▶ Your Answer :
In the reading passage, the author gives
several theories to explain the unexpected and puzzled collapse of ancient
Khmer Empire in the Angkor. However, the professor in the lecture contradicts
the author's claim by suggesting three opposite facts.
First, the professor contends that Black Death was mostly transmitted
through oceanic courses with the ships. The coastal cities were more vulnerable
to the plague and the Angkor area, located in inner city land did was not affected by
the disease decease. (Wrong grammar: contains two verbs inside) Also, it is unlikely that the Black Death could be spread to stretch out to the
Southern East Asia. This casts doubt on the reading passage's claim that the
Angkor was acted negatively by the calamitous illness spread by the interplay
with China and it eventually wiped out the huge number of populations.
Next, the professor suggests that the drawbacks in water supply system
were not critical elements for the destruction of the area. The water supply
infrastructure was not responsible for entire water capacity and there had must
been alternative origin of water (What does it mean?) to cover up the primary means. This counters
the reading passage's assertion that the negligence of operating water supply
suffered few technical challenges and instigated the destruction of the area, (Who or What suffers technical issues?) diminishing agriculture productivity and the number of populations.
Finally, the professor argues that the change in trade system did not
have a rigorous influence on the Angkor's region. Even though the oceanic cities
were developed with modified trade trading method, (What is that? Explain it in more details) they could not handle agricultural
items, yielded by the Angkor area. Therefore, the Angkor could still play the
important role as a prominent region even after the advent of new trade system.
This refutes the reading passage's suggestion that the oceanic exchange custom
forced a lethal effect on to the Angkor's economy, by hindering them from getting
involved in economic power.
채점기준표 | Grammar | Contents | Example | Coherence | 점수 | 2 | 3
| 2 | 3 | Score | Fair 17-23 | - 새로운 명칭이 언급이 될 때에는 반드시 적절한 설명이 필요합니다. - 첫 번째 리딩에서 언급된 부분이 리스닝에서는 언급이 되지 않아 적절히 대조되지 못하고 있습니다. - 두 번째 contents는 그래머적인 구조에 문제가 있는 것으로 보입니다. 주체가 누구인지를 밝혀주세요. - 세 번째 아이디어에서 제시된 trading system에 대해 상세히 밝혀주세요.
|
|