Five_007的写作练习贴~

ENJ0Y

已修改。我自己的作文水平有限，还请多多包涵。修改意见请参考。

Five_007

ENJ0Y 发表于 2014-6-21 02:14
已修改。我自己的作文水平有限，还请多多包涵。修改意见请参考。

谢谢~太久没写作文，越来越容易偏题了。。。多谢指教~
不过，patient除了病人，还是patience的形容词形式，有耐心的adj的意思

e23lzh

我自己找过来了。。看了你的最后一篇文章，感觉作者水平应该不错，但是细节问题太多，非常影响评分。

Five_007

TPO7  综合

Will the wood companies in the United State attract clients by presenting that their products are eco-certified? The reading showed that these companies won't, while the speaker refuted the view of the reading.


First, the author emphasized that consumers in the U.S. would not value or trust those ecological advertisements made by wood enterprises. However, the professor proposed an opposite view. He stated that the advertisements in American were not all the same and consumers there would like to trust independent consumer agencies. So if the wood companies could put ads certified by independent agencies, the clients would pay attention to it and have much trust on it.


Second, the passage contended that if the companies chose to produce ecological production, the price of products would increase accordingly. So the clients would not like to buy.  However, the speaker disagreed with this. He highlighted that the condition on which the consumers would only consider the price must be the price of the products was much higher or lower than usual. But the cost only took the price up a little, even less than 5%, so the consumers would like to think the environmental effect as well.


Finally, the text presented that the wood companies in America did not concern much about the foreign market for their major market was domestic. However, the speaker totally refuted this point. He claimed that those companies in the U.S had to concern developments for competitors came from foreign markets. If they could not keep up the pace of the world, the foreign competitors would take over the domestic market soon, and they would lose a lot of market share.

独立 People care more about public recognition than about money. Even if no money is given, public recognition can still make people work harder

When it comes to the issue about whether public recognition has more meaning than money for people, people’s perspective differ. Many people argue that money is necessary as reward of working, while others are just on the contrary, that is, they would be work hard even if there is no money paid. Each opinion has its redeeming feature if being determined on a case-by-case basis. On a personal level, I am in favor of the prior one.


Admittedly, public recognition could give people a sense of self-realization. Take the Netherlands national football team for example. In the year of 2012, they lost the opportunity to be the champion of European Cup for they were defeated by the Spain. In the World Cup, just several days before, they bitterly hit the Spain as the final score was 5:1. There is a question, what stimulated the Dutch to beat the Spain, one of the most opponents? The answer is that they want to prove themselves, who have the ability to win the game even if the competitor is strong Spain national football team. So here is the point, were they promised that if they won the game, they would be rewarded of a lot of money? No, the only thing provided faith for them was the hope to be recognized by the public. Granted the evidence above, is it a good idea to claim that public recognition is more important than money? When taking more factors in consideration, I think the money outweighs the public patience.


Compared with public recognition, the majority of people indeed work for money without which they are even hard to keep balance of daily life. For example, as a student, there are so many things I have to do with money. I need to support myself, to provide better environment for my parents and to prepare for the future, neither one would be realized without money. So money is still an essential element of my life at least first five years. It is reasonable for other people to pursue money rather than public recognition likewise.


In addition, money could bring public recognition for people. Looking into one of the richest people on the world, Bill Gates, he is constantly telling us how to get public recognition by making money. Microsoft is the biggest software company in the world, it makes numerous profits, instead of being free for any people, and put portion of the profits to establish funds. It means that Bill Gates have used the money taken from legal operation and supported the people who needed most. Then the Bill Gates and his company earned the reputation of outstanding company both in commerce and charity. Therefore, money may be the basic part of winning public recognition.


In a nutshell, from what has been discussed above, we may safely draw the conclusion that money is more paramount than public recognition in some aspects.

Five_007

e23lzh 发表于 2014-6-21 18:03
我自己找过来了。。看了你的最后一篇文章，感觉作者水平应该不错，但是细节问题太多，非常影响评分。 ...

真的感激不尽！今天回来完了补了一篇，自己知道写搓了。我会好好看您的评语！谢谢！

jennyer

已修改，请查阅。

Five_007

jennyer 发表于 2014-6-22 13:48
已修改，请查阅。

灰常感谢~

ENJ0Y

Five_007 发表于 2014-6-22 01:41
TPO7  综合

Will the wood companies in the United State attract clients by presenting that their pro ...

抱歉现在才改。文章整体没有大错误，听力的关键点都听到了。教你如何添加附件，在回复的对话框点高级模式，进入以后可以看到附件按钮。

北极的企鹅123

hello,不好意思拖了那么久，签证完了又偷懒去了，嘿嘿，综合写的很棒哈，向你学习

Five_007

TPO10 综合

Which is the main reason for the decline of sea otter? The reading contends that pollution is the main reason, while the listening has a different thought. She thinks that predation hypothesis can better explain the depleting of sea otters.


First, the passage shows that increment of chemical levels results in the decreasing of otters' resistance to infections, so the number of death of sea otters increase. However, the professor disagrees. She posts that if the death was caused by infections, people should have found many dead bodies of otters. But the fact is that there is not. So the fact is consistent with predation hypothesis because it is reasonable for human to find nothing on the beach for being eaten by predators.


Second, the author states that numerous organisms of different species died and only environment pollution can affect entire environment. This idea is refuted directly by the speaker. She states that orca did prey for many larger whales until those whales decreased by over hunting of human. So the orcas have to change their diets to small sea animals like seals, sea lions and sea otters. That's why so many mammals are affected at the same time.


Finally, the text proposes that uneven pattern of otter decline also meets with the pollution hypothesis, which is thought as ridiculous by speaker. The speaker contends that the uneven pattern exactly proves that predation hypothesis is true. Because the number of sea otters in areas such as shallow water is stable, and these places are just too small to enable the large orcas to be accessed. And the decline of sea otters also happened in deeper sea, which proves the predation hypothesis is right.


独立：Drivers have to pay a fee for driving in busy city streets when there is a great amount of traffic.

Obviously, since the development of transportation enables people to arrive at destinations without wasting lots of time, the embarrassing problem that rush hours inevitably become part of daily life. Thus, congestion charges are on the waiting list of possible methods to be done in order to ease this issue. Although many believe that charges will be effective, I, nevertheless, deem that it is far better to be free.


It is self-evident that congestion charges will bring negative effects to taxi drivers' income, which has been depleted a lot for sever competition in current taxi market. According to data revealed by the government in its traffic reporting, there has been a tenfold increment in the amount of taxis on the road in 10 years, so the time, when drivers could choose which passengers to take, had passed and they have to compete for clients in most of time. My uncle, who has been a driver for 30 years, often complains about the tough business, which would never happen several years ago. Last time we discuss about the method of charging fees, he had opposite viewpoint that I totally agreed with. That is, peak hours' orders occupy a large portion of their income, once government taxis on that they will bear much lose, which definitely will deteriorate the living conditions of drivers. And it is unfair at least for driver group.


Besides, isn't there any other approach that we can find to solve the issue? Obviously, there are many methods that can be chosen to resolve this problem. Construction of metros may be an appropriate illustration for this. Shenzhen, my friend Jack's hometown, had experienced a tough time when too many cars congested on the road during rush hours and it took us quadruple time between different scenic spots five years before when I came to visit him. The time wasted on congestion narrowly ruined a wonderful tour. Last summer, when I returned to Shenzhen for an interview, I was totally astonished by convenient transportation there. There were five trains and they eased the congestion effectively, with which citizens can choose which line to take according to their own destinations. Compared with charging fees simply, enlarging more spaces for transportation should be more rudimental choice, isn't it?


In a nutshell, for one perspective, charging fees is inequitable for drivers at least，and for another, creating more available spaces for advanced transportation would be a rudimentary resolution solution for congestion hours. Therefore, it is crystal clear that we should not ask drivers to pay fees for driving in peak hours.