【Daily Writing作文特训小组】小呆的作文贴，求监督求指导~

应小呆UID: 3109940

楼主关于英语的背景：
四级裸考585，六级继续裸考577。
以娱乐为主考过一次雅思6分（因为同时在准备CPA，然后杯具滴都考了50几==）
GMAT 720 作文4.5
各种普通各种不靠谱==

慕名来参加作文特训小组~
希望取得好成绩，大家互相监督，共同努力！
考试时间是7月23日，在山大~

应小呆UID: 3109940

独立作文：

7,4Do you agree or disagree with the following statement: If parents want their children to do well at school, they should limit the time their children spend on watching TV.


Children, because of their personal experience, emotional concerns, and different characters, may be diversely influenced by watching TV. So it is conceivable that the question above is not an either-or choice. But, for example, it is acknowledged to all that spending too much time on TV will influence the time that should be used to accomplish homework, take exercise and play with friends and family. So, from my point of view, parents should limit the time their children spend on watching TV to some extent. I have the following reasons to support my opinion.

First of all, nothing is more important than to have a balanced life. Thus, if a children spend too much time on watching TV, then he\she will not have enough time to communicate with other people. Then the balance of life is broken. What's more, lacking communication with others when one is young will do harm to his\her future character.

Secondly, watching TV will do harm to children's health. As we all know, when people watch TV they will stay still for a long time, which contributes to adiposity. Adiposity of children is undoubtedly a worldwide problem. So on no account can we add more children to it. In order to keep their children from adiposity, parents should limit the time their children spend on watching TV and encourage them to go out and play with other children.

Thirdly, watching TV may distract children. I can take myself as an example. When I was 8 years old, I was addicted to watching Ultraman. In order not to miss my favorite Ultraman--Dika, I sacrificed my time for siesta. As a result, I fell asleep every afternoon when we were having our math classes. What's more, I always thought about such question as why Ultraman should protect human, where did their power come from and what they fed on when I was having my class. At the end of that semester, I got 59 on my math. As math had been used to be my best subject, I was shocked by my score. But when I saw my paper and corrected it according to answers, I found the fact that my good math had gone from me.  It is obvious that watching TV will distract children's attention.

All in all, although TV may help children to learn more about the world, for the majority, the disadvantages overweight the advantages. So parents should limit the time their children spend on watching TV to some extent

应小呆UID: 3109940

综合写作
TPO 10
The lecture is convicing to explain that attacks by predators are the cause of the decline for the following reasons.

Firstly, there is no dead sea otter found. It is acknowledged by all that if the cause is environmental pollution, then there have to be dead sea otter found on the beach or somewhere else. But in fact no dead sea otters are found. So environmental pollution is not the best explaination. What’s more, if the decline is cuased by attacks by predators, the the dead sea otters are in predators’s stomach, thus there is no dead bodies left. In contrast to the first explaination, this one is more convincing.

Secondly, as human have get most of orca’s food away, orca can only feed on semaller prey, such as sea lions,sea otters and so on. So the assumption in the passage that orca will not attack sea otters is unconvincing. Widely occuring predators,such as the orca, could have the same effect, because they do not have other choice.

Thirdly, the smaller the sum is, the less chance will the predators find them.
What’s more, as we all know that sea otters loke to stay in shallow water, which is also the favorite of their predators. So if the number of sea otters in a place is small, then the chance they are caught will be small too. If no predator attacks the school, thenthe polition will remain stable.

sallyremyUID: 3120928

2# 应小呆


Children, because of their personal experience, emotional concerns, and different characters, may be diversely influenced by watching TV. So it is conceivable that the question above is not an either-or choice. But, for example, it is acknowledged to all that spending too much time on TV will influence the time that should be used to accomplish homework, take exercise and play with friends and family. So, from my point of view, parents should limit the time their children spend on watching TV to some extent. I have the following reasons to support my opinion.! j3 C; ^+ C" S; O2 T- _

First of all, nothing is more important than to have a balanced life. Thus, if a children spend too much time on watching TV, then he\she will not have enough time to communicate with other people. Then the balance of life is broken. （balanced life这个观点感觉和主题契合的不是很好）What's more, lacking communication with others when one is young will do harm to his\her future character.（第二点没有继续阐述了！）
, K% F$ p: @( y) J) h+ ?4 V
Secondly, watching TV will do harm to children's health. As we all know, when people watch TV they will stay still for a long time, which contributes to adiposity（这个点很不错！！）. Adiposity of（among） children is undoubtedly a worldwide problem.(有具体数据可能更有说服力哦~~) So on no account can we add more children to it（用法有点awkward）. In order to keep their children from adiposity, parents should limit the time their children spend on watching TV and encourage them to go out and play with other children.
# V2 X- F" a' r3 g2 t& @5 \0 o& Q$ ?
Thirdly, watching TV may distract children. I can take myself as an example. When I was 8 years old, I was addicted to watching Ultraman. In order not to miss my favorite Ultraman--Dika, I sacrificed my time for siesta. As a result, I fell asleep every afternoon when we were having our math classes. What's more, I always thought about such question as why Ultraman should protect human, where did their power come from and what they fed on when I was having my class. At the end of that semester, I got 59 on my math. As math had been used to be（用法有点awkward） my best subject, I was shocked by my score. But when I saw my paper and corrected it according to answers（这样讲有点chinglish）, I found the fact that my good math had gone from me.(什么意思？？) It is obvious that watching TV will distract children's attention./ H9 n5 |: J) o9 I: `
" M5 j0 R8 q8 h4 W( n
All in all, although TV may help children to learn more about the world, for the majority, the disadvantages overweight the advantages. So parents should limit the time their children spend on watching TV to some extent

谢谢应小呆对我作文很高的评价，不敢当:loveliness:，我应该会一直来写的吧，呵呵，不然没动力写，大家组队有交作业时间限制的。
文章结构清晰，下次可以试试不同的段首开头词
举得例子，迪迦奥特曼好可爱好搞笑哦~~:D呵呵，不过不知道托福中拿自己举例子好不好。。看你们都是举身边人的例子
最后结尾处你说the disadvantages overweight the advantages，可是整篇文章并没有提到advantages啊~
关于我开头的写法：从大的background写到具体的题目（topic）,最后一句亮出你的观点和理由（总概括）你可以试试~（写了老多建议，应为看得比较认真，不要生气哈~~~）
看到你GMAT720啊~是我想考的分数啊！！求经验分享~~~:handshake

sallyremyUID: 3120928

3# 应小呆


The lecture is convicing to explain that attacks by predators are the cause of the decline for the following reasons.( Q" t& g4 l( m" T$ Q9 a
2 H0 g/ w% r7 t  A
Firstly, there is no dead sea otter found. It is acknowledged by all that if the cause is environmental pollution, then there have to be dead sea otter found on the beach or somewhere else. But in fact no dead sea otters are found. So environmental pollution is not the best explaination. What’s more, if the decline is cuased by attacks by predators, the the dead sea otters are in predators’s stomach, thus there is no dead bodies left. In contrast to the first explaination（指代不明）, this one is more convincing.7 D( f0 F. X, M9 z* n. |
# L6 n- _6 l$ V: c6 d9 C
Secondly, as human have get most of orca’s food away, orca can only feed on semaller prey, such as sea lions,sea otters and so on. So the assumption in the passage that orca will not attack sea otters is unconvincing. Widely occuring predators,such as the orca, could have the same effect（what effect?）, because they do not have other choice.
, |% H  J3 x+ j5 u
Thirdly, the smaller the sum is, the less chance will the predators find them.
What’s more, as we all know that sea otters loke to stay in shallow water, which is also the favorite of their predators.(第三点和你听得不太一样。。ocras太大不能游过去啊！！会搁浅的啊~) So if the number of sea otters in a place is small, then the chance they are caught will be small too. If no predator attacks the school, thenthe polition will remain stable.

写得很不错~~将听力中的3个points都解释清楚了~
对了，听力的原文有吗？？在哪里可以下到？我觉得我听的时候内容有些出入==

栗孒UID: 3120977

Children, because of their personal experience, emotional concerns, and different characters, may be diversely influenced by watching TV. So it is conceivable that the question above is not an either-or choice. But, for example, it is acknowledged to all that spending too much time on TV will influence the time that should be used to accomplish homework, take exercise and play with friends and family. So, from my point of view, parents should limit the time their children spend on watching TV to some extent. I have the following reasons to support my opinion.. （嘿嘿，这个套路我也经常用撒，以前在朗阁读雅思的时候学得。。。）
First of all, nothing is more important than to have a balanced life. Thus, if a children spend too much time on watching TV, then he\she will not have enough time to communicate with other people. Then the balance of life is broken. What's more, lacking communication with others when one is young will do harm to his\her future character.（这好像与balanced life关系不大吧，而且就一句话，也没有support）Secondly, watching TV will do harm to children's health. As we all know, when people watch TV they will stay still for a long time, which contributes to adiposity. Adiposity of children is undoubtedly a worldwide problem. So（So不能位于句首的吧我记得。。） on no account can we add more children to it.（可以想想与前面句合起来。。so that…）In order to keep their children from adiposity, parents should limit the time their children spend on watching TV and encourage them to go out and play with other children.
Thirdly, watching TV may distract children. I can take myself as an example. When I was 8 years old, I was addicted to watching Ultraman. In order not to miss my favorite Ultraman--Dika, I sacrificed my time for siesta. As a result, I fell asleep every afternoon when we were having our math classes. What's more, I always thought about such question as why Ultraman should protect human, where did their power come from and what they fed on when I was having my class. At the end of that semester, I got 59 on my math. As math had been used to be my best subject, I was shocked by my score. But when I saw my paper and corrected it according to answers, I found the fact that my good math had gone from me. （有点怪怪的。。） It is obvious that watching TV will distract children's attention.（这段的例子也比较充实，可以考虑放到第一点。。）All in all, although TV may help children to learn more about the world, for the majority, the disadvantages overweight the advantages. （advantage好像少了一点，）So parents should limit the time their children spend on watching TV to some extent.

作文总的来说不错挖~有些表达还可以修改。在段落的分部上，还可以多作考虑。前两段的support有点弱。
实习回来还可以写两篇作文，实在太厉害了。。我回来就好想睡觉啊。

xiangtuoUID: 3047550

写了很多话！
有关资料想要了找我 我这里都有！
共同进步！有异议欢迎联系！

应小呆UID: 3109940

4# sallyremy

GMAT那个东西，我写了个总结帖在这里的，喵~
傻傻的，不知道对你有没有帮助。
http://forum.chasedream.com/GMAT_Preparation/thread-534588-1-1.html

其实我也想举别的例子，但是积累不够~~~~(>_<)~~~~
O(∩_∩)O谢谢你的指正~~~

应小呆UID: 3109940

5# sallyremy

我没有听力原文的，不过听说无老师那版有，我打算去下，你要不？

应小呆UID: 3109940

6# 栗孒

O(∩_∩)O谢谢栗子~
我的实习很水的其实，
就是在我妈他们科，帮忙印个资料神马的，因为同办公室里的人几乎都住一个家属院，看着我长大，所以基本没我神马事，还不时给我好吃的==，然后我就很颓废的朝九晚五打酱油....睡过头了还不去.....
阿西吧，连我自己都鄙视我自己，有木有！！

我觉得你对于论点排序和增加阐述的建议很好，我会努力改正的~~~抱~

PS：头像是你真人吗？皮肤好好~

应小呆UID: 3109940

7# xiangtuo

啊，杜撰的最后一点被发现了，因为我没记住到底说了些啥，于是把记住的圆圆谎，拿去凑字数了==
对了，真考试的时候杜撰和字数、论证不够两个，哪一个罪过大呢？（我不是很了解，自抽==）
我的拼写真的很不认真呢，要重罚，嗯。
O(∩_∩)O谢谢包子告诉我，只要用he就好了，话说我每次都觉得这个he\she打起来超级麻烦的==
联系前提的问题我没有注意过，还要多谢包子指正呢~共同加油~~~~···

应小呆UID: 3109940

总耗时44min，总字数384
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement:, Z$ u0 F6 h+ [- \$ x" r, I; G
The government should support scientific research that does not have any practical use.

Humankind is like an innocent child in the universe. In fact, he does not really know what is wrong and what is right. What he regards as dogma now may become nonsense the next moment. In addition, there is no certain answer to the question that which use is practical. As a result, what we take as useless now may play an important role in our future life. Based on this, on no account should our government refuses to support scientific research that does not have any practical use.

There is no doubt that we, human beings, know very little about the universe. Moreover, we even do not know much about ourselves. The most simple question to demonstrate my point is that “Where does the first being come from?” Nobody can answer it absolutely. It is conceivable that we can not judge the difference between practical use and its opposite, too. Thus if the government do not support scientific research that does not have any practical use, it may lose opportunities in the future.

What’s more, there is no unless thing in the world. Even nonsense can give rise to a new idea.
Even an apple can bring home to Newton the law of gravity. Even an unsuccessful glue can contribute to the birth of Post-it. So if a government can tell what is of no practical use, then its future will be dim. If a government can not tell what is of no practical use, then it the question whether or not the government should support scientific research does not exist.

But we should also take into account that the ability and resource of a country at a certain moment is certain. So the energy must be used to do the most important jobs. The most important jobs have a name called things of practical use. As the government is behind the veil of ignogrance, it can only pay the most attention on the most important jobs. So although the government should support all kinds of research, it has enough reasons to pay less on scientific research that does not have any practical use.

In a nutshell, it pays to support scientific research that does not have any practical use. If the government is not strong enough, it can choose to pay less.

第一段不知道为什么，总是显示有下划线，去不掉...希望大家能迁就一下~~~~(>_<)~~~~

应小呆UID: 3109940

总耗时20min 总字数 228
The lecturer takes the view that the teeanger in the portrait is not Jane Austen herself. In addition, the girl in the portrait has loose relationship with Jane Austen. She may be her relatives. The lecturer has three evidence to support his claim.

First of all, Austen's family gave permission to use the portrait as an illutraction in an edition of her letters 70 years after Austen's death. Many family members may have even never seen Jane Austen. So the family may mistake the girl in the portrait as Jane Austen.

Secondly, Austen's family is very large. Even in the place, which is exhibited in the portrait, there were many relatives who was at the same age as Jane Austen was.Moreover, some people believe that the girl in the portrait is Jane Austen's relative, Maria Cupos.

Thirdly,although the painting is undated, we can have another way to find its birthday. According to the canvas used in the portrait, the portrait was painted when Jane Austen was an adult. The reason is that the canvas used in the portrait was sold by a certain seller,according to the record,and ,what's more,the seller started to sell canvas when Austen was an adult.So the girl in the portrait can not be Austen.

According to the three reasons above, the lecture successfully demostrates that the girl in the portrait is not Jane Austen.

theflyfishUID: 2101420

思路和我的有点像啊。写的挺不错的，学习了。

lemonsweet3UID: 2848875

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement:
The government should support scientific research that does not have any practical use.



Humankind is like an innocent child in the universe. In fact, he does not really know what is wrong and what is right. What he regards as dogma now may become nonsense the next moment. In addition, there is no certain answer to the question that which use is practical. As a result, what we take as useless now may play an important role in our future life. Based on this, on no account should our government refuse(s ) (去掉s因为前面有should） to support scientific research that only seemingly (因为你前面就是在说这个practical与否不是绝对的，所以如果不加seemingly的话感觉又像是在自己驳倒自己了) do not have any practical use.+ （还有一个问题就是以前一个网上的老师帮我改作文时说论述性的句子最好主语用one、he什么的，用we、our、you好像不太好，有点中国式英语；而且最好一段话、一篇文章的主语人称保持一致，不要变来变去；所以我觉得从as a result开始是不是把we换成one, our变成his好一点？但是我也不确定，你觉得哪个读着感觉好就用哪个吧^_^）



There is no doubt that we, human beings, know very little about the universe. Moreover, we （even） do not even know much about ourselves. The most simple question to demonstrate my point is that “Where does the first being come from?” Nobody can answer it absolutely. Similarly (这样在句首连接一下两个类比句会比较醒目，要不然万一考官判卷时一看全是道理论证没有例子，一没仔细读乍一看没看懂其中的联系什么的就完蛋了；但也有可能是我理解力太差一上来读第一遍时没过脑子就没看懂==) it is conceivable that we can not （考试一般连着写cannot）simply judge the difference between practical use and its opposite, too. Thus if the government does not support scientific research (that does not have any practical use) that seems impractical (句子有点累赘，你读读试试， 我觉得该简单时还是要简单，长短句结合) , it may miss an actually functional research and lose opportunities in the future.




What’s more, there is no （unless） useless吧 thing in the world. Even nonsense can give rise to a new idea. Even an apple can bring home to Newton the law of gravity. Even an unsuccessful glue can contribute to the birth of Post-it. So if a government can tell what is （of no practical use） impractical（这样比较简洁）, then its future will be dim. If a government （can not）cannot tell what is （of no practical use）impractical, then (it) the question whether or not the government should support scientific research that has no practical use（你忘了加啦） (does) will(主将从现) not exist anymore(表强调).




But we should also take into account that the ability and resource of a country at a certain moment is certain. So the limited energy must be used to do the most important jobs and the most important jobs (have a name called) mean the things of practical use. As the government is behind the veil of ignorance （没看懂== 在无知/忽视的面纱下？）, it can only pay the most attention (on) to the most important jobs. So although the government should support all kinds of research, it has enough reasons to pay less on scientific research that seems to (does not) (即使是让步段也要加上seem，否则和你自己前面的观点矛盾) have no （any） practical use.



In a nutshell, it pays to support scientific research that seemingly does not have any practical use. If the government is not strong enough, it can choose to pay less.:

我觉得咱们俩的风格迥然不同，你特别理性，擅长道理论证，而且每一段都论证的头头是道很有条理，不会自己把自己给绕乱了，好厉害你是理科生吧^_^ 我就不行，我总也写不出纯理论性的陈述句，我总习惯于举例子，缺少道理论证，这方面还得向你多请教啊！由于结构思路无可挑剔所以就在语言上多提了些建议。


你写这篇作文时是怎么构思、写每一段的展开论述时是怎么思考、又用这么简练的字数把整个意思表达出来的呢？我觉得我就缺乏这方面的思路和思维需要向你学习，谢谢！