Daily Writing 作业 by hdchangie

hdchangieUID: 2402936

2011年1月29日 周六：

独立：
7 s1 c+ X+ a6 ^, E* X09.11.12

Do you agree with the following statement? Parents should give school-age children money for getting a high mark they get in the school.

As to the issue that whether parents should give school-age children money for getting a high mark in school, I would like to no. Although, I admit that giving teenagers money in order to stimulate their performance in school could be a way that many parents take use of and one that could achieve the consequences parents want their children to, the defects of this method further outweigh the benefits it brings, and I insist that there are much better ways for parents to use to improve children’s mark in the school.

Although, the basic mind that school-age children should be promoted in certain forms after they grab a high mark in the school is of no problem, and at the same time, using money to stimulate children’s passion for getting a high mark is used wider and wider due to the development of economic society. However, there must be harmful consequences that parents couldn’t imagine. The start point is good, while it goes to the wrong direction. For instance, when children know that they could get money once they get a high mark, they would think any way to get it, including cheating in exams. They may copy answers on exams papers of students next to him or her, or they choose to copy directly from textbooks. Although they could avoid teachers’ supervise and may get a high mark, it is not what they deserve. Besides, they may use the money they get to do illegal things, even dealing drugs.

Moreover, using money to be the gift for high mark in the school would also be deteriorated to children’s mind. Their mind toward money would change dramatically. For example, once children know that they could get money once they get high mark, they would gradually extend the attitude toward other issues in their life, even everything. Finally, they assume that no matter what they pursue, the eternal purpose is money. Maybe when they go to college, they choose a major they don’t like at all, but they could get a decent job and a high salary through this major; besides, they may want to marry a girl not because he loves her, but merely due to the fact that she has a wealthy family so he could become rich by marrying her. In another word, other aspects in things are eliminated and finally, only money exists. How terrible it is!

In my opinion, there are far more ways for parents to choose for stimulating their children besides giving money, such as taking their children to pleasure ground. Their children could have a happy time with parents and the relationship could be enhanced in the process; or parents could just cook delicious food for their children, telling them that they are the best, and parents take proud of them. By doing these actions, children could feel concretely that their parents love him so they are motivated by this feeling, far much better than merely giving money to children.

All in all, although giving money to children for their good performance in the school is convenient, it is not the best way parents could take, especially taking the harmful consequences it will bring about into consideration. And there are other better ways for parents to choose for getting high mark in the school.

综合作文TPO1

In the reading, the author states that four-day work week would benefit the company, the society and the individual. However, the professor casts doubt on the statements given in the reading by presenting three reasons to support his opinions in the lecture.

First , the company profits would not increase and the company may even spend more due to the change because they have to provide new training for new employees and they will also provide medical benefits, which would be the same for both four-day work
employees and five-day work ones. Also, hiring more people means more office space and more computers, all of which are costs of money.

Second, four-day week work does not follow the decrease of unemployment rates. Because hiring new employees are costly, so companies may choose to let the employees they have work overtime; besides, the expectations for employees would be raised, the company would think four-day work employees could do the same thing as they used to be, so the situation doesn't change, no more jobs are created and employees feel more tired after the change.

Finally, four-day work week may risk ending the better life employees expected. After choosing four-day work week, job stability and chance for job would be reduced; besides, they may lose their jobs much easier than those who choose five-day work week, and managers would like to pass them over for promotion for they would like to choose employees with five-day work week for coverage and supervision.

In the reading, the author states that the option of working a four-day work week would be beneficial for the economy as a whole as well as the individual companies and teh employees who decided to take the option, while in the lecture, the professor contradicts the view points by stating three reason to illustrate that the four-day work week is not as benffical as showed in the reading.

a08805436UID: 2725634

As to the issue that whether parents should give school-age children money for getting a high mark in school, I would like to no. Although, I admit that giving teenagers money in order to stimulate their performance in school could be a way that many parents take use of and one that could achieve the consequences parents want their children to, the defects of this method further outweigh the benefits it brings, and I insist that there are much better ways for parents to use to improve children’s mark in the school. (个人建议把这句话改短些)

Although, the basic mind that school-age children should be promoted in certain forms after they grab a high mark in the school is of no problem, and at the same time, using money to stimulate children’s passion for getting a high mark is used wider and wider due to the development of economic society. However, there must be harmful consequences that parents couldn’t imagine. The start point is good（有start point这个词么）, while it goes to the wrong direction. For instance, when children know that they could get money once they get a high mark, they would think any way to get it, including cheating in exams. They may copy answers on exams papers of students next to him or her（复数变成单数了）, or they choose to copy directly from textbooks. Although they could avoid teachers’ supervise and may get a high mark, it is not what they deserve. Besides, they may use the money they get to do illegal things, even dealing drugs.

Moreover, using money to be the gift for high mark in the school would also be deteriorated to children’s mind. Their mind toward money would change dramatically. For example, once children know that they could get money once they get high mark, they would gradually extend the attitude toward other issues in their life, even everything. Finally, they assume that no matter what they pursue, the eternal purpose is money. Maybe when they go to college, they choose a major they don’t like at all, but they could get a decent job and a high salary through this major; besides, they may want to marry a girl not because he loves her, but merely due to the fact that she has a wealthy family so he could become rich by marrying her. In another word, other aspects in things are eliminated and finally, only money exists. How terrible it is!

In my opinion, there are far more ways for parents to choose for stimulating their children besides giving money, such as taking their children to pleasure ground. Their children could have a happy time with parents and the relationship could be enhanced in the process; or parents could just cook delicious food for their children, telling them that they are the best, and parents take proud of them. By doing these actions, children could feel concretely that their parents love him so they are motivated by this feeling, far much better than merely giving money to children.

All in all, although giving money to children for their good performance in the school is convenient, it is not the best way parents could take, especially taking the harmful consequences it will bring about into consideration. And there are other better ways for parents to choose for getting high mark in the school.

主要是某些表达上的问题 建议把句子写短

w龙ol杨fUID: 2779438

向前辈学习~ 16# hdchangie

hdchangieUID: 2402936

这次作业确实比较赶。。。有些拼写错误没有检查出来哈~~不好意思了~~下次会注意滴~ 18# w龙ol杨f

蝶飞依依UID: 2905269

As to the issue that whether parents should give school-age children money for getting a high mark in school, I would like to say no.  Although, I admit that giving teenagers money in order to stimulate their performance in school could be a way that many parents take use of and one that could achieve the consequences parents want their children to,  the defects of this method further outweigh the benefits it brings, and I insist that there are much better ways for parents to use to improve children’s mark in the school.

Although, the basic mind that school-age children should be promoted in certain forms after they grab a high mark in the school is of no problem, and at the same time, using money to stimulate children’s passion for getting a high mark is used wider and wider due to the development of economic society. However, there must be harmful consequences that parents couldn’t imagine. The start point is good, while it goes to the wrong direction. For instance, when children know that they could get money once they get a high mark, they would think any way to get it, including cheating in exams. They may copy answers on exams papers of students next to him or her, or they choose to copy directly from textbooks. Although they could avoid teachers’ supervise and may get a high mark, it is not what they deserve. Besides, they may use the money they get to do illegal things, even dealing drugs.

T% {7 b) o/ o
Moreover, using money to be the gift for high mark in the school would also be deteriorated to children’s mind. Their mind toward money would change dramatically. For example, once children know that they could get money once(稍微换个词呗~~) they get high mark, they would gradually extend the attitude toward other issues in their life, even everything. Finally, they assume that no matter what they pursue, the eternal purpose is money. Maybe when they go to college, they choose a major they don’t like at all, but they could get a decent job and a high salary through this major; besides, they may want to marry a girl not because he loves her, but merely due to the fact that she has a wealthy family so he could become rich by marrying her. In another word, other aspects in things are eliminated and finally, only money exists. How terrible it is!

In my opinion, there are far more ways for parents to choose for stimulating their children besides giving money, such as taking their children to pleasure ground. Their children could have a happy time with parents and the relationship could be enhanced in the process; or parents could just cook delicious food for their children, telling them that they are the best, and parents take proud of them. By doing these actions, children could feel concretely that their parents love him so they are motivated by this feeling, far much better than merely giving money to children.

in all, although giving money to children for their good performance in the school is convenient, it is not the best way parents could take, especially taking the harmful consequences it will bring about into consideration. And there are other better ways for parents to choose for getting high mark in the school.

感觉还是写的很好的了，展开的很细致~

hdchangieUID: 2402936

2011年2月1日 周二：
5 e' p1 V0 N4 [) s/ H3 `3 H+ o独立：

10.01.22NA# l9 m  R/ ?. U( R) ^0 f$ W1 C0 U8 p
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People who go outside are more successful and happier than people who lives in villeges.
. {0 I% W- D& Z! P
Some people may agree that only bying going outside that one could gain success and happiness, while others hold the opposite view by saying that living in villeges is more comfortble and enjoyble than going outside. There are so much stress and competitions waiting for them outside, and it is much easier living in villeges. The two kinds of choices refect two kinds of lifestyle, and it is too hasty to assert that those who choose to go outside are more successful and happier than those who choose to live in villeges. There are still ways for people who choose to live in villeges to achieve success.

Admittedly, due to the high speed of development of big cities, especially taking the opportunities in big cities into consideration, the chance for those who choose to go outside and strive their own life in big cities are more easy to achieve success. Taking Beijing for example. There are more companies in Beijing, especially international companies, so people in Beijing are more accessable to materials and information provided by those big companies if they have the chance to work in one of them, consequently, compared with those who live in villeges, they posses more material and information, which are essential for success.

However, merely possesing more informations and materials does not necessarily mean achieving final success, and there are definitely other factors that devote to this issue. History is replete with examples that could support my opinion. Take Newton for instance. When Newton found the theory of gravity, he was just a common person living in a small villege. He sat under an apple tree and at the time, an apple was dropped on his head. Inspired by this atmonsphere, Newton discovered the gravity and by taking use of this theory, many phenomonon could be explained. So what can we learn from this example? It is not people’s location that determine success, but other factors, such as intelligence, hard working as so forth, that matter significantly.


Besides, let me ask you a question: does success equals with happiness? The criteria for success in nowaday society varies and the most common standard for it is money one earns. While does earning more money means more happiness they could get? Obviously the answer is no. It is common that those so-called successful men are suffering pains physically and phsicologically. They are stressful and have a bad relationship with family members. They are not happy at all. While for those who live in villeges, although they could not make as much money as people in big cities could, they are happier than them, at least in my perspective. They have more time to accompany families and do things that they like. They could enjoy dinner without thinking too much. In my opinion, this is happiess, and I believe many people think so.

All in all, although for people going outside, they have more chances and posses more information, which are essential for success, these factors are not determinate ones for final success; Besides, the distinction between success and happiness should be clarified, those who are thought to be success don’t happy at all, while those living in small villeges, due to the fact that they are more free to do what they really want and have more time to spend with families, they are much happier than those so-called successful men. So it is too hasty to assert that people going outside are more successful than those in small villeges.

综合： TPO3
In the reading material, the speaker suggests that there are some problems in the painting so the painting could not be a work by Rembrandt. However, In the lecture, the professor claims that the painting of a woman was proved to be true. She gives three reasons to debate the ideas illustrated in the reading material.

First, in the reading, the speaker says that because some inconsistent feathers about the way the woman is dressed existed in the portrait, so the painting was fake. While in the lecture, the professor disputes this idea with statement that the fur collar was added over the top of the original painting about 100 years after the original painting was made, maybe because of someone wanted to improve the value of the painting so the painting was made to be a portrait of aristocratic lady.

Second, there is no wrong in the painting about light and shadow. In the reading material, light and shadow were seen as evidences that proved the painting was not real. These elements, light and shadow, didn't fit together. However, the statement was also debated by the professor. She says that due to the fact that the original painting was covered by other colors, so after removing these colors, we can see that it was a light-color cloth that was wore by the woman, which could illuminate the woman's face. The light and shadow were so realistic that they were just expected from Rembrandt.

Finally, the professor holds different opinions about the wood that made up of the painting panel. In the reading, doubt was raised due to the fact that it was painted on a panel made of several pieces of wood glued together, and no painting known to be by Rembrandt uses a panel glued together in this way from several pieces of wood. While the professor doesn't agree with the statement given in the reading either. She says that once the painting was not the original one, so after removing the fake features on the painting, we can find that it was so grand and more valuable than it looked, and the original painting panel was on single piece of wood. Besides, the wood used in the portrait of a woman was from the same tree that another Rembrandt's painting panel's wood was from.

lz007523UID: 2879683

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? People who go outside are more successful and happier than people who lives in villeges.- U1 ~3 P/ x& U3 U6 n7 p, S

3 I; X$ ?3 L/ E# c. m" _' p! iSome people may agree that only bying going outside that one could gain success and happiness, while others hold the opposite view by saying that living in villeges is more comfortble and enjoyble than going outside.（这句不答题意，题目是more successful and happier） There are so much stress and competitions waiting for them outside, and it is much easier living in villeges. The two kinds of choices refect two kinds of lifestyle, and it is too hasty to assert that those who choose to go outside are more successful and happier than those who choose to live in villeges. There are still ways for people who choose to live in villeges to achieve success(It is too hasty to assert,but I don't know do you agree or disagree clearly on the first paragraph). % r) y( W  `( t) p" |. l" G$ H

3 B: d) U/ [( r% N! ~$ O5 w1 @* T! ^Admittedly, due to the high speed of development of big cities, especially taking the opportunities in big cities into consideration, the chance for those who choose to go outside and strive their own life in big cities are more easy to achieve success. Taking Beijing for example(这句不是句子）. There are more companies in Beijing than other cities, especially international companies. So people in Beijing are more accessable to materials (这个搭配不对）and information provided by those big companies if they have the chance to work in one of them, consequently, compared with those who live in villeges, they posses more material and information, which are essential for success.
% s6 {9 Z: [5 m( a& w4 }! W
5 F: W* Y2 j/ ^" k7 T4 ^2 gHowever, merely possesing more informations and materials does not necessarily mean achieving final success, and there are definitely other factors that devote to this issue. History is replete with examples that could support my opinion. Take Newton for instance. When Newton found the theory of gravity, he was just a common person living in a small villege. He sat under an apple tree and at the time, an apple was dropped on his head. Inspired by this atmonsphere, Newton discovered the gravity and by taking use of this theory, many phenomonon could be explained. So what can we learn from this example? It is not people’s location that determine success, but other factors, such as intelligence, hard working as so forth, that matter significantly（跑题了。。变成了题目问的是GO OUTSIDE 比住Villages 更容易成功，你同不同意）. 6 h0 @' s- |7 y, D
$ e8 W" B% A- D6 Z) ?/ z

+ Z7 A! D" p. z( T0 HBesides, let me ask you a question: （冒号不是这么用的）does success equals with happiness? The criteria for success in nowaday society varies and the most common standard for it is money one earns. While（要改成However,) does earning more money means more happiness they could get? Obviously the answer is no. It is common that those so-called successful men are suffering pains physically and phsicologically. They are stressful and have a bad relationship with family members. They are not happy at all. While for those who live in villeges, although they could not make as much money as people in big cities could, they are happier than them, at least in my perspective（放在句首）. They have more time to accompany families and do things that they like. They could enjoy dinner without thinking too much. In my opinion, this is happiess, and I believe many people think so.
7 @3 b8 ^" I7 l) b

. N- d0 c- F5 ?/ N% aAll in all, although for people going outside, they have more chances and posses more information, which are essential for success, these factors are not determinate ones for final success; Besides, the distinction between success and happiness should be clarified, those who are thought to be success don’t happy at all, while those living in small villeges, due to the fact that they are more free to do what they really want and have more time to spend with families, they are much happier than those so-called successful men. So it is too hasty to assert that people going outside are more successful than those in small villeges.
) H) E( l; ]; [1 y

theflyfishUID: 2101420

新年快乐啊昨天有事没上来，不好意思

静音UID: 2893385

In the reading material, the speaker（用author比较好吧） suggests that there are some problems in the painting so the painting could not be a work by Rembrandt. However, In the lecture, the professor claims that the painting of a woman was proved to be true. She gives three reasons to debate the ideas illustrated in the reading material.
; o( X: y- Q% t! t3 ?
First, in the reading, the speaker says that because some inconsistent feathers about the way the woman is dressed （feathers?）existed in the portrait, so the painting was fake. While in the lecture, the professor disputes this idea with statement that the fur collar was added over the top of the original painting about 100 years after the original painting was made, maybe because of someone wanted to improve the value of the painting so the painting was made to be a portrait of aristocratic lady. （这句话有直接复制听力内容，不太好的）
4 w. y$ p" {( L5 }# g( t7 S) W. O
Second, there is no wrong in the painting about light and shadow. In the reading material, light and shadow were seen as evidences that proved the painting was not real. These elements, light and shadow, didn't fit together. However, the （this）statement was also debated by the professor. She says that due to the fact that the original painting was covered by other colors, so after removing these colors, we can see that it was a light-color cloth that was wore by the woman, which could illuminate the woman's face. The light and shadow were so realistic that they were just expected from Rembrandt.

Finally, the professor holds different opinions about the wood that made up of the painting panel. In the reading, doubt was raised due to the fact that it was painted on a panel made of several pieces of wood glued together, and no painting known to be by Rembrandt uses a panel glued together in this way from several pieces of wood.（句子太长，没啥意义。） While the professor doesn't agree with the statement given in the reading either. She says that once the painting was not the original one, so after removing the fake features on the painting, we can find that it was so grand and more valuable than it looked, and the original painting panel was on single piece of wood. Besides, the wood used in the portrait of a woman was from the same tree that another Rembrandt's painting panel's wood was from.



我觉得达到了综合写作的高要求了，其实考的还是主要是把听到的看到的都全部呈现出来，这一点做得非常好，我自己的缺点也在这里。
但是同时要注意 ，不能直接用听力内容，一定要有变化才好。
我的作文也请多加批评咯～新年快乐！

hdchangieUID: 2402936

2月7日作业 独立作文
Some people think one's working is more important than being with one's family.

With the rapid pace of nowadays development of our society, it is tempting to assert that finding a good job and earning lots of money equal to happiness, so many people, espeically those young people, prefer to work hard one their work while forget to give even a glance to their family. This is pathetic because their emphasis about life put on the wrong element. In my perspective, it is not one’s working but one’s family that matters the most.

Admittedly, working hard on one’s job could render people a lot of things, including money, status, others’ reputation, and even love. Assume after years’ hard working, I could get a position in an international company, and earn a decent salary, people who could not get this posiiton may admire me. I could wear suit everyday and could afford almost everything that I like, and this is thought to be happy. It is true that doing well on one’s work could be rewarded with all thoese things, and they are, of course, the bedstone for leading a happy life. However, does it totally equal to happiness? I don’t think so.

In my opinion, the real emphasis of my life relies on family, not on work. Yes, although doing well in one’s work is the basic element for enjoy happy time with family, the emphasis should not be confused to be working, and family is the essential for everybody’s mind. Take myself as an example. I thought I used to do internship in a company, and after several weeks’ work, I felt tired about work there and I really want to quit. At this time, I talked with my dad, and expressed my depression I suffered in my work. My dad carefully illustrated my situation and my character, and finally he suggested that the work I was doing was not the most suitable one for me. So I decided to quit after the talk and chose to have my intern in an publishing house, which related my major more closely and which I love more. With family member’s help, it is much easier to see myself clearly.

Family is the eternal bay for my heart, and family members will not betray me forever, which give me a sense of security that fascinating me most. It is true that doing well in my work could also grand me with a sense of achievement, and that kind of feeling is really great, I admit. However, I don’t think this kind of emotion could replace my emotion toward family. I remember the first winter holiday in my undergraduate university, I slept so well at home, and I told my mom how wonderful I felt. It is the sense of security that make me sleep so well. It is a kind of quietness in my heart, and nothing elso could constitute it for ever.

Also, it is harmful for those who treat their job as their center of their life. Those who care less toward family than job could never feel the kind of happiness when gathering together with family and talk with them without having to think much. They are my family and that is the reason I love them so deeply.

To sum up, I totally disagree with those who think their work outweigh their family. From my perspective, the family is so essential and vital for my heart and soul that nothing eles could replace it at all. Family is more significant and I definitely think most of people would agree with me.

TPO8 综合作文

In the lecture, the professor challenges the ideas in the reading material and states that Chevalier's memoir is reliable and accurate enough.

First, it is true that Chevalier had a loan from a Swiss merchant, however, it did not necessarily mean that Chevalier were poor at that time. As we all know, Chevalier spent a great deal of money in Switzerland on parties and gambling, and he had to sell products to make money. So it was not unusual for him to to borrow money, waiting his money to arrive.

Second, in the reading, the author states that critics are skeptical about the accuracy of the conversations that the Chevalier records in the memoir with famous writer Voltaire. However, the professor states that the truth is that Chevalier recorded exactly what they said during the conversation immediately after the conversation, and vitnesses, who lived in his neighborhood, said shat Chevalier would refer to notes and journals when he wrote his memoir.

Finally, there were more powerful people at that time in the prison in Veice, however, they failed to escape from that prison by bribing. So it is not reliable to say that
Chevalier could esacape by bribing jailers. And according to another reference, after Chevalier's escape from the prison, they had the ceiling to be repaired. Why would they repair the ceiling unless it was broken before?


To sum up, in the reading, the author illustrates it is not accurate of the memoir, while the professor casts doubt on the reading material by giving three reasons, and thinks that the Chevalier's memoir is reliable and accurate.

py5223UID: 2973181

With the rapid pace of nowadays development of our society, it is tempting to assert that finding a good job and earning lots of money equal to happiness, so many people, espeically those young people, prefer to work hard one（应该是on吧） their work while forget to give even（这个even放在这里不对吧，能不能放在while 后面呢） a glance to their family. This is pathetic because their emphasis about life put on the wrong element. In my perspective, it is not one’s working but one’s family that matters the most. 这句话里的matters在这里是什么意思 有点不明白 s* G3 {8 i1 f' X$ \
8 |& f7 e- R! k0 S1 E3 x( g' S; d
Admittedly, working hard on one’s job could render people a lot of things, including money, status, others’ reputation, and even love. Assume after years’ hard working, I could get a position in an international company, and earn a decent（换成fat更好） salary, people who could not get this position may admire me. I could wear suit everyday and could afford almost everything that I like, and this is thought to be happy. It is true that doing well on one’s work could be rewarded with all thoese things, and they are, of course, the bedstone for leading a happy life. However, does it totally equal to happiness? I don’t think so. + h+ Z9 u, D$ q$ o* Y

In my opinion, the real emphasis of my life relies on family, not on work. Yes, although doing well in one’s work is the basic element for enjoy happy time with family, the emphasis should not be confused to be working, and family is the essential for everybody’s mind. Take myself as an example. I thought I used to do internship in a company, and after several weeks’ work, I felt tired about work there and I really want to quit. At this time, I talked with my dad, and expressed my depression I suffered in my work. My dad carefully illustrated my situation and my character, and finally he suggested that the work I was doing was not the most suitable one for me. So I decided to quit after the talk and chose to have my intern in an publishing house, which related my major more closely and which I love more. With family member’s help, it is much easier to see myself clearly.

Family is the eternal bay for my heart, and family members will not betray me forever, which give me a sense of security that fascinating me most. It is true that doing well in my work could also grand me with a sense of achievement, and that kind of feeling is really great, I admit. However, I don’t think this kind of emotion could replace my emotion toward family. I remember the first winter holiday in my undergraduate university, I slept so well at home, and I told my mom how wonderful I felt. It is the sense of security that make me sleep so well. It is a kind of quietness in my heart, and nothing elso（else） could constitute it for ever. , W5 `1 S$ Z' k3 f5 e8 k/ l

Also, it is harmful for those who treat their job as their center of their life. Those who care less toward family than job could never feel the kind of happiness when gathering together with family and talk with them without having to think much. They are my family and that is the reason I love them so deeply. 4 B  `6 J7 Y' v. f
$ v+ Z" t. L( |6 Z; M# n! z
To sum up, I totally disagree with those who think their work outweigh their family. From my perspective, the family is so essential and vital for my heart and soul that nothing eles could replace it at all. Family is more significant and I definitely think most of people would agree with me.
感觉lz的事例的语言都描述的很自然 句子也比较流畅 值得学习！
除了一点拼写错误 好像没什么别的问题  论证也比较严密 好词都用绿色标出  另外谢谢lz帮我修改的作文！

静音UID: 2893385

语法错误实在是比较多，我就不一一指出来了，希望自己能够好好改正。
In the lecture, the professor challenges the ideas in the readingmaterial and states that Chevalier's memoir is reliable and accurate enough.! n3 V2 F3 ]: r8 X; W5 y
First, it is truethat Chevalier had a loan from a Swiss merchant, however, it did (语法)not necessarily mean that Chevalier were （语法）poor at that time. As we all know, Chevalier spent a great deal ofmoney in Switzerland on parties and gambling, and he had to sell products tomake money. So it was not unusual（用反了） for him to to borrow money,waiting his money to arrive.
（用了太多听力里的直接复述，不好的）
Second, in thereading, the author states that critics are skeptical about the accuracy of theconversations that the Chevalier records in the memoir with famous writerVoltaire. However, the professor states that the truth is that Chevalierrecorded exactly what they said during the conversation immediately after theconversation, (怎么又是during又是after)and vitnesses, who lived in his neighborhood, said shat Chevalierwould refer to notes and journals when he wrote his memoir.

. O6 u- I% W. I
Finally, there weremore powerful people at that time in the prison in Veice, however, they failed toescape from that prison by bribing. So it is not reliable to say that3 J) l% w4 D6 Z( A+ e: j
Chevalier could esacape by bribing jailers. Andaccording to another reference, after Chevalier's escape from the prison, theyhad the ceiling to be repaired. Why would they repair the ceiling unless it wasbroken before?8 j([. R: P' q( w' w

, V+ j9 H3 |1 }( o7 K+ c
To sum up, in thereading, the author illustrates it is not accurate of the memoir, while theprofessor casts doubt on the reading material by giving three reasons, andthinks that the Chevalier's memoir is reliable and accurate.



欢迎互批哈
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-1230330-1-1.html

sun3mayUID: 2574771

改好了。

hdchangieUID: 2402936

2011年2月8日 周二：" r! P/ ]+ O9 L6 n" I
独立：

10.01.22NA2 v' I2 ~$ u3 j6 s- B9 Z
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Past people are friendlier than they are today .


+ b2 {0 ?0 L- o

Through retrospecting into the past, it is not difficult for us to see the distinction between people at that time and people today, which could be attibute to the change and rapid development of our whole nation. It is known to all that people’s characteristic is the mirror of that age, and the specific traits of the past age determine that people at that time are friendlier than they are today.

On the contrary to high-development of today’s society, those who live in the past get in touch with less things, espeically harmful things, so they are more innocent than people nowadays. Most of them who began their work in around 1990s or even earlier, such as my mom, believed that most people were born to be kind, so they trusted the human nature and were more optimistic for future life. Due to this explanation, they have the propensity to treat others friendly.

Aside from the aspect I mentioned above, there is another and more crucial reason that I want to demonstrate. Due to the fact that the level of economy and tecnology in the past could not be matched with that today, there were less things available then in the society, people lacked opportunity to get access to things of high level. Similar to the stage of nation’s development, most of people were not rich and the gap between the rich and the poor were not as wide as that today, so they were more inclined to incooperate with each other, help each other to conquer the difficult period they suffered at that time. So under this circumstances, people who live in neighborhood had good relationship with each other. My memory is espeically clear when it comes to my experience living in my first house. Although every home was not rich, we children were quite familiar with every family and after school, I may not go back home first but rather choose to go to my neighbor’s home and played with my little friends. It was quite natural that my mom would help our neighbors buy fruits or vegetables, and they would also in turn take care of me when my parents were away for work. That moment was really nice and carefree, which, pessimistically speaking, will never come back again. It is not difficult to understand when think about the situation today.

After analysis to the past, another glance should be given to the present situation. Nobody could deny the fact that people become more and more stressed and busy, and more competitions await us every day. With this reason, it is more likely for people to treat others rudely and without patience. Imagine everyday you live in the threat for being replaced by another potential competitor, and what you have to do first and formost is accomplishing your work discreetly and perfectly. Under this atmosphere, it is difficult to treat others kindly and friendly.

To sum up, from the discussion above, we can safely draw to the conclusion that people in the past treat people friendlier than people today. The changes of people reflect the changes of that age, and because the age in the past render more innocent and helpful personalities, past people are more likely to treat their others friendly as well.

TPO9综合作文

In the lecture, the professor disagrees with the statement made in the reading. The professor argues that although hydrogen is more clear than internal engine, it cannot solve the problems presented in the reading. The professor gives several specific reasons to support her idea.

Initially, although it is true that hydrogen could be derived from a variety of sources, such as natural gas or even water, it could not be gotten without any difficulty. Hygrogen is an artificial substitution for petroleum or other form of gasoline and getting hygrogen from natural gas or water has to go through many procedures, so it is not practical or easy to get.

Besides, hydrogen-based fuel cells could not solve pollution problems as mentioned in the reading passage. Although it is true that hydrogen itself is clean, it is polluted in the process of getting it. If people want to get hydrogen, they have to use technique of purification, which needs energy from burning oil or petroleum. Consequently, the problem of polllution is raised up to the environment.

Finally, there is no cost saving for using fuel-cell engines as illustrated in the passage, becasuse of the fact that manufacturing fuel-cell engine is expensive, and it is necessary for hydrogen to implement chemical reactions, which could then recharge energy, so taking this cost into consideration, it is not economically competitive at all.

All in all, the professor illustrates the disadvantages the author of the reading passage ignores to consider, and concludes that hydrogen-based fuel-cell engine isn’t the most promising alternative source for internal-combustion engine.

sun3mayUID: 2574771

改好了。