▶ Your Answer :
The reading passage suggests that R. robustus was not a hunting animal but just a scavenger. The professor contradicts the statement one bye one and claims that R. robustus was an active hunter.
First, the writer asserts that R. robustus was too small to be hunters. The animal was just about the size of a cat and most dinosaurs bigger than them. But, the speaker points out that R. robustus may have hunted baby dinosaurs. Normally, hunter animals are more than twice heavier than preys and the fossil of a dinosaurs which found in the R. robustus stomach prove it. So the professor claims that R. robustus hunted baby dinosaurs.
Next, in the reading passage, the appears of R. robustus show that they were more sutiable for scavenging. Their legs were too short to run fast and located to sides. However, the lecturer demonstrates the example of a modern animal "devil". The animal also has short legs but it run as fast as 15km/h and it is a successful hunter. So the lecturer suggests that R. robustus probably could do so.
Last, the writer claims that there is no fossil evidence because the psittacosaur inside the R. robustus do not have a tooth mark. The lecturer counters the statement because the characteristics of R. robustus' jaws. Hunting animals have a various of teeth shapes. Furthermore, the lecturer suggests that R. robustus may have swallowed the psittacosaur as a big piece.
에세이 format맞춰서 잘 작성해주셨습니다. 다만 어휘가 약간 더 다양했다면 더 좋았을 법한 부분이 꽤 있어 아쉬웠습니다. 예를 들어 claim/counter이런거 좋은데 조금 반복되고 있어서 최대한 다양하게 작성해주세요 그리고 내용이 조금 많이 짧은 듯 한데 리스닝 내용 더 길게, 자세하게 작성해주세요
|