Reading passage states that there are three
possible opinions on the use of Great Zimbabwe. However, the lecture contradicts that the three theories in the reading passage just come up short.
First, the theory in the reading passage claims
that Great Zimbabwe was used to protect people living inside the fortress.
However, the listening lecture suggests that the opinion which states Great
Zimbabwe was used as fortress is unlikely to accept. To be specific, good fortress
usually has the source of water that sustains the habitat. But, there were no
water supplies near the fortress. Furthermore, there were no archer towers or
other barriers to protect them and there were no other entrance.
Second, the theory in the reading passage says
that Great Zimbabwe was utilized as palace for the royal family. On the other
hand, the listening lecture criticize criticizes (lecture는 단수 주어 입니다) that many of scholars think that the term
Zimbabwe means homes of stone, that just imply the common house. Moreover, over
200 people lived in this area that means Great Zimbabwe was full size of a
city, not a likely palace.
Lastly, the reading passage referred that Great
Zimbabwe was used as religious place. However, the listening lecture
contradicts this idea by saying that Great Zimbabwe was not a compelling
religious place. She states that cave on the nearby hill was used for the king
to convey his voice to the valley. Thus, it means that the subjects were made
for kings not for the religious events.
In conclusion, the listening lecture is strongly
contradicting the theories that were stated in the reading passage by pointing
out the wrong aspect of the theories.
점수: 26
통합형 에세이는 기본적으로 리딩과 리스닝을 비교하는 것이기 때문에 결론이 필요 없습니다. 지금 이 에세이는 결론 빼고는 지적할 부분이 없습니다. 각 단락에서 구체적인 설명을 통하여서 리딩과 리스닝을 잘 비교하고 있습니다. 구체적인 설명은 서로의 견해가 무엇인지를 잘 파악할 수 있게 만든 거 같습니다. 잘 서술하였습니다. 수고많으셨습니다.