- 最后登录
- 2021-2-22
- 在线时间
- 4673 小时
- 寄托币
- 12296
- 声望
- 762
- 注册时间
- 2008-10-30
- 阅读权限
- 50
- 帖子
- 907
- 精华
- 4
- 积分
- 6161
- UID
- 2565872
 
- 声望
- 762
- 寄托币
- 12296
- 注册时间
- 2008-10-30
- 精华
- 4
- 帖子
- 907
|
cdelee 发表于 2012-12-19 12:54 
12.19
Drivers should pay a fee to be allowed to drive on the city streets during the time when ther ...
Drivers should pay a fee to be allowed to drive on the city streets during the time when there is the greatest amount of traffic. Agree or not?
There are some debates about whether drivers should pay a fee to get the permission of driving in the city (1. 'in' the city but 'on' the city streets. You can't take just the 'on the city' bit out of 'on the city streets'; 2. the question is not about whether they should be allowed to drive 'in the city' at all. It's about whether they should be allowed to drive in the city WHEN the traffic is the heaviest, i.e. during rush/peak hours.). Because ('because' heads a subordinate clause, which means any clause that starts with 'because' cannot stand on its own as one single sentence. You need to either merge this 'because' clause with the previous sentence, or say something like 'Because.., blah blah'.) the decrease in numbers of cars in the city could ease the tension of the traffic. In my opinion, I am agreed (You can't 'be agreed' with things. You can only 'be in agreement' with something. To 'be agreed' is like 被同意 in Chinese: you 'sort of' know what it means, and it has a certain contextual meaning that is almost idiomatic, but it's not, in theory, a completely grammatical phrase.) with this statement for two main reasons.
First, a/the payment could destroy ('destroy' is usually used in a malicious context, which doesn't really make sense here. Consider 'remove'.) the desire of using cars. If people could choose either (If you say 'both', it means 'both' – as in, the two must be used at the same time.) other vehicles and their cars at the same time, they would tend to use other vehicles because they don't want to pay more money to get to the same place even though using other vehicles may be more time-consuming than using the cars. If people have alternative vehicles, the payment could help with forcing people to give up cars. For example, when Beijing held its Olympic Games in 2008, the (local) government of Beijing Government had been exerted a regulation during the Olympic Games (Why would you want to repeat 'the Olympic Games'?). The regulation was that some drivers were forbidden to drive their cars in the city on specific days. If the drivers didn't follow the regulation, they would probably be caught by the police and paid a big deal of money as a penalty (A 'penalty' is paid when you do something illegal or 'wrong', but the money being paid in question is a 'fee', to get an access to a privilege over other non-paying people, rather than to serve as punishment. The difference between 费用 and 罚款 is subtle and often equated especially in Chinese practice, but I'd suggest you stay with the word 'fee'.). This regulation really worked magic since the number of traffic accidents and the amount of traffic both seriously decreased during the Olympics Games (The way you wrote the 'since' clause is extremely Chinese-like, to the extent that I can see the Chinese equivalent in my head word-by-word as I was reading the English version. And in this particular case, such a direct translation results in a subjectless English sentence.).
Second, a/the payment sets a new standard of driving in the city. Some people could pay this fee for a short period, but they may not afford to pay in the long run (Although there seems to be a trend to use 'for' instead of 'in' but the proper phrase itself is 'in the long run' as a whole.). A payment selects people who really need to utilize cars. Take people in China as an example. In most of the cities, people have to pay for driving on the city high ways. The payment is not a scary amount but people still have to sacrifice their money to get to use the high ways which belongs to the country. What Chinese people do is they often use the fewest cars to carry the most passengers, which could significantly minimize the budget of using national property, though some experts are worried about the safety problem (1. if you say 'THE safety problem', then it means a specific problem in safety, e.g. cars not properly maintained, rather than 'the generic, abstract idea that encompasses all problems on safety'; 2. if you don't intend to discuss 'the safety problem', which is not relevant to the question anyway, don't mention it at all. Mentioning an issue without a good reason or a good discussion is the best way to lose your coherence because it gives the impression that you write 'randomly'.). But what we can directly see is because of the strategy of how Chinese people minimize the payment, leads to fewer cars running on the high ways. So it is of great help to reduce the amount of traffic. (Again, the original sentence doesn't have a proper subject. As said before, 'because (of)' here leads a subordinate clause: the whole bit with 'because of' is a clause, and it cannot be a subject. The 'leads' bit therefore doesn't have a subject. If you're not sure about clauses and sentences, please do revise.)
To sum up, I wish more cities would try to use payment as a regulation method to control the numbers of the cars on the city streets.
总结:
请特别注意复杂句的句法。。另外题目问的不仅仅是在城里开车的事情,是在交通最繁忙的时段在城里开车的事情,于是你第一个例子还可以说奥运会属于交通繁忙的时段吧,但第二个论点就完全不靠题了。。请记住你讨论的话题是一句完整的句子,而不是一两个关键词。
|
|