求ROMANUS大大修改作文！！

皮哥大脚UID：3399152

ROMANUS大大修改作文专用贴

行者天下UID：2716370

发错了。。。

mpromanusUID：2565872

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The most important problem that affects the society today will be solved during my life time. Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.

    Looking through the window from my room, there was a broad sky with blue tints (If you say 'a broad sky with blue tints', it actually means the sky is NOT blue as a whole. Because if you mean the sky is blue as a whole, you'd just say 'a blue sky'. 'a sky with blue tints' is more likely to mean the sky is colored something other than blue, but the color is bluish (e.g. purple, indigo), or is only blue in certain spots. And by the way, the kind of blue that is characteristic of a clear summer sky is called 'azure'.), however, it has been replaced by an ever-grey one now by every kind of pollution, resulting in an extreme panic in the society.
    To some extent, I don’t think it is possible to get the pollution problem solved during my life time due to the trends of excessive development. Every country is ‘doing its best’ to add more grey to the sky for the time being (I'm sure if your examiner happens to be a patriotic environmentalist he won't be too happy about this..my point is that such a sweeping generalization on such a sensitive topic is not necessary and more often too evocative. 'Many countries are..' will get your point across equally well without the danger of being too absolute.). They are looking forward to attain (You 'attain' a state, but 'obtain' a possession of physical entities.) the majority of resources from the nature regardless of the pain and harm it is suffering from.(I understand what you're trying to say but the expression is rather awkward.) To run more vehicles, we dig increasingly deeper into the ground with sophisticated equipments; to lighten more buildings, we build larger dams to cut the natural flow of water；to make more convenience, we cut down a greater number of trees which take in co2 and release oxygen (I don't see why cutting down trees would make 'more convenience'. What 'convenience' is being made here, anyway?). What we have done all lead to a severe consequence------pollution (You..seem to confuse 'pollution' with 'overexploitation (of natural resources)'..Let me see if I can put this straight for you: you can be a very responsible farmer who never overfarms your land, never burns down trees nor uses machines, but you can still pollute the river nearby your farm by letting untreated manure into it. Pollution is just not the same as overexploitation of resources.), which may bring the death of earth and force us human beings to look for another planet for habitats.
    But, in a good way , more attention is paid to the ever-intense issue. It might be possible to resolve the problem if I can live to 80. Developed countries, together with the developing countries, are seeking solutions to reverse the outcome. Every year, conventions are held to discuss about air pollution and land drain. When different countries come to a consensus, the laws will be established to improve the current situation. At the same time, international corporations will create advanced machines to meet the demands of the governments, which will boost the income and maybe as well as the pollution (I'm completely confused by this sentence. I thought you were talking about ways to reduce pollution..and here you 'boost' it again?).
   As for me, the problem being solved is my best wish. But whether it will be solved during my lifetime or not depends on the authority and the awareness of every being (So your pet goldfish is supposed to be aware of the pollution, too..). On one hand, the pollution seems to boost our economy temporarily (This is a complete non sequitur. Pollution does not cause economy to develop. Rather it is a by-product of economy development..), while, on the other hand, it brings about a terrible environment ,which composes of the smoky air, dirty water, unfresh food ('unfresh' is not a word..) and fatal bacteria. If the governments enact the laws and rules more effectively, every problem will not be a problem (Now here is another over-generalizing statement that makes little sense..you were only talking about pollution, and suddenly 'every problem' is solved..).

总结：

好吧你的文写得很有诗意很有激情但是首先语句的表意不清，嗯。。第二你上来就直接开始讲污染问题但是问题问的是影响当今社会的最重要的问题，你都没有justify为什么你觉得污染是这个最重要的问题就开始讲污染，更何况从你的描述看来我觉得你其实不明白到底什么样的事情算‘污染’，因为大部分的描述是在讲自然资源过度开发 = =。。不过这还不是最致命的，最大的问题是我全篇读完也不知道你的文章架构到底是什么，主要观点是什么？支持论点是什么？最后一段提了一句说这个问题能否在我有生之年解决要上靠领导下靠群众，好吧，但是你其余的论述跟这句话的关系是什么？你前面说了那么多污染有多严重不过现在世界各国在想办法解决什么的，这些是为了要引出最后的论点？它们如何能说明你最后的论点是合理的？完全看不出来。。说白了就是你写的根本不是篇议论文而更像是篇命题散文。。建议先去找本作文书好好研究下议论性文章的基本架构。

皮哥大脚UID：3399152

mpromanus 发表于 2012-12-3 05:58
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? The most important problem that affects the s ...

多谢R大的批评啊！ 我也发现了我自己这个缺点 而且总是改不过来 在接下来的写作当中我会加倍注意的！