▶ Your Answer :
The professsor states that the New World indeed was discovered by European explorers by presenting several reasons. This directly contrasts the reading which says the Chinese are true men who discoverd the New World.
First, the professor, in contrast to the reading, says that discovery of stone anchors does not prove that first settler to the New World is the Chineese. The professor says stone anchors are not left by Chinese explorers before Columbia's discovery, but left by Chinese-American fishermen who imitate the stone to the older one from their ancesters. Also, the professor says that chemical type of stone is actually found in stone of California. In contrary to this, the reading says stone anchors prove that Chinese mariners arrived the land before Columbia's arrive.
Second, the professor contradicts the reading by claiming that lighthouse found near the town of Newport is flaw evidence, because according to radioactive equipment, it proved that the lighthouse was dated to 1630. Thus, it is imposible to match this lighthouse to the lighthouse in China which dated in 13Cs. Furthermore, in 1630, many Europeans were civilizing lands, so it is plausible that this lighthouse is left by Europeans explorers. In contrary to this, the reading argues that lighthouse found in the land is very similar to lighthouses constructed in China.
Lastly, the professor casts doubt on the reading by claiming that any languages can be seen similar even though they are not in relationship or contact with. Thus it cannot be assumed that Chinese language has deep connections with Native American language. The similarity between these two laguages is only coincidence. However, the reading strongly argues that there are interactions between two languages.
전형적인 통합형 에세이입니다`~
홧팅하세여~! |