Pls give me some suggestions about this essay.

Status
Not open for further replies.
E

eric2004

Guest
thanks everybody, if you feel a little superficial and bored to my essay, pls just correct some main and stupid mistakes. that would be fine as well. your little suggestions will be great helps for my preparation of the coming exam. thanks again.


how can we live without animals

I do always wonder why some people think human beings can exist more peaceful and comfortable without animals existing in this globe. Even if other creatures are totally meaningless to them, why they even do not consider their own interests a little?

Surely manufactures and food production benefited from animals can enrich human’s lives and promote the growth of social economies. To take an example, animal furs can be made into clothes and their meat into food cans. However, once such slaughter of animals causes serious problems to mankind, like ecological deterioration, this kind of economical prosperity would be completely pointless for human generation. After all, monetary methods cannot create those species of creatures to revive if they are extinct.

Human beings now, undoubtedly, have to face up to such extinction of species and manage to handle this serious problem. Because, to varying degrees, the dangerous decrease in the number of animal species has exerted a lot of adverse impacts on people’s lives. In some areas, species extinction leads to the devastation of food chain and as a result, the ecological balance in such areas would be very difficult to recover back. Then certainly the living conditions of residents in there cannot avoid being impacted, such as water becomes polluted and soil quality is destroyed. To make matters worse, some mystic diseases can be produced due to that, like SARS.

In addition, even if human beings do not care about those pernicious influences on them, emotional change, like loneliness, would cause some new questions with the disappearance of other creatures. Can we just imagine what would be like if, in the world, there are no any creatures else but ourselves?

Given this argument I feel strongly it is very necessary for the government to take effective measures to preserve the wild animals and even, to some extent, give the priority to protecting them at a cost of human interests.



whether we should reduce the number of auto cars

I am always amazed why, with the coming of automobiles in our society, some people argue that they do not benefit us but produce too many adverse impacts on our daily lives. However, even if they do not know the important role cars play in modern society, they should also deduce it from general principles.

Cars, indeed, exert some bad influences on our society. With the manufacture of this vehicle increasing at an alarming rate, traffic jams in city or exhausted gases emitted by cars beg serious problems. However, it is merely a matter of time for us to solve such problems and certainly cars have been and will be a vital part for social modernization.

Many techniques, in fact, have been adopted by automobile manufactures to reduce the pernicious effects by the application of cars. Not only is unleaded petrol able to improve the air quality afterwards but can also save the consumption of energy resources. And as a result of science progress and further urbanization, the present problems of cars usage can be largely avoided.

In addition, motor car speeds up (accelerates) the pace of social progress on a massive scale, for people do not need to worry about transport vehicles limiting us from developing in all sectors of societies, for example, international trade. In some sense, the very fact that cars became the main transport tool in society is the reason of the geographic limitation among people’s communication, which restricted our ancestors to lead a leap for a long term, being removed. So this is why America is often called “a country on wheels”.

Given this argument I feel strongly that, as the symbol of industrial development, all countries should take effective measures to deal with the problems resulted from cars and meanwhile to make cars serve our lives.
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
I'm going to get started on this one just so you know I'm not ignoring you. :wink:

how can we live without animals

That certainly looks like a question. Make it:

  • How Can We Live Without Animals?

I do always wonder why some people think human beings can exist more peaceful and comfortable without animals existing in this globe. Even if other creatures are totally meaningless to them, why they even do not consider their own interests a little?

  • I wonder why some people think human beings can exist more peacefully and comfortably without animals existing on this globe. Even if other creatures are totally meaningless to them, why do they not consider their own interests a little?

Well, I've got to go do something else now.

:wink:
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
Surely manufactures and food production benefited from animals can enrich human’s lives and promote the growth of social economies. To take an example, animal furs can be made into clothes and their meat into food cans. However, once such slaughter of animals causes serious problems to mankind, like ecological deterioration, this kind of economical prosperity would be completely pointless for human generation. After all, monetary methods cannot create those species of creatures to revive if they are extinct.

  • Surely manufacturing and food production benefit from animals. They enrich human life and promote the growth of social economies. To take an example, animal furs can be made into clothes and their meat into food. However, the slaughter of animals causes serious problems to mankind, like ecological deterioration. There is no way to bring back a species once it is extinct.

Unfortunately, that paragraph is not coherent. By the time you get to the end the subject has changed from what it is at the beginning. You need to have more focus.

8)
 
E

eric2004

Guest
Sir, there are some modified sentences below. I wanna say if the problem which result from animal's slaughter exerts an adverse impact on human beings, then economy prosperity ( from anmial's manufacture) would be useless. ( if human cann't survive on the globe) 555, I lost my confidence a little now.
Do you mind i give you some standard essays in my test ? And then you can judge my level. I'll paste them in billboard. But you don't need to correct them. Just balance a level. It's enough. Thanks again. And I'm sorry for continuing to disturb you .

"However, provided that the slaughter of animals causes serious problems for mankind to survive, like food chain being destroyed, such economical benefits would be meaningless for human. "
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
eric2004 said:
Sir, there are some modified sentences below. I wanna say if the problem which result from animal's slaughter exerts an adverse impact on human beings, then economy prosperity ( from anmial's manufacture) would be useless. ( if human cann't survive on the globe) 555, I lost my confidence a little now.

I think I understand now. You are talking about depletion of resources. If the slaughter of animals is uncontrolled it can have an adverse effect on the economy. (As with overharvesting of whales.) It might even threaten human survival. Do I have that right? (You can't use economy prosperity or economic prosperity.)


eric2004 said:
Do you mind i give you some standard essays in my test ? And then you can judge my level. I'll paste them in billboard. But you don't need to correct them. Just balance a level. It's enough. Thanks again. And I'm sorry for continuing to disturb you .

Are you talking about your answers to questions? Go ahead.

(You're not disturbing me.)

eric2004 said:
"However, provided that the slaughter of animals causes serious problems for mankind to survive, like food chain being destroyed, such economical benefits would be meaningless for human. "

  • If the slaughter of animals gets out of control the consequences could be very serious. The food chain could be disturbed, and the very survival of mankind could be threatened.

How's that?

:D
 
E

eric2004

Guest
Sir, why you eliminated "however and provided?
I thought there is a transition between sentences.
So i used a "however". I went wrong in this way, didn't I?

And pls let me know the relation of "provided, if, in the event of, whether and so on."
xixi, I had intention to avoid using "if" in order to make my essay not vulgar. Wrong again?
 
E

eric2004

Guest
Sir, what about other parts in my essay?
You're totally at a lost about them?
5555, at least give me a suggestion here,pls.
what i should improve a little quickly?
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
Usehowever if you want to contradict or contrast with what was said before. Example:

  • He makes a lot of money. However, he is very stingy.

Use provided to indicate a contingency or condition.

  • Provided that there is enough money, we will eat out Thursday night.

Use in the event of to indicate a contingency or condition. Example:

  • In the event of rain we will stay inside.

Whether is often used to indicate a contingency or possibility. Example:

  • I don't know whether he has left the building or not.

:)
 
E

eric2004

Guest
RonBee said:
Usehowever if you want to contradict or contrast with what was said before. Example:

  • He makes a lot of money. However, he is very stingy.

Use provided to indicate a contingency or condition.

  • Provided that there is enough money, we will eat out Thursday night.

Use in the event of to indicate a contingency or condition. Example:

  • In the event of rain we will stay inside.

Whether is often used to indicate a contingency or possibility. Example:

  • I don't know whether he has left the building or not.

:)


:oops: Faint, very similar with each other.
Could i use "provided and in the event of " more ? That can prolong my essay. :wink:
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
Could i use "provided and in the event of " more ? That can prolong my essay.

I wouldn't use those expressions more than you are already. That would clutter up your composition with words that don't really say much. It would add more words; that is true.

:wink:
 
E

eric2004

Guest
Sir, see this question,pls.

people(who're) involved, people (who're) concerned ======= related people?

I don't know when i can eliminate (who're) in my essays.

Eg: There is a beautiful girl (who is) flirted by someone. Or ......girl (who is) regareded as a hot chick.

They are just what i take for example. I'm always not sure how to eliminate (who, which, what, etc. as well as (is, are, be))

And there is another question:

eg. Female smokers saw the opposite trend. They increased from 16% in 1960 to 24% in 2000.

Can I change it to " .......trend, who increased .....?

Sometimes I'm at a lost about such organization of sentences, because I don't know their differences except one sentence or two sentences.

Pls tell me know. Thank you.
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
eric2004 said:
Sir, see this question,pls.

people(who're) involved, people (who're) concerned ======= related people?

I don't know when i can eliminate (who're) in my essays.

If you are involved you are involved with something or involved in something. If you are concerned you are concerned with something or concerned about something. Also, neither of them mean related people.

Additionally, in a sentence, you usually wouldn't need who are. Example: "Some of the people involved in the transaction are lawyers."

eric2004 said:
Eg: There is a beautiful girl (who is) flirted by someone. Or ......girl (who is) regareded as a hot chick.

The phrase "flirted by someone" is not possible. You can say, "There is a beautiful girl who has flirted with someone," but more likely is, "There is a beautiful girl who likes to flirt with people."

A girl who is regarded as a hot chick is somebody people would like to meet. :wink:

eric2004 said:
They are just what i take for example. I'm always not sure how to eliminate (who, which, what, etc. as well as (is, are, be))

Absent context, there is no reason to say you should eliminate those words.

eric2004 said:
And there is another question:

eg. Female smokers saw the opposite trend. They increased from 16% in 1960 to 24% in 2000.

Can I change it to " .......trend, who increased .....?

Sometimes I'm at a lost about such organization of sentences, because I don't know their differences except one sentence or two sentences.

Say: Their numbers increased.

:)
 
E

eric2004

Guest
Sir, that means I can change it to " whose (numbers) increased?

"They increased... " is not right? But it was from a sentence of native person, while I don't know his expression skills at times.

Thank you, dear teacher.
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
People can't increase. They can grow, but they can't increase. :)

Yes, you can use "whose numbers increased....", but, of course, whether it is grammatical or not depends on how it is used in the sentence.

You are always welcome.

:D
 
E

eric2004

Guest
Oh, get it.

Sir, new question.

But even having the most number of non-residents’ applications, America only have 1.5M resident applications.


While the whole trend of patent application has been rising, there is still a difference in the number of patents in different countries.


At last, can I say " the application increased to 25m."?

I'm not sure about these sentences. And I feel its strcture is weird. How can I make it better?

You are always nice, Sir.
 

RonBee

Moderator
Joined
Feb 9, 2003
Member Type
Other
Native Language
American English
Home Country
United States
Current Location
United States
But even having the most number of non-residents’ applications, America only have 1.5M resident applications.

Say:

  • But even though it has the most non-resident applications, America has only 1.5M resident applications.

That seems like a lot to me. :wink:

While the whole trend of patent application has been rising, there is still a difference in the number of patents in different countries.

Say:

  • While the number of patent applications has been on the increase, there is still a difference in the number of patents being issued in different countries.

I am not sure I understand the point behind that statement. It seems to suggest that we should expect different countries to issue the same number of patents. There are a number of reasons that is unrealistic, one obvious one being that different countries are of different sizes.

At last, can I say " the application increased to 25m."?

Say: the number of applications increased.

You are always nice, Sir.

Thank you. :D
 
Last edited by a moderator:
E

eric2004

Guest
Thank you, dear teacher.

They are just some essays of graphic description.

No some arguments there. Xixi.


I think it is difficult to be depicted too well.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top