▶ Your Answer :
(The main topic firstly here) The lecturer contradicts the three
possible causes that suggested in reading
passage suggests as the reasons for City Angkor’s demise; plague, water system, and the
rise of maritime trade. (Separate both opinions) First of all, the lecturer argues that the Black Death
unlikely affected the population in Angkor because the city was located far
inland. (Which city?) To be specific, since the disease was spread from China through Chinese shipments for trades and therefore, the plague must have infected should have affected coastal cities at first, not directly invading inland
cities such as Angkor. This argument counters the reading passage that
introduces the Black Death as one of the causes for the collapse of Angkor. Secondly, the speaker rebuts the reading passage’s assertion that the failed water
system should be also blamed to on the
collapse of Angkor. The lecturer mentions that only 50% of the Angkor
population depended on the irrigation system to get water and there should have
been other water supplies that Angkor people relied on. (Show the relevant result of it) Finally, the lecturer again disagrees with the reading passage’s assertion that the rise of the maritime trade brought
about the demise of Angkor’s economy. According to the
lecture, since Angkor traded only agricultural products, but on the
contrary, in 15th century the popular items for the maritime trade were luxury
goods. Therefore, the rise of the maritime trades hardly affected the trade of
agricultural items that Angkor mainly depended on.
채점기준표
|
Grammar
|
Contents
|
Example
|
Coherence
|
점수
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
2
|
Score
|
Limited 15-18
|
인트로에서는 main topic 인 “the causes for the collapse of Angkor”를 가장 먼저 밝혀주셔야 합니다. 또한 각각의 의견은 분리하여 어떤 방향으로 claim 하는지 briefly하게 설명해주세요. 두번째는 그에 따른 결과를 설명하여 주셔야 하며, 세번째는 luxury good과 agricultural product 를 비교,대조하며 why did the
city collapse 하였는지 에 대한 근거를 보여주셔야 합니다.
|
|