이집트의 멸망 원인 3가지에 대한 문제였습니다
감사합니다!!:)
In this given set of materials, there is some discrepancy between the views of the lecturer and the author over the issue of Egyptian culture. With three cogent explanations, the lecturer raises objections to the plausible causes of the collapse of Egypt presented in the passage.
To start with, the lecturer disagrees with the author’s contention on the disobedience of local power. The
author claims that the fall of Egypt is attributed to changed attitudes of local
governors becoming against the
pharaoh due to their excessive
ambitions. However, the lecturer debunks the idea since it is hardly considered to be founded
on a factual basis. To elaborate in detail, the lecturer explains that loyal provincial
sovereigns were highly
privileged position that made them less motivated to revolt against the pharaoh.
Also, the central government retained
a powerful army at that time so that most of the rebellions were likely overwhelmed.
In addition, the lecturer indicates dissent over the author’s idea on the drought. The author convinces that severe drought written on historical documents which brought great, bitter famine resulted in the ruin of Egypt. The lecturer, in contrast, points out that those are not solid evidence because of misinterpretation. In detail, it is mentioned that the drought only affected the eastern part of Egypt and the rest of the country was not suffered from the harsh climate. In other words, the drought is hard to say that it is considerable to destroy entire Egypt.
Lastly, the
lecturer goes on to expound that the author’s final point on succession-related
turmoil is flawed. The author suggests that the political conflict for succession to
the throne after the reign of Pepi II led Egypt on the load of ruin. The lecture dissents
over this opinion stating struggles for succession were commonplace affair in the dynasty. Besides, the
lecturer claims those disruptions were subdued and the government could restore rapidly thanks to the highly
systematical central government.
In conclusion, while the passage notes three factors that probably contributed to the fall of Egypt, the lecture makes compelling points of each component with cogent arguments.
-
1. introduction의 분량을 3문장 이상으로 늘려주세요.
2. 아주 잘 쓰신 통합형 에세이 입니다.
아쉬운 점이 있다면 conclusion을 굳이 넣지 않고 body에 조금 더
focus를 맞추면 더 좋을 것 같습니다.
문법도 굉장히 깔끔하고 통합형 에세이에서 가장 중요한 연결어 사용도 좋습니다.
어휘 사용도 폭넓고 매끄럽네요.
수고하셨습니다. *^^*