animal - opinion 17/08-2015 [closed]

Question

This is my task two essay. Could you help me check it ?. Thanks u so much.

 

Wild animals have no place in the 21st century, so protecting them is a waste of resources. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Many people suppose that in the 21 st century, It will not have accommodation for wild animals therefore we must not protect them. Personally. I absolutely disagree with this point of view and I will give some reasons follow :

The first reason. I do not think that the wild animals will not have place in the 21 st century. That thing is not fair with them because the god created people and animals, also trees, so He must have place for all and people should respect that thing. If only for the sake of human individuals and occupy the place of wild animals; actually, this is a crime. We do not know that in a near future people will occupy accommodation each other. In the past, we witness many wars that people create to occupy land of each other. For example: the first world war and the second world war killed very many people and make damage for generation; therefore, human need respect place for wild animals.

The second reason, everyone shall have the responsibility to protect the wild animals. Nowadays the situation of hunting and killing them is very serious more and more. People kill animal to find tusks and horns or other part of body for their benefit  that help them have much money. That thing make animal extinct or face with dangerous circulation. For example : at the moment, in the world only has around 1000 tigers and with situation as serious hunting as today, i am afraid that tigers could become extinct. In my opinion, to avoid ecological imbalance. We must  see that protecting animals is a compulsory task of people and the government of nations in the world 

In conclusion, I believe that wild animals is a part of our life. So we must have to protect them and treat fair with them. That is responsibility of every people.

 

Answer 1

đầu tiên mình nghĩ bạn nên ghi lại yêu cầu của bài writing task 2 này để các bạn khác tiện theo dõi

Thứ hai, theo như kinh nghiệm của mình thì khi nói về 1 nhận định chung thì mình nên để ở dạng passive voice hơn là active để đảm bảo tính khách quan cho bài viết. ví dụ: "Many people suppose that in the 21 st century, It will not have accommodation for wild animals therefore we must not protect them" có thể đổi thành " It is supposed that in the 21st century accomodation might not be available for wild animals therefore we must protect them etc. Thay vì dùng "the first reason, the second reason" ta có thể thay thế bằng "first of all", "my second point is that" để tránh bị lặp từ. cuối bài viết nên có phần kết luận rõ ràng,tóm lại luận điểm mà bạn đưa ra. by the way, người ta dùng là "do damage to" chứ ko phải là "make damage for" nhé

Hơn nữa, mình thấy bài viết này có vẻ chưa đc rõ ràng về mặt ý tưởng

Nói chung bài viết này ,cá nhân mình thấy nó mắc khá nhiều lỗi về cấu trúc câu, cách dùng từ cũng như việc diễn đạt ý. 

Nhưng đừng nản nhé. Cố gắng lên

Answer 2

 Mình đã gửi acticle rồi. Mình mới tập viết writing task 2, lại tự học nên chắc không tránh được những sai sót. Cảm ơn bạn đã có những góp ý. Tuy nhiên theo mình bài này khá khó viết. Mình viết xong kiểm tra lại thì thấy bài mình có ý tưởng khá trùng khớp với ý tưởng của simon nên phần nào cũng yên tâm. Đây là bài mẫu của simon bạn có thể tham khảo

IELTS Writing Task 2: 'wild animals' essay

Wild animals have no place in the 21st century, so protecting them is a waste of resources. To what extent do you agree or disagree?

Some people argue that it is pointless to spend money on the protection of wild animals because we humans have no need for them. I completely disagree with this point of view.

In my opinion, it is absurd to argue that wild animals have no place in the 21st century. I do not believe that planet Earth exists only for the benefit of humans, and there is nothing special about this particular century that means that we suddenly have the right to allow or encourage the extinction of any species. Furthermore, there is no compelling reason why we should let animals die out. We do not need to exploit or destroy every last square metre of land in order to feed or accommodate the world’s population. There is plenty of room for us to exist side by side with wild animals, and this should be our aim.

I also disagree with the idea that protecting animals is a waste of resources. It is usually the protection of natural habitats that ensures the survival of wild animals, and most scientists agree that these habitats are also crucial for human survival. For example, rainforests produce oxygen, absorb carbon dioxide and stabilise the Earth’s climate. If we destroyed these areas, the costs of managing the resulting changes to our planet would far outweigh the costs of conservation. By protecting wild animals and their habitats, we maintain the natural balance of all life on Earth.

In conclusion, we have no right to decide whether or not wild animals should exist, and I believe that we should do everything we can to protect them.