▶ Your Answer :
In the lecture, the speaker mentions that three explanations about the existence of 'Will-o'-the-wisp' from the reading passage are not convincing. The lecturer contradicts the reading passage's assertion by suggesting rebuttal on each of the three hypotheses. to explain its source are plausible.
To begin with, the speaker claims that chemical illumination occurred by gas emission does not resemble the 'Will-o'-the-wisp'. This is due to the fact that the color of chemical illumination is cool and green, whereas that of the other mysterious lights is warm and yellow. This challenges the reading passage's point that the 'Will-o'-the-wisp' is not a form of chemical illumination.
Second, the lecturer asserts that fireflies not actually the source of the anomalous lights. The reasons is, the light from fireflies is dispersed while that of 'Will-o'-the-wisp' does not. Also, flying insects' lights blink, whereas the mysterious lights do not flash or blink at all. This rebuffs the reading passage's claim that the source of the 'Will-o'-the-wisp' might be coming from flying insects.
Lastly, the speaker says that the hypothesis that barn owls may be the cause of the mysterious lights does not make sense. In fact, owls' feathers are not white, so it cannot reflect light brightly. Moreover, the thing is, it cannot be the light source around barn owls. (moreover이후의 내용은 더욱 detail해야 합니다. 본 문장이 어떤 다른 detail로 간주되기에는 too general 합니다) This casts doubt on the reading passage's assertion that the cause of 'Will-o'-the-wisp' might be barn owls.
Writing 0–30 score scale: Limited (1-16) / Fair (17-23) / Good (24–30)
ADDRESSING TOPIC
|
ORGANIZATION
|
PROGRESSION AND COHERENCE
|
LANGUAGE USE
|
GRAMMAR
|
FAIR
|
FAIR
|
LIMITED
|
FAIR
|
GOOD
|
각 카테고리별 SCORE: LIMITED / FAIR / GOOD
|
|