For quite as long as I can remember, people have debated on whether a city should try to preserve its old, historic building rather than destroy them and replace them with modern buildings. Even though Although the jury is still out, I firmly believe that conservation of the old, historic buildings is neccessary. needed. The rationale behind this is that the historic relics allow us to grasp our history as the best materials to learn the history. (historical events) (그런데 뒤에 또 learn history?!!) (Besides, mankind has damaged the environment to get convenience of their living.)
(whether~ 의 도입문에 주제에서 주어진 문장을 그대로 쓰셨는데, 이렇게 쓰는것 보다는.. 그냥 다른 도입문을 써주는게 좋을것같네요^^. 같은 의미를 가진 문장이라도 자기 own words 로 써주세요!
그리고 두번째 이유는 뭔가요..?! 두번째 이유가.. 왜냐하면 사람들이 has damaged~ 했기 때문에...?
이유 두가지를 rationale 로 놓고 정확히 나열해주세요!)
Firstly, (no one can deny that) we can learn many different kinds of the history from things (learn history with different forms of ~ ??) in from the past. Although making modern buildings has advantages, I think that the advantage of preservation outweighs ~. is more outweigh than the advantages of others. That’s because, it is helpful (for us) to learn the history more easily. (전체적으로 that is because~ 문장은 따로 필요하지 않은 문장 같네요..^^) For example, I went to a museum in Japan last year, (콤마!) and was able to understand Japanese history more easily. If I will think Japan, For example, when we think of Japan, I would able to image we imagine “the Samurai”. (OR the image of Samurai appears~ )urprisingly, When I went to the a museum, I find found that a lot of swords and blades. (sword, blade 모두 s붙습니다. 복수! 그리고, when to a museum 은 경험. 따라서 find 가 아니라 found 입니다.) Indeed, I can still demonstrate my dim knowledge for about Japanese history through my experience. the museum. Since then, I always visit a museum as the best place to learn a culture, if I go abroad. Without I had been If I had never been to Japanese museum, I would not have been able to ~. could not have grasped they culture easily.
(중간부터 "history 를 이해하려고 museum 을 가야하는가?" 에 대한 주장으로 바뀌는것 같아요..
preserving buildings 에 대한 설명이 전혀 없네요.! preserving old building 이 꼭 museum 에 historical 물품을 보관한다는것은 아닙니다..^^ 일본에 대한 예제를.. 좀 더 바꾸는것이 어떤가요?
modern building 보다는 old 가 많아서 그 나라의 culture, 그리고 history 에 대해서 잘 알수있다. 고 주장하면, 좀 더 relevant 할것 같아요. always visit a museum ~ 에서 밑줄 그은 이유는, 주장에 아예.. 어긋나기 때문인데요, visit museum or not 에 대해서 쓰신것 같아서 off topic 인것같습니다^^.)
Secondly, environmental issues are one of the greatest challenges to mankind. (preserving old buildings 하면 environmental issues 를 줄일수 있다! 주제와 직접적으로 연관있게 써주셔야 합니다^^) With more advanced technical technological development, human beings devote themselves only to improving techniques technology for a cozy life. Unfortunately, these efforts would be negative effects on to humans. For example, since their invention, cars have become are an integral part of our living and allow us to move farther away from cities (speedily). However, they discharge exhaust gas and bring about global warming. These environmental problems lead not only to tremendous economic losses, (콤마!) but also to massive health risks. If we overlook these environmental issues, more serious consequences will occurred. Therefore, we should be pay to attention to keep the old things.
(이 문단 또한, 왜 preserve 해야하는지에 대한 이유를 적기 보다는, modern building 을 지음으로써 생기는 negative effects 에 중점을 두고 쓰셨는데.. negative effects 는 additional 설명을 할때에 적어주면 좋을것같습니다^^. 그러면 preserving buildings 하는것이 ""어떤식으로"" 환경에 좋은지? 반대로 설명해주세요.
우선은 왜 preserve 해야하는지? 에 대해서 설명해주세요. 새로운 건물을 지으면 왜 안좋은지는 나중에 짧게 설명해주세요^^)
In conclusion, I strongly agree that conservation of the old, historic buildings is neccessary. needed. The reasons are This is because, not only that the historic relics help us to grasp our history as the best materials to learn the history (서론에서 쓰신 문장 똑같이 쓰지 마세요~^^), but also that the environmental issues should be ~. (그리고, preserving 하는것이 env. 에 좋다? 고 써주셔야 합니다^^. 반대 입장에서 쓰지 마시고, 주장 자체를 써주셔야해요^^) not be overlooked. Therefore, these are the two most convincing reasons for my contention. |