kchszy061ban的作业贴

小兔爱twins

The author of the readingtext talks about several advantages of salvage logging. In contrast, theprofessor in the lecture does not agree with the author's opinion, and she saysthat these benefits are questionable.

First, unlike to（to去掉）what has said in the textthat the removing of(of 去掉) dead trees will help forest to recover, the professor argues thatthis +practice (this放这里有点指代不明的感觉 所以我加了practice) may cause damages(damage作为赔偿损失的时候可数其他时候都不可数) to the development of theforest. She states that the decomposition of dead trees can enrich the soil,and provide nutrient to the trees in the forest. If the dead trees are allremoved, new trees may lack necessary nutrient for growth.


(first这段我自己把叙述的顺序调整了一下 把用词的修正了一下 再找了找可以稍稍润色的地方~~你看看哈 看上去会不会整齐一些? )
Firstly, in the readingtext, removing dead trees will help forest to recover. On the contrary, theprofessor argues that this the practice may cause damage to the development of the forest. Besides,the decomposition of dead trees can enrich the soil, and provide nutrient tothe trees in the forest. If the dead trees are all removed, new trees may lacknecessary nutrient for growth.

Secondly, the author says (个人感觉用author不太好吧 我给改成the reading cites) that removing of deadtrees helps to reduce insects infestation, while the professor points out thatthis is not the real situation. The spruce bark beetle have lived in the forestfor hundreds of years and they did not cause big damage(我觉得用听力原文里面的话会显得句子更高分就是….. years without causing major damage). Furthermore, decaying wood attracts birds and other insects whichare beneficial to the healthy development of the forest + in the long term(个人感觉加这个会更好些听力中有强调长期). More importantly(这个表达怪怪的感觉,,,可以用furthermore 你前面那个furthermore可以改成 in additon ), removing rottingwood would do more harm than insects do. Therefore, the benefit of salvagelogging is unsounded in this case.

Third= 用finally替换就不会123那么生硬啦~~, the professor explains that removing dead trees ofsome severely damaged forest needs helocopters(helicopters) and other expensive vehicles. So it is expensive to removethese dead trees.(内容不够准确,,,,这句这样改….helicopters and other vehicles which are expansion tomaintain.) Also, the economic benefits of salvage logging is smalland temporary. Meanwhile, the workers are most coming from other places, but not the native communities, because these workers have moreexperiences and trainning. As a result, the benefits offered in the readingtext is totally rejected by the professor.(后面表述的内容有点乱 我这段我也改动一下)

Finally, the professor disproves the reading’s idea that explains that salvage loggingbenefits the economy. She points out that the economic benefits of salvage logging is small and temporary. Becauseremoving dead trees of some severely damaged forest needs helicopters and other vehicles which are expansion tomaintain. Additionally, most  of the salvage logging workers are well-trainedoutsider rather than local residents.

小兔爱twins

听力的点大部分都听到了 ，，这是拿分的关键，，，非常棒
但是文章的结构有点点乱乱的~~ 所以在表述上需要进一步的去练习  建议你可以写一个自己的模板~~~

kchszy061ban

7月23日 2010.3.12NADo you agree or disagree with the following statement? To make children do well at school, parents should limit the hours that a child spends on watching TV. Use specific reasons to support your answer.

When it comes to the question of how to make children perform excellent at school, different people have various opinions. Some people blame the television becasue their children spend so much time on watching TV everyday especially during weekends, while other think other factors such as regular rest and study time for their children and the quality of the shcool and teachers have more important impacts on their children so that they do not think simply limit the hours that a child spends on watching TV would have any effect. From my point of view as a student, also based on what I have learnt from books and other people, I agree with first opinon and my reasons are as follows.

To begin with, spending to much time on watching TV reduces children' time on sudying. This point is not so difficult to understand by us and I would like to take one example of my friend Mike to explain this idea. Mike and I have been friends since we were five years old. He did a very good job on study in primary shcool, my parents often setted him as a model for me to follow. In fact, Mike worked hard on his study, he listen to our teachers in classes and asked questions after the lecture. One day I came to his home to call Mike palying football with me, but found that he was doing his homework. Everyone knew Mike loved study at that time. Howevery, things had chinged after Mike got to Middle school and lived far away from his parents. He began to watch TV programs everyday and liked some entermental programs. His score on the test decrease quickly more than I could imagine. In this case, Watching TV is bad to Mike's study.

Moreover, limiting the hours that a child spends on watching TV can help child contact with their parents and their classmates, which a child may not like to do if they are watching TV. Communicating with others is beneficial for children and their future. So, limiting the time that children spend on watching TV can bring benefits to children. For example, if children make friends with their peers, they can have a different perspective of view about their own life.

Finally, if children spend limited time on watching TV, they will less likely to be influenced by some advertisments and volient scenes. Nowadays some young children imatite some actors' actions in the TV programs and consider these actors to be cool. They do not realize that these actors' behaviors are bad and volite the law. On the contrary, children who have limited time to watch TV have less chances to watch such programs thus they will less likely to be influenced by them.

Of course, some people may argue that educational TV programs can help children to do well at school and enterment programs can help their children to relax after a busy day's hard work. While I admit that some TV programs are indeed good to children, and children need to spend some time to enjor watching their favorite TV programs. One thing needed to take into account is that parents should limit children' time on watching TV becasue this will do harm to their study at school.

kchszy061ban

7月24日
110821NADo you agree or disagree with the following statement? There is never a reason to be rude (impolite) to another person. Use specific reasons to support your answer.

When it come to the question of whether it is necessary to be polite to others, different people have various opinions. Some people are so kind that they do not want to be impolite to other people, while others do not think so and they think they can rude to others if other people are impolite to them. From my point of view as a student, I believe that there is no reason for people to be impolite to other. My reasons are as follows.

To begin wiht, people who have rude attitudes make other people feel uncomfortable and even depressed. People always like the feeling of being confirmed by others, such feeling makes them feel they are accepted by the people and that they will do much better in their work, study and so forth. However, people with a rude dispositon are less likely to give others such feeling. I want to cite one example to explain my poit. Researchers had done one experiment before. Two groups of workers were leaded by different bosses. One of them always criticized the workers in his group,while the other boss treated his workers politely. One month later,the researchers made a survey, the results revealed that the rude boss made his workers feel stressful and depressed, the work efficiency of them was lower than the other group.

In addition, if one always performs impolitely to others, others will tend to keep a distance with him or her. No one would love to live near a rude person, and enjoy the feeling of been treated impolitely. The result is that rude people have fewer friends, the relationships between them and their nearby people are strained. Such as when one chooses a house to buy, there are many of the houses to be selected. However, people are less likely to buy a house which means they are going to live with a rude neighbour. Living with a rude neighbour means so many things people have to consider. If you do something unintendly,but your neighbour does not think so, s/he may show her/his temper for you.

On the contrary, polite people have the effect of create a harmony and pleasant atmosphere. And other people are willing to live with people who are not rude. When I was in middle far away from my home, I lived in school with three roommates in the same room. One of my roomamtes was so rude that everyone would keep a distance from him. He did not realize this because that was his habit in his own home. Later, our teacher talked to him about this question and he quichly changed his rude behavors. He became polite to me and other roommates, all of us felt so comfortable to live with him after his change.

Of course, one sometimes has reasons to be impolite to other people who always have a bad temper and treat others unscrupulously. This is understandable because one has her/his limitation. While one thing I want to point out is taht being rude to other rude people, which have little sense of polite, may cause even worse effects. As a result, I definitely agree with the statement that there is no reason to be impolite to other people.

lcaecar

7月23日 2010.3.12NADo you agree or disagree with the following statement? To make children do well at school, parents should limit the hours that a child spends on watching TV. Use specific reasons to support your answer.

When it comes to the question of how to make children perform excellent at school, different people have various opinions. Some people blame the television becasuebecause their children spend so much time on watching TV everyday especially during weekends, while others think other factors such as regular rest and study time for their children and the quality of the shcool and teachers have more important impacts on their children so that they do not think simply limit the hours that a child spends on watching TV would have any effect. (语法和逻辑上没有问题，但是觉得还是简练一些的好)From my point of view as a student, also based on what I have learnt from books and other people, I agree with first opinon and my reasons are as follows.

To begin with, spending to much time on watching TV reduces children' time on studying. This point is not so difficult to understand by us and I would like to take one example of my friend Mike to explain this idea. Mike and I have been friends since we were five years old. He did a very good job on study in primary shcoolschool, my parents often settedset him as a model for me to follow. In fact, Mike worked hard on his study, he listened to our teachers in classes carefully and asked questions after the lecture. One day I came to his home to call Mike palyingplaying football with me, but found that he was doing his homework. Everyone knew Mike loved study at that time. Howevery, things had chingedchanged after Mike got to Middle school and lived far away from his parents. He began to watch TV programs everyday and liked some entermentalentertainment programs. His score on the test decrease quickly more than I could imagine. In this case, Watching TV is bad to Mike's study.

Moreover, limiting the hours that a child spends on watching TV can help child contact with their parents and their classmates, which a child may not like to do if they are watching TV. Communicating with others is beneficial for children and their future. So, limiting the time that children spend on watching TV can bring benefits to children. For example, if children make friends with their peers, they can have a different perspective of view about their own life.

Finally, if children spend limited time on watching TV, they will less likely to be influenced by some advertismentsadvertising and volientviolent scenes. Nowadays some young children imatiteimitate some actors' actions in the TV programs and consider these actors to be cool. They do not realize that these actors' behaviors are bad and voliteviolate the law. On the contrary, children who have limited time to watch TV have less chances to watch such programs thus they will less likely to be influenced by them.

Of course, some people may argue that educational TV programs can help children to do well at school and entermententertainment programs can help their children to relax after a busy day's hard work. While I admit that some TV programs are indeed good to children, and children need to spend some time to enjorenjoy watching their favorite TV programs. One thing needed to take into account is that parents should limit children' time on watching TV becasue this will do harm to their study at school.

548个单词，但是也狠狠地打错了16个单词。
kch的逻辑很好，但是词语不够优美，good、bad 好多
第二段的例子可以提炼一下的，铺垫写的字数太多，没有突出电视的negative influence

kchszy061ban

TPO 15
The author of the reading text talks about three methods to stop the spread of cane toad in Australia. The professor in the lecture does not agree with the author and she says that these methods will not get rid of the cane toad, and they may cause environmental damages.

First, contrary to the idea in the reading that a national fence can prevent the spread of cane toad, the professor states that this method will not work. She explains that there are rivers or steams between one side of the fence and the other side of it. Since young toads and toad eggs can get through the fence and then spread, the fence can not stop the spread of cane toad.

Second, the professor admits that volunteers can help to destory and trap the cane toad as what the author says in the passage. Then, she argues that these volunteers may also caught native frogs as these frogs are similar to cane toad especially then they are young. This directly contradicts its counterpart in the reading text.

Third, the professor points out that disease-causing virus may do harm to cane toad in Central South America. The reason is that pet collectors may bring reptile and amphibian species to South America, and researchers also will bring these animals to South America. These animals will carry the virus to South America where it is the native place of cane toad. Since the virus will kill cane toad, this can cause damage to the local environment and the whole ecosystem will suffer.

kchszy061ban

7月25日
110304NA Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The most important problems in today’s world will be solved in our lifetime.
When it comes to the question of whether the major problems nowadays can be solved in present people’ lifetime, different people have various opinions. Some people positively believe that people can find perfect solutions of these problems because of the development of our science and technology, while others do not think so. They are more practical than those positive people. From my point of view as a student, and also based on what I have learned from others and books, I do not think these major problems can be solved in our lifetime. My reasons are as follows.

To begin with, one of these most important problems-gobal warming-can not be solved in our lifetime. As the invention of stream engine and other interal-burnning engines, fossils fuels had been widely used hundreds of years ago. The burnning of these fossil fuels released greehouse gases such as carbon dioxide. These gases caused temperature to rise quickly accross the world. Records revealed that because of global warming, the galcial in north pole and south pole both begin to decrease. Scientists discovered this problem decades ago, they made lot of efforts to deal with this problems. But the result is not exciting. Because the development of industry needs fossil fuel as one source of power, and some factories also need coal and oil as raw materials to produce clothes, gasoline and so forth. Therefore, the release of these greenhouse gases is continue everyday. For example, huge amount of coal is burnning in power plant in countries accross the world. At the same time, people use cars, planes, buses to go to work and other places. All of these things consume oil and release carbon dioxide. Until now, scientists can not find efficient alternatives to oil and coal. Therefore, the release of carbon dioxide will continue, the same as the global warming.

Moreover, people can not solve the shortage of water in the next hundrend years, which means that we can not solve this problems in our lifetime. Every year, there are many people die of short of water and crops suffer from drought. For example, in north Africa people have to drill deep wills in order collect ground water for drink and provide water to their crops. I read from newspaper that one year, a drought which lasted for three years in one part of this place had caused the death of hundred people. Although wills could provide water for these people, the resource may be used up in decades. Thus, the shortage of water is still a serious question in this place. In fact, this situation is not rare. In the last year, a drought also happened in southwestern China. Many people there had no water to drink, their crops were all died in the filed. In these cases, what people can do is waiting for the wet weather, but can not completely elimate drought.

Finally, people can not solve air polution in their lifetime. The release of poluted gases had exsisted for hundreds of years as global warming. Nowadays, the use of fossil fuels, the gases from chemical factories both polute the air. But people need the products of chemical factories and fossil fuel to do a lot of thing. For example, farmers need pesticides to kill harmful insects in the field; people need electricity to cook, to work on their computers and to power their cars. So, as far as people rely on these products, air polution can not be stoped. In this way, air polution will continue.

Of course, some people may argue that some day people can use the energy from nuclear fusion, and this kind of power is unlimited. In fact, this technology can not be put into actual application because there is no effective way to solve problems relate to this technology. In fact, this situation is not rare. One solution of a problem will cause new problem. None of the solutions are perfect. So, based on what I have discussed above, the most important problems in modern world can not be solved in the next hundrend years.

kchszy061ban

TPO 16
The author of the reading text talks about some problems relate to old cultural artifacts and archaeolotists in Britain. On the contrary, the professor of the lecture states that new rules and guide line have been issued to change all of the three areas mentioned in the reading text.

First, the new guide line says that construction companies msut hire scientists to examine whether the sites are of interest or value before the contruction. If the sites indeed interest archaeologists' attention, then, archaeologists, companies and government officials work together to make a plan about how to perserve the site. The solution may be build around the site or unearth the site properly. So, the first problem in the reading text can be solved in this way.

Second, the professor points out that according to the new guide line, sciectists are paid by the construcion companies. These companies pay all of the process such as examination, plan and so forth. This new financial support could provide enough fund for archaeologists enough money to do a great range of researches than before.

Third, the professor explains that all of the stages such as examine the sites, make plans to preserve the site, need archaeologists. Also, new jobs are offerd to collect data, write articles and so on. So, new paid jods are provided to archaeologists, the number of these jobs are the highest than ever before.

Vance1991

蓝色为意见或建议 红色为错误高亮为精彩 绿色为总结
110304NA Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The most important problems in today’s world will be solved in our lifetime.
When it comes to the question of whether the major problems nowadays can be solved in present people’(peoples') lifetime, different people have various opinions. Some people positively believe that people can find perfect solutions of these problems because of the development of our science and technology, while others do not think so. They are more practical than those positive people. From my point of view as a student, and also based on what I have learned from others and books, I do not think these major problems can be solved in our lifetime. My reasons are as follows.

To begin with, one of these most important problems-gobal warming-can not be solved in our lifetime. As the invention of stream engine and other interal-burnning engines, fossils fuels had been widely used hundreds of years ago. The burnning of these fossil fuels released greehouse(greenhouse) gases such as carbon dioxide. These gases caused temperature to rise quickly accross the world. Records revealed that because of global warming, the galcial in north pole and south pole both begin to decrease. (逗号不能有，不然一个句子有两个谓语动词了。另外begin改为began。一个句子中时态要统一的)Scientists discovered this problem decades ago, they made lot of(a lot of/lots of) efforts to deal with this problems(problem). But the result is not exciting(这个句子有点怪怪的...). Because the development of industry needs fossil fuel as one source of power, and some factories also need coal and oil as raw materials to produce clothes, gasoline and so forth. Therefore, the release of these greenhouse gases is continue everyday. For example, huge amount of coal is burnning in power plant in countries accross the world(前面已经出现过一次accross the world了，可以试着换个词. all over the world等等). At the same time, people use cars, planes, buses to go to work and other places. All of these things consume oil and release carbon dioxide. Until now, scientists can not find efficient alternatives to oil and coal. Therefore, the release of carbon dioxide will continue, the same as the global warming.

Moreover, people can not solve the shortage of water in the next hundrend(hundred) years, which means that we can not solve this problems in our lifetime.(个人感觉which后面引导的从句有点累赘了) Every year, there are many people die of short of water and crops suffer from drought. For example, in north Africa people have to drill deep wills(wells) in order (to)collect ground water for drink(个人认为drinking--喝水.drink做名词为饮料) and provide(providing) water to(for.我参考了有道，例句都是provide sth to somebody. 所以觉得用for会好点) their crops. I read from newspaper that one year(that one year？？？我木有看懂~), a drought which lasted for three years in one part of this place had caused the death of hundred people. Although wills(wells.井是well不是will) could provide water for these people, the resource may be used up in decades. Thus, the shortage of water is still a serious question in this place. In fact, this situation is not rare. In the last year, a drought also happened in southwestern China. Many people there had no water to drink, their crops were all died in the filed. In these cases, what people can do is waiting for the wet weather, but can not completely elimate drought.

Finally, people can not solve air polution(pollution) in their lifetime. The release(用了很多的release。可以换emission之类的) of poluted(polluted) gases had exsisted for hundreds of years as global warming. Nowadays, the use of fossil fuels, the gases from chemical factories both polute(pollute) the air. But people need the products of chemical factories and fossil fuel to do a lot of thing. For example, farmers need pesticides to kill harmful insects in the field; people need electricity to cook, to work on their computers and to power their cars. So, as far as people rely on these products, air polution(pollution) can not be stoped. In this way, air polution will continue.

Of course, some people may argue that some day people can use the energy from nuclear fusion, and this kind of power is unlimited(你是想说是取之不尽，用之不竭的么？个人感觉unlimited的意思是说nuclear power没有限制，是可以摧毁一切的power。我觉得用renewable会好些). In fact, this technology can not be put into actual application because there is no effective way to solve problems relate to this technology. In fact, this situation is not rare. One solution of a problem will cause new problem. (这个观点极赞，我在gre范文上看到一篇类似的就说这个主题的，写的超好)None of the solutions are perfect. So, based on what I have discussed above, the most important problems in modern world can not be solved in the next hundrend years.


文章证明的很好，例子很充分！有些句子写的很精彩！
单词拼写要注意一下。另外，尽量多用同义词替代。有些句子感觉有点awkward。

Vance1991

蓝色为意见或建议 红色为错误高亮为精彩 绿色为总结
7月24日
110821NADo you agree or disagree with the following statement? There is never a reason to be rude (impolite) to another person. Use specific reasons to support your answer.

When it come(comes) to the question of whether it is necessary to be polite to others, different people have various opinions. Some people are so kind that they do not want to be impolite to other people, while others do not think so and they think they can rude to others if other people are impolite to them. From my point of view as a student, I believe that there is no reason for people to be impolite to other. My reasons are as follows.

To begin wiht(with), people who have rude attitudes make other people feel uncomfortable and even depressed. People always like the feeling of being confirmed(你是想说认可吧。approved) by others, such feeling makes them feel they are accepted by the people and that they will do much better in their work, study and so forth. However, people with a rude dispositon(disposition) are less likely to give others such feeling. I want to cite one example to explain my poit. Researchers had done one experiment before. Two groups of workers were leaded by different bosses. One of them always criticized the workers in his group,(space)while the other boss treated his workers politely. One month later,the researchers made a survey, the results revealed that the rude boss made his workers feel stressful and depressed, the work efficiency of them was lower than the other group.(一句话里只能有一个谓语动词,要用句号隔开的!)(另外据这种调查的例子的时候可以说xxxx机构或xxxx大学,要具体,越具体越好!作文老师讲的...)


In addition, if one always performs impolitely to others, others will tend to keep a distance with him or her. No one would love to live near(live near的意思只能说生活在旁边,用live with是和他一起生活) a rude person, and enjoy the feeling of been treated impolitely. The result is that rude people have fewer friends, the relationships between them and their nearby people are strained. Such as when one chooses a house to buy, there are many of the houses to be selected. However, people are less likely to buy a house which means they are going to live with a rude neighbour.(which means 这里木有看懂.我明白你的意思,但是英语表达的不对.) Living with a rude neighbour means so many things people have to consider.(句子语法没有问题,可是逻辑有问题啊.难道living with polite neighbour, 你就不用be considerate了么?) If you do something unintendly,but your neighbour does not think so, s/he may show her/his temper for you.

On the contrary, polite people have the effect of create(creating) a harmony and pleasant atmosphere. And other people are willing to live with people who are not rude. When I was in middle(in middle是在中间, 这里改为in middle school) far away from my home, I lived in school with three roommates in the same room. One of my roomamtes was so rude that everyone would keep a distance from him. He did not realize this because that was his habit in his own home. Later, our teacher talked to him about this question and he quichly changed his rude behavors(behaviors). He became polite to me and other roommates, all of us felt so comfortable to live with him after his change.(个人认为在描述过程中,在句子与句子之间要多连贯一点,增加一些then, as a result, afterward等衔接词)

Of course, one sometimes has reasons to be impolite to other people who always have a bad temper and treat others unscrupulously. This is understandable because one has her/his limitation. While one thing I want to point out is taht(that) being rude to other rude people, which have little sense of polite, may cause even worse effects. As a result, I definitely agree with the statement that there is no reason to be impolite to other people.


整体还不错!
有些单词的用的不够恰当,要注意.
举例论证的时候,句子与句子之间要连贯.多加入一些衔接词.