integrated writing #2

Свои творения - на суд общественности

Модератор: Max

Аватара пользователя
whatsuup
Сообщения: 373
Зарегистрирован: Пн янв 14, 2013 11:26 am

integrated writing #2

Непрочитанное сообщение whatsuup » Сб авг 10, 2013 12:32 pm

всем здрасьти. Написал сочинение, пытаясь учесть предыдущие ошибки. Писал не спеша, глядя в текст и скрипт лекции,

текст
Music. We all love it. In fact, I’m listening to music right
now, music I downloaded off the internet without paying for it.
That’s right. I didn’t pay a nickel. Not one red cent. And for
that, many would call me a criminal. Well, go right ahead. As
far as I’m concerned, downloading music off the internet
without paying for it is not a crime. Why not?
Let’s start with a little history. The internet was originally
invented to be a source of free information benefiting all.
Downloading music off the internet without paying for it is a
perfect example of this democratic ideal in action. In this light,
I am not criminal. I am simply exercising my democratic right
to move freely in the vast new democracy called cyberspace.
Now if you’re like me, you love to share music with your
friends by downloading it from their computers. This is not
stealing music. Hardly. My friends and I are simply sharing
songs. In fact, I share music with people all over the world,
people I don’t know and will never meet. This process is called
P2P or peer-to-peer file sharing. Now think: Is sharing
something you love a crime? I don’t think so.
Finally, and this point I really want to stress: What I do in
the privacy of my home is nobody’s business but my own.
Period. I don’t need the government telling me what I can or
can’t do with my computer. The United States is a democracy
not a dictatorship.
To sum up, just because I refuse to pay for downloaded
music does not make me a felon. The real criminals are those
in government and business determined to deny music-loving
individuals their right to freedom and privacy.

лекция
It happens every second of every day all over the world. One
click and that new song—the one you didn’t pay for—is on your
iPod. You may think it’s legal. After all, downloading music is
fast and easy, right? Think again. It goes without saying that
downloading music off the web without paying for it is a crime.
I know. I know. Some will argue that “It’s my democratic
right to download music without paying for it.” Nonsense. The
internet might have started out with the intention of being a
democracy but, believe me, those days are long gone. The
internet these days is about two things: information and
money. Big money. One of the biggest money makers on the
web is music, and music is protected by law. If you download
U2’s latest album, let’s say, and you don’t pay for it, then you
are breaking the copyright law that says U2 owns that music.
It is their property and you just stole it. If you want to listen to
U2, you’ve got to buy it, no ifs, ands, or buts.
Also, the artist has a legal right to get paid for his or her
work no matter how or where it is downloaded. How would you
like it if somebody were stealing your music? This is exactly
what Napster was doing. Napster was the first peer-to-peer
music sharing web site. Musicians, however, took Napster to
court for not paying royalties, money owed each time a song
was downloaded via Napster. Napster argued that it was just
helping friends share music. The courts disagreed. Napster
paid a big fine and is now a pay site.
Moreover, illegally downloading music off the web is not a
privacy issue. If you break the law by illegally downloading
music, you are a criminal. I’m sorry, but you can’t have it both
ways. You can’t break the law and hide behind the privacy
issue. The law is clear. Criminals have no right to privacy.
Period.
It bears repeating that downloading music without paying
for it is a crime no matter what anyone says about “the
freedom of cyberspace.” Just because downloading music is
fast and easy doesn’t mean you have the right to steal it.


мое сочинение
In the lecture, the professor argues that downloading music off the internet without paying for it is a crime. This is different from the reading, which states that it is legal to download it not having paid a nickel. However, the teacher casts doubt on the reading providing the following reasons.

First, the lecturer says that the Internet today is about only two things: information and money. She provides an example of the U2 latest album and says that if you want to download it, you must pay U2, otherwise you are breaking the copyright law. This directly contradicts to the information in the passage which states that an opportunity to download anything from the net is a perfect example of democracy America built on.

Second, the professor says that even sharing downloaded music with friends is also a crime. For instance, the first peer-to-peer music sharing web site Napster was sued for breaking the right law. In contrast, in the reading it is argued that sharing something you love with close people can not be illegal.

Finally, the professor argues that downloading music and not paying for it is not a privacy issue because this way you break the law. And again it contradicts to the information in the reading which says that no one can tell what to do or not to do with your personal computer.


кстати не смог так сразу придумать conclusion как последний абзац. может ктонить подскажет как можно перефразировать красиво?

Vesta87.87
Сообщения: 1066
Зарегистрирован: Сб авг 07, 2010 8:15 am
Откуда: Barnaul-> Flagstaff, AZ -> Oxford, MS -> Boston, MA

Re: integrated writing #2

Непрочитанное сообщение Vesta87.87 » Сб авг 10, 2013 1:12 pm

мое сочинение
In the lecture, the professor argues that downloading music off the internet without paying for it is a crime. This is different from the reading, which states that it is legal to download it not having paid a nickel. However, the teacher casts doubt on the reading providing the following reasons.

First, the lecturer says that the Internet today is about only two things: information and money. She provides an example of the U2 latest album and says that if you want to download it, you must pay U2, otherwise you are breaking the copyright law. This directly contradicts to the information in the passage which states that an opportunity to download anything from the net is a perfect example of democracy America built on.

Second, the professor says that even sharing downloaded music with friends is also a crime. For instance, the first peer-to-peer music sharing web site Napster was sued for breaking the right law. In contrast, in the reading it is argued that sharing something you love with close people can not be illegal.

Finally, the professor argues that downloading music and not paying for it is not a privacy issue because this way you break the law. And again it contradicts to the information in the reading which says that no one can tell what to do or not to do with your personal computer.
1) Количество слов 197-хорошо.
2) Структура соблюдена - хорошо.
3) В начале слово however не соотносится с предложением до него:
This is different from the reading, which states that it is legal to download it not having paid a nickel. However, the teacher casts doubt on the reading providing the following reasons.
Можно, наверное, сказать Consequently или as the result....
4) Есть замечания по языку. Не знаю, сколько читала литературы, пишут много, что you в академическом эссе не употребляется. Это делает его informal. Обычно нужно заменять либо на пассивный залог + инфинитив, либо на конструкции с one (e.g., if one wants to download music, they should pay for it). Может, в ТОЙФЛ это и допустим. Но думаю, заранее нужно приучать себя к formal writing rules :D
5) Contradict smth, но to be contradictory to smth
6)
America built on.
is built on
7)
This directly contradicts to the information in the passage which states...
...that states :)
8) Я бы вместо сложный пассивных конструкций типа it is argued in the reading, употребляла бы the reading /lecture argues/claims/states/assertains/
9) Много повторений слова says, можно believes/argues/claim etc
10) Бросается в глаза break the law. Может, тоже стоит подобрать синонимы, например-act illeagally или просто smth is illegal
11)
can tell what to do or not to do with your personal computer.
tell smb
12) В целом, хорошо. Я думаю, поставили бы за такое 27-28 из 30.

victor_a
Сообщения: 429
Зарегистрирован: Ср авг 18, 2010 4:31 am
Откуда: Pennsylvania, US

Re: integrated writing #2

Непрочитанное сообщение victor_a » Сб авг 10, 2013 8:24 pm

whatsuup писал(а):Написал сочинение
> the internet
the Internet

> which states that it is legal to download it
download what? ("it"?)

> the teacher casts doubt
casts a doubt?

> the lecturer says
"lecturer", "teacher", "professor" -- это разные люди или все об одном но разными словами?

> the U2 latest album
U2's latest album

> that if you want to download it
не стоит you'кать в письме; читатель тут вообще не причем, зачем его примешивать? =) "people", "a person", "one", "music fans", "movies aficionados", ... -- ищите как обойти.

> contradicts to the information
contradicts the information

> the net
the Internet?

> is a perfect example of democracy America built on.
is a perfect example of the democracy the US is built (up)on. (Говоря "America" о США вы обижаете Канаду, Мексику и всех остальных не-US американцев.)

> First, Second
-> Firstly, Secondly? (тут может быть ОК и так и так)

> that even sharing downloaded music with friends is also a crime
even подчеркивает какую-то мелкость шаринга; однако, sharing т.е. distribution -- это как раз и есть major offence, а downloading -- это можно с even.

> the reading
- так говорят? Как насчет the text, the passage, the lecture, ...?

> the professor
the Professor?

> And again it contradicts
1) And again,
2) Не очень хорошо начинать прежложение с And, But, Also.

> the information in the reading which says
information...says -- не очень

> no one can tell what to do or not to do with your personal computer.
1) Опять your; читатель тут не при чем, не надо его компутер сюда приплетать.
2) to do or not to do -> to do?
3) -> no one can regulate people's usage of their personal computers (aside from PC manufacturers, of course ;)).

Аватара пользователя
whatsuup
Сообщения: 373
Зарегистрирован: Пн янв 14, 2013 11:26 am

Re: integrated writing #2

Непрочитанное сообщение whatsuup » Вс авг 11, 2013 3:16 am

victor_a писал(а): > the teacher casts doubt
casts a doubt?
Vesta87.87 писал(а):Как и обещала, вот темплэйты из книги:
Template #1: Casting Doubt on a Lecture
Summarize the points made in the lecture, explaining how they cast doubt on the reading.
...
...
IV. Thesis statement
The professor's lecture casts doubt on the reading by using a number of points that are contrary to (the main idea of the reading).
вообще, словарь дает countable/uncountable

Аватара пользователя
whatsuup
Сообщения: 373
Зарегистрирован: Пн янв 14, 2013 11:26 am

Re: integrated writing #2

Непрочитанное сообщение whatsuup » Вс авг 11, 2013 3:21 am

victor_a писал(а):
> the reading
- так говорят? Как насчет the text, the passage, the lecture, ...?
не знаю про разговоры..но так точно пишут))
victor_a писал(а): > the professor
the Professor?
capital letter? в 1ые слышу)

Аватара пользователя
whatsuup
Сообщения: 373
Зарегистрирован: Пн янв 14, 2013 11:26 am

Re: integrated writing #2

Непрочитанное сообщение whatsuup » Вс авг 11, 2013 3:23 am

на самом деле спасибо) полезная оценка

Аватара пользователя
whatsuup
Сообщения: 373
Зарегистрирован: Пн янв 14, 2013 11:26 am

Re: integrated writing #2

Непрочитанное сообщение whatsuup » Пн авг 12, 2013 3:50 am

кстати, как Вы думаете: можно ли здесь написать вывод??

Ответить

Кто сейчас на конференции

Сейчас этот форум просматривают: нет зарегистрированных пользователей и 6 гостей