[TOEFL] 토플 라이팅 1번 문제 답변 템플릿 (TOEFL Writing Q1. Integrated Writing Template)

서론

*이 두 문장은 통째로 암기

1. The reading passage and the lecturer both discuss [토픽]

2. The writer states that (   ), however, the lecturer disagrees with the argument, saying that (   ).

 

본론

1. Fisrt of all, <상황설명> + <부연설명>

2. Secondly, <상황설명> + <부연설명>

3. Finally, <상황설명> + <부연설명>

<상황설명>

- The lecturer [ v ] the [ writer's point / argument / opinion ] that (   ).
- [ He / She / The lecturer ] [ v ] that (   ).

<부연설명>

- (반대의견1) Although the writer [ v ] that (   ), the lecturer [ v ] that (   ).

- (반대의견2) While the writer [ v ] that (   ), the lecturer [ v ] that (   ).

- (공통의견 짚기) While the writer and the lecturer both agree that (   ),
                            in the reading passage, the lecturer [ v ] that (   ).

 

[ v ]에 쓸만한 동사들

- 반박하다: doubts, claims, points out, refutes, contends, challenges

- 주장하다: states, asserts, says, argues

- 강조하다: highlights, emphasizes

---

Practice

 

The reading passage and the writer both discuss ( the declination of the yellow cedar tree. )

The writer states that ( scientists can account for the reason for the declination by some htpotheses ), however, the lecturer disagrees with the argument, saying that ( these hypotheses are not convincing at all. )

 

1. First of all, the lecturer doubts the writer's point that ( climate change leads to difficulties in the growth of surface roots. ) He claims that ( cold temperatures are not related to a tree's health. The fact is that the lower temperature at high altitude, the fewer trees die there. )

Although the writer states that ( young roots are prone to freezing in cold temperatures ), the lecturer points out that ( trees usually have a great chance of survival even in cold environments. )

 

2. Secondly, the lecturer refutes the argument in the reading passage that ( parasites such as cedar bark beeltes are harmful to the tree. ) He states that(  the beetles have no negative effects on the yellow cedar tree because they have resistance to insects. )

While the writer states that ( the larvae of the beetle eat the wood ), the lecturer highlights that ( the actual damage the tree could sustain from them is minimal. That's because they are toxic to insects chemically; therefore, thier attacks could not directly affect to the tree. To be specific, there is a higher probability of already having diseases. )

 

3. Finally, the lecturer doubts the argument that ( a brown bear can damage the tree by tearing off bark from the tree. ) He contends that ( the bears are not responsible for the decline. Actually, brown bears don't live in habitats where the yellow cedar trees are plentiful. )

While the lecturer and the writer both agree that ( the brown bear's feeding habit poses a risk to the trees ), in the reading passage, the lecturer says that ( there is a low possibility of such an event actually occuring. )

 

 

The reading passage and the lecturer both discuss the effectiveness of TED(Turtle Excluder Device). The writer states that many people are opposed to using TED, however, the lecturer disagrees with the argument, saying that many experts acknowledge the excellence of TED.

1. First of all, the lecturer challenges the opinion in the reading passage that TED is not as effective as other strategies, such as restricting the amount of time underwater. She refutes that it may sound good, but is very difficult to enforce on a large number of boats. While the writer states that setting a time limit may help the caught turtles have a chance to breathe or be free, the lecturer highlights that the strategy(=the restraint) is not as simple as installing TED, because there are too many boats to regulate.

2. Secondly, the lecturer refutes the argument in the reading passage that the TED is ineffective for certain alrge turtle species. She points out that those speices are present in very small numbers in shrimp fishing locations. Although the writer asserts that there are large turtles such as adult leatherbacks and loggerheads, the lecturer states that TED can still be implemented.

3. Finally, the lecturer doubts the writer's point that it lowers the profitability of boats because turtles rarely get tangled up in nests. While the writer and the lecturer both agree that data indicates that only 10 turtles are caught per year, the lecturer highlights that 10 is a huge number for already endangered specices. She argues that rapid decline of endangered turtle populations is worse than decline in human profits.

 

 

The writer and the lecturer both discuss a few theories to explain why there is a 52-hertz whale. The writer states that there are three probable theories to explain this, however, the lecturer argues that each of three theories has flaws. (=these three theories are all indistinct)

1. First of all, the lecturer doubts the writer's point that the 52-hertz whale must be a species that scientists have never encountered before, suggesting that it may be the only surviving member of a rare species. He challenges that it is improbable for it to be the last member of an endangered species. This is because scientists have never heard the singing of its parents or ancestors for several decades. (=that high pitch is unprecedented)

2. Secondly, the lecturer refutes the opinion in the reading passage that it may be the hybrid of two different species. He points out that the probability of it being a hybrid is low. He states that the 52-hertz whale exhibits an unusual migration pattern, whereas a hybrid usually follows the migration pattern of non-hybrids.

3. Finally, the lecturer claims the argument in the reading passage that it might be unable to hear. He says that hearing deficiencies cannot explain why its singing frequency is so high. Although the writer states that an impaired whale is highly likely to develop very differently from a whale with perfect hearing, the lecturer says that the high pitch is not related to deafness but rahter to the structure of its throats.

 

The writer and the lecturer both discuss ethanol fuel, one of the alternatives to traditional gasoline. The writer states that ethanol is not a suitable future alternative to gasoline, however, the lecturer disagrees with the argument, saying that it is not persuasive.

First of all, the lecturer refutes the writer's point that ethanol can not compete with gasoline in terms of price. She states that the price of ethanol fuel will decrease in the future. While the writer and the lecturer both agree that the current government subsidy policy is offsetting the cost, the lecturer highlights that the cost of ethanol fuel is highly likely to decrease by about 40% if the ethanol fuel production increases by more than 300%.

Secondly, the lecturer doubts the opinion in the reading passage that gasoline-related issues such as global warming will not be solved by ethanol fuel. She argues that the process of burning ethanol is balanced when it comes to CO2 emissions. Although the writer says that ethanol fuel is not beneficial to the environment due to the CO2 release, the lecturer contends that the amount of CO2 absorbed by plants used for producing ethanol fuel is greater than the amount of CO2 released.

Finally, the lecturer challenges the argument in the reading passage that ethanol production will lead to a decrease in the number of plants available for food. She points out that the feedstocks for farm animals will not be affected by ethanol production. This is because ethanol fuel can be produced from cellulose, which is abundant in plant walls and unsuitable for animal food, as well as from feedstocks.