issue83 [sweetbox 第二次作业] by sara

sara0522UID: 2336981

TOPIC: ISSUE83 - "Government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state, even though these areas are often extremely remote and thus accessible to only a few people."
WORDS: 438          TIME: 00:45:00          DATE: 2007-5-29 下午 02:50:07

The speaker claims that government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state. I disagree with that from a standpoint of public interest.
It is true that keeping those wilderness areas in their natural state is right in some degree. First of all, to explore those areas, especially those extremely remote ones will cost government lots of money and energy .In addition, these wilderness areas may have played some role in balancing the natural environment. For example, the vegetation there may help to hold soil and be good to alleviate the air pollution in near areas.
However, compared with those advantages and disadvantages to preserve these areas in their natural state, there are more advantages to explore them and to make some use of them properly, in the interest people's interest.
To begin with, It will be a huge waste if we leave those wilderness areas alone. The so-called downtown starts from wilderness areas, too. People established roads, departments, apartments, and shopping malls, all of these efforts makes it become what it is today. Government should make use of every publicly owned areas properly and reasonably to better serve our people. For example, government should set a goal to explore these areas and build them into "ecological areas" step by step and connect them with city in 5-10 years' time. This farsighted plan will benefit contemporary people and our generations in many respects. People will have a better place to release themselves during their holidays from heavy workload, from stress, and from the bad transportation condition in the city. Further more, the connection between the city and those areas will create more job opportunities and help to alleviate the serious transportation system in city.
Secondly, although we fight again pollution, we still know that some certain kind of pollution can't be eliminated clearly, such as toxic metal and some polluted water released from some factories ,they will inevitable be bad to people' health in some degree.  Then these factories indeed do some contributions to our economic development: it sooths the problem of unemployment and provide more products for our people. So, it is important to choose a place to locate these "double-edged swords". Areas that are extremely remote and accessible to only a few people is undoubtedly the best choice. Similarly, some huge projects ,such as airplane field, which will create lots of noise, can be carried out in those areas. In that case, they will benefit the people and meanwhile minimize their adverse effects on people's heath and lives.
In sum, properly explore these area will beneficial to people and following generations, government should do that.
这个话题我实在没什么话讲,就先不写费话了,请各位帮我看看现有的观点合不合理吧,谢啦~~~~

jiangyue011UID: 2340595

The speaker claims that government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state. I disagree with that from a standpoint of public interest.

It is true that keeping those wilderness areas in their natural state is right in some degree. First of all, to explore those areas, especially those extremely remote ones will cost government lots of money and energy .In addition, these wilderness areas may have played some role in balancing the natural environment. For example, the vegetation there may help to hold soil and be good to alleviate the air pollution in near areas.

However, compared with those advantages and disadvantages to preserve these areas in their natural state, there are more advantages to explore them and to make some use of them properly, in the interest people's interest.(for the people’s interest?)

To begin with, It (it) will be a huge waste if we leave those wilderness areas alone. The so-called downtown starts from wilderness areas, too. People established roads, departments, apartments, and shopping malls, all of these efforts makes(make) it become what it is today. Government should make use of every publicly owned areas properly and reasonably to better serve our people. For example, government should set a goal to explore these areas and build them into "ecological areas" step by step and connect them with city in 5-10 years' time. This farsighted plan will benefit contemporary people and our generations in many respects.(aspects) People will have a better place to release themselves during their holidays from heavy workload, from stress, and from the bad transportation condition in the city. Further more, (Furthermore) the connection between the city and those areas will create more job opportunities and help to alleviate the serious transportation system in city. (似乎并非所有的城市都有交通问题,我觉得说in some cities好点,似乎觉得这段稍微缺乏点有力的分析,但要我写,也不知道怎么去具体展开,sigh)
Secondly, although we fight again pollution, we still know that some certain kind of pollution can't be eliminated clearly, such as toxic metal and some polluted water released from some factories, they will inevitable (inevitably) be bad to people' health in some degree.  Then (照你所说,这应该是转折了) these factories indeed do some contributions to our economic development: it (they) sooths the problem of unemployment and provide more products for our people. So, it is important to choose a place to locate these "double-edged swords". Areas that are extremely remote and accessible to only a few people is undoubtedly the best choice.(我个人不大喜欢用undoubtedly之类的绝对词,不知道其他人怎么看) Similarly, some huge projects ,such as airplane field, which will create lots of noise, can be carried out in those areas. In that case, they will benefit the people and meanwhile minimize their adverse effects on people's heath and lives. (把有污染的建在远郊, 这是合情合理的例子, 我怎么就没想到呢)

In sum, properly explore these area will beneficial to people and following generations, government should do that. (结尾稍微有点仓促)
楼主不错哦,都限时了, 我不知道我什么时候能限时成功呢. 文章的脉络很清楚, 这是比较好的. 可能由于限时的原因, 稍微单薄了点. 另外,你G报名了吗? 什么时候考作文呀?

bluerbirdUID: 2141732

The speaker claims that government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state. I disagree with that from a standpoint of public interest.（看了下面的得知作者赞成的是explore，not keep觉得应该把基本主张扩充一下）
It is true that keeping those wilderness areas in their natural state is right in some degree. First of all, to explore those areas, especially those extremely remote ones will cost government lots of money and energy .In addition, these wilderness areas may have played some role in balancing the natural environment. For example, the vegetation there may help to hold soil and be good to alleviate the air pollution in near areas.（我觉得逻辑有点乱，应先把in addition后面的部分提前，说明right。然后再指出政府要cost）
However, compared with those advantages and disadvantages to preserve these areas in their natural state, there are more advantages to explore them and to make some use of them properly, in the interest people's interest.
To begin with, It will be a huge waste if we leave those wilderness areas alone. The so-called downtown starts from wilderness areas, too. People established roads, departments, apartments, and shopping malls, all of these efforts makes it become what it is today. Government should make use of every publicly owned areas properly and reasonably to better serve our people. For example, government should set a goal to explore these areas and build them into "ecological areas" step by step and connect them with city in 5-10 years' time. This farsighted plan will benefit contemporary people and our generations in many respects. People will have a better place to release themselves during their holidays from heavy workload, from stress, and from the bad transportation condition in the city. Further more, the connection between the city and those areas will create more job opportunities and help to alleviate the serious transportation system in city.
Secondly, although we fight again pollution, we still know that some certain kind of pollution can't be eliminated clearly,（我觉得thoroughly更好点） such as toxic metal and some polluted water released from some factories ,they will inevitable be bad（harmful^_^） to people' health in some degree.  Then these factories indeed do some contributions to our economic development: it sooths（sooth是adj，你指的是soothe，alleviate或者moderate更好） the problem of unemployment and provide more products for our people. So, it is important to choose a place to locate these "double-edged swords". Areas that are extremely remote and accessible to only a few people is undoubtedly the best choice. Similarly, some huge projects ,such as airplane field, which will create lots of noise, can be carried out in those areas. In that case, they will benefit the people and meanwhile minimize their adverse effects on people's heath and lives.(觉得airplan field的例子不错)
In sum, properly explore these area will beneficial to people and following generations, government should do that.
楼主可以限制时间写，真的早我好多步。我也觉得稍显空洞，加油吧！

zoe797970UID: 2249886

The speaker claims that government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state. I disagree with that from a standpoint of public interest.
It is true that keeping those wilderness areas in their natural state is right in some degree. First of all, to explore those areas, especially those extremely remote ones will cost government lots of money and energy .In addition, these wilderness areas may have played some role in balancing the natural environment. For example, the vegetation there may help to hold soil and be good to alleviate the air pollution in near areas.（例子很好！）
However, compared with those advantages and disadvantages to preserve these areas in their natural state, there are more advantages to explore them and to make some use of them properly, in the interest people's interest.（这一小句有点不太清楚）
To begin with, It（it） will be a huge waste if we leave those wilderness areas alone. The so-called downtown starts from wilderness areas, too. People established roads, departments, apartments, and shopping malls, all of these efforts makes it become what it is today. Government should make (full) use of every publicly owned areas properly and reasonably to better serve our people. For example, government should set a goal to explore these areas and build them into "ecological areas" step by step and connect them with city in 5-10 years' time. This farsighted plan will benefit contemporary people and our generations in many respects(貌似应该是aspects). People will have a better place to release themselves during their holidays from heavy workload, from stress, and from the bad transportation condition in the city. Further more, the connection between the city and those areas will create more job opportunities and help to alleviate the serious transportation system in city.
Secondly, although we fight again(against)  pollution, we still know that some certain kind of pollution can't be eliminated clearly, such as toxic metal (建议此处用heavy metal) and some polluted water released from some factories ,they will inevitable be bad to people'(people’s) health in some degree(觉得应该是to some degree).  Then these factories indeed do some contributions to our economic development: it sooths the problem of unemployment and provide (provides) more products for our people. So, it is important to choose a place to locate these "double-edged swords". Areas that are extremely remote and accessible to only a few people is undoubtedly the best choice(建议这句话改下，明确下句子主干). Similarly, some huge projects , such as airplane field, which will create lots of noise, can be carried out in those areas. In that case, they will benefit the people and meanwhile minimize their adverse effects on people's heath and lives.（很不错的example）
In sum, properly explore these area will beneficial to people and following generations, government should do that.(建议结尾再充实一下)

Jack_JiUID: 2340109

The speaker claims that government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state. I disagree with that from a standpoint of public interest.(开头很简洁,我喜欢)
It is true that keeping those wilderness areas in their natural state is right in some degree. First of all, to explore those areas, especially those extremely remote ones will cost government lots of money and energy .In addition, these(those) wilderness areas may have played some role in balancing the natural environment. For example, the vegetation there may help to hold soil and be good to alleviate the air pollution in near areas.
1.欲抑先扬,先阐明保留那些地区的好处
However, compared with those advantages and disadvantages to preserve these areas in their natural state, there are more advantages to explore them and to make some use of them properly, in the interest people's interest.(in terms of people's interest)
2.以利弊权衡作为过度
To begin with, It will be a huge waste if we leave those wilderness areas alone. The so-called downtown starts from wilderness areas, too.(删) People established roads, departments, apartments, and shopping malls, all of these efforts makes it become what it is today(all of these efforts have transformed these areas from wild to flurishing today). Government should make use of every publicly owned areas properly and reasonably to better serve our people. For example, government should set a goal to explore these areas and build them into "ecological areas" step by step and connect them with city in 5-10 years' time. This farsighted plan will benefit contemporary people and our generations in many respects. People will have a better place to release themselves during their holidays from heavy workload, from stress, and from the bad transportation condition in the city. Further more, the connection between the city and those areas will create more job opportunities and help to alleviate the serious transportation system in city.
Secondly, although we fight again pollution, we still know that some certain kind of pollution can't be eliminated clearly, such as toxic metal and some polluted water released from some factories ,they will inevitable be bad to people' health in some degree.  Then these factories indeed do some contributions to our economic development: it sooths(soothing) the problem of unemployment and provide more products for our people. So, it is important to choose a place to locate these "double-edged swords". Areas that are extremely remote and accessible to only a few people is undoubtedly the best choice. (这地方的观点不错)Similarly, some huge projects ,such as airplane field, which will create lots of noise, can be carried out in those areas. In that case, they will benefit the people and meanwhile minimize their adverse effects on people's heath and lives.
In sum, properly explore these area will beneficial to people and following generations, government should do that.(结尾稍微有点草率)