issue83

caichongbaobaoUID: 136935

83"Government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state, even though these areas are often extremely remote and thus accessible to only a few people."
  There are many beautiful scenes of wilderness areas in the world, to protect which, the government establish laws to avoid man-made destroy as well as invest both money and energy to keep them in their natural state.Some people may argue it is a waste to do so , since they are accessible to only a small number of people.However, most of them fail to see that preservation of these areas need two prerequisites: away from the man-made damages and natural disaster.(说实话我实在不知道该如何开头，高人指点一下吧)(81)
  The government makes laws to restrain people from(可以这么用么) doing harm to the natural environment.For example, one is not allowed to take along anything that will cause fire when one is in the forest; one is also not permitted to graze herds(有没有问题？？) excessively,which is  too heavy a burden for the grass; and one will be punished severely if one hunt the animals without permission.If all following these regulations , willingly or forced, there will be less forest fires caused by cigarette ends thrown by careless smokers; there will be less grassland facing the danger of disappearance owing to excessive grazing; and there will be a much safer living condition for the wild life without human being’s disturbing.On the converse , if no law exist to regulate people’s action toward wilderness , the few people who come there or live there probably become the killers of beauty and ecology balance.(150)
  Although these laws are effective to meet the first prerequisite mentioned above, they can do nothing about the second—natural disaster.Some forest fires are caused by dry whether and strong sunlight ,some grass may suffer a lot when there is a flood, and some rare animal is susceptible(易受影响，是这么写么？) to the changing whether and decreasing food. These explained why government invest money to perform program after program that will improve our living condition and natural environment. Government always finds a responsible person for woods, whose work is to watch the natural resource and search for concealing dangers regularly. At the same time, the officials spare no effort to protect the rare animals from extinction by increasing their reproduce in Nature Protecting Regions(自然保护区是这么写么？这句话别扭应该怎么改比较好？). And the great panda is a case in point.（132）
  However, not all the nature states are worth preserving, some even need to be changed instead of keeping what they are originally. Desert, having few green and almost all sand, so desolate that only appear in the nightmare, not only is impossible for people’s living but also have other negative effects on the climate and so on. Government and scientist find it a big headache to prevent the deserts from enlarging,and many fertile lands become worse and maybe tomorrow’s new deserts. Maybe what they can do not is enough to change that for the time being ,but we will never think of leaving it undisturbed.(105)
To sum up, the government make laws to keep the man-made damages less ,and they provide financial and technological help to reduce or avoid the loss by disaster.Before the days people are all willingly to strive for healthy environment and no more natural catastrophy happen, the endeavor of government is hardly useless. (all 522)
有些话说得太抽象，不够具体；有重复的现象：词语主要是森林火灾，在表意上总有前后同意，而且我总觉得写的不够深刻。但是说实话真的不知道该怎么写，有的是为了凑字数才弄上去的。

caichongbaobaoUID: 136935

怎么没人帮我改改
是不是写的太差了
没有思想内容大家不好意思说啊

tomatoeggsUID: 82073

别急嘛！看ing……

brilliant77UID: 11224

"of keeping what they are originally"   
个人认为 keeping their originality 更好，不知对否？
另外，你说的森林火灾等前部分我觉得不好，后边的沙漠的例子我觉得挺好。前边如何保护，避免天灾人祸，好想与题意关系不大，个人认为，重点是到底应不应该保持原状，为什末？而不是如何保持原状？
不知道对否？欢迎和我探讨

caichongbaobaoUID: 136935

那这篇题目的重点是政府保护还是维持natural state 那

gteryyUID: 114434

保护维持都说得通啊。就是说即使那些wildness是很遥远很少有人使用的，也要保护、维持它们的自然的状态。

开头如果不是特别牛的人不要用什么新奇的开头。我看到过的可以有：名人名言；举个事件，由该事件引发思考；让步一下，尽管。。。但是（说出自己的观点）；相应可以同意，因为。。。所以。。。。差不多就这几种常见些吧。

自然保护区我原来记过的，你这一问想不起来了。不过不是你那样写的。等我想起来再告诉你。

angeikimUID: 4857

我没看完，部分修改了一下。等晚上回来再看再做修改吧[/COLOR]

最初由 caichongbaobao 发布
[B]83"Government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state, even though these areas are often extremely remote and thus accessible to only a few people."
先说说这个题目，这个题目以前和BECKY在做作文训练每日三篇的时候做过。大家可以在作文习题库里面找到相关的分析和文章。
因为这个BAOBAO改文章比较多，我就再来分析这个题目:)
这个题目中的topic is: wilderness areas .
题目我简短翻译为：政府应该对一些公有的荒野进行保护，虽然这些地方通常是非常偏远而且人烟稀少。
the english explanation of the word' preserve' is: to keep from harm or injury or decay. 所以我将他引申为不进行开发的方面去。而wilderness 的英文释义是:desert也就是荒野之地。所以，我说这个speaker自己就带着倾向说这个话的。这个题目只要是想让你分析政府对自然保护，或者说人对自然保护的参与和自然的关系。

说到了这里，是不是一点点的感觉应该从什么方面下手了？
我说的只是一个方面，其他的，BAOBAO还可以自己扩展。


There are many beautiful scenes of wilderness areas in the world, to protect which, the government establish laws to avoid man-made destroy 这个DESTROY是不是用的有点过了？[/COLOR]as well as invest both money and energy to keep them in their natural state.Some people may argue it is a waste to do so , since they are accessible to only a small number of people.However, most of them fail to see that preservation of these areas need two prerequisites: away from the man-made damages and natural disaster.(说实话我实在不知道该如何开头，高人指点一下吧)(81) 这样的开头可以的。一个基本陈述加上自己的观点的表达。只要简洁，不罗嗦不跑题，那么一般情况下都每问题的[/COLOR]

The government makes laws to restrain people from(可以这么用么) doing harm to the natural environment. 直接写保护自然就好了，不用绕弯子。 [/COLOR]For example, one is not allowed to take along anything that will cause fire when one is in the forest; one is also not permitted to graze herds(有没有问题？？) 不要HERDS。不过放牧是看季节的吧。。要再查查[/COLOR]excessively,which is too heavy a burden for the grass; and one will be punished severely if one hunt the animals without permission. 应该是稀有动物--rare animals--的HUNT是违法的，但是在某些国家对一些种类的动物的HUNT是合法的。所以是不是要限制一下？ [/COLOR]If all following these regulations   应该换成legislation ,因为REGULATION有规章制度的意思，但是你前面说的是LAW, willingly or forced, there will be less forest fires caused by cigarette ends thrown by careless smokers; there will be less grassland facing the danger of disappearance owing to excessive grazing; and there will be a much safer living condition for the wild life without human being’s disturbing.On the converse , if no law exist to regulate people’s action toward wilderness , the few people who come there or live there probably become the killers of beauty and ecology balance.(150)
Although these laws are effective to meet the first prerequisite mentioned above, they can do nothing about the second—natural disaster.Some forest fires are caused by dry whether and strong sunlight ,some grass may suffer a lot when there is a flood, and some rare animal is susceptible(易受影响，是这么写么？) to the changing whether and decreasing food. These explained why government invest money to perform program after program that will improve our living condition and natural environment. Government always finds a responsible person for woods, whose work is to watch the natural resource and search for concealing dangers regularly. At the same time, the officials spare no effort to protect the rare animals from extinction by increasing their reproduce in Nature Protecting Regions(自然保护区是这么写么？这句话别扭应该怎么改比较好？). 用wildlife refuge ，是野生动物保护区的意思。自然保护区：natural reserve (area)[/COLOR]And the great panda is a case in point.（132）
However, not all the nature states are worth preserving, some even need to be changed instead of keeping what they are originally. Desert, having few green and almost all sand, so desolate that only appear in the nightmare, not only is impossible for people’s living but also have other negative effects on the climate and so on. Government and scientist find it a big headache to prevent the deserts from enlarging,and many fertile lands become worse and maybe tomorrow’s new deserts. Maybe what they can do not is enough to change that for the time being ,but we will never think of leaving it undisturbed.(105)
To sum up, the government make laws to keep the man-made damages less ,and they provide financial and technological help to reduce or avoid the loss by disaster.Before the days people are all willingly to strive for healthy environment and no more natural catastrophy happen, the endeavor of government is hardly useless. (all 522)
有些话说得太抽象，不够具体；有重复的现象：词语主要是森林火灾，在表意上总有前后同意，而且我总觉得写的不够深刻。但是说实话真的不知道该怎么写，有的是为了凑字数才弄上去的。 [/B]

tomatoeggsUID: 82073

83"Government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state, even though these areas are often extremely remote and thus accessible to only a few people."

There are many beautiful scenes of wilderness areas in the world, to protect which, the government establish laws to avoid man-made destroy as well as invest (这个句子语法及表达有严重问题。Avoid 后应根nouns,所以destroy ---destruction, invest---investment,试参考：to ban humanbeings from destroying as well as investing…)both money and energy to keep them in their natural state.Some people may argue it is a waste(of time and energy) to do so , since they are accessible to only(they are accessible only to …) a small number of people.However, most of them fail to see that preservation of these areas need two prerequisites: away from the man-made damages and natural disaster(s).你第一段淂观点立场究竟是？？？

The government makes laws to restrain people from(可以这么用么) doing harm to the natural environment.For example, one is not allowed to take along anything that will cause fire when one is in the forest; one is also not permitted to graze herds(有没有问题？？只有feed herds, 没有graze herds，下次建议你先查查英汉大词典。) excessively,which is too heavy a burden for the grass是vegetation; and one will be punished severely if one hunt the animals without permission.If all following these regulations , willingly or forced改为unwillingly, there will be less forest fires caused by cigarette ends 下面部分多余thrown by careless smokers; there will be less grassland facing the danger of disappearance应为extinction owing to excessive grazing; and there will be a much safer living condition for the wild life without human being’s disturbing.On the converse , if no law exist to regulate people’s action toward wilderness , the few people who come there or live there probably become the killers of beauty and ecology balance.(150) 这一段举的例子还可以，就是有些表达不太清楚。建议重写。

Although these laws are effective to meet the first prerequisite mentioned above, they can do nothing about the second—natural disaster.Some forest fires are caused by dry whether and strong sunlight ,some grass may suffer a lot when there is a flood, and some rare animal is susceptible(易受影响，是这么写么？subject to) to the changing whether and decreasing food. These explained why government invest money to perform program after program that will improve our living condition and natural environment. Government always finds a responsible person for woods, whose work is to watch the natural resource and search for concealing dangers regularly. At the same time, the officials spare no effort to protect the rare animals from extinction by increasing their reproduce in Nature Protecting Regions(自然保护区是这么写么？这句话别扭应该怎么改比较好？). And the great panda is a case in point.（132）个人认为这个自然灾害问题对中心思想没太大关联吧，没有很特别的理由。

However, not all the nature states are worth preserving, some even need to be changed instead of keeping what they are originallywhat they used to be. Desert, having few green and almost all sand, so desolate that only appear in the nightmare, not only is impossible for people’s living but also have other negative effects on the climate and so on. Government and scientist find it a big headache to prevent the deserts from enlarging,and many fertile lands become worse and maybe tomorrow’s new deserts. Maybe what they can do not is enough to change that for the time being ,but we will never think of leaving it undisturbed.(105)

To sum up, the government make laws to keep the man-made damages less ,and they provide financial and technological help to reduce or avoid the loss by disaster.Before the days people are all willingly to strive for healthy environment and no more natural catastrophes happen, the endeavor of government is hardly useless. (all 522)
有些话说得太抽象，不够具体；有重复的现象：词语主要是森林火灾，在表意上总有前后同意，而且我总觉得写的不够深刻。但是说实话真的不知道该怎么写，有的是为了凑字数才弄上去的。你说的对，确实有点凑字数的感觉，说来说去是“理屈词穷”的问题，我建议你还是找找有关这些remote places 的专业名称等，看过national geography 这本杂志吗？或者直接在这个网站上搜索资料，会让你的思路开阔一些。

happyman2000UID: 136936

我觉得这个题目主要是探讨保护边远地区自然环境的意义。是否可以从以下几个角度入手：第一，边远地区在维持地区和全球生态平衡方面具有重要意义。例如，保护水源问题，世界主要河流均源自高原地区。 再如，防止气候变暖， 喜马拉雅山被称为地球的肺。
第二，边远地区自然条件一般比较恶劣，生态平衡脆弱，即使很少一部分人的活动也可能导致整个地区生态环境的急剧恶化，因而需要特别保护。例如，非洲草原的狮子和猎豹被大量捕杀后，食草类动物大量繁殖，草原不断退化。
你的讨论比较泛，没有抓住实质，几乎可以套在任何一个有关环境保护的题目上。
你的很多表达方式感觉比较怪，我自己的语言能力也十分有限，无法判断是否正确。

caichongbaobaoUID: 136935

谢谢各位的点评！！3x。我觉得不好写的原因是因为我选择的论证的角度不好，说实话没想到happy 说得那些，我会去看看national geography的：）。还有angeikim和eggs 的细致的修正。moved:）

tomatoeggsUID: 82073

最初由 happyman2000 发布
[B]我觉得这个题目主要是探讨保护边远地区自然环境的意义。是否可以从以下几个角度入手：第一，边远地区在维持地区和全球生态平衡方面具有重要意义。例如，保护水源问题，世界..

以下省略...... [/B]

happyman的观点很不错。

tomatoeggsUID: 82073

突然想到一点：知道臓羚羊的悲惨故事吗？曾经在全世界环保问题上掀起巨浪的。所以，地方的偏远并不代表着是否应该得到应有的保护。