写作 by nikiniki333

smilingshirlyUID: 2601249

mine~thx for revising~

nikiniki333UID: 2673802

2.16

laozhanguotoeflUID: 3246339

已改完

nikiniki333UID: 2673802

2.20 综合 TPO11

nikiniki333UID: 2673802

2.20独立

xiesisiminervaUID: 2997765

谢谢你的批改。

猛龙过江UID: 3220220

附件~

nikiniki333UID: 2673802

2.27 综合
TPO16

Frankie0616UID: 2763738

我的听力不太好 总是很多东西 听不到。。。。已经改了

nikiniki333UID: 2673802

对哦。。非常感谢～～

nikiniki333UID: 2673802

TPO17
2.28 综合

echo52888UID: 3260900

不好意思，改晚了！
The passage explains that the number of birds is reducing due to the decline of their habitats used by human and the wide usage of pesticide. The lecturer, on the other hand, mentions that the argument in the reading is groundless.

In the first place, the lecturer argues that urban development provides a better and larger environment that is suitable for some birds to live. As a result, the number of certain birds, such as pigeons, have shown an significant increase. The reading passage, however, holds the opinion that the bird's number presents an uniform decrease because of the increase of human populations ,which causes the destroying of the natural habitats of birds.

In the second place, the lecturer refutes that opinion in the reading that the growing population of human beings leads to the growing agriculture, which will damage bird habitats further and further. She asserts that with the invention of more productive crops, less and less land will be transformed to farmland, and thus bird habitats will not decrease any more in the future.

Finally, according to the reading, the increasingly use of pesticides, resulting from increasing agriculture, will cause the birds' death, since the birds are depending on poisoned insects or water for living. This claim is rejected by the lecturer. She explains that with the development of science, less toxic pesticides will be discovered, and besides, people will apply pest-resistant crops in agriculture, which have no harm to birds. Consequently, the issue about pesticide will be solved.
写得还可以！不过还要加油！

nikiniki333UID: 2673802

TPO19 综合
The passage presents three criticisms about buzzers, who personally advertise products to people they know or meet. The speaker, a buzzer, explains that these criticisms are somewhat misleading.

In the first place, the speaker admits that they are paid by the company, whereas the reason why company hires them as buzzers is that they, as customer of the company first, buy the products and do get a excellent experience, as a result, what the buzzers say are all their real feeling and thinking. The passage, on the other hand, argues that a buzzer is likely to praise the product blindly just for payment.

In the second place, the speaker refutes the statement in the reading that consumers tend to trust a buzzer without any doubt because they do not know that the person is a buzzer. He asserts that consumers will ask a lot of questions about the products that the buzzer is promoting, such as the price, service or even how long the buzzer has been used.

Finally, according to the passage, buzzing will result in an adverse influence on social relationships. While the speaker rejects this opinion, reasoning that buzzing behavior might actually do good to the human relationship. He explains that the buzzer will tell the truth to the consumers, and thus make the consumers enjoy a good experience by using this products, which will deepen the trust between people. In this way, customer tend to become more trustful and more open to people.

nikiniki333UID: 2673802

3.1 独立

saturn2011UID: 3071229

44# nikiniki333