours has been a heated dabateddebate ( aroused a heated debate)in our contemporary society. Different people hold different ideas(这样写会更好：people hold various ideas)according to their distinguished different(distinguished是“卓越的，著名的”的意思) backgrounds. Some people may say that working too many hours a day will be very tired and have(强调施加，建议使用exert) harmful effects on people's health, while others assets that our life will be much more happier if we have four days off every week. In my point of view, although the former statement is not wholly unsupportive（这么写老外可能看不懂，直接表达就行，建议使用plausible）, the latter idea is more reasonable for certain reasons.

To begin with, people can live a more（更后面的longer照应）meaningful life by arranging their leisure time, if they can enjoy a longer weekend. For example, my mother, who is a very busy business woman,（is a businesswoman, who nearly have no spare time, and she )always dreams about taking a dancing class with my father. If she can(have a )rest for four days a week, she can( will be able to)spend more time with our family and enjoy music and art to relaxherself. What's more, she can even go to the college in her spare time and learn more about her business.(There is possibility for her to come to the college and accumulate more on her business) This example maybe quite small, but since it is common in all around the world, it does make sense to support my opinion.（这句话感觉很中式，直接说有意义就行）

注意词汇的多样性，不要一直用can，比如说enable, make, let，via doing 都是可以的.

Furthermore, having a longer weekend can doesgood to the employersas welltoo, by stimulating the employees to work more efficiently. This is not only because people will have to work for long hours a day,（这一句没有读懂）but also because people will work very hard if there is a long holiday waiting for them. And for those who love their jobs, they will finish their work at home and thus increase the working hours.
该段未展开，之后可以再跟一个细节描写，比如只工作三天的人是怎么提高工作效率的

Finally, even the whole society can benefit from the long weekend. That is because an increasing number of people will spend more time on shopping and traveling, and this will stimulate（更换成promote）the economy of the country, and make more people wealthy.

To conclude, given the reasons I discussed above, which sometimesarecorrelated with each other and thus become more persuasive, we can safely（很别扭，用accurately 吧） arrived at the conclusion that if people only have to work three days a week, not only  workers but also employees, and even the society as a whole will benefit a lot.

Conclusion:词汇量仍需扩充，注意多样性。每一段之后一定要紧跟细节，这是采分点

晨依Jacqueline

越人歌~晨依修改晚了，真的灰常不好意思咧希望你不要生气(～ o ～)~zZ
The focus of the article and the lecture is about whether a specific painting, called Portrait of an Elderly Woman in a White Bonnet, is actually painted by Rembrandt. （好准确！赞！）The reading material lists three reasons to support its idea that the painting could not be a work by Rembrandt, while the speaker thinks all of them need more consideration.

To begin with, the reading says that the woman in the picture is wearing a luxurious fur collar which is inconsistent with her servant coat.  The writer is very confident to say that Rembrandt cannot make such mistake. Unfortunately, the speaker refutes his idea by pointing out a fact that the painting was once redecorated by someone, who covered something on the top of fur and changed its color, probably in order to sell it for a better price.（这一段写的不错，虽然有些原文中的点没有重现，但是用了一些同意替换，说明真的明白了文章，好！）

Secondly, the speaker also doubts that light reflected on the face cannot be proper evidence, because when we uncover the added painting, the woman is actually wearing a light-colored collar.（第二点写的不太准确哦、比如shadow on the woman's face等细节可以提一下~完善一点。可以再把听力是怎么反驳阅读的说详细一点点，虽然意思有了，但是感觉这个点可能会扣分。）

Finally, according to the reading material, the wood used to carry the painting is made of several pieces of wood, which cannot be done by Rembrandt. But the speaker said（says） that it is because the original wood was enlarged when the painting was redecorated. What's more, the original wood of the painting is nearly the same as another painting of Rembrandt. （我觉得这里可以再写一下：所以speaker认为是R的作品、或者说反驳了阅读的观点，稍微总结一下突出阅读和听力的关系~）
越人歌的文章大意和要点都写对啦，可以多记一些要点使文章内容充实一下下就更好了！我在写的时候也很发愁，感觉会漏掉一些要点，我们慢慢练吧~加油咯！

越人歌

TPO5
The focus of the reading and speaking is about the possible use of the "great houses" in New Mexico. The writer raises three competing theories to explain it, while the speaker thinks all of them are inconvincible.

To begin with, the writer says that the structures can be purely residential, with each housing hundreds of people. But, according to the speaker, although it is sure that the Chaco houses appear similar to the "apartment buildings" at Taos from the outside, the inside of the structure doubts its function of housing hundreds of people. That is because there is no enough fire places in the houses, actually, in the large room, the fire place is only enough for 10 families, not to mention the small rooms.

Secondly, according to the reading material, the structures can be used to store food. The writer is quite confident that the size of the great houses is very suitable for the purpose. However, the speaker thinks that this idea is not supported by enough evidence. In fact, no food containers or splinted grain maize was found in the great houses.

Furthermore, the professor doubts the idea that the houses were used as ceremonial centers, also because it lacks evidences. If the house was used to celebrate ceremonies, there should be some building constructions, which has never been discovered.

All in all, the professor is totally against what is said in the reading material. And to solve the problem, further information is in need.

Crystaljoy

TPO5 综合修改
嘿嘿，我终于来了。太晚了，表打我哈。

The focus of the reading and speaking is about the possible use (function) of the "great houses" in New Mexico. The writer raises three competing theories to explain it, while the speaker thinks（deems 换个） all of them are inconvincible.

To begin with, the writer says that the structures can be purely residential, with each housing hundreds of people. But, according to the speaker, although it is sure that the Chaco houses appear similar to the "apartment buildings" at Taos from the outside, the inside of the structure doubts its function of housing hundreds of people. That is because there is（are） no enough fire places in the houses, actually, in the large room, the fire place is only enough for 10 families, not to mention the small rooms.

Secondly, according to the reading material, the structures can be used to store food. The writer is quite confident that the size of the great houses is very suitable for the purpose. However, the speaker thinks (argues) that this idea is not supported by enough evidence. In fact, no food containers or splinted grain maize was found in the great houses.

Furthermore, the professor doubts the idea that the houses were used as ceremonial centers, also because it lacks (adequate) evidences. If the house was used to celebrate ceremonies, there should be some building constructions, which has (have) never been discovered ( in reality).  (貌似不是这样吧。我听得好像是发现了其他碎片，说明不一定是祭祀，而是建筑工人丢弃的。这篇有范文越人歌可以参考一下。)

All in all, the professor is totally against what is said in the reading material. And to solve the problem, further information is in need.结尾不错哦！

语言很新颖！再积累一些综合常用同义词更好，比如赞同/反对。。。
加油！