CECE的作文贴

dreamcece

The reading material talks about three possible solution to solve the over-populated cane toad problem while the lecturer shows her negative attitudes all the solutions for she considering the solutions to be either unsuccessful or unexpected harmful.

For the first solution, the article suggests build up a national fence while the lecturer doubts the effectiveness of the solution. She says the cane toad produce eggs in river or streams which could flowing from one side to another, which is not useful at all. In addition, she mentions that even limited number of the cane toad get through the fence, the large population could be produced in new area.
The lecturer holds her idea toward the second solution of the collective efforts to be not possibly useful. However, she thinks the side effect of the solution outweigh its benefit. The untrained volunteers are unlikely distinguish the native toads against the cane toad because they are not easy to tell especially when they are young. Some of the native frogs are endangered and the sequence can resulted in a worse way.
The third solution is intensely opposed by the lecturer. She says the virus could do a terrible harm to the ecosystem of original habitat, which is in Central America. The lecturer demonstrates that the Australia species are usually carried out of the country by the researchers, which would spread the virus to the original habitat. In that area, the cane toad serves as an important part of the ecosystem and even the small eliminating part could results in a devastated harm.

AnthonySummer

期待才女姐姐10.5号的独立哦，弟弟写好了在 http://forum.chasedream.com/TOEFL_Writing/thread-769386-1-1.html  ，另外贴一个建议：
例二：
     再看这么两句话：I love a girl. This girl is outgoing.
      有人从前一句收到启发，写出——I love a girl who is outgoing. 但是，我觉得更为“有效”的表达是I love an outgoing girl.
      比较两者，为什么更短的后者更加有效？发出这个疑问的人没有掌握英语的美学标准——文章不在乎长，在乎字字珠玑，表达有效。还记得你知道为例一的定语从句所欢呼喝彩的原因么？原因是用了一个定语从句把累赘的两个girl精简为一个，使表达更加有效率。但是，其中的美学标准是“更加有效”，而不是“定语从句”。所以，你简单地利用定语从句对例二进行“修饰”，是得不到这种美的——因为这个例子里，定语从句本身就是一个累赘——一个简简单单的形容词就足够美了。
由此及彼，什么主语从句、宾语从句等等发杂的句子成分的目的不是使句子更长，而是使表达更加有效。
原文网址 http://forum.chasedream.com/TOEFL_Writing/thread-712479-1-1.html

AnthonySummer

10.5 综合， TPO 15

The reading material talks about three possible solution (solutions) to solve the over-populated cane toad problem while the lecturer shows her negative attitudes all the solutions for she (her) considering the solutions to be either unsuccessful or unexpected harmful. （实话挑不出什么毛病，整体思路和架构不错，感觉你写的时间有些紧，很多粗心的地方，姐姐要注意细腻啊！）

For the first solution, the article suggests build (building) up a national fence while the lecturer doubts the effectiveness of the solution. She says the cane toad produce eggs in river (s) or streams which could flowing (flow) from one side to another, which is not useful at all. （这句话可以不用which，一个句子里面两个which啊！one side to another. It is no useful at all，逻辑不清，莫怪弟弟说话直接啊 \(^o^)/~）In addition, she mentions that even limited number of the cane toad get through the fence, the large population could be produced in (the) new area.
The lecturer holds her idea toward the second solution of the collective efforts to be not possibly useful. However, she thinks the side effect of the solution outweigh (outweighs) its benefit. The untrained volunteers are unlikely distinguish the native toads against the cane toad because they are not easy to tell especially when they are young. Some of the native frogs are endangered and the sequence can resulted （*result原型！）in a worse way.
The third solution is intensely opposed by the lecturer. She says the virus could do a terrible harm to the ecosystem of original habitat, which is in Central America. The lecturer demonstrates that the Australia(所有格) species are usually carried out of the country by the researchers, which would（其实有些which指代问题，如果用and 替代which would就行了）spread the virus to the original habitat. In that area, the cane toad serves as an important part of the ecosystem and even the small eliminating part could results (be results) in a devastated harm.

姐姐加油哦！说的不对的地方多多包涵谅解 ^_^

dreamcece

综合直接在模考软件里面写的，我怕时间一到写的东西就没有了，所以写得很急，之后也没有再检查了，现在再看确实问题很多呀。

dreamcece

Family bonds its members altogether, and the connections end up benefiting all the members by providing mutual corporation and supports. This is the reason why people value families. However, as time goes by, the structure of the society and the change in mind toward the success make people live at the moment to achieve success without families’ help than in the past.


Social structure changes with the time and so are the functions of the family. In the past, personal developments were strongly related to the social status of his family. At first, good education usually makes a better person. However, only the nobilities were allowed to take the education. Not only because their identification gave the privileges, but also the cost of education were too high to burden for the public. Most of the great people in the past were lucky to have a either rich or powerful family. In contrast, the world of today is differentiated against the past. The public education system provide the majority a relatively equal chance to build up the foundations for the future.
Meanwhile, the social mobility increased along the time showed by the socialists in Europe, especially after the industrial revolution. People are now more free from the land and certain place, doing whatever he wants at anywhere he like. The flexiblity and mobility increases the chance of achieving success. One can even make his name known in an area which his family totally unfamiliar with, not even to mention the help from families.
In addition, the bond of family were strong in the past, which in return resulted in a better collective force to be utilized. Nevertheless, as the society rapidly developed, families are not required to stay in one same place for the life time. This goes with the consequence that “the families are not even helpful than a close neighbor when one needs help,” as a famous Chinese old saying goes.
People change their minds toward success as well compared to the ones in the past. Modern society advocates more for individual endeavour. Take the greatest country in the world, the United States, for example, most of the offsprings are encouraged to set up his own career besides the family-own buiness and families’ help are limited even when the youth are struggling for their own career. In reality, the grassroot success are more admirable than the success for the priviliges, people take it for granted once you have the help from family.
In all, two changes make people today easier achieve success without families’ help.

AnthonySummer

10.5 独立



Family bonds its members(their members?)altogether, and the connections end up benefiting all the members by providing mutual corporation and supports. This is the reason why people value families. However, as time goes by, the structure of the society and the change in mind toward the success make people live at the moment to achieve success without families' help than in the past. (开头不错！)

Social structure changes with the time and so are the functions of the family. In the past, personal developments were strongly related to the social status of his family. At first, good education usually makes a better person. However, only the nobilities were (was) allowed to take the education. Not only because their identification gave the privileges, but also the cost of education were too high to burden for the public. Most of the great people in the past were lucky to have a (an) either rich or powerful family. In contrast, the world of today is differentiated against the past. The public education system provide (provides) the majority a relatively equal chance to build up the foundations for the future. （此段举个列子就更好了！）

Meanwhile, the social (第一次出现无需the） mobility increased along the time showed by the socialists in Europe, especially after the industrial revolution. People are now more free（freer，前几次修改也出现类似问题）from the land and certain place, doing whatever he wants （wants +something 句子结构不完整） at anywhere he like. The flexiblity （flexibility） and mobility increases the chance of achieving success. One can even make his name known in an area which his family totally unfamiliar with, not even to mention the help from families.

In addition, the bond of family were strong in the past, which in return resulted in a better collective force to be utilized. Nevertheless, as the society rapidly developed, families are not required to stay in one same place for the life time. This goes with the consequence that "the families（提个问题：需要the吗？) are not even helpful than a close neighbor when one needs help," as a famous Chinese old saying goes.

People change their minds toward success as well compared to the ones in the past. Modern society advocates more for individual endeavour. Take the greatest country in the world, the United States, for example, most of the offsprings are encouraged to set up his own career besides the family-own buiness (business) and families' help are (is) limited even when the youth are (is) struggling for their own career.（短小精悍的列子不错！）In reality, the grassroot success are (is) more admirable than the success for the priviliges, （可以另起一句 priviliges. Poeple ... ) people take it for granted once you have the help from family. (the family 像我上一段提的问题the 的用法，文章总体出现很多单复数用法错误，一些拼写错误，不过因为是实战水平，还不错！姐姐再接再厉！)

In all, two changes make people today easier achieve success without families' help.

(限于目前水平实在看不出其他问题~ 姐姐果然长句用的很不错！这次文章显得比前几次精炼！前两次的确需要动脑用心去读！这次读起来更舒畅，长句很流畅！没有那么多小毛病起码27+)


Mary Maxwell Gates (born Mary Maxwell on July 5, 1929 – June 10, 1994) was an American businessperson. Gates served 18 years (1975–1993) on the University of Washingtonboard of regents. She was the first female president of King County’s United Way. ......and the first woman on the First Interstate Bank of Washington's board of directors. Mary's son Bill Gates is the co-founder of Microsoft.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mary_Maxwell_Gates
他妈妈不是老师啦~
看了点评，果然姐姐点评句句到位！偏题严重~无语了
长难句被你一说回过头以旁观者角度看，也看不大懂~
列子也太偏~
姐姐有什么写作长难句的好书推荐码?

dreamcece

The points held by the lecturer respectively go against the viewpoints claimed by the reading material.

First, urbanilization does do harm for some types of the birds, but in total facilitates other types and increasing population of birds in the city area. Seagols and pigeons are more often seen in the urban because they can have more food, and hawks can be more often seen in the city than in the past. Therefore, it is not accurate the expansion of human settlements will unavoidably cause the decreasing the size of the bird populations.
Second, it is true agricultural will result in diminishing wilderness areas, but the prediction in the reading material is opposed by the lecturer. She mentions that in America, with the development of technology, less and less land have been occupied to be the agricultural land year by year. Crops are sufficient for people and there is no need to destruct the wilderness area to convert to agricultural use.
Third, the lecturer points two aspects to object the projection in the reading material. The lecurer admits that the traditional pesticides do harm the birds. However, the trend about the future pesticides will not have the issue. Firstly, Less pesticide will be used in the future. Secondly, the pesticide used in the future cause the crops be more unattractive to the insects, which will have no harm to the birds at all.

AnthonySummer

The points held by the lecturer respectively go against the viewpoints claimed by the reading material.

First, urbanilization (urbanization) does do harm for some types of the birds (brids) , but in total facilitates other types and increasing population of birds in the city area. Seagols (seagulls) and pigeons are more often seen in the urban because they can have more food, and hawks can be more often seen in the city than in the past. Therefore, it is not accurate the (用that 会不会更好?应该从句吧！)expansion of human settlements will unavoidably cause the decreasing the size of the bird populations.

Second, it is true agricultural will result in diminishing wilderness areas, but the prediction in the reading material is opposed by the lecturer. She mentions that in America, with the development of technology, less and less land have ( has, 原文中是is） been occupied to be the agricultural land year by year. Crops are sufficient for people and there is no need to destruct the wilderness area to convert to agricultural use. (姐姐总结的好精炼！)

Third, the lecturer points two aspects to object the projection in the reading material. The lecurer （lecture) admits that the traditional pesticides do harm the birds. However, the trend about (of ) the future pesticides will not have the issue（issue还有，只是less toxic）. Firstly, Less (小写less）pesticide will be used in the future. Secondly, the pesticide used in the future cause the crops be （to be）more unattractive to the insects, which will have no harm to the birds at all.

感觉很多细节没有提到，而直接用模糊词汇替代了~ 下次提高精确度吧！

dreamcece

The lecturer gave three explanations respectively responding to the confusions showed in the reading part and testified that the portrait painting was the art of Rembrandt's.

First, after the X-ray examination, researchers found that the fur color was added after 100 years of the portrait originally painted. The reason speculated by the lecturer was that someone want to increase the value of painting by adding up the fur color and therefore making the portrait more formal, as a portrait of an aristocrat lady.
Second, according to the research, the original color that Rembrandt used for the girl was in light color of cloff, which illuminated her face. Thus, it was realistic for the painter not painting the shadow. The detail was exactly expected in Rembrandt's work.
Third, the enlarged part of wood panel was added at the same time as the adding fur color because someone wanted to make it more granted and valuable. However, in the original part of the portrait, the wood panel was examinated to be made by same tree for another wood panel, which was for Rembrandt's self portrait with hat.

dreamcece

The lecturer challenged the point of reading passage that dinosaurs were endotherms. She provided severval evidences to cast the logic chain to prove that the dinosaurs were not endotherms.

First, according to the reading passage, the bone fund in the polar area suggested that the dinosaurs were endotherms because only endotherms can survive in such a cold environment. The lecturer asserted that the polar area wer much more warmer than what it is now. It is warm enough for the dinosaurs to survive even they are not endotherms. In addition, the migration of dinosaur also explained why they were not found in the polar area any more because they were not fit for the cold.
Second, reading material suggested that the leg position of the dinosaur can be the evidence that dinosaurs were endotherms. Nevertheless, the lecturer debated that the leg position had nothing to do with the definition of dinosaurs being endotherms. The structure was effective to support weight and that was why dinosaurs can grow in such a huge size.
Third, information given in the reading part indicated that the presence of Haversian canals in bone being a sign of endotherm. The lecturer admitted that dinosaurs had the Haversian canals, but more evidence were found in their fossils to undermine the conclusion of the reading passage. She mentioned that there was a growth ring in their bone, it implied the growth rate of animals. Evidence showed that the dinosaurs were growing more rapidly in warmer age than the cold one, while the endotherms were supposed to grow at the same rate whenever in cold or warm time.