Should a city try to preserve its old, historic buildings or destroy them and replace them with modern buildings? Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion.
*진하게 표시한 부분은 제가 파악한 문단의 주요 내용이니 참고하세요^^
Many cities seek renovation for their development. Some of them try to build modern buildings, sometimes destroying some old buildings. Those new skyscrapers even replace historic ones. However, it’s not desirable that those meaningful buildings are broken down. Rather, they should be protected.
To begin with, it is not efficient to destroy existing buildings and build new ones, given that those old buildings are safe enough to stay in. Mostly many of the historic buildings are still in good condition with some repairs. A large amount of money and time would be required to operate all the things about replacing the buildings. Actually, the functions of a building don’t change drastically even if it’s reconstructed. 비용의 효율성을 주장으로 제시한 부분이 reasonable합니다. 건물의 '기능'이 다를 바 없다는 설명도 적절하게 논리를 뒷받침해주고 있습니다. To illustrate, my university has been reconstructing many buildings including a library and a laboratory for five years. The new buildings seem clean and comfortable, while the main functions never changed. 사례가 주장과 관련해서 어떤 점을 보여주는지 해석하는 문장을 연결고리로 보완해주세요. 단순히 관련 사례를 제시하기만 하고 마무리하는 것보다 '이처럼 정말로 내 주장이 맞다'는 식으로 논지를 한 번 더 강조하며 문단을 마무리짓는 편이 설득력과 전달력을 높이는 데 도움이 됩니다.
In addition, historic buildings are very important in their meaning. The historic sites show us lots of facts and lessons from the days far ago. Descendants learn a lot from history, and this is the reason that students visit museums, houses of famous writers, jails, etc. We should remember the ancestors who fought for individual freedom, democracy, or rights for voting. But what if those historic sites are destroyed? While newer and cleaner buildings replace them, the profound meaning of the sites would not be preserved. 적절한 idea와 설명입니다. old building들이 어떤 식으로 역사적인 교훈을 주는지에 대한 내용을 설명하는 문장을 보완하는 것도 좋을 것 같아요. For example, in Italy, a woman edited an old picture of Jesus Christ on her own, to make it seem clear. The picture does seem brighter in its colors, while the historic and religious meaning of it has gone. 사례 내용이 주장과 어떤 관련이 있는지 잘 모르겠습니다. 전하고자 하는 내용이 명확하게 연결되도록 내용을 보완하고 흐름을 다듬어주세요.
In conclusion, a city should try to keep its historic buildings even though they are old. Destroying and rebuilding them would throw away various important values. Moreover, since buildings don’t have enormous changes in their function and are still rigorous←? enough, it’s economically undesirable to replace those buildings with modern ones.
주요 채점기준 (항목별 5-4-3-2-1점수로 30점 만점 자가채점)
논제 파악 effectiveness in addressing the task
적절한 설명 appropriate explanation
적절한 예증, 구체적 설명 appropriate exemplification, details
일관성, 단계적 구성, 주제와의 연관성 unity, progression, coherence
다양한 단어 구사 syntactic variety
적절한 단어 선택, 관용적 표현 word choice, idiomaticity
Writing 0–30 score scale
Fair (17–23)
기본적인 논리 자체는 reasonable합니다. 다만 구체적인 설명이 아쉬운 부분들이나 사례 내용이 충분한 coherence를 보여주지 못하는 부분들이 감점요인이 될 수 있습니다. 연결고리를 중점적으로 보완해보시면 좋을 것 같아요. 수고 많으셨습니다^^ 화이팅!