▶ Your Answer :
In modern society, it always has always been a disputable issue whether the obligation of taking care of old people should be onto their sons or daughters. In the past, it was undoubtedly the responsibility of their kids offsprings, and there existed legal penalties for those who didn't fulfill it. However, as our society develops and , the family system power of combination has collapsed, those custom lost its basis.>> 본인의 메인 주장을 써주세요 이 글은 주체가 the old냐 young people이냐 입니다
The proponents of the old system emphasize its moral side. >> 누가 주장한다는 얘긴 서론에서 쓰는거고 본론에선 본인의 의견을 쓰는 것이 맞습니다 They consider it>>?? as a from of compensation for the parents' devotion to their children them, and insist that negligence on it>>?? is an unforgivable, immoral behavior. For example, there are still lots a lot>> lots는 구어체에서나 쓰입니다 of the news about those people who abandoned their parents, and the anger of other people on their behavior. In addition, they>>? suggest various kinds of benefits to live with the old. It is economically desirable in that the living cost can be reduced,>> 콤마 빼주세요 자식과 부모가 같이 사는데 생활비가 줄어드나요? 더 늘어나는게 상식적인 내용이죠 사람이 늘어남에 따라 as well as good for psychological status due to the vivid communication between parents and their kids. Furthermore, the old people are the most suitable people who can replace the children's mother when she has to work outside>>??.
Meanwhile, the opponents argue that it is way too old- >> 대쉬 빼주세요 fashioned and burdensome for the young people who should live without enough money and enough time to serve their parents.>>?? They think of those responsibilities as shared things between amongst young people, society, and the government, not individual obligation. Aside from moral obligation, the truly helpful care for the old can be provided by brand-new facilities which are fully equipped with medical devices and professional service.>> 갑자기 무슨 말인가요?
Considering those two different views, I think that the opponent's opinion is more convincing >> 뭔지 직접 말하셔야 합니다. As just living together cannot provide enough solutions for both the old and the young, the young people and our society should play individual roles to take care of the old people with the best service.
오프토픽이 보이네요
자녀와 부모가 같이 사는 것에 대한 논의에 정부와 사회의 서비스가 나오는 자체가 오프입니다
제 3자가 들어갈 필요와 이유가 없습니다
문장도 이해 안 되는 부분들이 꽤 많습니다
아마 조동사에 대한 뜻이나 사용을 정확히 모른느 듯 싶습니다 should 는 어떤 뜻인지 어떤 목적으로 어떻게 쓰이는지 등에 대해 확실히 공부해보시길 바라고
Task2 가 아닌 Task1 부터 6점 이상 받으시고 Task2 쓰시길 바랍니다
Task Achievement - 5 Coherence and Cohesion - 4 Lexical Resource - 5 Grammatical Range and Accuracy - 4
4.5 예상합니다
|