Kathryn22天备考日志

kathryn慕云UID: 2638683

二战待定，一战上场

kathryn慕云UID: 2638683

自己加油、。。。你们也加油。。。。。

DriftKingUID: 2664045

我坐板凳 慕妞加油

blade134UID: 2328542

支持，我也是11月底考托福，与楼主共勉！

我是chineseladyUID: 2662783

云云加油!

kathryn慕云UID: 2638683

3# DriftKing

DK妞也加油。。。

kathryn慕云UID: 2638683

4# blade134

嗯嗯嗯，加油。。。

kathryn慕云UID: 2638683

5# 我是chineselady

谢谢花妞姐。。。。

kathryn慕云UID: 2638683

记住上午120惨案。。。

kathryn慕云UID: 2638683

作文完成，阅读没完成，听力完成但无比惨案，口语做了作业。。。

睡觉去了

kathryn慕云UID: 2638683

120-2综合写作第一次以不是围观的态度写。。。
望狠批。。。听力太差，所以好多细节都没听出来，只能一顿写了。。。
In the lecture,the speaker argues that Marco polo had traveled to china.However,this is different from the reading passage,which contend that he had never came to china.The lecture by the professor,unquestionably,casts doubt on the reading.

First of all,the speaker raises the issue that the name of place in China had changed.According to her statements that a large places had another name in now-days. On the contrary,the passage rather deviating from the speaker,demonstrates that there were not a Chinese or Mongolian place-names he had picked up.

Morever,the professor advocates the fact that it have no association that  Marco Polo hadn't pointed the tea of Chinese .And she mentions that perhaps the tea was popular sudden of the time and prospered in south of China.Contrary to belief in the lecture,the reading asserts that if Marco Polo had traveled to China,he missed is just impossible.Therefore,this point is contradicted by what the lecture contends.

Finally, the listening part states that  China didn't have the document at that day.To be specific, he didn't use his real name when he worked in the Yangzhou government. However,the reading passage hold the opposite perspective,nothing can present that Marco Polo had been to China.

All in all, the lecture conflicts with the reading passage from the three aspects which are presented above.

STELLA710UID: 2435774

哈哈 同是长沙人啊~~FC SIGRACE呀~~~~我11月22

kathryn慕云UID: 2638683

12# STELLA710


:handshake。。。

melody106UID: 2559573

In the lecture,the speaker argues that Marco polo had traveled to china.However,this is different from the reading passage,which contend that he had never came to china.The lecture by the professor,unquestionably,casts doubt on the reading.& v3 Z" f1 f0 M$ H9 P) N. B7 d

First of all,the speaker raises the issue that the name of place(用复数吧，因为好几个地方呢) in China had changed.According to her statements that a large（a large amount of 表示大量，但是接不可数名词） places had another name in now-days（nowadays）. On the contrary,the passage rather deviating from the speaker,demonstrates that there were not a Chinese or Mongolian place-names he had picked up 我感觉这后一句像是reading在挑战speaker呢，觉得还是先reading的观点再Speaker的观点好些，或者说完reading的观点后再补充一句，the above point raised by the speaker refutes the argument of the reading completely.这类的感觉完整点8 @# q- ]# c  D8 n

Morever,the professor（一直用the speaker 会不会显得前后统一一点呢？） advocates the fact that it have（has） no association that  Marco Polo hadn't pointed the tea of Chinese .And she mentions that perhaps the tea was popular sudden of the time and prospered in south of China. Contrary to belief in the lecture, the reading asserts that if Marco Polo had traveled to China, he missed is just impossible这句语法错误. Therefore,this point is contradicted by what the lecture contends.3 o) ?( {' b' P
2 b5 I8 `' P2 b. D* e* Y+ a( X1 V
Finally, the listening part states that  China didn't have the document at that day. To be specific, he didn't use his real name when he worked in the Yangzhou government. However, the reading passage hold the opposite perspective,nothing can present that Marco Polo had been to China.嗯，点是对的，但是需要注意Speaker的语气，她也只是提出质疑，并没有确切的证据，用假名或者档案丢失都是猜测。

All in all, the lecture conflicts with the reading passage from the three aspects which are presented above.嗯，有结尾挺好的，我之前从没写过结尾。加油！

kathryn慕云UID: 2638683

In the lecture,the professor argues that moon's formation. However,this is different from the reading passage,which contends that there are many differences between the moon and the earth about there formation
The lecture by the professor,unquestionably,casts doubts on the reading.

First of all,the speaker raises the issue that  the earth's impact had disappeared.According to him,4 billion years ago happend a accident,which had marked in the earth,and the earth's surface was so hot
On the contrary,the passage rather deviating from the speaker,Demonstrate that there was nothing in the earth's surface.Therefor,this point is contradicted by what the lecture contends.

Moreover,the professor advocates the fact that the moon has same materials with the earth.As he mentions that it doesn't surprising about the water,and the water would be evaporate.Contrary to the belief in the lecture,the reading asserts that the moon and the earth has nothing in common.The points runs counter to the lecture contends.

Finally, the listening part states that the density of the moon is equal the moon's surface.However, the reading passage holds the opposite perspective,the density of the earth is more higher than the moon.

All in all,the lecture conflicts with the reading passage from the three aspects which are presented.