《美利坚写作小组》 作文互改 nexthop

happyfaith2008UID: 2709856

修改完毕。

nexthopUID: 2744929

4.7 The best way to travel is in a group led by a tour guide.

Nowadays, there is a heating discussion with sharply soaring volume about whether the best way to have a trip is in a group led by a tour guide. A fair proportion of people claim that there would be much more interesting stories in the trip led by a tour guide. However, as far as I concerned, I believe making a trip by a tour guide is not the best way. My reasons are as follow.

The most persuasive reason is that without a tour guide people could arrange their time more flexible. It has been commonly accepted that conducting the tourists around the scenery point is the tour guide’s job, and of course he/she will manage the schedule of visiting some places. That is to say, tourists have less freedom on deciding how much time could speed on visiting certain place. For example, when some people have been arrived the great wall, they found it is more wonderful than they thought before. Then they decide to spend more time on enjoying this excellent scenery. However, if they lead by a tour guide, it could be difficult for them to realize this plan. So, without the tour guide, people could manage the schedule all by themselves.

Another remarkable result that leading by a tour guide in the trip brings about is probability of losing the real feeling of tourism. Undoubtedly, when people are conducted by a guide, they become more reliable on the guide. They just follow the guide from one place to another without enjoying the scenery with their hearts. Whereas, if a person make a trip all by himself/herself, he/she will cherish every precious impression when he/she wit the impressive scenery. So, without the tour guide, people could receive more deep impression.

Admittedly, a tour guide could bring about some advantages in the trip. For instance, the tour guide could tell the tourists some stories about the scenery point, which could make people easier to understand the background of this place.

In conclusion, the trip with a tour guide could lead to not only a tour schedule without flexible but also less impression of the trip. Considering these main points, hardly could I agree that led by a tour guide is the best mean to make a travel.

lawrencelanUID: 2173940

晚上看你的作文，nexthop

nexthopUID: 2744929

4.8 Human needs for farmland, housing, and industry are more important than saving land for endangered animals.

Nowadays, there is a heating discussion with sharply soaring volume about whether human needs farmland and other resources more important than saving land for endangered animals. A fair proportion of people claim that the development, which needs various kinds of resources, is the most vital thing for human being. However, as far as I concerned, I believe spearing sparing land for endangered animals are more important.

The most remarkable result that no land for animals brings about is the extinction of animals. The earth is the only living place, not only for human but for various animals as well. The animal once extinct they will never produced again, which result in the less and less kinds of animals. So human should save the endangered animals. The hummingbirds, for example, are once in a notable low population in the world. Because people develop the land along the migrate line. When people realize this severe problem, they return the space for the hummingbirds, and the population is finally increasing.

Another persuasive reason is that the balance of biology would be broken. There is commonly accepted that human and animals are the essential parts of the biological diversity. If the animals get distinct, undoubtedly, there would be serious problems. The woodpecker, for instance, is considered the curer of the trees. The number of pest will increase and many of trees will be ruined if the woodpecker is extinct. So, saving the animals is the effective way of keeping balance of biology.

Admittedly, the resources, such as the farmland, housing, and industry, are considerably important for human. As the population is increasing in the world, human need much more land than ever before. Human need land to built communities, and factories. However, we should not get the land at the expense of extinction of animals.

In conclusion, no land for endangered animals could lead to extinction of the animals, which could never come back. Moreover, the extinction will break the balance of biology. Considering these main points, hardly could I agree that land is more important for human.

Word: 345
Time: 32 min

lawrencelanUID: 2173940

4.7 The best way to travel is in a group led by a tour guide.

Nowadays, there is a heating discussion with sharply soaring volume about whether the best way to have a trip is in a group led by a tour guide. A fair proportion of people claim that there would be much more interesting stories in the trip led by a tour guide. However, as far as I concerned, I believe making a trip by a tour guide is not the best way. My reasons are as follow.

The most persuasive reason is that without a tour guide people could arrange their time more flexible. It has been commonly accepted that conducting the tourists around the scenery point is the tour guide’s job, and of course he/she will manage the schedule of visiting some places. That is to say, tourists have less freedom on deciding how much time could speed on visiting certain place. For example, when some people have been arrived (arrive at) the great wall(Greate Wall), they found(find) it is more wonderful than they thought before. Then they decide to spend more time on enjoying this excellent scenery. However, if they were lead by a tour guide, it could be difficult for them to realize ( update) this plan. So, without the(a) tour guide, people could manage the schedule all by themselves.

Another remarkable result that leading by a tour guide in the trip brings about is probability of losing the real feeling (real feelings)of tourism. Undoubtedly, when people are conducted by a guide, they become more reliable on the guide. They just follow the guide from one place to another without enjoying the scenery with their hearts. Whereas, if a person make a trip all by himself/herself, he/she will cherish every precious impression when he/she wit the impressive scenery. So, without the(a) tour guide, people could receive more deep impression.

Admittedly, a tour guide could bring about some advantages in the trip. For instance, the(a) tour guide could tell the tourists some stories about the scenery points, which could make people easier to understand the background of this places.

In conclusion, the trip with a tour guide could lead to not only a less flexible tour schedule without flexible but also less impression of the trip. Considering these main points, hardly could I agree that led by a tour guide is the best mean to make a travel.


总结：同学的思路清楚。略有不足的地方是对第二个分论点论证不充分。另外模板痕迹较重，冠词使用有点乱

stefanie299UID: 2667762

4.8 Human needs for farmland, housing, and industry are more important than saving land for endangered animals.

Nowadays, there is a heating discussion with sharply soaring volume about whether human needs farmland and other resources more important than saving land for endangered animals. A fair proportion of people claim that the development, which needs various kinds of resources, is the most vital thing for human being. However, as far as I am concerned, I believe spearing sparing(两个动名词？) land for endangered animals are more important.
The most remarkable result that no land for animals brings about is (两个动词？) the extinction of animals. The earth is the only living place, not only for human but for various animals as well. The animal once extinct they will never produced again, which result in the less and less kinds of animals. So human should save the endangered animals. The hummingbirds, for example, are once in a notable low population in the world. Because people develop the land along the migrate line. When people realize this severe problem, they return the space for the hummingbirds, and the population is finally increasing。

Another persuasive reason is that the balance of biology would be broken. There is commonly accepted that human and animals are the essential parts of the biological diversity. If the animals get distinct？？应该是extinct吧？, undoubtedly, there would be serious problems这句表达比较生硬. The woodpecker, for instance, is considered the curer of the trees. The number of pest will increase and many of trees will be ruined if the woodpecker is extinct. So, saving the animals is the effective way of keeping balance of biology.我觉得你这段似乎还是在说动物灭绝的观点，观点1和2的观点重复了，都是说如果人类不….的话那么动物面临灭绝的危险导致影响物种的多样性


Admittedly, the resources, such as the farmland, housing, and industry, are considerably important for human. As the population is increasing in the world, human need much more land than ever before. Human need land to built communities, and factories. However, we should not get the land at the expense of extinction of animals.（这段的作用挺好的，感觉让整篇文章结构更饱满了）



In conclusion, no land for endangered animals could lead to extinction of the animals,（题目并不是说完全不留土地给濒危动物改成less land应该会好些） which could never come back. ？？Moreover, the extinction will break the balance of biology. Considering these main points, hardly could I agree with that land is more important for human.




不好意思改晚了

112471311UID: 2725426

10# nexthop
我对这个题目有点疑问4.4Do you agree or disagree the statement that scientists should be responsible for the negative impacts of their discoveries?
题中的discoveries可以写成发明吗？因为discovery本身的意思是“发现”啊！楼主用了克隆、因特网和核武器作为例子，不知算不算是discoveries呢？
呵呵，我刚开始准备托福作文，请大家指明，谢谢！

Davidhan11UID: 3461393

Thx