▶ Your Answer :
It is sometimes argued that overseas tourists from overseas should be charged more than local residents to visit important sites remains and monuments. I completely disagree with this idea.
The argument in favour of higher prices for foreign tourists would be that cultural or historical attractions often depend on state subsidies to keep them going, which >> It means that To begin with, the inhabitants population are already paying money to these sites through the taxes system. However, I believe this to be a very short sighted view. Foreign tourists contribute to the economy of the host country with the money they spend on a wide range of goods and services, including food, souvenirs, and accommodation and travel. The governments and inhabitants of every country should be happy to subsidise important tourist sites and encourage people from the rest of the world to visit them to see relics.>>제가 지워드리기 전에도 주장은 이미 세금으로 사람들이 돈을 내고 있다고 했습니다 그게 근시안적인 생각이라고 했구요 근데 갑자기 외국 여행객들의 얘기가 왜 나오는지 모르겠습니다 주민들이 세금으로 돈을 납부하고 있으니 반대하면 그에 대한 주장 근거 예시가 모두 통일되어야 합니다
If travellers realised that they would have to pay more to visit historical and cultural attractions in a particular nation, they will >> 가정법 과거는 현재 사실에 반대입니다 현재 사실에 반대되는 내용이라곤 보이지 않습니다 perhaps decide not to go to that country on holiday. To take the UK as an example, the tourism industry and many related jobs rely on visitors coming to the country to see places like >> such as Windsor Castle or Saint Paul’s Cathedral. These two sites charge the same price regardless of nationality,>> 콤마 빼주세요 and this helps to promote the nation’s cultural heritage>> how??. If overseas foreign tourists stopped coming due to higher prices, there would be a risk of insufficient funding for the maintenance of these important buildings.
In conclusion, I believe that every effort should be made to attract tourists from overseas other countries,>> 주어가 같을 때에 and 앞에 콤마를 씁니다 따라서 빼주세요 and it would be counterproductive >> 한 단어입니다 to make them>> who ? 디테일이 요구됩니다 pay more than local residents.
단락이 바뀔 때마다 대명사로 받던 것들의 개념이 사라진다고 보시면 됩니다
만약 2 단락에서 people인데 3단락에서도 people을 쓴다면 they가 아닌 people 혹은 다른 식으로 표현해서 받아야 합니다
if절은 주장에 대한 설명에서 적합합니다 따라서 본문 2 부분도 틀에서 벗어난 글이긴 합니다
Task Achievement - 5 Coherence and Cohesion - 5 Lexical Resource - 6 Grammatical Range and Accuracy - 6
5.5 예상합니다 |