寄托家园留学论坛 › 论坛 › 寄托学术类备考版 › GRE作文互动版 › 【issue互批】 wilderness areas 求指导

返回列表

查看: 6377|回复: 4

[习作点评] 【issue互批】 wilderness areas 求指导 [复制链接]

ghostkiller2
UID: 3414086

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 50
寄托币: 106
注册时间: 2013-2-24
精华: 0
帖子: 13

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2013-8-6 10:47:45 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

语法问题用ginger检查过了但是逻辑就不清楚了
写的不好求指导

ISSUE 10:

Nations should pass laws to preserve any remaining wilderness areas in their natural state, even if these areas could be developed for economic gain.

Discuss your views on the policy and consider the possible consequence of implementing the policy.

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The policy may be right that nations should pass laws to preserve remaining wildness areas in their natural state, but when mention about protecting any wildness is deserve to discuss.

Nations have the capacity and responsibility to pass laws for preserving some wildness areas. Because government execute this policy can protect environment from outside destroy which is a useful method to preserve their natural. And by this way, also can maintain a better natural environment for humankind which a primary duty of government. In the meanwhile, protect wildness areas is benefit of human society, such as keeping the diversity of species and ecosystem. For instance, some wilderness areas may be wetland, forest and rainforest. In the common sense, rainforest usually be portrayed as the lungs of the earth with its function as people breath that transform oxygen from carbon dioxide, the chief cause of the global warming, if were protect it under laws, it will purify our air better. Thence, nations ought to enact this act.

Granted that, protecting some wilderness areas is beneficial for our society, but preserving all wilderness areas which include some can be developed for economic gain is unnecessary. Develop some wilderness areas also have many merits. Both of development companies will increase more capital and supply more employment to society and government will get more revenue from companies' tax paid. However, this development should be controlled under a reasonable extent which not contaminated or destructive environment seriously.

In the final analyze, we may find another solution about it. Develop wilderness for tourism is reciprocal. In the one hand, some simple development of the wilderness will not destroy the natural environment rather than protect it more enhancement. And in the other hand, tourism promotes engendering more revenue for company and government and supply natural environment for tourists to release. For example, partly like Singapore, which is a famous city for tourism and appeal many tourists all over the world. Though the city is not a wilderness area, they have the same features in nature, the mechanism facilitates Singapore flourish which tourism development and tourism revenue from tourists are mutually complementary will also work in wilderness development.

In summary, nations passing laws to preserve some wilderness areas is approval and develop some certain areas is allowed in some conditions. Otherwise, develop for tourism which slight effect environment may be a reciprocal method.

相关帖子 Updated by 2024.12.21

回应
0

使用道具举报

victoriayuchu
UID: 2319102

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 70
寄托币: 278
注册时间: 2007-3-25
精华: 0
帖子: 32

沙发

发表于 2013-8-6 13:28:09 |只看该作者

如果我没理解错lz是想写中立文？我觉得你提出的合理建议挺不错的，最好make sure你的第三段不要压过你的第二段，而只是该mention第二段的局限性。另外，还是觉得楼主的语法问题实在是略多，找个身边朋友帮着仔细改一下把

【2025FALL】全站祈福已开放~~来领祈福章，求offer得offer

使用道具举报

ghostkiller2
UID: 3414086

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 50
寄托币: 106
注册时间: 2013-2-24
精华: 0
帖子: 13

板凳

发表于 2013-8-6 13:49:16 |只看该作者

victoriayuchu 发表于 2013-8-6 13:28
如果我没理解错lz是想写中立文？我觉得你提出的合理建议挺不错的，最好make sure你的第三段不要压过你的第二 ...

十分感谢
不可否认我的语法确实有点渣了这确实是个挺大的问题
不过我想知道文章的逻辑是否写的清楚论据是否向论点收敛
还有就是怎样才能让文章的更深刻一些
谢谢

使用道具举报

victoriayuchu
UID: 2319102

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 70
寄托币: 278
注册时间: 2007-3-25
精华: 0
帖子: 32

地板

发表于 2013-8-6 14:05:32 |只看该作者

个人觉得逻辑上的漏洞就是没有说清楚发展与保护生态的关系。如果我写我会用一段来写“保护生态固然重要，但是对于一些贫穷的地方，盲目的要求保护生态是不合理的。国家与国家的发展程度不同，如果要求拉丁美洲的国家也如加拿大美国一样保护生态，会导致这些地方贫穷加剧，造成更多的社会问题与健康问题，更加困扰人类发展，得不偿失。”

我也就是个人建议。。。。不知道有没有用。

使用道具举报

ghostkiller2
UID: 3414086

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 50
寄托币: 106
注册时间: 2013-2-24
精华: 0
帖子: 13

5楼

发表于 2013-8-6 16:57:42 |只看该作者

victoriayuchu 发表于 2013-8-6 14:05
个人觉得逻辑上的漏洞就是没有说清楚发展与保护生态的关系。如果我写我会用一段来写“保护生态固然重要，但 ...

捋了一下全文的思路

第一段阐明观点保护全部环境是不必要的
第二段政府出台法律保护环境的合理性和可行性
第三段开发环境对人类的益处但是要限定在合理的范围内
第四段合理的开发反而是一种保护，形成一种互馈--向旅游业发展（不知道这算不算发展和保护的关系）
第五段总结

建议挺好~
我之前一直在考虑是否应该将issue内容拆成两个论点来分别论证
刚开始这么想思路就限制在应不应该保护环境是否保护所有环境上了
没有过多考虑负面影响
应该把第三段拆分两段，分别写写开发的益处和过度开发的弊端会好一些

使用道具举报