ttuuttuu的独立作文贴

风起云落UID: 2833888

改好了哈~

ttuuttuuUID: 2299729

0911 遲交帖，請狠批~:loveliness:

2009.9.19 NA  Government should more support art museum and music performance than
recreational facilities, such as swimming pool or play ground.

The general consensus now appears that government should more support art museum and music
than recreational facilities. However, I prefer that government should more support recreational
facilities than art museum and music performance. That's because that people 's heath are
important. In addition, people don't have enough money to buy museum tickets  for enjoying these
display because of economy decline. Furthermore, we don't have much time to go to appreciate art
exhibit or music concert. That's why government should not support art museum and music
performance than another. There are several reasons to support my viewpoint.

First of all, the most important thing is people's health for government in a country. A scientist
report displays that doing a exercise every day will enhance human's health. Thus, government
should constructure more recreational facilities. John who is my friend is an artist, and he usually
spends time on art museum. He never goes to do a excrise, and becomes unhealth. After I invient
him to go swimming together for three months, he feels energetic every day. Thus increasing
recreational facilities is more important than art museum.

Second, poeple don't have enough money to appreciate art exhibit or music show. In addition, the
price of ticket for enjoy recreation facilities is cheaper than which of art museum and music
performance. In my country Taiwan, there are several art museum. However, few people go to there
in the recent years. Because fo economy decline, people need to save money. On the other hand,
they choose an alternative way. It can save money and enhance their health. That's do a exercise.
Thus, people need more recreational facilities than art museum.

Thirdly, appreciating art museum and music performance usually cost more time.  Because of
economy decline, people need to work harder than pervious stage. After they finish the work, they
don't have any spirit to appreciate art display or music show.  For me, I need to prepare iBT toefl test.
After studying for 12 hours every day, I just want to go to a recreat center. In addition, I can buy a
dvd to enjoy these art dispaly or music performance any time. Thus, I am eager for more recreational
facilities.

To sum up, government should not more support art museum and music performance than
recreational  facilities. That's because that enjoying recreational facilities can increase people's
health. In addition, Apprecriating art museum or music performance will cost more money. Because
of economy problem, people don't have exact money to enjoy them. Furthermore, enjoying
recreational facilities have many benfits including save the time and increase people's health. Thus,
in my opinion, government should more support recreational facilities than art museum and music
performance.

WSYLRUID: 2666837

改好了 欢迎交流~~

langtianrinuanUID: 2810236

0911 遲交帖，請狠批~

2009.9.19 NA  Government should more support art museum and music performance than recreational facilities, such as swimming pool or play ground.

The general consensus now appears that government should more support art museum and music than recreational facilities. However, I prefer that government should more support recreational facilities than art museum and music performance. That's because that people's heath are (is? more) important. In addition, people don't (do not) have enough money to buy museum tickets for enjoying these displays because of economy decline. Furthermore, we don't have much time to go to appreciate art exhibit or music concert. That's why government should not support art museum and music performance than another. There are several reasons to support my viewpoint.


First of all, the most important thing is people's health for the government in a country. A scientist/ scientific report displays that doing an exercise every day will enhance human's health. Thus, government should constructure/ structure more recreational facilities. John who is my friend is an artist, and he usually spends time on art museum. He never goes to do an excise, and becomes unhealthy. After I invient him to go swimming together for three months, he feels energetic every day. Thus increasing recreational facilities is more important than art museum.

Second, poeple don't have enough money to appreciate art exhibit or music show. In addition, the price of ticket for enjoy recreation facilities is cheaper than which of art museum and music performance. In my country Taiwan, there are several art museums. However, few people go to there in the recent years. Because fo economy decline, people need to save money. On the other hand, they choose an alternative way. It can save money and enhance their health. That's do a exercise. (这个论证顺序有点问题啊，不要把中文翻译成英文，这样很跳跃，也不符合英文表达习惯)Thus, people need more recreational facilities than art museum.

Thirdly, appreciating art museum and music performance usually cost more time. Because of economy decline,（这个好像在文中出现好几次了，如果非要用的话也最好换种说法） people need to work harder than pervious stage可以删除. After they finish the work, they don't have any spirit to appreciate art display or music show.  For me, I need to prepare iBT toefl test. After studying for 12 hours every day, I just want to go to a recreat center. In addition, I can buy a dvd to enjoy these art dispaly or music performance any time. Thus, I am eager for more recreational.

To sum up, government should not more support art museum and music performance than recreational  facilities. That's because that enjoying recreational facilities can increase people's health. In addition, Apprecriating art museum or music performance will cost more money. Because of economy problem, people don't have exact money to enjoy them. Furthermore, enjoying recreational facilities have many benfits including save the time and increase people's health. Thus, Win my opinion, government should more support recreational facilities than art museum and music performance.

呃，写完自己先拷到word里面修改一下，好多打字和拼写的问题。论证上，头尾都各自将理由又说了一遍，中文论证时候也没有换种句式或说法，总体看下来就会觉得重复很多了。论证上也不够展开和充分。语言上至少要自己先改过再拿出来。说得不妥的地方，多多包涵。

langtianrinuanUID: 2810236

呃，同学你还没改我的作文。。。

ttuuttuuUID: 2299729

這都是貼上前 已經由office word訂正錯字過的
不知道你是看到誰的文章    但還是謝謝你細心的修改

19# langtianrinuan

ttuuttuuUID: 2299729

0914  寫作

2009.9 25NA do you agree or disagree: having jobs with low paying salary and being high secure is better than jobs with high salary but being easy to lost.


The general consensus now appears that having jobs with high salary even being easy to lost. However, in my opinion, I prefer jobs with low paying salary and being high secure. That's because that people don't need to worry about losing job when they become older. In addition, they can have more time to stay with family members. Furthermore, they can have a healthy and unpressured life. There are several reasons to support my viewpoints.

First of all, losing the job is horrible when people are over forty years old. Every day, the news displays that people who lose job and suicide, some of them had owned high salary previously. For instance, John who is one of my best friends had a job with a high salary. However, because of economy decline, he lost his job last month. I suggested him to find a new job, but he was not suitable for low salary job anymore because he was familiar to spend over 5000 dollars every month. For low paying salary, over 5000 dollars is a huge number. Thus, I prefer to have a job with low paying, and it is durable.

Second, people, who have low salary, have more time to stay with family members. I think that family members are most important for human life. If we have a lot of money without them, our life would be terrible. In my town, there is a famous story. One rich man spent his whole life to earn money, but he ignored his family. In the end, his wife left the family, and his children went to the jail. Thus, I think that people can make lower money and spend more time to take care the family.

Thirdly, I don't think that high salary job can have more freedom and health. People who have high salary need to stand by over twenty hours every day. Although they have money, they cannot use money to enjoy the vocation. In addition, their life is under the pressure. They would be worried about losing the job when they become older. Many computer engineers realize this situation. They spend a lot of time for their company even work over 24 hours for their project. Because of this reasons, they usually have problems of health after they work in the company for 2 years. Thus, job with lowing salary is better than another.

To sum up, I agree that people who have job with low salary are better than that have high salary. That's because that they don't need to worry about losing job. In addition, they can have more time to take care their family members especially their children. Furthermore, they can avoid living under the pressure. Thus, low salary's job has more benefits than another.

teresaliqUID: 2371296

The general consensus now appears that having jobs with high salary even being easy to lost. However, in my opinion, I prefer jobs with low paying salary and being high secure. That's because that people don't need to worry about losing job when they become older. In addition, they can have more time to stay with family members. Furthermore, they can have a healthy and unpressured life. There are several reasons to support my viewpoints.) O1 G+ z1 l: A6 [+ ~7 _1 F

First of all, losing the job is horrible when people are over forty years old. Every day, the news displays that people who lose job and suicide, some of them had owned ( owned这里用一般时就可以)high salary previously. For instance, John， who is one of my best friends had a job with a high salary. However, because of economy decline, he lost his job last month. I suggested him to find a new job, but he was not suitable for low salary job anymore because he was familiar to spend（used to spending） over 5000 dollars every month. For low paying salary, over 5000 dollars is a huge number. Thus, I prefer to have a job with low paying, and it is durable.! n$ x6 f2 T5 I

Second, people, who have low salary, have more time to stay with family members. I think that family members are most important for human (human's)life. If we have a lot of money without them, our life would be terrible. In my town, there is a famous story. One rich man spent his whole life to earn money, but he ignored his family. In the end, his wife left the family, and his children went to the jail. Thus, I think that people can(这里用should 更好吧！) make lower money and spend more time to take care the family. 6 ^% }1 Y& C6 N* Y& s# @
; X6 T/ z/ q1 d4 |
Thirdly, I don't think that high salary job can have more freedom and health. People who have high salary need to stand by over twenty hours every day. Although they have money, they cannot use money to enjoy the vocation. In addition, their life is under the pressure. They would be worried about losing the job when they become older. Many computer engineers realize this situation. They spend a lot of time for their company even work over 24 hours for their project. Because of this reasons, they usually have problems of health after they work in the company for 2 years. Thus, job with lowing salary is better than another.

To sum up, I agree that people who have job with low salary are better than that have high salary. That's because that they don't need to worry about losing job. In addition, they can have more time to take care their family members especially their children. Furthermore, they can avoid living under the pressure. Thus, low salary's job has more benefits than another.条理很清晰，举例明确合理，但是词汇有些用的简单一些了，注意一下词汇的变换

ttuuttuuUID: 2299729

9月16日  補交  請狠批~
2009. 10. 17 NA Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Movies and televisions should always show audience good people are being rewarded and bad people are being punished.

The general consensus now appears that movies and televisions should not always show audience good people are being rewarded and bad people are being punished. However, I have opposed viewpoint. That's because that movies and televisions have responsible for educating people. In addition, everyone watch movies and televisions, and they are good tools to alarm people never to do bad thing even just thinking. Furthermore, if they display the context which good people are being punished and bad people are being rewarded, I don't know how terrible our society will become? There are several reasons to support my viewpoint.

First of all, televisions and movies have a lot of responsible to educate people. Everyone watches televisions everyday, and watches movies once per month. The science report displays that people spent more than twenty four hours on television and movies. Thus, they play an extreme role. Jill, who is one of my best friends and is a ten year old kid, like to watch televisions. One day, he walked back his home after school, and found 1000 dollars. He sent money to police office immediately. I ask him why he don’t keep that money. The answer is that televisions taught him when people found money.
Thus, television and movies are good source to educate people.

Second, movies and televisions are the alarms which can prohibit people to do bad things. That's because that people spent much time on movies and televisions. If they show the results which context include that bad people are being punished, this way can decrease the criminal rate. For instance, there was one famous movie in my childhood. The context displayed that one man stole money and car when he was 20 years old. During that time, he though nobody would find this thing.
However, his wife found that after ten years. His wife and children left him. This story mentioned that don't have any bad thinking and be a good person. Now, I still remember it.

Third, if movies and televisions don't show audience good people are being rewarded and bad people are being punished, that will be horrible. Some people think that televisions and movies have their freedom to contain any context. However, they ignore the responsibility of movies and television. I still remember one famous television episode before 8 years. The context showed that bad people always win everything and are rewarded. You know what? During that year, the criminal rate enhances a lot. Finally, the television decided to stop that television episode even it still was popular.


To sum up, I agree that movies and televisions should display audience good people are being rewarded and bad people are being punished. That's because that they have responsibilities to educate people. In addition, their context can inhibit people to do bad things when they have evil thinking. Furthermore, if movies and televisions don't display audience that context, the society will become terrible.

littleecho33UID: 2876349

The general consensus now appears that movies and televisions should not always show audience good people are being rewarded and bad people are being punished. However, I have (an) opposed viewpoint. That's because that(,which is ) movies and televisions have responsible for educating people. In addition, everyone watch movies and televisions, and they are good tools to alarm people never to do bad thing even just thinking. Furthermore, if they display the context which good people are being punished and bad people are being rewarded, I don't know how terrible our society will become? There are several reasons to support my viewpoint.(第一段哈~ 写得蛮好 但是显得太过冗长了些 不要展开论点)
; Z; W: H4 j* E! F0 U4 N
: z: T( m) Q! P- U6 r0 U8 PFirst of all, televisions and movies have a lot of responsible（responsibility） to educate people. Everyone watches televisions everyday, and watches movies once per month. The science report displays that（accoding to a recent survey） people spent more than twenty four hours on television and movies. Thus, they play an extreme(ly important) role. Jill, who is one of my best friends and is a ten year old kid, like to watch televisions. One day, he walked back his home after school, and found 1000 dollars. He sent money to police office immediately. I ask him why he don’t keep that money. The answer is that televisions taught him when people found money.
% T1 R  p1 e5 ^- g8 EThus, television and movies are good source to educate people.
Second, movies and televisions are the alarms which can prohibit people to do bad things. That's because that people spent much time on movies and televisions. If they show the results which context include that bad people are being punished, this way can decrease the criminal rate(in a large degree). For instance, there was one famous movie in my childhood. The context displayed that one man stole money and car when he was 20 years old. During that time, he though nobody would find this thing.
However, his wife found that after ten years. His wife and children left him. This story mentioned that don't have any bad thinking and be a good person. Now, I still remember it.(删)7 a7 X- U8 m7 u: k
2 @0 i. p  }6 }6 Q& a4 c
Third, if movies and televisions don't show audience good people are being rewarded and bad people are being punished, that will be horrible. Some people think that televisions and movies have their（删） freedom to contain any context. However, they ignore the responsibility of movies and television. I still remember one famous television episode before 8 years. The context showed that bad people always win everything and are rewarded. You know what? During that year, the criminal rate enhances a lot. Finally, the television decided to stop that television episode even it still was popular.
To sum up, I agree that movies and televisions should display audience good people are being rewarded and bad people are being punished.（这里得换个说法来表达相同意思了） That's because that they have responsibilities to educate people. In addition, their context can inhibit people to do bad things when they have evil thinking. Furthermore, if movies and televisions don't display audience that context, the society will become terrible.（这样子的结尾不是前后照应，而是重复了）
点子蛮丰富 但是太冗长，罗嗦了。尤其开头结尾应该再看看范文些。

WSYLRUID: 2666837

第二次看楼主的了  
加油加油:loveliness:

思遥UID: 2865808

The general consensus now appears that having jobs with high salary even being easy to lost. However, in my opinion, I prefer jobs with low paying salary and being high secure. SO THAT(That's because that) people don't need to worry about losing job when they become older. In addition, they can have more time to stay with family members. Furthermore, they can have a healthy and unpressured life. There are several reasons to support my viewpoints.
H7 W3 c
First of all, losing the job is horrible when people over forty years old. In some way, it can cause the social problem for the losing people's job(中间要过渡）.Every day, the news displays that some of people who lose job and then suicide have owned high salary previously（能简单就尽量简单，使得句型也比较多样化）. For instance, John who is one of my best friends had a job with a high salary. However, because of economy decline, he lost his job last month. I suggested him to find a new job, but he was not suitable for low salary job anymore because he was familiar to spend over 5000 dollars every month. For low paying salary, over 5000 dollars is a huge number. Thus, I prefer to have a job with low paying, and it is durable.! ^' A& a( l  x  q
, J! g$ u9 ?9 c/ u' e
Second, people, who have low salary, have more time to stay with family members. （中间应该加上，为什么工资低和家人处的时间就长？因为压力小？工作量小？）I think that family members are most important for human life. If we have a lot of money without them, our life would be terrible. In my town, there is a famous story. One rich man spent his whole life to earn money, but he ignored his family. In the end, his wife left the family, and his children went to the jail. Thus, I think that people can make lower money and spend more time to take care the family. 1 U- h$ _' h2 k7 L4 P5 h

Thirdly, I don't think that high salary job can have more freedom and health. People who have high salary need to stand by over twenty hours every day. Although they have money, they cannot use money to enjoy the vocation建议把假日改成生活，因为外国人高薪的都很会享受假日. In addition, their life is under the pressure. They would be worried about losing the job when they become older. Many computer engineers realize this situation. They spend a lot of time for their company even work over 24 hours for their project. Because of this reasons, they usually have problems of health after they work in the company for 2 years. Thus, job with lowing salary is better than another.
To sum up, I agree that people who have job with low salary are better than those who have high salary. for the reason that (that's because 不够高端啊）that they don't have concern about losing job(worry 之前已经用了好多次了，用了太多会显得词汇贫乏）and (in addtion也can have more time to take care their family members especially their children. Furthermore, they can avoid living under the pressure. Thus, low salary's job has more benefits than another.
句型 词汇都很好 就是注重每段的逻辑和句子间的衔接

ttuuttuuUID: 2299729

0918 補交 Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?

Sports teach people more lessons about life The general consensus now appears that sports don't teach people more lessons about life. However, I don't agree with their opinion. That's because that I can learn how to work with other people from sports. In addition, I can release the stress from the life. Furthermore, I can make more friends when I do sports. There are several reasons to support my viewpoints.

First of all, sports can teach us how to collaborate with other persons. That's because many sports need more than one person to complete such as baseball, football as well as soccer. For me, I like to play baseball. I remembered that I always hold the ball when I played the game in the first time. After, I learn how to work with other persons. In the suitable time, I pass the ball to my teamer. This behavior effects me in my life. Now, I can divide the work to different people in the group when I have the big project. I don't hold every responsibility, and learn how to trust my teamer.

Second, sports can make me release pressure. As economy declines, everyone works harder than before because they don't want to lose their job. However, it causes that people's life is under the pressure. Therefore, sports can make me to health and release the pressure. For instance, my young sister had an important test. However, she was stressful during that time. Therefore, I suggested learning how to swim. She would focus on swimming in the pool and forgot the pressure which the text caused. After the sport, she can remember more contents from the textbook. Thus, sports can help people to release pressure and benefit human's health.

Third, we can make friends when we do sports. That's because that some people have the same interest as I. We can discuss how to improve our skills and update our equipments. It includes a lot of information. I entirely believe that people can make friends from sports. My friend whose name is John prefers to ride the bike. Every weekend, he goes to Natural Park to do this sport. In addition, he makes many friends and team a bike club there. In the club, there are many people from different domain including house designer, computer engineers, and so on. This month, he buys a new department. His friend from a bike club, provide a free design for his new home.

To sum up, I agree that sports can provide many advantages for our life. That's because that we can learn how to collaborate with people. In addition, sports have many benefits including releasing pressure and becoming health. Furthermore, making a lot friends from sports not only make our life abundant but also provide advantages which we don't anticipate previously.

WSYLRUID: 2666837

对于单词，我基本都是在精读TPO阅读的时候顺便把好词好句挑出来，之后经常翻出来看看。还有些个副词集中积累以下也就行了。

ttuuttuuUID: 2299729

9月21日交

09.05.30NA Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Younger school children (age five to ten) should be required to study art and music in addition to math, science, history and language.

The general consensus now appears that younger school children (age five to ten) should not be required to study art and music in addition to math, science, history, and language. They think that too many courses will be stressful for younger school children. However, I have opposed opinion. That's because that younger school children can enlarge their knowledge from art as well as music. In addition, art and music can release their pressure. Furthermore, it can help them learn math, science, history and language after studying art and music. There are several reasons to support my viewpoint.

First of all, younger school children can enlarge distinct knowledge from art and music. That's because younger children like sponges which can absorb any information. Therefore, in these stages, they are suitable for learning anything. If their parents just focus on math, science, history as well as language, it may cause to lose a future artist. Like my older brother, John, had learned to play piano from five years old. During his childhood, he also studied math, science, history, and language.
Now he is a professor in the university, and teaches music course and science course. If he never learned the music when he was five, he wouldn't have the success.

Second, play music and appreciate art can make children peaceful and to release their pressure. That's because that younger school children are energetic. Though art and music, they can make them to be stable and sit in front of the table peacefully. For instance, my friend's son, named as Jon, ran and destroyed anything when I saw him every time. However, my friend sent him to learn the music. After three months, Jon became peaceful and stable. In addition, he can complete his assignments on time.

Third, math, science, history and language can not present all subjects. Some people think that younger school children just learned these courses, and their children can obtain higher score in the future. However, they forget the obvious function of art and music. The famous report of science mentions that art and music can increase memory as well as ability of learning for younger children.
The researcher finds that younger children can do better in the subject including math, science, history and language when they learn art and music than others.

To sum up, I agree that younger school children (age five to ten) should be required to study art and music in addition to math, science, history as well as language. That's because that art and music can expand their knowledge. In addition, they can become peaceful after studying art and music, and art as well as music can release their pressure. Furthermore, younger children can improve their ability of studying after learn art and music.