第一次加入写作分队 xiaoqing song

shanhunian

1月10  TPO 10
The reading passage and the listening passage completely uphold different ideas toward whether the environment pollution or the predation is the cause of sea utter population decreased? The speaker says that the predation is the most likely cause of the sea otters population decline. Then she uses three specific ideas to support her opinion.

To begin with, the speaker opposes the first idea in the reading passage, which states that the chemical pollution along the Alaskan coast affects the sea otters. She states that the pollution theory is weak, the fact is that no one found these dead otters. On the other hand, the otters hard to find is consistent with the predation hypothesis. The predators kill utters immediately cannot show on shore.  

What’s more, the speaker opposes the second issue in the reading passage, which infers that other sea mammals also disappeared because environment pollution have effects on the all mammals as a whole. She explains that it is probably the orcas caused these smaller mammals disappeared. Since human hunters hunt the large ones, and the orcas have to adapt to survive, the smaller mammals are only available. So orcas started to eat these smaller ones.

Finally, the speaker casts light on the third thought in the reading passage, which makes the point by saying that pollution causes the uneven pattern of otter decline. She demonstrates that it is better explained by the predation theory. Otters decreased greatly where the location is easily acceptable for the orcas to survive. However, otters did not decline where the location is in the shallow or rocky areas, because the orcas are so large that they cannot arrive in the shallow area.

To sum up, the speaker discerns the flaws in the reading passage and takes one more step to carefully reveal the fallacies needed to be close scrutiny.

wsxz007

1月10号 独立

Nowadays people spend too much money on their pets, although those can be spent on other things. What's your point?

It is a common belief that people nowadays have a much better quality of life than before for the increasingly(increased adj.) development of society. But here comes a puzzle, when people have earned much money for their work, should they take much money on the pets so that these pets could company with people to kill time well? 这里逻辑很牵强哦，背景是生活质量升高了，转折到一个puzzle，挣钱多了是否就花钱给宠物因为他们能打发时间。生活质量提高和这个puzzle 有啥关系呢，一定要这么写的话中间少个逻辑链，不仅有多余的钱而且寂寞——来自于快节奏生活，人与人沟通变少的寂寞From my point of view, I deem that it is really unnecessary for us to spend much money on the pets because there are so many other aspects worth being invested into.

To begin with, we could spend much money on the study, which could help us learn more in our career. As we all know, ourhuman beings（是表达人类的意思么？社会竞争提高不假，可是首段写了生活条件越来越好了，这个地方人类压力从何说起……）have much pressure than before that we have to spend time（money吧？）studying in order to keep up with other.（表达怪怪的that 引导的从句里面再加in order to ，建议直接改成目的状语从句会不会好些）Namely, we could go abroad to a further study in America for many years, which can improve our language skills and broaden our horizons completely. That is, through the experience in foreign contraries, we could learn so much from the study, such as communication skills, language skills, etc. all these skills are very vital for us to obtain the success in the future.最后两句话基本就是在重复，语义上木有解释说明、总结或递进的意思哦

What’s more, we could spend much money on the travelling, leading us to a deep and overall know of the outside world. Most of us, especially for the young, have so many works to do every day that we are very easily tired and have a bad emotion for a long time. In this case, all of us need a rest. One of the best choices for us is to travel in another city. That is, we could ask some of our best friends with us （invite some of the best friends together）to have a sight-seeing in another city. Through the travelling, we could get lots of things as well, such as new friends, beautiful sceneries, etc. For this reason, I strongly feel that it is a good way for us to spend some money on travelling to obtain much knowledge and improve ourself.

Finally, donating some money for people, especially for the poor, who need help is a very meaningful event for our humans.(donation is an other choice,which help the people who are really in need )Even though most of people now live a better life than people in the past, there are still some people living in a very poor life that they even cannot ensure the basic needs for their daily life. According to the china daily reported in 2010, roughly 34 percent of people cannot earn enough money for their basic food, let alone for the children to study at school. To be honest, when I saw this news from the report, I cried for a long time that I(and)cannot sleep for over nights. So, when we hear these kinds of news in china, I have to say that there is no reason for us to spend much money on the pets. Of course, we could spend much money on the poor who still live in the rural villages now.



这里的逻辑有点点问题，语气太过绝对了，对于穷人的帮助更多的是一种呼唤和好号召，因为有人穷的吃不上饭我们就必须帮助，而忽略自己的喜好有点牵强，可以从善举（喜爱宠物和做善事同是善良的表现，可以捐一些钱给更需要帮助的人，而不是花过分多的钱在宠物身上）出发。你的段落里自动跳过了善良这一帮助他人的内心动因。

To sum up, I firmly believe that it is completely unnecessary for us to spend so much money on the pets, which is such a waste of money. For one thing, we could take some money to go study abroad to learn more knowledge and also visit other cities for a travelling to abroad our horizons. For another, we could use the money to help the poor to get basic needs so that they can live a better life.



逻辑有些小问题，题点much没写出来啊，我觉得这个题目是比较相对而言的，是个比较型题目，你的观点都是绝对语气表达出来的。逻辑跳跃比较大，中国人都懂可老美不适应的。这毛病我也经常犯……在努力改ing。

perfectends

备注：红色--修改；绿色高亮：赞
The reading passage and thelistening passage completely uphold different ideas toward whether theenvironment pollution or the predation is the cause of sea utter otter population decreased? The speaker says that the predationis the most likely cause of the sea otters population decline. Then she usesthree specific ideas to support her opinion.

To beginwith, the speaker opposes the first idea in the reading passage, which statesthat the chemical pollution along the Alaskan coast affects the sea otters. She states that the pollution theory is weak, while the fact is that noone found these dead otters. On the other hand, theotters hard to find dead otters is consistent with the predation hypothesis. The predators kill utters otters immediately, so the dead bodies of otters cannot show on shore.  

What’s more, the speaker opposes the secondissue in the reading passage, which infers that other sea mammals alsodisappeared because environment pollution have effects on the all mammals as awhole. She explains that it is probably the orcas caused these smaller mammals disapperance disappeared (双谓语). Since human hunters hunt the large ones, and the orcas have to adaptto survive, the smaller mammals are the only available for them. So orcas started to eat these smaller ones.

Finally, the speaker casts light on the third thought in the readingpassage, which makes the point by saying that pollution causes theuneven pattern of otter decline. She demonstrates that it is better explained by the predation theory.Otters decreased greatly where the location is easily acceptable for the orcasto survive. However, otters did not decline where the location is in theshallow or rocky areas, because the orcas are so large that they cannot arrivein the shallow area.

To sum up, the speaker discerns the flaws in the reading passage andtakes one more step to carefully reveal the fallacies needed to be close scrutiny.


听力的大意和重要细节都听出来了（鄙视我自己，很多就听出来半截，做笔记就顾不上听，听就顾不上做笔记），也paraphase后将文章与讲座做了对比，总体很好的文章。有个别错误如下：有的句子不完整，有的出现双谓语，还有笔误otter—utter。
呃，我综合都没有写总结段的，需要吗？


8好意思啊，我那天保存之后忘了备注是copy word里了谁的帖子，然后就找不到了，回晚了。。。希望你前两天的T考试顺利啊～看你到我这溜达过，对照一下，果然是你。。。鄙视我自己。。。