作者：北美考试院 托福写作组 陈亚男
2020.01.11 托福综合写作真题 |
Integrated Writing Task |
阅读部分：三种解决方案阻止蝙蝠被风力涡轮机伤害到 1、不造在蝙蝠的迁移路径上； 2、不在晚上运行； 3、制作蝙蝠不喜欢的雷达让它们不能接近。
听力反驳：阅读所说的三种方法都无法实现 1、风力涡轮机需要造在风很大的地方，如果把它建在了蝙蝠飞不到的地方例如平原，那就没有足够的风可以让它运行起来； 2、晚上蝙蝠会栖息在高的东西上面，有可能会栖息在风力涡轮机上面。所以如果白天风力涡轮机开启就可能会伤害到这些蝙蝠； 3、蝙蝠之所以会远离雷达是因为雷达会损害它们的生殖能力，只要碰到一点就会带来的伤害。所以如果在那边放置雷达，他们的生育率会更加低，从而蝙蝠的种群数量会更低。 |
这道题目可以说是复习充分的考生不会感觉陌生的考题，一是本身就是常考的动植物类领域，二是考的又是相对常见的由于人类活动导致动植物数量变化的题材。考生可以通过平时TPO练习时多掌握这类高频话题的反驳思路，做到词汇无障碍，反驳思路有底气。如TPO17、34、42，都和本期考题有相似之处。
可以类比下列这些TPO的综合写作。
TPO17
阅读部分：
总观点：人类活动会导致鸟类灭绝的原因
• 鸟类的栖息地持续减少
• 人口增长导致的农业发展持续影响鸟类栖息地
• 人类居住地扩张和农业发展不可避免带来更多的农药使用
听力反驳：
总观点：阅读所使用的理由都是没有说服力的
• 城市的发展事实上也为其他的鸟类提供了更大更好的栖息地；
• 农产品产量的增加是因为引进了新的、产量更高的农作物品种，而这种趋势将会持续。这些新的农作物有更高的亩产量，因而，就没有必要破坏原有荒地用作农耕了；
• 农产品产量的增加是因为引进了新的、产量更高的农作物品种。这些新的农作物有更高的亩产量，因而，就没有必要破坏原有荒地用作农耕了。
TPO42
阅读部分：
总观点：建筑物上的玻璃对鸟类造成危害的解决办法：
• 用单面玻璃；
• 设计彩色图案；
• 加上磁场引导鸟类。
听力反驳：
总观点：阅读中的保护鸟类不受到来自玻璃的伤害的方法全都是无用的：
• 单向玻璃会被鸟当成镜子，它们还是会撞上去；
• 那些没有被涂成彩色的玻璃会被鸟当成是洞，一样会撞上去；
• 只有当长途飞行时比如迁徙，鸟类才会用地磁导航。
以上两道题目的思路和高频词对这次考试的题目很有参考价值。
有一些观点是人类活动对动物影响中非常常见的：如威胁、预防措施、迁徙等。考生需要掌握以下高频词汇：
² 威胁/伤害（threat/harm/ devastate/ injuries）
² 人工的（artificial, man-made）
² 迁徙/引入（isolate/ migrate/ immigrate）
2020.01.11托福独立写作真题 |
Independent Writing Task |
Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?
It is more important for governments to spend money on building new housing than to spend money on preserving historical or old homes and buildings.
|
题目解析：
1月11日的独立写作是一道重复很久之前的旧题（2014年出现过），但是仍然不失为是一道友好的题目。关于人文价值和经济价值的争议在如今国内社会也是越来越有讨论度的一类话题。譬如前端时间一度热议的综艺节目《奇葩说》讨论的——当火灾发生时，应该抢救世界名画还是一只小猫——“远方的哭声和近处的哭声”这个话题其实可以说和本题的思路有异曲同工之妙。可见，对于19年开始显而易见的托福独立写作中明显频率升高的社会类题目，学生可以通过平时生活中多进行人文社科的拓展和思考做到考试时思路有干货，论证有素材。特别地，由于历史建筑题材对中国考生特别友好，文中提到历史文化遗产的细节和举例可以说相对轻松了。
一个参考思路：选择经济价值（保证人民生活质量，创造就业机会，促进经济发展）/选择文化价值（保存文化历史遗传，提供教育机会和场所，也能将文化价值转化为经济价值等）
关于文章的结构方面，由于文章中具备清晰的两个对比项，且双方都可以说理据充分。建议可以写成两个正面论证加上一个让步反驳段，构成一篇文章。
请参考如下范文：
Saturated with match-box-like buildings, the government of metropolises in modern world are now facing with a dilemma---whether more funds should be allocated to old towns or the modern edifices. Some opinions point out that, the more new constructions, the more space they create for the citizens who suffer from the prohibitive housing prices, contributing to the societal soundness. From my perspective, however, the expenditure should be applied more to those historical architectures.
The main reason for preserving traditional buildings is the cultural, aesthetic and historical qualities it provides. History makes us what we are now, indicates where should we go, and distinguishes us from people from other nations. Historical buildings，the embodiment of history for a nation or a city, carry our cultural identity and symbolism. What would China be without the Forbidden City, what would Italy be without the Roman Colosseum and what would France be without Notre Dame cathedral? Apparently, the financial support from governments can ensure the survival of those historical buildings for at least decades or even centuries in future, showing and conveying the prosperity of the past as well as the distinguishable contemporary image of the cities to the rest of world.
Moreover, funding these historical building is a real boost for the local tourism. It is not uncommon to see that quite a few valuable old buildings have become famous tourist attractions, bringing in millions and millions of visitors home and abroad to appreciate the beauty. For instance, the famed Terra-Cotta Warriors built in China's ancient imperial city of Xi'an during the Qin Dynasty (221BC-206BC), has managed to attract more than 100 million tourists in 2019, 20% of whom are from foreign countries. It is not hard to image that how much this flourishing tourism stimulates the other industries, such as catering services, local and domestic transportation, manufacturing industry and so forth. With more funds infused into maintenance, these buildings would renew and revive, rendering them better prepared for the sightseeing. As a result, the constant flow from tourists can be provided and collected back to the authority to increase its tax revenues.
Admittedly, as the gap between the rich and the poor is growing, these apartments in cities become unaffordable. Accordingly, constructing more new building helps drive down the cost of housing. Nevertheless, the high housing prices is mainly derived from a surge of private capitals rushing into the markets. What the government ought to do and what the most efficient measure to guarantee dwellers’ housing should be the massive involvement and oversight from housing to financial regulatory. All in all, keeping enough housing spaces should not come at the expense of the preservation of traditional values.
In conclusion, when confronted with the choices between constructions of new housing and preservation of historical buildings, I believe it is more meaningful if governmental budget goes to the latter one.
