【09年1月-4月】TOEFL作文互改小组-之【TWE作文】第五次作业.2.1号作业 by acai1118

acai1118UID: 2338482

第一次参加活动，交晚了点，惭愧～～～

In the reading part, it hold a view that four-day working policy had many benefits for companies,countries and employees. But speaker of listening part had a reverse opinion.

First of all, the passage emphasized that employees taking four-day workweek can benefit the economy both of individual companies and employees,because of decreasing cost. However, in lecture, speaker said that companies would spend more, even a lot more because of the policy of four-day workweek. When companies added new workers, they had to provide training for new workers, pay more health and medical benefit, and there is need more office space and more computers as well.all of these would cut the profit of companies. So it is wrong to operate this working policy.

Secondly, passage considered that four-day workweek can create more working oppotunity. In contrast, the speaker deny this view that employers can require employees have a overwork time for them, meanwhile they believe employees can finish their work in four days which originally need five days. In that case, there is no extra working jobs available.

Finally, in passage, writer thought more spare time can promote the quality of eployees and their families. But from speaker's perspective, too much time for employees to rest is a risk of their quality life. Because working for a shorter time, employees will decrease their abilities of working, and the people who work for four days will have much more risk of being fired comparing with those who work for five days.

Amber0926UID: 2555355

In the reading part, it hold a view that four-day working policy had many benefits for companies,countries and employees. But speaker of listening part had a reverse opinion.

First of all, the passage emphasized that employees taking four-day workweek can benefit the economy both of individual companies and employees,because of decreasing cost（of company). However, in lecture, speaker said that companies would spend more, even a lot more（用不可数much more 吧） because of the policy of four-day workweek用条件句吧，没原因关系呀. When companies added（recruit） new workers, they had to provide training for new workers, pay more health and medical benefit, and there is need more office space and more computers as well.all of these would cut the profit of companies. So it is wrong to operate this working policy.

Secondly, passage considered that four-day workweek can create more working oppotunity. In contrast, the speaker deny this view that employers can require employees have a overwork time for them, meanwhile they believe employees can finish their work in four days which originally need five days. In that case, there is no extra working jobs available.（这段我听的不好，感觉好像漏了几点）
Finally, in passage, writer thought more spare time can promote the quality of eployees and their families. But from speaker's perspective, too much time for employees to rest is a risk of their quality life. Because working for a shorter time, employees will decrease their abilities of working, and the people who work for four days will have much more risk of being fired comparing with those who work for five days.最后细节好像是减少升职机会吧，咱们再好好听听，研究下下

ibt9.12UID: 2581152

In the reading part, it(the writer) holds a view that four-day working policy (可数名次不要单独使用，前面要加定冠词the)had many benefits for companies,countries and employees. But speaker of listening part had a reverse opinion.(陈述观点不需要用过去时吧)

First of all, the passage emphasized that employees taking four-day workweek can benefit the economy both of individual companies and employees,because of the decreasing cost. However, in lecture, speaker said that companies would spend more, even a lot more because of the policy of four-day workweek. When companies added new workers, they had to provide training for new workers, pay more health and medical benefit, and there is need for more office space and more computers as well.all of these would cut the profit of companies. So it is wrong to operate this working policy. (我觉得wrong这个词不能随便用，另外operate policy,这个搭配，呃)

Secondly, passage considered that four-day workweek can create more working oppotunities. In contrast, the speaker deny this view that employers can require employees have a overwork time for them(work overtime), meanwhile they believe employees can finish their work in four days which originally need five days. In that case, there is no extra working jobs available.

Finally, in passage, writer thought more spare time can promote the quality of employees and their families. But from speaker's perspective, too much time for employees to rest is a risk of their quality life. Because working for a shorter time, employees will decrease their abilities of working, and the people who work for four days will have much more risk of being fired comparing with those who work for five days.

1.最后一段少要点
2.我觉得全篇是不是该用一般现在时
3.呃，个人觉得，LZ的句子不用写的太常，结构多了之后搭配容易出错，表意还不太清楚~

哈哈，加油加油 Fighting

sunnylingUID: 2499568

In the reading part, it holds a view that four-day working policy had many benefits for companies,countries and employees. But speaker of listening part had a reverse opinion.

First of all, the passage emphasized that employees taking four-day workweek can benefit the economy both of individual companies and employees,because of decreasing cost. However, in lecture, speaker said that companies would spend more, even a lot more (spend a lot more what?)because of the policy of four-day workweek. When companies added new workers, they had to provide training for new workers, pay more health and medical benefit, and there is need (这样并列有点怪，改成offer?)more office space and more computers as well.All of these would cut the profit of companies. So it is wrong to operate this working policy.

Secondly, passage considered that four-day workweek can create more working oppotunity. In contrast, the speaker deny this view that employers can require employees have a overwork time for them, meanwhile they believe employees can finish their work in four days which originally need five days. In that case, there is no extra working jobs available.(少了要点？有提到make up difference的？)

Finally, in the passage, writer thought more spare time can promote the quality of employees and their families. But from speaker's perspective, too much time for employees to rest is a risk for their quality life. Because working for a shorter time, employees will decrease their abilities of working, and the people who work for four days will have much more risk of being fired comparing with those who work for five days.

发现楼主很不喜欢用冠词的说，嘿嘿，写得不错，学习一下。

acai1118UID: 2338482

恩 虚心向大家请教 我下来好好改改 那个陈述观点的事情我也挺纳闷的 我很想用现在时 但是不自觉用了过去时 我现在觉得还是用现在时好