这里的烤鸭们似乎很热心，我也厚着脸皮找大家改改作文。。
本帖最后由 qiuxan 于 23-8-2013 19:51 编辑The restoration of old buildings in major cities in the world costs enormous government expenditure. This money should be used in new housing and road development. To what extent do you agree or disagree?
Resorting old buildings is one project that the government spends a considerable number of annual budget on. In this essay, whether this budget should be used in the restoring work or building new houses would be discussed. It is suggested that the money should be used in building something new.
First of all,. Restoring old houses can cost more more money than building new ones. Restoring an old house would require a huge a mount of workers, and a lot of aspects must be considered. For example, workers would think about whether theyshould replace the floor with a new one or fix it. However, building a new house is simply a combination of separating parts of a brand new house, so it needs far fewer workers than restoring old houses.
Also, the citizens would be happier to live in a new house than a old restored one. Old restored houses are more or less havingsome problems, such as bad smelling and bugs. People might not feel comfortable to live in such places. On the other hand, new houses are aways clean and well designed. For that reason, people who live in a new house are most likely feel happier than those who live in old restored ones. Since the may task of government is to make those who have the right to vote, there is no reason why the government do not use the money in new development.
In conclusion, to develop a happier city, and save annual budget, the government should spend the money that is being used in restoring old house indeveloping new buildings.
很羡慕那些能写好多很漂亮的长句的人，被这里研究生课程洗脑到，只能写出这些一板一眼的句子了，请问这样离7还有多远呢？该如何加强呢？ 第一段 or 打成 of了～ 囧 本帖最后由 shyaka 于 24-8-2013 00:55 编辑
离7还很远吧，虽然我只有6。。。。
有不少语法错误，不过最大的问题在于你想写一边倒，但你只提出了两个原因，而且都不怎么给力，比如你举的例子：workers would think about whether theyshould replace the floor with a new one or fix it.这和论证cost more 有啥关系。你要论证修复老房子花的钱多，除了你说的需要工人多以外，可以说修复老房子时需要花更多钱使修复后的部分和老房子本身的材料、风格保持一致。
而且，钱都花去建新房了，老建筑怎么办？注意题目说的是old buildings ，不仅仅是住房，Notre Dame de Paris也是老建筑，难道也不保护了么。。。。 shyaka 发表于 24-8-2013 00:37 static/image/common/back.gif
离7还很远吧，虽然我只有6。。。。
有不少语法错误，不过最大的问题在于你想写一边倒，但你只提出了两个原 ...
谢谢你的提醒！第一个确实逻辑有问题，我该多写句人工费要钱，而恢复旧房子比建房子更多人工，让我想起我有次吃泡面，鬼佬看到我吃泡面说就问为什么，我说一堆作业要做，然后跟他说，周末就能吃好了。他听不懂了。。。过了一会儿他恍然大悟，说：哦！你周末就做完作业了！ 还是中国人思维跳跃性太大，你不指出来，自己真看不出来。
至于第二个嘛，我也觉得是写这个确实勉强了点（随机抽题来练习，这道题反正我写着很不舒服）
能麻烦你随便指出些语法错误么？
qiuxan 发表于 24-8-2013 01:30 static/image/common/back.gif
谢谢你的提醒！第一个确实逻辑有问题，我该多写句人工费要钱，而恢复旧房子比建房子更多人工，让我想起我 ...
我个人感觉写作文论证的逻辑最重要，一定要扣题和有力。我还发现个问题，题目中有说road development，而你压根没提。题目也一定要看清啊。
至于语法错误，你先把你的作文放到word文档里面自动检查一下。还有，On the other hand是要提出相反面的观点的意思，而你在此处之前写的是老房子有问题，后面写的是新房子干净设计好，这两个其实是一个意思。are most likely feel 这个应该也是个语法错误。 第一个单词是不是应该是restoring? Resorting的意思完全不一样。
第二段举例没有直接针对论点。那个however使用错误，可以考虑用用on the contrary, whereas之类。最后一句短短一个分句里出现两个new house不太好。
第三段第二句一般会用一般现在时吧？最后一句来得突兀了点，没有足够铺垫。
如果我是你，我会赞成维护旧建筑，因为理由比较好找，比如历史传承啦，人们对城市的归属感之类的，另外，这也避免了楼上说的，你这个观点还要涉及road development的问题。
随便说说，希望对你有帮助。祝炸鸭成功！
页:
[1]