贴一篇今天的模考issue10,大家有时间就随便看看给个分吧

happymichelleUID: 154082

上午限时写得，差一点没写完。
贴到words上看，拼写错了不少~
麻烦大家看看ts,把握一下大方向就好了，语言的东西估计也没时间纠了，谢谢~
10"Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive, because it is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated."

Whether major cities should received the financial support from the government?  The speaker in the title statement claims so, in that he believes that it is primarily in cities that a nation's cultural traditions are preserved and generated.  While it is true that there are some cities owning complete and well-preserved cultural traditions, I strongly suggest government fund more on rural areas where such kind of financial support is necessary and indispensable for the local cultural as well as for the local artists.

Admittedly, there is no doubt that some cities have long histories and are rich in their cultural heritage, yet such cities have the ability and power to support themselves, for example through attracting business, developing tourism, etc, there are so many ways for these cities survive and boom that they do not need the financial support from government.  A case in point is Beijing, the capital and center of culture as well as politics, who is famous for its historic culture and traditional arts such as Peking Opera.  Nevertheless, Beijing receives little financial support from government, since Beijing could attract tourists all over the world and attract many foreign company to invest here, it does not necessarily accept the financial support, or sometimes, even support the government from the annual income.  In this sense, major cities do not need the financial support from the government.

In addition, it is also true that not all the major cities are well-preserved in traditional culture due to the strong impact of globalization.  As we all known, many cities look quite the same: full of skyscrapers, automobiles, fast food restaurants, and of course the busy people.  As far as I am concerned, I have ever been to Tokyo, and Seoul, except by speaking different language of their citizens, I found no big cultural discrepancy between the two and have good reason to doubt whether the varied cultures preserved well in such big cities, and if such cultural traditions is on the verge of extinction in major cities, how could government preserve and protect such cultural treasures simply by funding and giving financial support to major cities?

In fact, it is just in some rural areas that a nation's culture tradition is well preserved and intact, because the traditional life style and local culture are not, or less, ruined by the process of globalization.  Not only does folk music still widespread, but also many handicraft arts are popular in small towns or rural areas, such as embroidery.  Such local culture and arts are big treasures, without which a country or a nation will lose its characteristics as well as features and cannot be distinguished with other nations.  Suppose the mere cultural difference is eliminated, the separation of a nation or a country makes no sense.  Besides, many folk musicians and handicraft artists in the rural areas, now suffer from the lack of money, if government could not give them financial support in order to encourage them continue their traditional skills, maybe, one day, such culture tradition will disappear from the world.

To sum up, I strongly believe that government should fund more and give support to rural areas, where is most urgent in need of such money.  After all, we are reluctant to see a nation without its own cultural tradition.  Only with more concern to such big treasures--cultural tradition could a nation achieve success in the long run.

gdhdannyUID: 125843

写得很不错的说。

The speaker in the title statement claims so这个title statement觉得有点别扭

语言很好了。考虑一下让步和转折的篇幅分配。

加油！

lovebrianUID: 157127

8错了~~~限时写的~~~
呵呵~~~真的是牛mm哦~

楼上说的有道理~~
让步的部分应该是次要的~~转折的才是主要的~~
这是个问题哦~~

学习语言中……
加油阿！！

happymichelleUID: 154082

多谢楼上的两位，但是我觉得我的body1和2不是在让步阿，是在批驳
只不过body1用admittedly开头，是不是容易让人家误解一直在让步？
但是如果主体部分想用2段来批驳对于city不应该give support~
用1段说应该给与rural areas更多的关注
怎么把结构安排一下，能更好、更明白呢？

疑问~~~~~~？？？

CrackETSUID: 155235

我也觉得是不是让步阿~~
body 1不是说：大城市可以自给自足
body2 说即使一个big city的文化要注定灭亡，投钱也没用
只是可能句首的词语没用好，导致狒狒误解

happymichelleUID: 154082

最初由 CrackETS 发布
[B]我也觉得是不是让步阿~~
body 1不是说：大城市可以自给自足
body2 说即使一个big city的文化要注定灭亡，投钱也没用
只是可能句首的词语没用好，导致狒狒误解 [/B]

是不是作文的评分软件ERATOR，很认这些标志性的词语
以次来平结构和逻辑层次呢？

jianguoUID: 157933

一会学习以下

eveningboatUID: 157918

占个座先，脑子快成浆糊了。快乐米歇尔的文章一定要看的，呵呵。

总算睡清醒了。

文章我总体读了一遍，发现这个论证过程是有些问题。

首先，段首关联词的问题。body1的admittedly就是让步的标志，紧接着body2给个in addition，给人的感觉是接着让步。跟着body3的in fact，感觉这一段是上两段的反面例证，而不是立证。虽然细看会发现并不是，但一个教授批一篇文章也就2-3分钟，不会看那么仔细的。
建议：按照body3——body1——body2的顺序来写，body1中的让步往后挪。
最好立证可以弄出两段，body1body2合并，取消让步部分。不过说的简单，立证写两段……我也不知道怎么写……

天哪，脑子又成浆糊了，刚睡醒啊

happymichelleUID: 154082

大家过奖了
写的时候还是有一点混乱
大家看看这个body1的开头要不干脆不要些让步了，直接就驳斥，怎么样？

song123456UID: 133578

牛人

davidjackyUID: 135962

个人意见，仅供参考：
1）文章很流利，明显语法错误（我认为）body1-attract many foreign company---->companies;;;;最后urgent in need of ---->是不是urgently in need of
2）把Admittedly---->To begin with就可以了，三段论述驳立结合的很好
3）羡慕中。。。。

eveningboatUID: 157918

意见写在占座的位置那里了