From now on, sensationally, is a brand new English creative column coming to us: "A Challenge to The Cherubims". It is a special area authorized by Dr. Chris Lin, PhD. in English literature and reproductive organic satires, where we can learn English through interest and liveliness under Dr. Lin's descriptive expressions of diversities. There will be including many funny articles under many catagories: pure lit, social values, natural science, deductive, business,...and so on. And I'm so honored to have the privilege to publish his very first one in the series.
The following is the fantastic debut which appeared in the editorial section of a newsmagazine.
"Some states are creating new laws that restrict the use of
of handheld cell phones by drivers of automobiles. Such
legislation, however, is sheer folly. Although some people
with cell phones undoubtedly cause problems on the road,
including serious accidents, the majority do not. Besides,
problems are also caused by drivers who are distracted by
any number of other activities, from listening to
the radio to disciplining children. Since there is no
need to pass legislation restricting these and other
such activities, it follows that there is no need to
restrict people's freedom to use a device that they find
convenient—or helpful in emergencies."
Q1. Try to weaken the statement of this argument. There may be unlogical points of views. Find them out and explain why in the reply section of this column.
The answer of Q1 along with the whole passage translation are seen in the reply section of the article beneath. The rest can be seen on his personal blog in Wretch: clarkchris.
Good luck!
The following is the fantastic debut which appeared in the editorial section of a newsmagazine.
"Some states are creating new laws that restrict the use of
of handheld cell phones by drivers of automobiles. Such
legislation, however, is sheer folly. Although some people
with cell phones undoubtedly cause problems on the road,
including serious accidents, the majority do not. Besides,
problems are also caused by drivers who are distracted by
any number of other activities, from listening to
the radio to disciplining children. Since there is no
need to pass legislation restricting these and other
such activities, it follows that there is no need to
restrict people's freedom to use a device that they find
convenient—or helpful in emergencies."
Q1. Try to weaken the statement of this argument. There may be unlogical points of views. Find them out and explain why in the reply section of this column.
The answer of Q1 along with the whole passage translation are seen in the reply section of the article beneath. The rest can be seen on his personal blog in Wretch: clarkchris.
Good luck!
全站熱搜
留言列表
神學一 (3)