daily writing homework---sumess

sumessUID: 3008634

TPO 5 integrated writing


Inthe lecture, the professor mainly argue against three possible usage of themassive stone buildings discovered
NewMexico put forward by Archaeologists, residential, to store food supplies andused as ceremonial centers.

First, the professor points out though it seems like apartment buildingat Teos on the outside, yet, it doesn't make sense judged by inside. If it isan apartment, there should be a wide range of fire places for daily cooking to accommodate100 people. However, even in the largest building, there is only 10 fire placeswhich is far entail the demand. Therefore, the theory that these architecturesare purely residential doesn't hold.

Second, according to the lecture, it is unsupported for the Chacostructures to be food storage facilities. Though the structures are capaciousin size for that purpose, however, there are no maize trees on the floor andmaize containers inside. Thus, there is not sufficient evidence for the theoryof food storage purpose to stand.

Third, the lecturer doesn't agree that the houses are taken asceremonial centers. On the one hand, apart from mound found in the houses,other irrelevant materials were found as well, such as sand, stone etc, whichseems like disposed building materials.

Toconclude, the professor doesn't think any of the three possible theory hold.

sumessUID: 3008634

4.4 daily writing

Personally,I think government should concentrate on the university education for threereasons. First, the university students have already been selected so that thecountry will get a better rewarding. Second, the contribution from theuniversity is far more than that the young children made. Third, it willprevent heave burden from stifling the children’s interest in the cradle.

Tobegin with, only the students of talent in some sense will be admitted into auniversity. On the one hand, university is a place contains a wide range of geniusesand the probability for the university students to succeed is much higher thanthe average people. On the other hand, there are various uncertainties toinvest in the young children as their intellect varies. Therefore, investing onsuch students with high potential is bound to reward substantially decent.
Additionally, asmost of the university students have chose their careers and have implicitgoals, they tend to spare no effort to advance in their ways without any incentives.However, the young children are completely different. They are just enlightenedand have no idea about their career paths. Compared to the self-motivated andinitiative senior students, these young children are just like aimless flieswith an unknown future. Therefore, it doesn’t seem they will make muchcontribution.
Furturemore, itis indispensible for the children to shoulder heave burden prematurely if thegovernment provokes a public attention on the development of the youths. Forexample, in China, because of dramatic pressure on the university entranceexaminations, parents endeavor to force their children to take a range ofextra-curricular course, which will be a shortcut to enter key universities. Asa consequence, a student attaining the first place in International MathematicsOlympics said that he wouldn’t take up mathematics again. What a pity.
Therefore, inorder to achieve the optimized outcome and sound development of youths, thegovernment should focus on the university education.

Yvaine198831UID: 2956487

Personally, I think government should concentrate (more) on the university education for three reasons. First, the university students have already been selected so that the country will get a better rewarding. (是想表达大学的学生都是被甄选过的，所以国家以后可以从他们那得到回报么？the students of universities are the best of the talents, from whom the country could get great retribution) Second, the contribution from the university is far more than that the young children made. Third, it will prevent heave burden from stifling the children’s interest in the cradle. (这句话的意思弄不明白 >.<)
第一段总体上明确的表达了意思，但是理由不够明确。个人认为第一段只是明确的阐述自己的观点即可，不需要罗列你的理由。（毕竟不是雅思作文，只是个人观点而已）
To begin with, only the students of talent in some sense will be admitted into a(an) university. On the one hand, university is a place contains a wide range of geniuses and the probability for the university students to succeed is much higher than the average people. On the other hand, there are various uncertainties to invest in the young children as their intellect varies.(这句话的意思是投资孩子有很多不确定因素因为他们的才能不同？there is some risks to invest funds in young children depending on their various intellect.) Therefore, investing on(should be “in”) such students (such student 指的不太明确是 college student?) with high potential is bound to reward substantially decent.
第一段只要是在说 把钱花在大学生身上回报率更高。但是句子表达的不是太明确，有些词汇用的不能够准确的表明意思。

Additionally, as most of the university students have chose their careers and have implicit goals, they tend to spare no effort to advance in their ways without any incentives. （they are not willing to devote more effort to acquire success without any incentives）However, the young children are completely different. (There is complete contrast in young children) They are just enlightened and have no idea about their career paths. (career planning) Compared to the self-motivated and initiative senior students, these young children are just like aimless flies with an unknown future. (这句话过于的chinglish了。Flies是苍蝇用来形容孩子不太好。而且如果是苍蝇的话应该是找不到方向，direction。个人觉得这句话可以删除) Therefore, it doesn’t seem they will make much contribution.
我觉得首先要把意思表达清楚，然后才是选择用比较高级的词汇。

Furture （futher） more, it is indispensible for the children to shoulder heave burden prematurely if the government provokes a public attention on the development of the youths. For example, in China, because of dramatic pressure on the university entrance examinations, parents endeavor to force their children to take a range of extra-curricular course, which will be a shortcut to enter key universities. As a consequence, (consequently) a student attaining the first place in International Mathematics Olympics said that he wouldn’t take up mathematics again. What a pity. (what a pity过于口语化。) "

Therefore, in order to achieve the optimized outcome and sound development of youths, the government should focus on the university education.
总体来说，反驳的理由还是比较明确的。但是意思表达的不是太好，一起加油
我也是刚接触托福不久，所以对于作文的形式什么的还是不太了解，我觉得先把观点表明，其次句子的意思写明确，这两点是比较重要的（因为我有的时候也是表达不清楚）。改的不好，多多指教啦~

Yvaine198831UID: 2956487

In the lecture, the professor mainly argue against three possible usage of the massive stone buildings discovered New Mexico put forward by Archaeologists, residential, to store food supplies and used as ceremonial centers.
& }: u: S7 K' M3 s% `2 c
, {4 o- m3 X1 q3 q3 N, ]; p1 r
First, the professor points out though it seems like apartment building at Teos on the outside, yet, it doesn't make sense judged by inside. If it is an apartment, there should be a wide range of fire places for daily cooking to accommodate100 people.(family) However, even in the largest building, there is only 10 fire places which is far entail the demand. Therefore, the theory that these architectures are purely residential （for residential purpose更好）doesn't hold.8 L* P,
]9 v2 ~
+ I' A3 E, E  }* Y0 m* H! J
Second, according to the lecture, it is unsupported for the Chacostructures to be food storage facilities. Though the structures are capaciousin size for that purpose, however, there are no maize trees on the floor andmaize containers inside.(原文说的好像是散落的玉米粒，而不是玉米树吧。) Thus, there is not sufficient evidence for the theoryof food storage purpose to stand.7 A8 ]; d6 L0 ~

Third, the lecturer doesn't agree that the houses are taken as ceremonial centers. On the one hand, apart from mound found in the houses,other irrelevant materials were found as well, such as sand, stone etc,(最好不要有简写出现吧。) which seems like disposed building materials.% Z9 p" N8 {+ `" i0 c7 L

To conclude, the professor doesn't think any of the three possible theory hold.

个人觉得表达的很明确，录音里的观点也写的很好。就是有个别细节再注意下。

sun3mayUID: 2574771

改4.4 daily writing!

5 b) R; C% ]( a% ^9 p6 g* w
Personally,I think government should concentrate on the university education for three reasons. First, the university students have already been selected so that thecountry will get a better rewarding. Second, the contribution from the university is far more than that the young children made. Third, it willprevent heave burden from stifling the children’s interest in the cradle.1 w/ N8 O: c2 N, Q! k# S
  A8 [& u, K" V/ @7 w3 |/ O7 Y4 o) `5 w( }
Tobegin with, only the students of talent（这个表达方式好像不是很对，建议改成talented students） in some sense will be admitted into a university. On the one hand, university is a place (which)contains a wide range of geniuses and the probability for the university students to succeed is much higher than the average people. On the other hand, there are various uncertainties to invest in the young children as their intellect varies. Therefore, investing on such students with high potential is bound to reward substantially decent.(这段的观点有自我矛盾的地方，将大学生和小孩对立起来似乎是不合适的，毕竟再聪明的大学生也是从小孩子成长过来的。)
Additionally, as most of the university students have chose their careers and have implicit goals, they tend to spare no effort to advance in their ways without any incentives.However, the young children are completely different. They are just enlightenedand have no idea about their career paths. Compared to the self-motivated andinitiative senior students, these young children are just like aimless flieswith an unknown future. Therefore, it doesn’t seem they will make much contribution.（本段似乎说的是大学生对社会的贡献会远比小孩子要大，暂且承认小孩对社会不容易太大的贡献，但也应该不能否定他们未来可能对社会的贡献吧。这个地方建议注意一下大学生和小孩子之间的联系和区别，不能完全把他们对立成两种不同的人，他们只是人在成长中不同的阶段而已）
Furturemore, it is indispensible for the children to shoulder heave burden prematurely if thegovernment provokes a public attention on the development of the youths. For example, in China, because of dramatic pressure on the university entrance examinations, parents endeavor to force their children to take a range of extra-curricular course, which will be a shortcut to enter key universities. As a consequence, a student attaining the first place in International Mathematics Olympics said that he wouldn’t take up mathematics again. What a pity. （小孩子的学习负担的减轻和政府对大学的支持有直接关系么？如果是间接的建议把其中的逻辑阐释的再清晰一些）
Therefore, inorder to achieve the optimized outcome and sound development of youths, thegovernment should focus on the university education.

建议重新整理一下思路，觉得你的观点不是那么convincing。
个人建议，有什么改的不对的再多讨论哈！

sumessUID: 3008634

4.5 TPO1 integrated writing


In the lecture, the professor argues against the benefits brought by a four-day week which mentioned in the reading materials, increase in profit, decrease in unemployment rate and a better life style.
  To begin with, the professor holds the view that the profit actually would shrink contradicting the point in the article. Because of additional employees, the employers have to pay extra medical welfares, training expenditure, as well as renting lager office space and more office utilities say computers. Thus, taking the increased expenditure into account, the profit declines.
   Additionally, the lecturer claims that the unemployment rate will not fall as well.  In reality, due to the profit decreases by hiring more workers, the employers will force their employee to work overtime so that the workers will have the same workload but in a shorter time. Moreover, the employers will raise their expectations since the working time is shortened and the workers should be more rested and alert, which will lead to layoff.
  Finally, in the professor's viewpoint, the employees won't have more leisure time, because those who work four day week will suffer job instability and less promotion chance. As mentioned before, the employers are reluctant to hire more workers. Therefore, they tend to present some incentives such as promotions to induce employees work overtime.  In an economic downturn, the four-day-week will more likely be laid-off. Therefore, the workers who work four day shift will tolerate more pressure and be subject to work five day week again.
   Thus, four work day per week seems make nonsense.

sumessUID: 3008634

4.5 Independent writing


Currently, an increasing number of people are endeavoring to pursue a materialistic affluence instead of spiritual fulfillment. There is even
a prevalent saying that I prefer to crying in BMW instead of smiling on a bicycle, which inspired widely debating whether people are happier with more
possession. Personally, I cannot agree with the argument that wealthy people will become unhappy.
        There is no denying that a lot of affluent people are unsatisfactory about their current life status. But is it the money itself that make them
unfulfilled? Obiviously not. It is due to their greedy that they concentrate so much on wealth accumulation but neglect their spirits. Therefore, even
with the most possessions, they are unhappy.
        However, it doesn't necessarily mean that people with less possessions own more happiness. They as well have their own worries.
They possess brilliant ideas but no one admires because of their social classes; They have to work day and night to support their families; and they have
to pay much more efforts to make the same achievement as the rich. Are they happy? Probably not. At least the wealthy they accomplish part of their dreams
to be rich, but the average people only have to console their frustrated soul that I at least have much freedom.
        Additionally, most of the wealthy obtain their spiritual opulence by contributing back to the society. With more possessions, it's more than easier
for them to change others' life courses. For example, Bills Gates's devote all his belongings to the African people, which does make a difference to their
life. And whenever there is any calamity, thanks to his reputation attained from his wealth, he can always provoke a multitude of people to donate which is
almost impossible for the normal people. And there affluent people obtain their fruitful life in another course.
        Therefore, people possess are not necessarily unhappy; and people with less belongings are not bound to happier.

Go2011GoUID: 3006241

Currently, an increasing number of people are endeavoring to pursue a materialistic(material)affluence instead of spiritual fulfillment. There is even 3 D* }2 U) Y0 N* G6 A) E8 n' h" d
a prevalent saying that I prefer to crying in BMW instead of smiling on a bicycle, which inspired (invoked) widely debating (debate on) whether people are happier with more 4 X' G7 O: p3 A% r( [' ?: W5 l
possession. Personally, I cannot agree with the argument that wealthy people will become unhappy.你的观点是？
There is no denying that a lot of affluent people are unsatisfied about their current life status. But is it the money itself that make them . O, I+ Q2 i" W3 @
unfulfilled? Obiviously no. It is due to their greed that they concentrate so much on wealth accumulation but neglect their spiritual pursuit. Therefore, even
with the most possessions, they are unhappy. (这一段如果是让步的话，觉得太强了) ( a( _5 d. Y! j  w" [
        However, it doesn't necessarily mean that people with less possessions own more happiness. They as well have their own worries. " f3 W, e- P; n
They possess brilliant ideas but no one admires because of their social classes; They have to work day and night to support their families; and they have to pay much more efforts to make the same achievement as the rich. Are they happy? Probably they aren't. At least the wealthy have accomplished part of their dreams4 q/ u5 v. z3 K9 w6 U6 ~& b as being rich, but the average people only have to use some pretext to console their frustrated soul that I at least have much freedom.; x6 T$ P; r5 E. Z, w
        Additionally, most of the wealthy obtain their spiritual opulence by contributing back to the society. With more possessions, it's more than easier for them to change others' life courses. For example, Bills Gates devotes all his belongings to the African people, which does make a difference to their life. And whenever there is any calamity, thanks to his reputation attained from his wealth, he can always provoke a multitude of people to donate which is/ L2 f8 Z, ~! ~7 j+ L almost impossible for the normal people. And the affluent people obtain their fruitful life in another course.Therefore, people possess much (?) are not necessarily unhappy; and people with less belongings are not bound to happier.
文章的语言和用词都很好，就是没有看懂你的观点。想表达的似乎是幸福与财富无关？呵呵，不够有很多地方值得学习

Yvaine198831UID: 2956487

7# sumess

revised by Yvaine198831

凉言UID: 2996787

改好~

JessieGHUID: 2882063

8# Go2011Go 不是我不想改你的作文~实在是gogo同学所言甚得我心，你的观点实在是很模糊~