▶ Your Answer :
Recently, there has been a ton of debate as to the decline of frog
populations. More specifically, in regards to the passages, the writer puts forth
the idea that issues related to reducing frog populations can be solved by
several methods. In the listening, the lecturer is quick to point out there are
some serious flaws made in the writer’s claims. In fact, the professor believes
that none of the suggested solutions are practical, and addresses, in detail, troubles
with each point made in the reading text.
First and foremost, the author of the reading states that prohibiting farmers
from using harmful pesticides can protect frogs. Some professionals in the same
field, however, stand in firm opposition to this claim. (이 문장 아주 좋습니다)In the listening, for
example, the professor states that reducing the usage of pesticides is not an economically
practical and fair method. (여기서는 neither-nor을 쓰면 조금 더 자연스럽게 문장 이어질 거 같습니다) He goes on to say that farmers who need to rely on
pesticides will face severe disadvantages when they follow the law.
One group of scholars, represented by the writer, think that treatment killing
the fungus with heat and antifungal medication will be helpful for slowing down
the decline of the frog populations. Of course, though, not all experts in this
field believe this is accurate. Again, the professor specifically addresses
this point when he states that this method is very complicated and costly. He
mentioned that applying treatments to every individual frog requires a lot of
work. Also, treatments are not able to prevent frogs from passing fungus to
their offspring.
Finally, the author wraps his argument by positing that protecting their
natural habitat can solve this problem. Not surprisingly, the professor takes
this issue with this claim by contending that their biggest threat is not their
habitats but global warming. He said, protecting from using excessive amount of water is
unlikely to be an effective way of solving the decline of frog populations.
To sum up, both the writer and the professor have conflicting views
about the reduced population of frogs. It’s clear that they will have trouble
finding common ground on this issue.
listening에 대한 detail이 조금 더 자세하게 나왔더라면 훨씬 좋았을 것 같습니다. 문장 자체가 틀린 것은 아니지만 어색한 부분/ 다르게 쓰였더라면 훨씬 이해가 잘 되었을 거 같은 문장들이 많이 보였습니다. 문장 쓸 때 가장 주의해야 하는 점이 주어/동사 일치되는지 체크하는 것이라 생각합니다. 연결사 사용 자체는 아주 좋았던 거 같습니다. (문장 자연스러움에 더 신경써주세요)
|