Writing:
In China, to restore lost property to its original owner is regarded as one of the most cherished virtues. However, the draft property rights law stipulates that property Owners should pay some money to the one who returns the property. Is it a deviation from traditional values? Write a composition of about 400 words to state your view.
In the first part of your essay you should state clearly your main argument, and in the second part you should support your argument with appropriate details. In the last part you should bring what you have written to a natural conclusion or make a summary.
You should supply an appropriate title for your essay.
Marks will be awarded for content, organization, grammar and appropriateness. Failure to follow the above instructions may result in a loss of marks.
Sample
In Favor of Rewards for Good Conduct
To restore lost property to its original owner describes one of the most cherished virtues embodied by the Chinese people. The draft law stipulates that property owners should give rewards to the people or organizations that return their property, such as storage. To some people, the new provision challenges the virtue that China has advocated for thousands of years by including economic compensation into law. Yet to me, it is a good thing to regulate a moral concept with law.
Since people spend time and energy in restoring lost property, it is reasonable for the actual owner to offer some material reward. There is no contradiction between kind deeds and material compensation. If those who help others by fighting off robbers can be rewarded, why not those who return lost property? More importantly, giving people tangible reward has significance in reality. According to a survey, most people who get back their lost items are willing to give a reward to the finder. Providing a compromise solution between returning and keeping lost items, this new provision encourages people to return lost property rather than hiding it. Although one may say it diminishes the nobility associated with it, it is better to have more lost property restored to original ownership.
Law should play a role only where moral principle fails, otherwise, there would be chaos in social relations. I think this is the basis for transformation of law, specifically the stipulation of restoring lost property in propert, rights law. The major goal of this legislation is to restore property owners’ right over lost property. It is true that restoring lost property to its owner is our traditional virtue. For a long time, we have been relying on this moral principle in dealing with lost property. But today, we have to admit that it falls behind the realities of current society if we rely solely on it in handling the issue of lost property, the result is a much slighter possibility of lost property being returned and increasing disputes about restoring lost property.
All in all, without modification, traditional virtues will be going farther away from the realities of modern life and become irrelevant. What’s more, the draft of the property rights law stipulates that a finder“can’’ receive reward, which means they can also refuse reward. Thus, this does not thwart virtuous people from practicing our traditional virtues.
暂无解析
The children should go to school instead of to support their families.
汉译英：手机改变了人与人之间的关系。通常有注意到会议室的门上的告示，写着―关闭手机。‖然而，会议室仍然充满着铃声。我们都是普通人，没有很多重要的事情。但是，我们也不愿轻易关闭手机。打开手机象征着我们与世界的联系。手机反映出我们的社交饥渴。我们经常看到，一个人走着走着，就突然停下来了，眼睛盯着他的手机，不管他在那里，无论是在道路中心或旁边有厕所。
In some countries where racial prejudice is acute, violence has so come to be taken for granted as a means of solving differences, that it is not even questioned. There are countries where the white man imposes his rule by brute force; there are countries where the black man protests by setting fire to cities and by looting and pillaging. Important people on both sides, who would in other respects appear to be reasonable men, get up and calmly argue in favor of violence – as if it were a legitimate solution, like any other. What is really frightening, what really fills you with despair, is the realization that when it comes to the crunch, we have made no actual progress at all. We may wear collars and ties instead of war-paint, but our instincts remain basically unchanged. The whole of the recorded history of the human race, that tedious documentation of violence, has taught us absolutely nothing. We have still not learnt that violence never solves a problem but makes it more acute. The sheer horror, the bloodshed, the suffering mean nothing. No solution ever comes to light the morning after when we dismally contemplate the smoking ruins and wonder what hit us. The truly reasonable men who know where the solutions lie are finding it harder and herder to get a hearing. They are despised, mistrusted and even persecuted by their own kind because they advocate such apparently outrageous things as law enforcement. If half the energy that goes into violent acts were put to good use, if our efforts were directed at cleaning up the slums and ghettos, at improving living-standards and providing education and employment for all, we would have gone a long way to arriving at a solution. Our strength is sapped by having to mop up the mess that violence leaves in its wake. In a well-directed effort, it would not be impossible to fulfill the ideals of a stable social programme. The benefits that can be derived from constructive solutions are everywhere apparent in the world around us. Genuine and lasting solutions are always possible, providing we work within the framework of the law. Before we can even begin to contemplate peaceful co-existence between the races, we must appreciate each other's problems. And to do this, we must learn about them: it is a simple exercise in communication, in exchanging information. "Talk, talk, talk," the advocates of violence say, "all you ever do is talk, and we are none the wiser." It's rather like the story of the famous barrister who painstakingly explained his case to the judge. After listening to a lengthy argument the judge complained that after all this talk, he was none the wiser. "Possible, my lord," the barrister replied, "none the wiser, but surely far better informed." Knowledge is the necessary prerequisite to wisdom: the knowledge that violence creates the evils it pretends to solve.
1. What is the best title for this passage?
[A] Advocating Violence.
[B] Violence Can Do Nothing to Diminish Race Prejudice.
[C] Important People on Both Sides See Violence As a Legitimate Solution.
[D] The Instincts of Human Race Are Thirsty for Violence.
2. Recorded history has taught us
[A] violence never solves anything. [B] nothing. [C] the bloodshed means nothing. [D]everything.
3. It can be inferred that truly reasonable men
[A] can't get a hearing.
[B] are looked down upon.
[C] are persecuted.
[D] Have difficulty in
advocating law enforcement.
4. "He was none the wiser" means
[A] he was not at all wise in listening.
[B] He was not at all wiser than nothing before.
[C] He gains nothing after listening.
[D] He makes no sense of the argument.
5. According the author the best way to solve race prejudice is
[A] law enforcement. [B] knowledge. [C] nonviolence. [D] Mopping up the violent mess.
汉译英;我想不起来哪一个熟人没有手机。今天没有手机的人是奇怪的，这种人才需要解释。我们的所有社会关系都储存在手机的电话本里，可以随时调出使用。古代只有巫师才能拥有这种法宝。
手机刷新了人与人的关系。会议室门口通常贴着一条通告：请与会者关闭手机。可是会议室里的手机铃声仍然响成一片。我们都是普通人，并没有多少重要的事情。尽管如此， 我们也不会轻易关掉手机。 打开手机象征我们与这个世界的联系。手机反映出我们的 "社交饥渴症 "。最为常见的是，一个人走着走着突然停下来，眼睛盯着手机屏幕发短信。他不在乎停在马路中央还是厕所旁边。
为什么对于手机来电和短信这么在乎?因为我们迫切渴望与社会保持联系。
HowI_____Icouldliveonthemoon.
