- 最后登录
- 2007-5-28
- 在线时间
- 0 小时
- 寄托币
- 4830
- 声望
- 1
- 注册时间
- 2004-11-1
- 阅读权限
- 35
- 帖子
- 9
- 精华
- 5
- 积分
- 4581
- UID
- 184361
- 声望
- 1
- 寄托币
- 4830
- 注册时间
- 2004-11-1
- 精华
- 5
- 帖子
- 9
|
再用三十分钟436字。。不知道有人看没有。。
整个重写了一遍,,主题思想如下:
第一:修改首段和末段。让首段相对“专业”一点儿。
第二:注意主体段的topic sentence。
Based on the successful experience, the arguer advise the Paraterra government to
promote ecotourism to make more income and protect their environment. Moreover, the arguer also advise the government to hire the current director of Bellegea’s
National Tourism office as a consultant in order to acqiure a successful advertising
campaign. At the first glance, this claim sounds plausible and feasible, but it suffers
critical fallacies after close examination.
First of all, the aurguer lack convincing evidence to prove the increasement of
income in Bellegea is fully due to the promotion of ecotourism. It is true, that the foreign visitors doubled to Bellegea’s main airport, and the income increased. But there
are many other causes may cause the advance of Bellegea economy and hence the
income per capita. The promotion may attracted many foreign visitors to Bellegea,
and some of the visitor’s expenses did turn to the local people’s income, but is that
sufficient evidence for the whole ten persent income increasement? The answer
may be doubtful unless the arguer present concrete statistic data to support this
view point.
Secondly, the view point that to commence a ecotourism can protect Paraterra’s
natural environment, which is inferred from the arguer’s claim, does not make sense
either. As a common sense, the visitors might leave many rubbish when they are
traveling in a place such as plastic products, paper bags, litter of the ticket, etc.
Meanwhile, the Paraterra government might need to build many stores, toilets,
transport constructions in the sites to make convinience for the tourists. All these
things will harm the original natural resources, where the original lives there might be very peaceful and neat. Even though the Paraterra government can provide
powerful and efficient recycle system to process those rubbish, the natual
environment will be disturbed.
The last but not least, granted all the above concerns can be well handled by
Paraterra government and the ecotourism is still worth a try, to hire the current
director of Belllegea Tourism Office as the consultant sound more unwisely. It is true
that the director’s ideas are very successful in Bellegea, but most likely, that might
because the director is very familiar with Bellegea. So to make a successful move in
Paraterra needs a person who can know’s the Paraterra thoroughly and deeply.
What’s more, the competition between Bellegea and Paraterra in ecotourism need
to dig out some special ideas to attract those touriss.
In summary, to make a decision based on these mere evidences to commence
Paraterra’s ecotourism is too rash and might cause fatal problems. The arguer needs
to present more convincing evidence to support his claim. |
|