▶ Your Answer :
The lecturer disagrees with the reading passage’s
claim on lead poisoning that lead to the collapse of Roman Empire by presenting
three counterarguments.
First, the lecturer argues that if the cosmetics
contained lead, it they (cosmetics는 복수입니다.) would
cause flaking of skin and scarring. (scaring은 ‘두렵게 하다’라는 뜻이며, scarring이 흉터를 남기다 라는 뜻입니다.) Moreover,
lead should be injected to the blood stream to be highly toxic but Romans did not do this. This refutes the reading
passage’s claim that cosmetics containing lead lead to the collapse of the Roman Empire.
Second, the lecturer argues that lead pipes did not cause water pollution as water did not
contact the lead. This is because the pipe contained high calcium which formed
a mineral coat that prevented water pollution. This refutes the reading
passage’s claim that water pipes made from lead caused lead poisoning among the
Roman elite.
Lastly, the lecturer asserts that Salpa was not toxic
because it was heavily watered down when consumed. Only a trivial amount of dose of Salpa was consumed in wine and this was
harmless. This counters the reading passage’s claim that the Romans from the Roman Empire that enjoyed mixing
wine with Salpa that contained lead were slowly poisoned.
Writing 0-30
Score Scale
Fair (17-23)
Overall Comment:
일단 포인트도 잘 잡아주셨고 흐름도 좋습니다. 하지만 여기저기 문법 실수가 보이는데, 단어의 뜻을 아예 바꿔버리는
실수여서 작은 실수로 보기가 힘듭니다. 대문자를 사용하시는 것도 조심해주셔야 하고, 사소한 수의 일치 실수들도 다듬어주시면 좋을 것 같습니다.
|