2.7 独立综合写作 by 静音

静音UID: 2893385

综合 TPO8The reading passage explores the issue thatthe memoir written by Chevalier was partial fake. The professor’s lecture dealswith the same subject. However, she thinks that every detail in this memoir isreliable and believable , which contradicts whatthe reading passage indicates. And in the lecture , the professor uses three specificpoints to support her idea.

Initially, the professor asserts thatChevalier did borrow money, but the reason why Chevalier borrowed money is notout of poverty, but making money, whereas the author of the reading claims thatChevalier was not as rich as he described in the memoir otherwise he didn’tneed to borrow money. The professor proves that claim is indefensible bypointing out that borrowing money happened before he was rich. Chevalier needsthis money to run business and awaiting wealth come.

Moreover, despite the statement in thereading that conservations between Chevalier and () could not be so specificbecause it was narrated many years after, the professor holds that the readingpassage neglects a fact that after every conservation, Chevalier would notedown what they two fought about. Based on these notes and journals, there ispossibility that Chevalier could restore the original conservations yearsafter. This is incompatible with the article’s viewpoint.

The professor’s last point concern on thefinal notion of the reading referred to the prison break. In light of thereading, Chevalier didn’t escape from breaking the celling and running away onthe roof and the fact the reading suggests is that Chevalier bribe the jailers.The professor argues in the lecture that there are prisoners who were morepowerful and rich than Chevalier, by inference, if Chevalier could successfullybribe the jailers, others could escape by that way too. And the professor alsomentioned a factor that after Chevalier was escaped, the celling of this prisonwas demanded repairmen. Why this prison needed urgent amendment was clear andpowerfully supports the professor’s point. Obviously, the professor’s argumentdisproves its counterpart in the reading.

In conclusion, the contents in the readingpassage are completely refutes by the lecture and the lecture advocates totallydifferent ideas on the central standpoint of reading.




独立
Somepeople think one's working is more important than being with one's family.

I never question that there is a growing number of people, mostof them are man but nowadays women are increasing too, put their life emphasis onthe work. However, after deliberation, I believe I will side against this tendencyand approve that people should bear in mind that family is always importantthan one’s work.

The main reason for mypropensity is that I hold the major aim of work is to create wealth for familylife. This major responsibility of work is established on the base that we needa job to earn living. The ultimate goal is that by working, we have a colorfullife. Having a better job means higher salary; higher salary means we could betterenjoy our life with our family. For instance, many man put more energy inworking when their wives are pregnant. In that case, the man’s motivation ofwork is to create a beautiful environment for the coming baby. Family is the centralfor everything.

A more essential factorwhy I advocate being with family towers over work is that people can alwayschange their jobs only if the man still grasp a dream. However, family is forone’s life time. Wife or husband is the one will take your hand until out deathwhereas work just accompanies us for about 40 years. So which one is more worthour management and engagement is self-explanatory. It is obvious that peoplecan give up one job and start it over time but one can never easily give up hisfamily because it is family that supports one’s whole life.

So how bad is the caseif one puts central emphasis on the work? Is that all bad? The answer is certainlyno. As is mentioned before, working hard does bring us high quality of livingstandard. And it is undeniable that satisfactory from work could help uscomplete our self-actualization. But all in all, family is a life-time thing.One couldn’t achieve real success and gain respect if he misses the importantpart of family.

In a nutshell, via myillustration above we can safely draw the conclusion that it is wise to upholdthe idea that being with family is significant than work, and to some degree, thaneverything.

sourjuiceUID: 2869051

独立写作的修改
I never question that there is a growing number of people, most of them are man but nowadays women are increasing too, put their life emphasis onthe work.（put an emphasis on work in their life） However, after deliberation, I believe I will side(set) against this tendency and approve (that people should bear in mind)这部分啰嗦了，去掉较好 that family is always more important than one’s work.

The main reason for mypropensity is that I hold the major aim of work is to create wealth for familylife. This major responsibility of work is established on the base（basis） that we needa job to earn（a）living. The ultimate goal is that by working, we have a colorfullife. (感觉这句话和后面的例子关系不大，colorful改成其他词比如幸福的，更恰当。)Having a better job means higher salary; higher salary means we could betterenjoy our life with our family. For instance, many man put more energy inworking when their wives are pregnant. In that case, the man’s motivation ofwork is to create a beautiful environment for the coming baby. Family is the centralfor everything.

A more essential factorwhy I advocate being with family towers over work is that people can alwayschange their jobs only if（as long as） the man still grasp(has) a dream. However, family is forone’s life time. Wife or husband is the one will take your hand (together with you) until out deathwhereas work just accompanies us for about 40 years. So which one is more worthour management and engagement is self-explanatory. It is obvious that peoplecan give up one job and start it over time but one can never easily give up hisfamily because it is family that supports one’s whole life.

So how bad is the caseif one puts central emphasis on the work? Is that all bad? The answer is certainlyno. As is mentioned before, working hard does bring us high quality of livingstandard. And it is undeniable that satisfactory from work could help uscomplete our self-actualization. But all in all, family is a life-time thing.One couldn’t achieve real success and gain respect if he misses the importantpart of family.这段其实就是总结前两段的吧，也不算一个新的论点。可以和最后一段合并到一块了。
In a nutshell, via myillustration above we can safely draw the conclusion that it is wise to upholdthe idea that being with family is significant than work, and to some degree, thaneverything.

大家共同进步了

hdchangieUID: 2402936

综合 TPO8
The reading passage explores the issue that the memoir written by Chevalier was partial fake. The professor’s lecture deals with the same subject. However, she thinks that every detail in this memoir is reliable and believable , which contradicts what the reading passage indicates. And in the lecture , the professor uses three specific points to support her idea.2 \" c- c( `7 d7 }9 \! y  X

1 F" h5 p  g% S  R& g9 N# ]; `Initially, the professor asserts that Chevalier did borrow money, but the reason why Chevalier borrowed money is not out of poverty, but making money, whereas the author of the reading claims that Chevalier was not as rich as he described in the memoir otherwise he didn’t need to borrow money. The professor proves that claim is indefensible by pointing out that borrowing money happened before he was rich. Chevalier needsthis money to run business and awaiting wealth come.(这段先写了professor的观点，再写了author的观点，然后又论述professor的观点，是否可以将professor的观点合在一起论述，会比较清晰？)


+ O# b5 V0 e% H( T4 u, \, f% f+ x
7 k8 n4 o) w. ]. EMoreover, despite the statement in the reading that conservations（conversations）
between Chevalier and () could not be so specific because it was narrated many years after（before？）, the professor holds that the reading passage neglects a fact that after every conservation（conversation）, Chevalier would note down what they two fought about. Based on these notes and journals, there is possibility that Chevalier could restore the original conservations（conversations） years after. This is incompatible with the article’s viewpoint.# ?' B) R, t( g* \  l
8 h8 w2 w( h! {
The professor’s last point concern（concerning） on the final notion of the reading referred（之前一直用一般现在时，建议改成refers）
to the prison break. In light of the reading, Chevalier didn’t escape from breaking the celling and running away on the roof and the fact the reading suggests is that Chevalier bribe the jailers.（太多and，建议另起一句，改为Chevalier didn’t escape from breaking the ceiling and running away on the roof, but rather getting away by bribing the jailers.）The professor argues in the lecture that there are prisoners who were more powerful and richer than Chevalier, by inference, if Chevalier could successfully bribe the jailers, others could have escaped by that way too. And the professor also mentioned a factor that after Chevalier was escaped, the celling (ceiling) of this prison was demanded repair men. Why this prison needed urgent amendment was clear and powerfully supports the professor’s point. Obviously, the professor’s argumentdisproves its counterpart in the reading.
8 g' D1 D+ G+ o4 e* d+ O
* X$ F6 r2 F. b, R& aIn conclusion, the contents in the reading passage are completely refutes (refuted) by the lecture and the lecture advocates totally different ideas on the central standpoint of reading.

感觉你的综合作文已经形成自己的一套模板了，小的细节还要注意，大致已经很好了，学习！~