After a one-on-one conversation last week, I have a lot of reflections on it. The first is that I learned the shortcomings of my wp1. I am more concerned with small details that can be ignored, rather than the coordination and compelling beginning of the article. For example, at the beginning of wp2, I spent a lot of sentences to emphasize the identity of the author. And I accurately wrote the name of this character in the article. It's also because I think the names of the characters are indispensable, so my beginnings are not very neat and eye-catching. After the teacher Zark made a slight change in the order of my article, my beginning was very different. This allows me to understand the importance of the lack of articles in LTE.
Of course, there are some good parts in my composition. I used the rhetorical question in both articles.“What about the security of the people? If possession of 30 grams has caused this damage, what about its legalization? What do we gain by being a wealthy but insecure state?” LTE1 and“ Why should people with cancer suffer during chemotherapy when there is a solution? Why should people suffer from depression when there is a solution to reduce it? Why should people cry over alcohol addiction when marijuana can help solve this problem?” LTE2. I think that the rhetorical question can not only cause the reader to think, but also make people compare the quality of the two-sided answer. Thus more support my central argument. You can also guide readers step by step to follow my thoughts to get to the topic. Of course, I did not mention only the one-sided support for this topic in the article.
I also used turning words and talked about negative benefits. For example: However, the public should be educated on its negative effects such as its effects on people with bipolar disorder. I only used one sentence in the text to explain. But the importance of this reverse thinking will be greatly reflected in the reader's reading.
评论
发表评论