新一輪的雅思考試又結(jié)束了，此次真題感覺如何呢?想必是不少出國人士比較關(guān)心的問題，和出國留學(xué)網(wǎng)一起來了解了解2018年2月10日雅思寫作真題回憶解析，歡迎閱讀。
2018年2月10日雅思寫作真題回憶解析
類別 | Line Chart |
題目 | The graph shows the size of ozone layer hole in Antarctic and the production of three kinds of ozone-damaging gases from 1980 to 2000. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant. |
題目翻譯 | 如下線圖顯示了1980年至2000年南極臭氧層空洞的面積，以及危害臭氧層的三種氣體排放。 選取主要的特征對信息進行概括，在相關(guān)的地方進行比較。 |
要素回憶（數(shù)據(jù)僅供參考）：動態(tài)線圖 #FormatImgID_0# | |
寫作指導(dǎo) | 1. 注意時態(tài)，要用過去時。 2.主體部分分為兩個段落： Body1：size of ozone hole Body2：production of ozone-damaging gases 3.最后一段：比較兩個主體段 |
重點表達式 | The period from … to … underwent a sudden rise of … from … to …. … while a greater number of A than B were found in … (the former is… and the later is …) By contrast, A increased (declined) from … in … to … in …. |
題目評價 | 難度一般 |
推薦練習(xí) | 劍橋真題8, test3 劍橋真題9, test4 |
近期考試趨勢 | 近期重點關(guān)注柱狀圖、柱狀圖。并預(yù)警流程圖。 |
Task 2
考試日期 | 2018.02.10 |
類別 | 社會類 |
題目 | Some people believe that people who read books can develop more imagination and language skills than those who prefer to watch TV. To what extent do you agree or disagree with this opinion? |
題目翻譯 | 有些人認為，相比喜歡看電視的人來說，讀書可更多地開發(fā)人的想象力和語言技能。 你多大程度上同意還是反對這個觀點？ |
寫作指導(dǎo) | （1）單邊題型。建議寫中立偏同意。 （2）Possible Ideas： 讓步段: 誠然，看電視為觀眾（尤其兒童），提供影像信息，拓寬了視野。 立場段: a. 然而，電視不能開發(fā)想象力，其影像信息甚至限制了觀眾想象力的發(fā)揮。相反，書上沒有圖像，有助于讀者通過語言發(fā)揮想象力 b. 不同于電視圖像和聲音分散注意力，閱讀可使讀者關(guān)注語言。 c. 同時，相比電視上較為非正式的口頭語言，書上的語言較正式、規(guī)范。 Conclusion: 重申立場，總結(jié)主體段 |
重點表達 | Unlock people’s imaginative potential; be provided with more room for imagination; visualize sth. in our minds; oral styles; be addicted to; writing skills; spelling and grammatical mistakes; employ different words; stifle people’s creative potential |
題目評價 | 舊題，難度一般 |
推薦練習(xí) | 2010.3.27 Studies suggest that children spend more and more time on watching TV than they did in the past and spend less time on doing active or creative things. Why do you think this is the case? What measures can be used to solve the problem? |
近期考試趨勢 | 近期考生可多關(guān)注社會、文化、教育、犯罪類話題。 |
Task2參考范文：
Since the beginning of civilization, human beings have joined in the pious hope that books, as a whole, would edify people by sparking their imagination, spurring their creativity, and enhancing their linguistic aptitude. By stark contrast, the ascent of modern media has only goaded on the harangues against arts by mechanical reproduction. TV – as commonly perceived as the epitome of “l(fā)owbrow” culture – has become a case in point. However, such sweeping generalization, or rather simplistic dichotomy, is susceptible to further examination.
If books in ancient times or pre-industrial era remained rare commodities or some “food for soul” of scarcity, such trite elitism hardly holds true anymore. It’s commonly acknowledged that the modern publishing industry has thrived in tandem not only with people’s intellectual needs or the authors’ meticulous research and tormenting introspection, but also the economic cycle, the scandals and rumors of celebrities, the life and (probably untimely) death of much glorified politicians and business tycoons, recipes for success, some ephemeral buzzwords in marketing etc. The life cycle publishing industry hence no more than mirrors the myriad of supply and demand curves in the real commercialized world, which only makes it all the more demanding on the readers’ effort to distinguish what is good from what is bad. It thus does not come as surprise when Arthur Rubinstein, the pianist of great theatricality, grieved at his becoming blind at 90 years young: “I simply regret having read so many bad books all my life.” Such compunction will undoubtedly repeat itself on you and me and alike.
If a book is characterized as intellectual fast food or worse by readers, it would be futile and far-fetching to discuss its effect on their cognition or knack for languages. However, if we think of some breath-taking TV documentaries on some of scenic places in some uncharted land or those unraveling the myth of human civilization and the universe, it is hard not to concede that they are indeed more edifying than some of the potboiler books. As Nabokov once wryly has it, “imagination is merely a function of memory”; and memory a multiplication of vision and learning. By the same token, who would deny that Maggie Smith’s impeccable rendering – with those witty twists in her uncanny demeanor - in so many TV series simply outshines the unending clichés in those best-selling books?
To conclude, books, as a traditionally much venerated cultural form, should not be overrated in its importance on transforming one’s intellectual capacity, as manifested by many cautionary tales. Both illuminating books and inspiring TV programs call for one’s discerning capacity.
以上是小編整理的2018年2月10日雅思真題回憶解析，謝謝您的閱讀，如想了解更多資訊，請繼續(xù)關(guān)注出國留學(xué)網(wǎng)其他欄目。