▶ Your Answer :
The lecturer forms argument that the government should not keep to offer offering agriculture subsidies. In stark contrast, the reading passage claims that it is necessary for government to provide the subsidies to farmers. First of all, the lecturer asserts that the disbursements do not stabilize the supply of food. The speaker says that it do does not cause overall increase of in food production. For example, those who received most amounts of subsidiaries from US governments in 5 years are people who produce not crops, but bio-fuel. This contradicts the reading passage’s claim that it helps farmers to raise additional crops to compensate for any geographic losses, resulting in a steady, enough supply of food. Furthermore, the lecturer maintains that it do does not decrease the price of food. The speaker argues that it will increase specific nutrition types of crops. Farmer will be likely to focus on the crops that in which the subsidiaries are offered, such as corn and wheat. So, some crops, which when the subsidiaries are not provided, will cause increased prices of food. This counters the reading passage’s assertion that the assistance for farmer can lower the price of food. The final point made by the lecturer is that the assistance do not trigger economic prosperity in rural communit community. The speaker argues that when farmers have to increase the amount of land under culitvation cultivation, they will not hire new farmers, but new equipments. equipment. This refutes the reading passage whih which states that increase of land under cultivation will bring about reduced poverty with rising job opportunity.
Fair: 17~23 점수: 23 일단 문법적인 오류들이 많습니다. 제가 첨삭한 것을 보시고 확인해 주시길 바랍니다. 또한 통합형 에세이에서는 리딩과 리스닝을 얼마나 적절하게 비교하였나에 대해서 점수가 매겨지는데 지금 이 에세이는 균형있게 비교하지 않는 거 같습니다. 한 문장으로 리딩을 정리하는 것 보다는 리스닝을 좀 더 반박할 수 잇는 문장들을 더 서술하시는 것을 추천합니다. 이러한 부분 이외에는 문제가 없어보입니다. 수고많으셨습니다. |