▶ Your Answer :
In this set of issues, both the
reading passage and the speaker discuss several aspects of whether there are
possible theories about Teotihuacan’s collapse or not. The lecturer argues that
there are not -> no convincing theories about the collapse of Teotihuacan. This
casts doubt the reading passage’s claim that Teotihuacan’s collapse can be explained by several theories. To begin with, in the response to the
reading, the speaker discusses that only small fractions of entire city complex
were burnt. It was not a
big damage to Teotihuacan people. Also, after burnt the city, -> the city was burnt, they still lived in the
city. The evidence is that there were a
lot of arts artifacts and crafts after the fire. <- 이 부분을 맨 앞으로 빼주세요, Artifacts and crafts 를
봐서 ~~~ 주장한다. This contradicts the
reading passage’s claim that Teotihuacan’s people did not
try recover after fire. On top of that, the speaker challenges
<- challenges
what? by
stating that drought was regularly occurred in an ancient Mexico.
So, the lecturer asserts that Teotihuacan people experienced regularly limited
rainfall. <->
문장 연결이 안되요.
Also,
they made irrigation field. Due to irrigation, irrigation which helped to Teotihuacan's living. it could not make sense,
it caused Teotihuacan’s collapse. This refutes the reading passage’s claim that experienced serious drought can lead to the
destruction. Finally, the speaker refutes the
reading by saying that deforestation occurred before Teotihuacan collapsed. This is because, Teotihuacan people were
traded such as woods they needed. It could not lead to collapse <- 무슨말인가요?. This opposes the reading
passage’s claim that too much destroy -> that destroying too much forest resulted in
Teotihuacan collapsed -> collapsing. Writing 0-30 Score
Scale Limited (0-16)
Overall Comment : 어색한 문법 많습니다. 문법 공부 꼭 해주세요. 통합형 에서는 listening points 들 만 나열 하는게 아니라, 유기적으로/논리적으로 연결이 되어야 됩니다. 문장간의 연결에 신경 써주세요. 특히 Body 2/3 렉쳐 부분 다시 정리해주세요! |