▶ Your Answer :
In the reading passage, there are ample supports to the author's claim of that the story that Greek used parabolic mirrors to burn Roman ship cannot be true. However, the professor in the lecture gives several reasons as a rebuttal to the author's point. First, the professor contends that the reason there's no scientific study about the mirror is that all were destroyed in a library those days. Instead, there is a play about the mirror which was written over a century ago before the battle. This refutes the reading passage's claim that considering no scientific materials, parabolic mirrors may not have been used for attacking the Roman ship. Second, the professor insists that since the Greek soldiers were trained hard, targeting the ship could have been possible. They had a lot of time to improve the skill, so the disciplined military might have targeted the roman ship accurately before it moved away. This counters the reading passage's assertion that since aiming the ship was really confusing to the soldiers, it was impossible to attack the moving ship. Third, the professor argues that the fire emanated from the mirrors could quickly spread widely, making it really difficult to extinguish. Moreover, since the Roman ship was made of a tar which is water proof and flammable, the fire might have become huge in a minute. This is why the Roman could not prevent fire from engulfing the entire ship. This casts doubts on the reading passage's suggestion that the Greek could not have vanished the big ship due to the small size of the fire.
Writing 0–30 score scale: Good (27–30) -두 글을 비교해서 잘 쓰셨습니다. 리딩의 내용을 조금더 추가했어도 좋았을 것 같습니다. 자잘한 문법 실수도 유의하시면 더 좋은 글이 될 것 같습니다. |