- 最后登录
- 2004-5-20
- 在线时间
- 0 小时
- 寄托币
- 12
- 声望
- 0
- 注册时间
- 2004-5-11
- 阅读权限
- 10
- 帖子
- 0
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 6
- UID
- 163961

- 声望
- 0
- 寄托币
- 12
- 注册时间
- 2004-5-11
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 0
|
发表于 2004-5-11 10:50:22
|显示全部楼层
No time in the human history has the issue protecting human needs for
farmland, housing, and industry been,(逗号去掉) so much concerned than
nowadays. To be frank, I think the importance of the human needs as well
as the benefit and advantages(虽然没语法错误,benefit和advantage的单复数最
好一致) it brought through protecting it outweighs more than(去掉more
than) that of saving land for endangered animals. From a personal
perspective, I strongly agree that(this) view due to the reasons given(去
掉given) as follows.
In the first place, enough housing is the basic factor to keep healthy.
Living(加in) a small room, one can not do indoor exercises. When staying
the room for a long time, he will feel tired and maybe get headache
because of the lack of oxygen(没有因果关系,而且这样写有点搞笑). What’s
more, the population increases so quickly that the housing land per
everyone(per person,或者for everyone) will be definitely small(加,变成插入语,不然就有语法错误) if we
don’t protect it.
In the second place, it is the farmland that ensures our personal life,
for example, thousands of hundreds of African people have to endure hunger
because they don’t have much(adequate好些) farmland. Not only does the
farmland produce food(,) vegetable as well as fruits for everyday life,
but also some medicine used to cure diseases(medicine当然是cure disease的
,所以这句话有点多余,如果想赚字数可改成also some indispensable
pharmaceuticals). A case in point is the
Chinese herb medicine(s) that is(is不要) distracted from many herbs
without enough
farmland;(去掉without...) neither can we avoid hunger nor illness.(用
neither前面必须有他的conterpart,但是我找不到)
In summary, it is important to protect human needs(resources) since they
ensure our
health and our basic needs(用词要多样化,而且要准确) Although it means
many endangered animals
extinct contributed to lack of their land, we have no better choice.(这句
话不光有语法问题,而且还有逻辑问题。改成Even if it means to compromise the
deracinating animals,we have no better choice) It is
sad(cruel) but realistic.
the whole passage is full of grammer mistakes, which, im sure, you would
be able to correct by youself if you had time to review, so i can't really concentrate on you logic reasoning. moreover, it would be better if you could use different words each time to express the same meaning. |
|