서론 = 설득력이 약하긴 하지만 큰 문제는 없어 보입니다.
본론1 = 설득력이 매우 떨어집니다. "그만큼 열심히 노력했기 때문이다"라는 주장을 펼치시면서, 그에 걸맞는 근거들은 제시하지 못하셨습니다. 똑같이 엄청난 노력을 기울인 사람들도 성공하지 못한다면, 그럼 이러한 성공하지 못한 사람들은 성공한 사람들에 비해 절대적인 노력의 수치가 낮다는 말씀이신지요? 본론1에서는 잘 느껴지지가 않네요.
본론2 = 역시 설득력이 떨어집니다. 유명인들은 타인들에게 긍정적/부정적 영향을 많이 미치므로 돈을 많이 받아도 된다고요? 별로 설득력 없는데요...
결론 = 좋습니다. 마무리 좋네요.
162. Some famous athletes and entertainers earn millions of dollars every year. Do you think these people deserve such high salaries? Use specific reasons and examples to support your opinion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------
As more and more people watch and receive information via the television and internet, they are getting continuously exposed to some famous athletes and entertainers. Consequently, the famous athletes and entertainers, or celebrities, earn millions of dollar every year. Some people disagree about the celebrities obtaining such a high salary. In my personal opinion, I assent to the notion that superstars deserve such a opulent salary, for not only did they work arduously to be a superstar, but also because celebrities entertain a significant amount of people.
1) watch and receive information via the television and internet 은 다시 풀어 써보면 watch information via the television and internet and receive information via the television and internet 입니다. 왜 틀린지 아시겠죠?
2) getting exposed는 틀린 말은 아니지만, get이라는 단어는 formal한 느낌이 안듭니다. 그냥 they become continuously exposed...라고 하심이 어떨지요?
3) 그 결과(consequently)라고 하셨으면, 실제로 앞 문장과 인과관계가 성립해야죠. 하지만, 인과관계가 성립하기에는 논리가 너무 약합니다. "자주 보이니까 돈을 많이 받는다"는건 좀 약하죠.
4) opulent salary 가 말이 되나요? 확실치는 않지만, 이건 마치 expensive price와 동일한 오류가 아닌가 싶은데...? egg님 생각은 어떠세요?
5) amount of people 보다는 number of people이 좋겠죠?
To begin with, the majority of the celebrities, unlike some of our views of them, worked incredibly hard. In order to become a famous athlete, they have to work painstakingly hard, considering the colossal amount of people that wish to become a well-known athlete. We must recognize that famous entertainers and athletes have to go through a very harsh process to become themselves, and not many of the people that try their best succeed. To illustrate, I had a close neighbor that wished to become an athlete. He wanted to be a National Football League player, and had the innate flair to achieve it. He became a varsity quarterback player in sophomore year, and was recognized as the 'most hopeful player' in our whole county. After he graduated high school, he went to college with pride. However, what he had to realize was that almost every football player in college was 'the player' in his own county. He practiced day and night, perennially. He did every thing he could. However, in the final entry, he got rejected. I am confident that he did his best, and I consider (that) the famous athletes and entertainers have worked hard enough to earn that salary.
1) unlike는 절대로 이런 식으로 사용하시면 안됩니다. X, unlike Y, ~ 라는 구문에서, X와 Y는 동일한 범주에 속하는 대상이어야 합니다. 사람이면 사람, 음식이면 음식, 새면 새, 짜장면이면 짜장면, 탕수육이면 탕수육...그런데 지금은 X는 사람, Y는 견해입니다. 이렇게 쓰심 안됩니다.
2) celebrities 이야기를 하시다가 왜 갑자기 "유명한 athelete이 되려고 하는 사람들"과 비교하시죠? 비교 대상이 서로 사맞디 않잖아요...
3) become themselves 라고 쓰시면 마치 "미친 사람이었더가 제정신을 차리게 되다"라는 뜻으로 보여요. become what they are now 혹은 become who they are now 라고 쓰셨어야죠.
4) every thing -> everything
5) 읽는 사람의 편의를 위하여 consider 보다는 consider that 이라고 써주시는게 좋겠습니다. 그냥 쭉 읽다 보면 "consider가 나왔으니 consider X Y (X를 Y라고 여기다) 라는 내용이 나오겠구나"라는게 자동적으로 유추되는데, 막상 읽고 나면 consider + 절이 나오니까 좀 어색하죠. 절을 이끄는 that은 왠만하면 생략하지 마세요.
Moreover, superstars mostly entertain people in a broader domain than the majority of human beings. It is a simple equation; if you entertain more and more people, you earn more and more credit and money. Also, while entertaining a large amount of people, they impact their lives, both positively and negatively. One research done by the National Research Center states that 45% of all people reads entertainment news daily, and over 83% sees entertainment news at least once a week. It also states that 62% of all people know basic details and news about celebrities. I was once startled when my friends were talking about Hollywood news I did not know. Wondering, I asked them when the news came out, and they replied it came out about seven hours ago. Advancement of communication technology made us much more exposed to information of celebrities. In my opinion, as superstars impact the lives of a titanic amount of people, they deserve to have their high salaries.
1) Moreover, superstars mostly entertain people in a broader domain than the majority of human beings 는 틀린 표현은 아니지만, 끝에 do만 붙여 주셨다면 더 좋은 문장이 되었을 것입니다. 비교대상이 '슈퍼스타'와 '대부분의 사람들'인지, 아니면 '더 넓은 도메인'과 '대부분의 사람들'인지 헷갈릴 여지가 충분히 있거든요? 마지막에 do만 붙여 주시면 이런 오해의 여지가 말끔히 사라지죠. 분쟁의 여지는 애시당초 없애버리는게 좋겠죠.
2) both positively and negatively 는 왜 쓰신 건지 모르겠슴다. 내용상 왜 들어갔는지 모르겠네요.
To put it concise, the laborious work to become a renowned entertainer or athlete and the impact they have on society makes it very reasonable for them to obtain luxurious amount of salary. Some people may say that some celebrities became well-known because of luck, but I highly doubt it. I think that people who agree such a notion does not know the back side of their life, but only the front, radiant side.
1) agree -> agree to