各位学霸们好，今天黄老师跟大家分享一下本周PTE考场真题 - Summarize Written Text答案。
❌ 句子1 while 句子2, and 句子3 whereas 句子4.
❌ 句子1 because 句子2, but 句子3 while 句子4.
这些模版本身并没有太大的语法问题，但是他们的问题主要是在对应⚠️文章的逻辑上。因为该题并不是像很多人认为的那样：❌ 可以忽略文章的逻辑随意连接。同学们在使用从句的时候必须确保：☑️ 从句符合原文逻辑关系。
When an individual drives a car, heats a house, or uses an aerosol hair spray, greenhouse gases are produced. In economic terms, this creates a classic negative externality.Most of the cost (in this case, those arising from global warming) are borne by individuals other than the one making the decision about how many miles to drive or how much hair spray to use. Because the driver (or sprayer) enjoys all the benefits of the activities but suffers only part of the cost, that individual engages in more than the economically efficient amount of the activity. In this sense, the problem of greenhouse gases parallels the problem that occurs when someone smokes a cigarette in an enclosed space or litters the countryside with fast-food wrappers. If we are to get individuals to reduce production of greenhouse gases to the efficient rate, we must somehow induce them to act as though they bear all the costs of their actions. The two most widely accepted means of doing this are government regulation and taxation, both of which have been proposed to deal with greenhouse gases.
Greenhouse creates a classic negative externality that most of the cost are borne by individuals other than the one making the decision, andwe must somehow induce them to act as though they bear all the costs of their actions in order to reduce production of greenhouse gases to the efficient rate, which requires government regulation and taxation.
Because driver enjoys all the benefits of the activities but suffers only part of the cost, that individual engages in more than the economically efficient amount of the activity, so if we are to get individuals to reduce production of greenhouse gases to the efficient rate, we must somehow induce them to act as though they bear all the costs of their actions by government regulation and taxation.
2.Compulsory Voting in Australia
A democratic country should have the right to decide whether to vote or not. It is strange that after decades of crawling up the political backside of the US, Australians don't have that right. Being fined for not voting reminds me of the old saying "you can lead a horse to water but you cannot make him drink". The fine is not for failing to vote but for failing to have your name marked off a list! Forcing people to make a decision just means they'll make the easiest, quickest decision they can, not the best one. You need an informed electorate for compulsory voting to work. However, the reality is that nobody knows anything about the candidates and promotional material is not readily available. I'd rather 80% of people didn't vote than have them all just pick the first recognisable name on the ballot sheet. Then at least the government is elected by the 20% who care and make informed decisions. Otherwise it is largely pot chance who gets elected. Furthermore, compulsory voting doesn't ensure that the entire electorate is engaged in the democratic process. Those who don't want to vote can simply turn up and get their name marked off, without even putting pencil to paper. But you're seriously deluding yourself if you think that this is what all those who don't care about government do when they turn up to the polling booth. Voluntary voting at least ensures those who vote are the ones that care enough to do so. Perhaps somebody could enlighten me as to the reason why, to the best of my knowledge, Australia is the only 'democracy' that has compulsory voting. It is certainly not compulsory in the USA, England, Canada, New Zealand, Philippines or any other European or Asian democracy that I am aware of. Compulsory voting is, however, mandatory in most communist regimes.
Australia is the only democracy country that has compulsory votingwhereas compulsory voting is mandatory in most communist regimes, and forcing people to vote just means they'll make the easiest andquickest decision instead of the best one while compulsory voting doesn't ensure that entire electorate is engaged in the democratic process
3.American and Indian IT
Consider the current situation: like their counterparts in the United States, engineers, and technicians in India have the capacity to provide both computer programming and innovative new technologies. Indian programmers and high-tech engineers earn one-quarter of what their counterparts earn in the United States. Consequently, India is able to do both jobs at a lower dollar cost than the United States. India has an absolute advantage in both. In other words, it can produce a unit of programming for fewer dollars than the United States, and it can also produce a unit of technology innovation for fewer dollars. Does that mean that the United States will not lose not only programming jobs but innovative technology job, too? Does that mean that our standard of living will fall if the United States and India engage in the international trade? David Ricardo would have answered no to both questions- as we do today. While India may have an absolute advantage in both activities, that fact is irrelevant in determining what India or the United States will produce. India has a comparative advantage in doing programming in part because such activity requires little physical capital. The flip side is that the United States has a comparative advantage in technology innovation partly because it is relatively easy to obtain capital in this country to undertake such long-run projects.
India is able to do both computer programming and innovative new technologies at a lower dollar cost than the United States becausesuch activity requires little physical capital, but United States will not lose not only programming jobs but innovative technology jobbecause it is relatively easy to obtain capital in this country to undertake such long-run projects.
The world engages in improving literacy of reading and writing, but it is not that important now. What are text language anyway? It's an ancient IT for storing and retrieving information. We store information by writing it, and we retrieve it by reading it. Six thousand to 10,000 years ago, many of our ancestors' hunter -- gatherer societies settled on the land and began what's known as the agricultural revolution. That new land settlement led to private property and increased production and trade of goods, generating a huge new influx of information. Unable to keep all this information in their memories, our ancestors created systems of written records that evolved over millennia into today's written language. But this ancient IT is already becoming obsolete. Text has run its historic course and is now rapidly getting replaced in every area of our lives by the ever. increasing array of emerging ITs driven by voice, video, and body movement rather than the written word. In my view, this is a positive step forward in the evolution of human technology, and it carries great potential for a total positive redesign of education.
Text language, which is an ancient IT for storing and retrieving information, was created by our ancestors and evolved over millennia into today's written language, but text has run its historic course and is now rapidly getting replaced in every area of our lives by the ever, which is believed by author to be a positive step for technology and education.