本區搜索:
Yahoo!字典

投票項目 ( 單選 ) 參與人數 10

1. 5*
 

0 (0.00%)

2. 5**
 

0 (0.00%)

3. 2
 

2 (20.00%)

4. 3
 

1 (10.00%)

5. 4
 

0 (0.00%)

6. 5
 

4 (40.00%)

7. 1
 

3 (30.00%)

8. U
 

0 (0.00%)

打印

[Eng] 15 DSE PART B Q5求評

[隱藏]

15 DSE PART B Q5求評

15 DSE PART B Q5求評(HOW TO IMPROVE)!!
THANK YOU VERY MUCH!!!!!!




Question:
Manyparts of Hong Kong’s harbor front are still undeveloped. Some suggest usingthese areas for housing and commercial use, while others argue that such areasshould be left as open space for public use. Write to the editor of Hong KongDaily stating your opinion either for or against leaving these areas open forpublic use. Justify your point of view with three reasons.


Dear Editor,
Public space for public use takes precedence
Clock Tower, Hong Kong Cultural Center and Avenue of Star, to namebut just a few - all of them are the well-known attractions near Hong Kong’sharbor front. And now, some part of Hong Kong's harbor front still undeveloped.Some suggest to develop housing and commercial buildings in order to cater forhongkonger's need; some propose to turn it as public space for recreational use.After careful ruminations in the long run as whole, l thumb up for the latter-leaving as open space for public use.


There is no shortage of my stance, probably the first coming to mindis that open space for public use improves citizens' health, rising theirquality of life. It is acknowledged that hongkongers work day and night inorder to earn a living, causing them lead an unhealthy lifestyle. It is notuncommon to suffer from chronic diseases be they, high blood pressure ordiabetes. With public space, people will find it easier to achieve work-lifebalance, providing a great place for physical workouts. People are encouragedto walk, to play sports, or simply to enjoy the natural environment. Theirstress will definitely relieved as they escape from the hustle and bustle city,exposing themselves into fascinating scenery; however, in absence of publicspace, the health of the citizens will deteriorate continuously. If the areaturn into housing and commercial buildings, it will show the attitude of thegovernment putting undue emphasis on money, being indifferent to citizens'health. Why don't the government put citizens' health as the top priority? Inactual fact, lacking of physical exertions poses a grave threat to the health,causing the health expenditures of the government soar dramatically in the longrun. Accordingly, it is evident that these area should be left as the open areafor public use so as to improve citizens' health.


Closely associated with the above is that there is every likelihoodthat open area will sharpen Hong Kong’s reputation. When it comes to Hong Kong,the first impression is a global metropolis as well as a prosperous commercialcity, high-rises skyscrapers and commercial buildings are here and there.Hardly can we find a vast place of lawns in the urban area for recreation. Ifwe leave the area for public use, the visitors will be more convenient to havea close touch with the mesmerizing view of Victoria Harbor, especially atnight, resulting a change of their impression towards Hong Kong -from aninternational financial center to a vibrant city. Actually, the government canpromote the open area as a tourist spot, organizing some events on the regular basisin order to highlight Hong Kong’s vibration. On the contrary, the concept ofcommercial city will be deeply rooted in visitors' mind, rarely can they breakthis mindset. Hong Kong will become monotonous, nothing but focus on thebusiness. In the long term, the visitors may find dull easily since Hong Kongis akin to other commercial cities such as New York, Shanghai, being in lack ofits own characteristics. In light of this, it is crystal clear that leaving theopen area for public use triumph over turning into housing and commercialbuildings in term of Hong Kong's prestige.


Naysayers may counter my stance, claiming that developingresidential flats could boost the land supply and hence driving down theproperty prices. At the first glance, this belief seems valid. However, the issimply not feasible for suppressing the property price through building housingflats near the harbor front as we all know that the flats which facing harboris more expensive compared with that without appealing scenery. Therefore, itis useless for the government building housing flats near the harbor front. In fact,there are still numerous ways to cause the property prices plunge. First of all,it is the high time for the government to speeding up urban renewal. Reclamationto develop new towns likes Tseung Kwan O and North Lantau are also available tocreate land supply for housing and commercial use. It is against these backdrops that turning theseareas for housing and commercial use is not a must, but Hong Kong citizens andvisitors are in desperate need of leaving as open space for public use.


Taking all aspects into account, it is my firm conviction that using the areas of Hong Kong’sharbor front for housing and commercial use is no match for leaving as openspace for public use. It is citizens' health that willbe better due to openspace; and Hong Kong’s reputation
thatwill be promote because of open space. It is sincerely hoped that the government will leave thespare for public use in order to satisfy citizens’ thirst.
                                                                                                                                                                                                                   Yours faithfully,
                                                                                                                                                                                     Chris Wong         

[ 本帖最後由 ballballbb 於 2016-3-19 04:08 PM 編輯 ]
   

TOP

Push



TOP

Push



TOP

There is no shortage of my stance,
stance可以有shortage? 你有好多立場?

rising theirquality of life
--> rise & raise點用架?

causing them lead an unhealthy lifestyle
--> cause又點用架?? 跟to-infinitive定bare-infinitive?


It is notuncommon to suffer from chronic diseases be they, high blood pressure ordiabetes.
--> be they? 又be they又it is,邊個先係subject & verb?

If the areaturn into housing and commercial buildings, it will show the attitude of thegovernment putting undue emphasis on money, being indifferent to citizens'health.
起公屋都好,一定大把市民讚成 (笑)

Inactual fact
--> 有無in fake fact/ in wrong fact?


lacking of physical exertions poses a grave threat to the health
lack作為動詞和名詞又點用架?


其實公共空間... NT大把啦? 九龍香港島都有好多公園,海邊的公共輕間,TST、Kwan Tong & 上環一樣有...
都市人的健康...恐怕係同工作&生活習慣有關... 而且香港的空氣質素本來都唔係咁好...做gym可能仲好 (笑)
至於health exp呢一點,人口老化就似乎係更大原因...
自學英文無難度!Learning English ON YOUR OWN!
Autodidact 自學者

TOP

所以呢,第一段重點應該要講,香港的公共空間不夠,又或者市區之內的公共空間不夠,而NT又對很多人來說是太遠,不太方便
自學英文無難度!Learning English ON YOUR OWN!
Autodidact 自學者

TOP

第二段問題類近:現有的public areas有甚麼不足? 為甚麼要建設新的public areas?

其實不一定要在Victorian Harbour附近... 其他地方也可以考慮... (當然,不同地方的生態問題,又可能是一大阻礙)
自學英文無難度!Learning English ON YOUR OWN!
Autodidact 自學者

TOP

The ideas in your passage are very good, but the greatest disadvantage of yours in your grammar inaccuracy. It is really good that you have tried to use connectives like "in actual fact". However, pay attention to the following:
1.  Never begin a sentence with "and", "but", etc.
2.  Be careful with the participles. "suggest" goes with gerund but not to-infinitive.
3.  Try not to let your passage overflow with "canned phrases", like "it is my firm conviction", "Naysayers", "there is every likelihood" etc,  It makes the passage very strange and unnatural if a lot of phrases like these are present.

Grammar is inaccurate, so this deserves at most a level 3. With correct grammar and a rich content, you have the potential to achieve level 5 or above.

[ 本帖最後由 bryanfu926 於 2016-3-27 09:07 PM 編輯 ]

TOP

重要聲明:小卒資訊論壇 是一個公開的學術交流及分享平台。 論壇內所有檔案及內容 都只可作學術交流之用,絕不能用商業用途。 所有會員均須對自己所發表的言論而引起的法律責任負責(包括上傳檔案或連結), 本壇並不擔保該等資料之準確性及可靠性,且概不會就因有關資料之任何不確或遺漏而引致之任何損失或 損害承擔任何責任(不論是否與侵權行為、訂立契約或其他方面有關 ) 。