第二波来袭-剑8第三篇作文求批（自认为进步很大）

pawehu

自上一篇作文（https://www.freeoz.org/ibbs/thread-1082121-1-2.html）经细心网友批改后，吸取教训，加上本题比较对胃口，自认为进步很大，现再次求批，谢谢。

题目：
Increasing the price of petrol is the best way to solve growing traffic and pollution problems.
To what extent do you agree or disagree?
What other measures do you think might be effective?


正文：
Traffic congestion and air pollution are some of problems that emerging from urbanization. People are involved in the heated debate over whether rising petrol price can address above problems. From my point of view, there are other measures far more effective than increasing petrol price to deal with relevant problems.

It is understandable that economic incentives are easily and firstly adopted method to tackle traffic and pollution problems, especially in big cities. Since cars become necessities to convey residence between different locations, such as schools, offices, supermarkets, and so forth, simply rising petrol price would not add considerable burden for common families. The top priority, however, is the convenience of transportation, rather than petrol price, which occupy a relectively small amount of daily spendings. For this reason, the effectiveness of increasing petrol price is questionable.

It should be worth mentioning that some other ways of eliminating traffic congestion and mitigating air pollution are available. The foremost measurement is increasing government investments in public transportation, such as trains, trams, buses. With the productive public transportation network, people are more likely to reduce the use of private cars, thereby controlling the main source of air pollution in central areas. At the same time, the government should encourage people to adopt home office and mobile working, thus minimum unnecessary commuting. Also, scientists should make an effort to reduce car's fuel consumption and promote this technology to the market. If eco-friendly vechcles are available at a affordable price, it is conceivable that people will show a preference to purchase them.

In summary, boosting petrol price is an option among the solutions toward addressing traffic and pollution dilemma, but it is not the most effective way. Other measures include introducing public transportation, developing fuel-efficient cars and change people's life patterns.

pawehu

架构：
一、开头段。
二、提高汽油价格的作用存在疑问。
三、还有其他手段更有效：1、引入公共交通，2、移动办公，3、开发节能汽车
四、总结段。

v26v26oo

我觉得这篇作文应该是在6-6.5分左右，有以下几点原因：
1、用词准确性有待提高，很多次LZ是从中文翻译过来的，不natural。其实用词贵在准确，不在乎大词什么的。用了个大词，但是用错了，反而会扣分。
2、语法小错误太多。其实雅思作文不在语法有多复杂，而在于少犯错。一个从句套从句掩盖不了主谓不一致等基础错误。
3、段落的扩展不够紧密。没有紧密围绕中心句写，CC的分不高

homeboxoffice

我还没开始大作文的学习，整体结构和逻辑就不评论了，其他的班门弄斧一下。

Traffic congestion and air pollution are some (two) of (the) problems that emerging (grammar) from urbanization. People are involved in the heated debate over whether rising petrol price can address above problems. From my point of view, there are other measures far more effective than increasing petrol price to deal with relevant problems. (I prefer adding the before above and relevant, probably, here such is better than relevant)

It is understandable that economic incentives are easily and firstly adopted method(s) to tackle traffic and pollution problems, especially in big cities. Since cars become necessities to convey residence (residents) between different locations, such as schools, offices, supermarkets, and so forth (such as means etc, repeated here), simply rising petrol price would not add (not sure whether add is fine, preferably increase) considerable burden for common families (这里有问题？不会增加负担？是不是想说由于汽车是必需品，所以加价会增加普通家庭的负担？那后面还要说一句，resulting in less usage of private cars). The top priority, however, is the convenience of transportation, rather than (the increase of) petrol price (modified: the top priority is convenient transportation, rather than increasing petrol price, FYI), which occupy (grammar, preferably account for) a relectively (misspelling) small amount (not sure whether amount is OK, proportion is suitable) of daily spendings (this probably is not right). For this reason, the effectiveness of increasing petrol price is questionable.

It should be worth mentioning that some other ways of eliminating (don't use such word which makes a 100% result, use relieve or others) traffic congestion and mitigating air pollution are available. The foremost measurement (measure) is increasing government investments in (on) public transportation, such as trains, trams, (and) buses. With the productive public transportation network, people are more likely to reduce the use of private cars, thereby controlling the main source of air pollution in central areas. At the same time, the government should encourage people to adopt home office and mobile working, thus minimum (minimizing) unnecessary commuting. Also, scientists should make an effort to reduce car's fuel consumption (and emission) and promote this technology to the market (the latter is not the responsibility of scientists alone, and the former is a just a proposal, so cannot be promoted until it appears). If eco-friendly vechcles (misspelling) are available at a (grammar) affordable price, it is conceivable that people will show a preference to purchase (delete purchase) them.

In summary, boosting petrol price is an option among the solutions toward addressing traffic and pollution dilemma (something probably went wrong here), but it is not the most effective way. Other measures include introducing (not introduce, should be improve, etc.) public transportation, developing fuel-efficient cars and change (changing) people's life patterns.

wisezmz

这篇的TR比上一篇好多了。

styx1009

攒人品开始……


TR 6分，因为第一句这种最显眼的话就让人觉得审题没认真，题目中没说是traffic congestion带来了问题，而是growing traffic背后的一系列可能性带来了污染问题。如果说成Traffic-related problems会好些。（本人实战经验，不论你后面多扣题，你大句子没写准就特惨）

CC 逻辑和转折词用的地方有问题。第二段尤其混乱，详解见下面文章。5分

词汇难度给7分，有几个我还不太确定意思和用法，还查了词典。。但是。。。看下面这条

语法和用词的准确度来看，我觉得非常不够，全篇下来语法和用词的小错误非常多，楼上的朋友们都改出来了。就不多改了。反正好几个词我都查字典了……如果简单的词没有到达运用自如的程度，那大词会给人感觉是硬背了用上去的。6分

我不知道自己在放松状态和可以随便查词典的状态下的写作能力是几分，但我能肯定是至少按照7分的标准来改的。
所以总分给6分左右

Traffic congestion and air pollution are some of problems that emerging（如果是我我会用完成时，that have emerged，但我其实也不会用emerge from。。。直接result from挺好的，因为我无法把握emerge from这个词组的用法，我基本上没见过。。可能鄙人的知识面比较窄） from urbanization. People are involved in the heated debate over whether rising petrol price can address above problems. From my point of view（要是能做到完全不用这一系列的短语就好了。。）, there are other measures far more effective than increasing petrol price to deal with relevant problems.
可以换些说法甚至简化语言，不要重复说那么多problems。。


第二段CC详解一下：
It is understandable that economic incentives are easily and firstly 读者有点别扭，但又不能说这错了。。纯纯的语感。adopted method to tackle traffic and pollution problems, especially in big cities.
首句没有大问题

这里才应该用转折词however，因为跟你第一句话是相反的意思！
Since cars become necessities to convey residence between different locations, such as schools, offices, supermarkets（such as 后面的东西非常多余） , and so forth, simply rising petrol price would not add considerable burden for common families.（这句话完全没有逻辑性。。。车是传输我们的必需品，提高油价就没有经济负担了吗？应该是油费支出只是生活开销的小部分，也就是你后面那句要说的东西。）

The top priority, however,此处不用however吧。。这不是跟你前面一句话是一个意思么。。此处应该用“certainly”等词，is the convenience of transportation, rather than petrol price,这里which前面的逗号不该用，没有必要用非限制性状语从句，而你要限制的内容就是petrol price。还有就是不准确，不是八九块的油价本身是生活支出的小部分，而是“油费”。建议把句子改准确些。 which occupy a relectively（relatively） small amount of daily spendings. For this reason, the effectiveness of increasing petrol price is questionable.

上面那两句的逻辑完全是混起来的
你的原文是：“经济动机来解决也是可以理解的，尤其在大城市。由于车成为我们的必需品运送我们去很多地方，所以提油价也不会给普通家庭带来相当大的负担。但是首要前提是方便与否，而不是油价，因为油价只占支出的一小部分。所以提高价格不是一个有效的措施。”

你读出前后矛盾逻辑不通了么亲？改改呢。。
“经济动机来解决也是可以理解的，尤其在大城市。但是，由于车成为我们的必需品运送我们去很多地方，而且首要前提是方便与否，而不是油价，因为油价只占支出的一小部分，于是提油价也不会给普通家庭带来相当大的负担。所以提高价格不是一个有效的措施。”


It should be worth mentioning that some other ways of eliminating traffic congestion and mitigating air pollution are available. The foremost measurement is （is to increase）increasing government investments in public transportation, such as trains, trams, buses. With the productive public transportation network, people are more likely to reduce the use of private cars, thereby controlling the main source of air pollution in central areas. At the same time, the government should encourage people to adopt home office and mobile working, thus minimum unnecessary commuting. Also, scientists should make an effort to reduce car's fuel consumption and promote this technology to the market. If eco-friendly vechcles are available at a affordable price, it is conceivable that people will show a preference to purchase them.
政府应该多投资在公共交通上。我觉得这个topic sentence不够准确。政府多投资应该是topic sentence之后的建议。因为多投资公共交通和交通量下降然后相关的污染减少没有直接关系。可以更准确的一步到位，把topic sentence写为鼓励公共交通或限制私家车从而减少汽车的数量（其实你自己拟出来的结构，也是要鼓励公共交通的意思，只是写出来变了样）。然后就写这就需要政府的支持，多投资建设公共交通，让私家车主们觉得很方便，于是他们愿意放弃开车而加入公共交通。
不知道这个point你能不能理解？ topic sentence 是最直接最直接陈述你的分论点，从而正面支持大论点。要简洁明了，直接了当！.


In summary, boosting petrol price is an option among the solutions toward addressing traffic and pollution dilemma, but it is not the most effective way. Other measures includeintroducing（用词简直太不准确了，introducing的意思是引进新的东西。。。怎么都应该用encourage公共交通的使用吧。。。） public transportation, developing fuel-efficient cars and change people's life patterns（working patterns不是更准确么亲）.


anyway！祝你成功！
我继续找工作了。。。

asxdcfv

有几点不理解,1. 为什么不分点阐述, 2. 为什么写的那么复杂的句子和词汇. 我看的好费劲啊....不过我就是6分模板水平...

cherub

楼主知道用模板的奇效么？就是让任何一个懂得英语的人都不想把这篇文章看第二遍，无论内容好坏。所有用了模板的作文都有这种效果。
我觉得写一篇作文主要是让考官看着舒服不反感，这是主观判断的一个重要依据。反正我作文没写完也没用模板就得了6分，无大词无难句，连结尾都没有。让我这种水人来评判我也没法评判。

pawehu

styx1009 发表于 21-8-2013 18:05

                               
登录/注册后可看大图

攒人品开始……

谢谢耐心把我的文章看完了，逻辑思路上修改得很到位，祝早日找到心仪工作。

yifanw

我觉得写得不错啊。这种精神也值得我学习。