Toefl writing review: discuss whether the trouble is to call or text.

In our daily life, we all encounter some annoying or controversial problems with others. What is the problem of distress? This problem is very complicated and can't be solved immediately. What is a controversial issue? There are at least two different views on this, and it is difficult to convince the supporters of the other view in one sentence. Although some people may choose to send text messages or emails, I prefer to use telephone or voice messages to discuss such issues.

Voice SMS is more effective than SMS. I think both young and old people can speak faster than typing on the phone or computer. Therefore, in the same time, voice short messages can convey more information than short messages, which is of great significance in the discussion of disturbing issues. When I was a freshman, I had trouble in how to apply for the student union. Then I sent a text message to my seniors for help. However, she just asked me if it was convenient to answer the phone. After I promised, she called back and told me the complicated process in ten minutes. What she includes is really not simple. If she types, it may take half an hour. Time is money, in other words, time is so precious that we shouldn't ignore any way to save time.

The ambiguity caused by short messages can be reduced by pronunciation. The wording is likely to lead to ambiguity, which may lead to two different or even opposite understandings. But if you choose to make a phone call or send a voice message, the intonation and voice can make it clear. Take the word yes for example. When you text me yes, I will think that I persuaded you to agree with me. In fact, this is pure irony, and you don't believe it at all. On the contrary, if you say it, I won't be so stupid that I can't tell whether this is true agreement or sarcasm. In this respect, voice information is better. Although, you may say, when the problem is controversial on the phone, it is easy to argue with the other party, but SMS will not. Using email or SMS means that you can modify your words and control your emotions many times, which really helps to avoid conflicts. On the contrary, it also means that I can't get a direct response. I'll send you an email, and send it back one day after you notice it. My next response to this question may be one week later. How can we be so inefficient when the problem is disturbing or controversial?

If you ask me how you will discuss a book or a movie, I will answer that it is better to use email or text messages. But now these issues are disturbing or controversial. So I still choose to express myself by phone or voice message.

Homework review

In our daily life, we all encounter some annoying or controversial problems with others. What is a troublesome problem? This problem is very complicated and can't be solved immediately. What is a controversial issue? There are at least two different views on this ... usually expressing their views on something. Or about something. It is different to convince supporters of another point of view in one sentence. Although some people may choose to send text messages or emails, I prefer to discuss such issues by phone or voice messages.

In the first paragraph, the author puts forward the view that when discussing controversial or annoying issues, the author prefers to choose telephone or send voice messages. The author explains the meanings of subversive and comparative problems according to his own understanding. In the following argumentation, especially when giving examples, he will defend himself according to the definition given here, otherwise these two sentences will be meaningless.

Voice SMS is more effective than SMS. I think the speed of speaking ("the speed of doing something") is generally expressed as the speed of doing something, whether young or old. And it's better to change it to of speaking) than typing (this sentence is expressed as "the speed of speaking is faster than the speed of typing", and the speed of typing can be changed to that, here it should be changed to: the speed of typing) on the phone or computer. Therefore, at the same time, the semantic expression at the same time is inaccurate, which is easy to cause misunderstanding. Voice short messages can convey more information than short messages, which is of great significance in the discussion of distress problems (problems). (The author gives an analytical argument) When I was a freshman in college, I had trouble with how to apply. It's an idiom that doesn't follow the infinitive compound structure and can be changed to apply for the student union. Then I sent a text message to my seniors for help. Anyway, she just asked me when I was present (the subject of present can't be people, if it means to facilitate someone to do something, it is usually convenient for someone. Do sth. Here is changed to: agree to answer the phone. After I promised, she called back and told me the complicated process in ten minutes. The content she collected is really not simple, and she may be taken. If she types, half an hour. Time is money, in other words, time is so precious that we shouldn't ignore any way to save time. (This sentence at the end of the paragraph is not closely related to the previous sentence, so it is suggested to delete it. )

In the second paragraph, the author puts forward the first reason to support his argument: voice messages are more efficient than short messages. Judging from the development of the argument, the author gives reasons to support the reasons with analytical arguments and explanatory arguments, but the example given by the author is to show that making a phone call is more effective, which has nothing to do with the central sentence of this paragraph (sending voice messages is more efficient than sending text messages). In addition, this example will be more convincing if the article can explain that applying for the student union is a very distressing thing.

Ambiguity caused by text messages (messages) can be reduced by speech. (Give the second reason) wording means "Wording". The author's original intention is that words can cause ambiguity, which cannot be expressed in words. ) likes to lead to ambiguity, and there may be two different or even opposite understandings. But if you choose to make a phone call or send a voice message, this intrusion and voice can be made clear. Take the word yes as an example. When you text me yes, I will think that I persuaded you to agree with me. In fact, this is pure irony, and you don't believe it at all. On the contrary, if you say it, I won't be so stupid that I can't tell whether this is true agreement or sarcasm. In this respect, voice information is better. The argument that the author wants to explain is that "the author tends to use telephone or voice messages when encountering controversial or complicated problems". This example does not mention discussing complex and controversial issues, which is obviously unconvincing. Although, you may say that when the problem is controversial on the phone, it is easy to argue with the other party, but SMS will not. Using email or SMS means that you can modify your words and control your emotions many times, which really helps to avoid conflicts. On the contrary, it also means that I can't get a direct response. I'll send you an email, and send it back one day after you notice it. My next response to this question may be one week later. How can we be so inefficient when the problem is disturbing or controversial? This part of the argument can't support the author's second reason. Perhaps the author is trying to explain that voice messages and phone calls are more direct, but in the last sentence, the author is talking about efficiency. Obviously, this part is invalid. )

In the third paragraph, the author gives a second reason to support his argument: pronunciation can eliminate ambiguity better than short messages. There are also analytical arguments and empirical arguments, but the problem is that empirical arguments are not closely related to arguments and are not convincing.

If you ask me how you will discuss a book or a movie, I will answer that it is better to use email or text messages. But now the problem is escalating or contradictory. So I'm still trying. Choose to express yourself by phone or voice message.

In the last paragraph, the author concludes that when discussing controversial issues, the author tends to choose telephone and voice messages. Before reaching a conclusion, the author eliminated the one-sided argument that "when discussing books or movies, it is best to send emails and messages".

According to the TOEFL writing independent task scoring standard, the author can examine the questions in a pertinent way, and use analytical argumentation and practical argumentation in the process of argumentation. The main problems in the article are: the logic is not strict, the argument is not closely related to the argument, and even has nothing to do with the argument; There are many grammatical errors in expression, such as some fixed collocation errors, singular and plural errors and so on. And the written language expression ability is not good. It is suggested that the author accumulate rich arguments in the process of preparing for TOEFL, consider the availability of arguments when writing, remember fixed collocation, and form the habit of self-checking grammatical errors after writing.