▶ Your Answer :
In the reading passage, there is ample support for the author’s
claim that recent research has found evidence about how Mima mounds are formed.
However, the professor in the lecture gives several reasons as a rebuttal to
the author’s point.
First, the professor contends that the physical characteristic of
Mima mounds shows it probably had not formed by wind. Mima mounds consist of
various sizes of many particles easily found on earth such as dust and rocks. And
some of them are too large to be carried by wind. Furthermore, Mima mounds has
a completely regular and round shape which is not well explained to say wind
was the major factor of the formation of Mima mounds. This casts doubt on the
reading passage’s claim that wind played a big role in making Mima mounds.
Next, the professor insists that it’s not really convincing that
glaciers had made Mima mounds formed. Specific climates such as heavy snow and
temperature low enough are required for glaciers to be formed. But Mima mounds
are found in various types of climates. They’re found not only in cold regions
but also in warm ones such as Mexico and Southwestern America. This counters
the reading passage’s assertion that melting glaciers are most likely to have
formed Mima mounds.
항상 수고많으십니다. 전체적인 첨삭 부탁드립니다. 그외의 질문이 하나 있습니다. 사실 reading passage에서는 recent research has provided scientists with 'promising ideas'정도로만 말했는데 저는 첫번째 문단에서 evidence라는 단어를 썼습니다. 엄밀히 말하면 다른건데 이게 감점요인이 될까요? writing에서 엄밀하게 모든 내용을 논리적으로 한치의 틀림없이 기입할 필요가 있는지 궁금합니다. 템플릿이나 예시 답변들을 보면 약간 유연하게 가면서 그냥 듣고 읽은 내용은 베이스로만 잡고 그것을 토대로 여러 단어, 표현, 어휘를 보여주는 것을 더 중요하게 생각하는것 같더라구요. |