综合

Reading

Heinrich Schliemann discovered a golden mask of warrior king. He claimed that the golden mask is the Mask of Agamemnon. However, the archaeology industry suspects that the golden mask is a fake. There are three reasons for that.

Firstly, Schliemann has a reputation of faking his discovery and excavation. He used to buy an antique from a craftsman and claim that the item is from ancient Greek until it was identified a fake. Therefore, the golden mask is very suspicious and Schliemann is incredible.

Secondly, some features of the golden mask are different from the authentic golden masks from Ancient Greek. Ancient Greek golden masks have very flat appearance and no pointed hairs. The golden mask of warrior king discovered by Schliemann has very well-defined lips and pointed beard. Therefore, the golden mask is a fake.

Thirdly, Schliemann immediately shut down the site where the golden mask is discovered after he found the golden mask. This is a very suspicious behavior. Usually archeologist will continue to excavate the site in the hope of finding more cultural information about the discovery, such as the historical context and identify whose mask it is. More information about the mask could have been discovered to identify the mask, however, Schliemann close the site in a rush, revealing his afraid of being found that the mask is a fake.

Lecture

Though many archeologists think the golden mask of warrior king is a fake, but I think that is an authentic item from Ancient Greek. There are three reasons to refute the points in the passage.

Firstly, Schliemann did have a reputation of faking discovery and excavation. However, for this mask, it’s not easy to fake. The Greek government is familiar with Schliemann’s reputation of dishonesty and specifically assigned a supervisor to closely supervise and monitor Schliemann’s work of excavation. If Schliemann really cheated on this discovery, it’s hard to do so without being caught by the supervisor.

Secondly, a golden mask of lion from Ancient Greek, which was proved an authentic antique, was compared with the golden mask of warrior king. The golden lion mask also has three-dimensioned lips and nose, and all pointed hair. All the features are comparable to the golden mask of warrior king.

Thirdly, the timing of the site being shut down immediately after the golden mask was discovered can be explained. Schliemann was not a real archeologist but a treasure hunter. It fitted a treasure hunter’s habit to close the site immediately after he depleted all the valuable things in the site. Therefore, Schliemann’s behavior of shutting down the site is not suspicious.

Question: summarize the points in the lecture, make sure how they oppose the specific points in the reading message.

Sample Answer:

The writer presents that there are several factors to demonstrate the mask found by Heinrich Schliemann is a fake, while the professor proves that the mask is genuine and the arguments in the reading are not convincing.

First, the writer says Schliemann had a history of fake discoveries. However, the professor suggests that because Schliemann had a bad reputation, his discoveries would be examined very closely by others. And there were many Greek supervisors guarded the site, which make it impossible that Schliemann could put the mask into the site without being found.

Second, as for the notable differences between the mask and other genuine ancient Greek masks found in other tombs, the professor points out that an old mask found in the same site was familiar with the mask found by Schliemann. The two masks have similar lines in mouth and sharp beard.

Finally, the lecturer provides a good explanation for Schliemann’s quick close of the site. Different from today’s archeologists, the ancient archeologists were only treasure hunters who just had interests in finding valuable objects and did not care about the culture of the objects. When Schliemann found the site had no valuable objects, he chose to close the site immediately.

(203 words)

独立

Children rely too much on the technology, like computers, smart phones, video games for fun and entertainment. Playing simpler toys or playing outside with friends would be better for children’s development.

Sample Answer:

Since the game Angry Birds went viral on the Internet, passed away at the age of young people, the negative effective to young children has been worried by most educators and parents. They relied too much on technological products for fun and entertainment, which has already caused severe problems. If I were parents, I would limited the time my kids spent on those “technology” and pushed them to play with simpler toys or hang out with friends.

The first reason must be the good of their health. Playing games on smartphones or computers means that the children have to stare at the electronic screen for a long time. The radiation these devices give off is harmful for human vision. Plus, due to their young age, their visual system is not entirely developed enough to bear the radiation. It will probably result in visual fatigue and thus cause shortsightedness. However, playing with simpler toys or with friends can avoid this potential harm. Doing some sports outside with friends such as running and playing soccer is good for children’s physical development. Evidently, regular outdoor exercise is an effective way to boost adolescent growth.

Moreover, playing with friends helps develop social and communication skills. When they hang out with friends, both listening and expressing is necessary in a harmonious friendship. In the process, one will understand the importance of exchanging ideas and cooperation and will also learn how to express themselves in a more effective way, which plays a vital role in one’s future life and career. That is why those kids who only stay at home and play games on computers alone lose the opportunity to interact with others and thus become unsociable.

Granted, getting knowledge by VR or AR is awesome in today’s smartphone. Many apps designed for education are present as games to children, which can, to some degree, motivate their curiosity, creativity and interest. In fact, the children won’t learn something as we expect. Most children ask their parents to buy the iPad in the name of study but actually for entertainment. Thus, encouraging them to hang out with friends will promise that they are more likely to learning something for real.

To conclude, playing with simpler toys or with friends is much better than staring at the screen of computers and playing games. It not only benefits the children’s physical growth but also helps foster interpersonal skills.

(399 words)