Terry95的作文帖(欢迎大家来吐槽）

GJason

Terry95 发表于 2014-7-29 19:33
我感觉，首先我的作文水平一般般吧，再就是我觉得写作是口语的基础，写作好了跟老美们会话时才不会局限于 ...

我的写作才刚刚开始，奈何下个月16号就要被托福狂虐呀。。。

Terry95

GJason 发表于 2014-7-29 19:35
我的写作才刚刚开始，奈何下个月16号就要被托福狂虐呀。。。

不会的啦，我感觉的你作文写得已经很不错了啊，而且你还有将近20天呢，每天一篇的话，提高会相当明显的。你在哪考？

GJason

你摘牌，我来当电灯泡啦

Terry95

GJason 发表于 2014-7-30 08:40
你摘牌，我来当电灯泡啦

7-29  
先贴一篇独立上来
YOUR FRIENDS ARE THE MINIATURE OF YOUR WORLD
There are numerous ways to understand people, and one of these ways is to analyze the friends of them. However,is it really an effective and reliable approach to know a person? The answer is that, in most cases, this way does help us to read people.

At the first place,we can find out the basic information,such as hobbies, assets, and tastes of a person by knowing his/her friends’ interests, personal possessions, and the level of appreciation. For example, if a majority of Terry’s friends play golf frequently, Terry may be interested in playing golf as well. Or, if most of Terry’s friends have meal only in decent and expensive restaurants, Terry must not be poor.This is because friends always go to restaurants together so Terry must also eat in fancy restaurants regularly. In short, a group of friends normally share a similar range of interests and have a proportional level of fortune.

In addition to the qualities mentioned above, we can also observe a person’s characteristics from his friends.For my own experience, I’m honest so I cannot tolerate any of my friends lying to me. In an other word, none of my friend is a liar ,or a fraud, and all of them share the same quality: integrity. Thus,by knowing my friends, everyone can easily learn that I am an reliable person.

However, there are some exceptions to this rule. For instance, someone’s hobby could be rare, such as collecting tarantulas, so that at most only a small fraction of their friends share the same hobby with him/her; therefore, we cannot know his/her liking by understanding his/her friends. Or, sometimes because of the geographical restrictions, the types of people around a person are usually limited; thus they do not have enough chance to choose their friends. For example, in some rural areas where there is only one piece of cultivatable land and thus one landlord,the only friends the landlord can have are farmers. Then, it would not be a good idea to know the landlord by observing his/her farmer friends.

In conclusion, under most but not all circumstances, it is justified to understand a person by analyzing his/her friends.

IPO16 这篇文章先写走题了，现在才发现综合写作还是分了几种类型的，这篇好像是解决问题性。上篇是常见的攻击measure型。还都有写什么类型啊？？？？

The lecturer addressed the three difficult situations mentioned in the reading passage by which the scientific field of archaeology was haunted for the most of the twentieth century in the United Kingdom. In support of the argument, the speaker separately states how the new rules improved the three situations.

At the first place, the new rules successfully solve the problem that many useful artifacts were destroyed or lost because of the construction projects. The professor says archaeologists will examine the construction sites before the construction companies are allowed to proceed, so that the important artifacts can be well preserved.

Also, the lecturer states that a new financial source is available for the scientists;that is, the construction companies instead of government will pay for the costs of the investigation of the sites.This relieves directly the problem that the origin of fund for the discovery was restricted to the government and the amount of fund was periodically decreasing.

According the employment rate of archaeologists, the lecturer points that more jobs,which were not existed before, have been created for the people who pursue a career in archaeology.In this case, the trouble of lacking of archaeologist positions is no longer as fierce as what the passage describes.

GJason

语法和句子已经无敌了，本主题的阐述难度较大，逻辑上略有瑕疵，一家之言仅供参考

GJason

今天晚上有活动，综合明天再该给你

Terry95

GJason 发表于 2014-7-30 17:14
语法和句子已经无敌了，本主题的阐述难度较大，逻辑上略有瑕疵，一家之言仅供参考 ...

感谢修改先！！！！！！！！Jason你说得很对，我这篇逻辑上存在问题，我再研究研究。。。不过不好写啊，这两天的题目。。。刚写完，马上就去看你的作文

sweetyecho

Terry 等待你的综合啦~~~

Terry95

独立+综合  7/30   让客人们着急了
HUMAN LIFE EXCEEDS BEYOND EVERYTHING
There is no doubt that historic buildings are the cultural symbol of a city, or even the emblem of a civilization;therefore, the government should seriously consider the preservation of those valuable assets. However, the fund to protect them is not limitless because the government is also responsible for building other infrastructures, such as constructing new homes for their citizens.Now, a question raised: Should the government spend more money on building new homes than on preserving old buildings? My answer is positive.

In the first place, government officials should consider the living conditions of their citizens prior to inanimated buildings. Let me ask you a question: which one is more important, the human life or the appearance of stones? Obviously, human life should always be the first consideration of any incumbent officials. Thus, it is at least morally correct to spend more money on improving our living conditions, by building more shelters for us, than on preserving stones.

Moreover, all the government expenditures, including the money spent on the preservation of old buildings, come from the citizens’ pockets, that is , the tax collected from us. Naturally, the tax should directly and firstly be used to benefit the tax payers and to foster their well-beings rather than to preserve historic buildings which will only indirectly and less effectively improve our living standards.

At last, it is economically a good idea to spend more money building new houses because investing in real estates is enormously profitable for the government. In this way ,the government will earn more money by selling houses and apartments to citizens and ,in turn,it can spend the earned money preserving historic buildings. Eventually, both the citizens and the old buildings will benefit from this investment.

In a nutshell, I wholeheartedly support the idea that the government should spend more money on the erection of new buildings.

IPO 17
By challenging three assumptions mentioned in the passage, the lecturer argues against the point that the number of birds will decline in the future.

In the first place, although the speaker admits that human population and settlement will indeed continue to expand in the future, she predicts that the total number of birds will not decrease,. The enlargement of human settlement will provide even better habitat for some bird species while destroy some habitat for some certain kinds of birds, but the total size of bird population will not shrink. This point weakens the view made in the passage that the extension of human settlement will endanger birds.

Second, the amount of the agricultural land used to grow crops will not increase in the future. Thanks to the new technology, crops are becoming more productive than before so that even smaller amount of crops will satisfy the human needs.In this case, we will not need to expand the area of agricultural land.This information contradicts directly the idea that more agricultural land will be used because of the increasing human population.

Moreover, the professor suggests that the problem of pesticide poison of birds will not be an issue.The pesticides protecting crops is becoming less toxical than they used to be. Moreover, the usage of pesticides will reduce because of the invention of pest-resistance crops.So pesticides will no longer harm birds as much as they did before. This suggestion relieves the bleak situation foreshadowed in the passage that pesticides will make the number of birds decline.  

Terry95

sweetyecho 发表于 2014-7-31 16:39
Terry 等待你的综合啦~~~

上菜啦，欢迎品尝！！