欧洲杯押注软件下载_欧洲杯押注平台

每场雅思考试之后，时间分享本场考试雅思A类大作文的范文权威解析。欢迎每周锁定。

2019年10月26日
雅思大作文题目
该谁来负责清理环境？

      “ Some people think that companies and private individuals, not the government, should pay to clean up the environment in proportion to the amount of pollution they have produced.To what extent do you agree or disagree?”

解析&审题

      本题审题中有一个暗含的陷阱，因为本题实际上包含了两个部分：部分是“公司和个人应该清理环境，而非政府”，第二个部分是“应该按照制造污染的数量的比例来负责清理环境”，也就是说，你制造了多少污染，你就负责清理多少垃圾。可能多数同学都回应了个部分，而没有注意到第二个部分。
      首先看个部分：公司和个人应该清理环境而非政府。可能我们的直觉是应该同意这个观点，而且认为这个观点非常合理，因为如果公司和个人不为环境不负责，他们就不会主动减少污染排放。这个观点基本是可以的，但我们也应该看到，这个观点依然是比较的，因为它只适用人为因素造成的污染（比如乱扔垃圾，使用交通工具等），却不适用那些非人为因素造成的污染，比如火山爆发、森林着火等引起的污染，对于那些非人为因素造成的污染，显然应该由政府负责清理。因此，这里的讨论应该区分“人为污染”和“非人为污染”两种情况。
      再看第二个部分：按照制造污染的数量比例来负责清理环境。这个建议虽然难以实施，但还是一个很好的建议，因为它体现了公平原则，也能对制造污染的公司和个人产生重要的制约作用。
      以下请看唐老师的高分范文。

老师笔记

      01
      Given the high costs of cleaning up the environmental pollution, some people argue that companies and individuals, rather than the government, should shoulder the financial responsibility of protecting the environment and how much they should pay depends on the amount of pollution they have produced.
      鉴于清理环境污染的成本高昂，有人认为，企业和个人，而不是政府，应该承担起保护环境的财政责任，他们应该支付多少，取决于他们产生的污染量。
      解析
      （1） 本段开门见山，直接对题目中的观点进行重新表述。
      （2） Given 鉴于；由于
      （3） Depend on... 取决于......
       02
      It is certainly true that the government should invoke the ‘polluter pays’ principle and make companies and individuals accountable for the damages done to the environment and human health, because this will make them feel the environmental burden of their action and stop them from doing more harm to the environment. For example, a paper-making factory will be more careful with its wastes if it is compelled to pay a tremendous amount of money for the water it pollutes, and a car owner may choose to use public transport if he is made to pay an extra pollution fee for driving.
      毫无疑问，政府应该援引“谁污染谁付费”的原则，让企业和个人为他们对环境和人类健康造成的损害负责，因为这将使他们感觉到自己的行为对环境造成的负担，从而阻止他们对环境造成欧洲杯押注软件下载_欧洲杯押注平台：的损害。例如，如果强迫造纸厂为其污染的水支付巨额费用，它就会更加小心处理其废物；如果让车主为驾驶而支付额外的污染费，他有可能选择使用公共交通工具。
      解析
      （1） 本段论证让公司和个人为其造成的污染是合理的。本段使用的是例证法：列举了两个例子。
      （2） Invoke 援用；使用
      （3） Accountable 负责的
      （4） Compel 强迫
      （5） A tremendous amount of... 大量的......
      （6） Extra fee 额外费用

      03
      Yet this does not mean that the government has no share of responsibility in cleaning up the environment. In fact, in cases such as volcanic eruption and forest fire, the pollution happens, but not as a result of the improper action of any company or individual. Under such circumstances, the government should be responsible for restoring the environment.
      然而，这并不意味着政府在清理环境方面没有责任。事实上，遇到诸如火山爆发和森林火灾这些情况，污染是会发生的，但不是任何公司或个人的不当行为造成的。在这些情况下，政府应该负责恢复环境。
      解析
      （1） 本段从另外一个角度论述政府在某些情况下也应该对环境负责。
      （2） This does not mean that... 这并不意味着......
      （3） Volcanic erutption 火山爆发
      （4） As a result of... 由于......
      （5） Under such circumstances 在这些（种）情况下
      （6） Restore 回复
      04
      It is perfectly reasonable that the companies and individuals who do greater harm to the environment should pay more to clean it up, though many problems may arise when this policy is put into practice. It is, after all, very difficult to determine in exact terms the proportion of pollution a company or individual has produced, and therefore there will be many quarrels about how much a company or individual should pay to deal with the pollution. Nevertheless, I believe that a final solution will be found so that no company or individual will argue over their share of responsibility.  
      对环境危害较大的企业和个人，应该多花点钱来进行清理，这是完全合理的，尽管这项政策实施后可能会出现很多问题。毕竟，很难准确地确定一个公司或个人所制造的污染的比例，因此，对于一个公司或个人应支付多少费用来处理污染，会有很多争吵。不过，我相信，较终的解决办法会找到，这样就不会有公司或个人为自己的责任分担而争论了。
      解析
      （1） 本段对题目的另一个观点进行回应，即是否应该按照造成污染的比例来确定公司和个人应该支付的款项。本文认为这个措施不错，但很难实施。
      （2） Arise （问题或情形）出现
      （3） Put into practice 实施
      （4） After all 毕竟
      （5） In exact terms 准确地

7分范文

      Given the high costs of cleaning up the environmental pollution, some people argue that companies and individuals, rather than the government, should shoulder the financial responsibility of protecting the environment and how much they should pay depends on the amount of pollution they have produced.
      It is certainly true that the government should invoke the ‘polluter pays’ principle and make companies and individuals accountable for the damages done to the environment and human health, because this will make them feel the environmental burden of their action and stop them from doing more harm to the environment. For example, a paper-making factory will be more careful with its wastes if it is compelled to pay a tremendous amount of money for the water it pollutes, and a car owner may choose to use public transport if he is made to pay an extra pollution fee for driving.
      Yet this does not mean that the government has no share of responsibility in cleaning up the environment. In fact, in cases such as volcanic eruption and forest fire, the pollution happens, but not as a result of the improper action of any company or individual. Under such circumstances, the government should be responsible for restoring the environment.
      It is perfectly reasonable that the companies and individuals who do greater harm to the environment should pay more to clean it up, though many problems may arise when this policy is put into practice. It is, after all, very difficult to determine in exact terms the proportion of pollution a company or individual has produced, and therefore there will be many quarrels about how much a company or individual should pay to deal with the pollution. Nevertheless, I believe that a final solution will be found so that no company or individual will argue over their share of responsibility.  
      (306 words)

建议背诵的句子

      1. It is certainly true that the government should invoke the ‘polluter pays’ principle and make companies and individuals accountable for the damages done to the environment and human health, because this will make them feel the environmental burden of their action and stop them from doing more harm to the environment.
      毫无疑问，政府应该援引“谁污染谁付费”的原则，让企业和个人为他们对环境和人类健康造成的损害负责，因为这将使他们感觉到自己的行为对环境造成的负担，从而阻止他们对环境造成欧洲杯押注软件下载_欧洲杯押注平台：的损害。
      2. In fact, in cases such as volcanic eruption and forest fire, the pollution happens, but not as a result of the improper action of any company or individual.
      事实上，遇到诸如火山爆发和森林火灾这些情况，污染是会发生的，但不是任何公司或个人的不当行为造成的。
      3. It is perfectly reasonable that the companies and individuals who do greater harm to the environment should pay more to clean it up, though many problems may arise when this policy is put into practice.
      对环境危害较大的企业和个人，应该多花点钱来进行清理，这是完全合理的，尽管这项政策实施后可能会出现很多问题。
      4. It is, after all, very difficult to determine in exact terms the proportion of pollution a company or individual has produced, and therefore there will be many quarrels about how much a company or individual should pay to deal with the pollution.
      毕竟，很难准确地确定一个公司或个人所制造的污染的比例，因此，对于一个公司或个人应支付多少费用来处理污染，会有很多争吵。