- 最后登录
- 2016-12-6
- 在线时间
- 332 小时
- 寄托币
- 313
- 声望
- 2
- 注册时间
- 2009-2-13
- 阅读权限
- 20
- 帖子
- 9
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 257
- UID
- 2602144
![Rank: 3](template/archy_plt8/image/star_level2.gif) ![Rank: 3](template/archy_plt8/image/star_level1.gif)
- 声望
- 2
- 寄托币
- 313
- 注册时间
- 2009-2-13
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 9
|
2月28
独立写作:
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?It is often not a good thing to move to a new city or a new country because of the lose of old friends?
The debate in the society over the phenomenon that it is often good thing to move to a new city or a new country because of the lose of old friends has already provoked wide attention. Some who advocate it contend that under no circumstance can anyone survive in the society without friends around. Others who object to it claim that takeing convenient transportation system, advanced communication tools and true friendship into consideration, it is not a bad thing to move to a new city or a new country. As far as i am concerned, i am inclined to the side of latter view.
To begin with, rapid and convenient transportation facilities ,say, planes, subway, motorcoach train, can really contribute to maintain the friendship between old friends, even through there is millions of meters between them. For instance, my senior high students, Alex, has been my friend for nearly 7 years. However, we are educated in different universities which are located different cities. Even if there is a distance, we can depend on developed transportation system, motor train set, to meet at least once a month. Current transportation facilities make the world smaller so that bonding among old friends from different cities and even countries is much easier. After paying for the tickets, people will spend a few hours to get the destination where their old friends dwell in. Accordingly, people who move to a new city or a new country will not feel the lose of old friends because of convenient and rapid transportation system.
The reason above alone, however, can not adequately explain why it is often a good thing to move a new city or a new country because of the lose of old friends. Advanced communication tools is also a significant factor contributed to my perspective. As is all known, the development of technology is so rapid that long-range communication, namely, telephone, the Internet, is not as difficult as it was. When we miss our old friends who inhabit the same place, we can rely on telephone to give them our respects, even send a greeting face to face through the Internet. Provided that there was not advanced communication tools or facilities, the opportunity of losing old friends would increase.
Although the two reasons i mentioned above are convincing, perhaps the primary reason is true friendship between old friends will never break down. No matter where old friends are and no matter where old friends are going, the friendship will exist in the our mind. distance can just separate from us in space, nevertheless, distance can make old friends more bonding on their minds. For example, my father and his old battle conpanion have not seen each other for since he moved to USA in 2006.
However, my father misses him all the time due to the true friendship existing between them. When my father went to the airport to welcome his old friend last summer, both of them are so excited that burst into tears. If old friends have true friendship, we never lost our old friends wherever we leave for.
From given reasons discussed above, we can safely come to the conclusion that moving a new city or a new country can not change the relationship between old friends owing to convenient transportation system, advanced communication tools and true friendship.
综合写作:
TPO8
The reading passage states that many events of Chevalier's memoir was distorted and fake in order to make his life more attractive. However, in the lecture, the professor argues that Chevalier' memoir is, by and large, accurate and true.
The first point the reading mentions is that it was impossible for Chevalier to borrow a great deal of money from others, if he was really wealthy. On the contrary, the professor asserts that he borrowed money from merchants because he did not possess the actual cash, which can not indicate he was not very rich enough. He need sell his property first while he wait to the arrival of cash.
The next point brought up is that describing these conversations accurately which occured many years ago is what is impossible. However, the professor argues that writing down conversation's content what he could remember immediately ensures that he could refer to it when he was composing his memoir.
Finally, in contrast to the reading's argument that it is more likely that his friends' offer a bribe to make Chevalier get out of prison, the professor says that not only could other prisoners' more powerful friends not free them by offering bribe, but there is an evidence about repairing the ceiling of prison where Chevalier lived in after his escaping.
In conclusion,the points in the lecture contrast with the reading. It demonstrates the theory of the reading is in doubt.
|
-
总评分: 寄托币 + 10
声望 + 2
查看全部投币
|