Money for postgraduate research is limited, therefore, some people think financial support from governments should be only provided for scientific research rather than for less useful subjects. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion?
Nowadays, some people have been arguing maintain that scientific research should be given financially supported much more than less important subjects because of limited money funding. In this essay, I am going to explore why I disagree with this view I argue administrations should invest their fiscal budget on relatively unuseful graduate ones as well.
First of all, a large number of colleges would have a difficulty in attracting new students for majors unrelated to scientific research >>무슨 말이죠? 많은 수의 대학들이 과학 연구와 관련없는 전공을 위해 학생을 이끄는 데에 어려움을 가질 수 있다 ?. This is mainly because,>> 콤마 빼주세요 students are likely to choose a major with which receives abundant the governmental finance monetary supports from the government. For example, >> 예시가 나오는 경우는 부사를 이렇게 써서 확실히 표현해 주세요 if less significant subjects, such as sociology or art, cannot >> 한 단어입니다 receive adequate funding, these kinds of curriculums will be faded away. Therefore, only few majors contributing to scientific research would be left in colleges that students will lose a chance of what field they seriously want seriously to study.>> 자금이 한정되어 있어서 과학 연구와 덜 중요한 과목의 재정적 지원을 말하는데 학생들을 이끄는 것과 무슨 상관이 있나요? 이 주장은 단순히 재정 지원에 대한 주장이고 자금이 한정됐다는 조건이 주어진 이 글에선 과학이 나라의 발전을 더 도모한다 이런 식으로 작성 되는게 맞습니다
In addition, students doing research in science would be fall into idleness. The chief reason is that postgraduates studying science do not need to try anymore to receive funding of the government, therefore, their outcome would be hard to be achieved enough. >> therefore는 부사라 접속사처럼 두 문장을 이어줄 수 없습니다 For example, since most students have to submit their reports related to their research, which consists of a number of reasons to be supported with money, they have a real passion and desire for their studies why they should be funded. Additionally, nation's competitiveness would be disappeared >> disappear는 자동사입니다 수동태 불가능합니다 and it would suffer from an enormous loss because there is no reason for students having scientific major to study hard>> 국가의 경쟁은 사라질 것이고 과학 전공의 학생들이 열심히 공부할 이유가 없기 때문에 그것은 큰 손실로부터 고통받을 것이다 무슨 말인지 모르겠네요. Consequently, if the governmental funding were given to the only one filed field, colleges and countries would have serious damages.>> 현재 question 의 중점을 파악 못하신 듯 싶습니다 학생들이 펀딩을 받아서 나태해질거란게 의견인데 그건 이미 펀딩이 확정된 상태에서 나올만한 의견입니다 주제가 과학 연구에 무조건 펀딩해야 한다/ 무조건적인 펀딩은 하지 말아야 한다의 주제에서 나올 의견입니다 언뜻 비슷해보이지만 분명히 다른 말입니다
In conclusion, it is the most important that balanced thebudget the government's balanced budget should be provided on every research fields >> every 단수명사입니다.
각 문단 첫 줄은 한 칸 들여쓰기 해주세요 논리나 문법에서 너무 약한 모습이 보입니다 논리는 모두 토픽과 빗나갔구요 우선 문법 어휘 공부하신 후 Task1 써주세요 한글로 써서 영어로 옮겨적는 연습 해보시길 바라구요
Task Achievement - 5
Coherence and Cohesion - 4
Lexical Resource - 6
Grammatical Range and Accuracy -4
5.0 예상합니다