Чтение и письмо: аргументированное эссе (even if, however + прилагательное)
Слова урока · 4
- alternative /ɔːlˈtɜːnətɪv/альтернатива
- on the merits /ɒn ðə ˈmerɪts/по существу
- proposal /prəˈpəʊzl/предложение
- weigh /weɪ/взвесить
Фразы урока · 2
- Consider at least one alternative, and judge each option on the merits.Рассмотрите хотя бы одну альтернативу и судите каждый вариант по существу.
- The proposal has three parts — weigh the alternatives against the same criteria.Предложение состоит из трёх частей — взвесьте альтернативы по одним критериям.
Текст: «Эссе: должны ли города платить жителям за отказ от машины? Три варианта»
The goal is not in dispute. Every party on the council wants fewer cars in the town centre, cleaner air and a market square that is not a car park. What is contested is the means, and the debate has narrowed — wrongly, I think — to a single proposal: paying households £500 a year to give up a car. This essay weighs that proposal against two alternatives and argues that the principle, not the payment, is what matters.
The strongest case for the payment is that it is honest about cost. Car-free households already subsidise drivers: a town-centre parking space is worth about £2,000 a year in lost rent, and road wear and air-quality measures cost the council roughly £600 per car. On this view, £500 is not a bribe but a partial refund. Ashford tried it, lost 200 cars from its centre in a year, and gained a square. Admittedly, uptake was modest — 340 households — and, more seriously, 70 % of those lived in central wards where nobody needs a car. The payment rewarded a choice already made. This is not to say the principle is wrong; it is to say the design was.
The first alternative is the mirror image: charge rather than pay. A £3 daily congestion charge on the two roads into the centre would, on the council's own model, remove more cars than the payment did, and it would raise money rather than spend it. The objection here is legitimate and holds for a specific group: villagers with no evening bus, for whom the charge is a tax on the only way in. However well the scheme performs on paper, it fails that group unless the revenue funds their bus first.
The second alternative is to spend the same money on the bus itself. £170,000 — Ashford's first-year cost — buys an hourly evening service to the five villages for two years. It removes no cars directly, and its effect on the square is slower. By the same token, it is the only option of the three that gives the villagers something rather than taking something away, and it makes both the payment and the charge fairer if either is adopted later.
Taken together, the options point to a principle rather than a winner: whichever measure is chosen, the people who cannot give up a car must gain before those who can are paid. It follows that the bus comes first, the charge second, and the payment — if at all — last, and only for households outside the centre. Even if the payment alone would work faster, speed bought by unfairness does not last. In short, the council has been arguing about the wrong question.
Задание
Напишите аргументированное эссе (240–280 слов) по общественному вопросу вашего города (например: платная парковка у школ, закрытие улицы для машин, перенос рынка, школьная форма): разбор — общая цель и спорное средство или допущение (the goal is not in dispute; what is contested is; rests on an assumption); сильнейший довод против вашей позиции в честной форме (the strongest case against; at its strongest; to be fair to; legitimate); развёрнутая уступка (granted / admittedly / while it is true that → nonetheless / for all that; even though vs even if; however … / no matter how); вес аргумента (right about X; holds only for; the general point stands / narrow the conclusion); хотя бы одна альтернатива, взвешенная по тем же критериям; абзацы с тезисом, основаниями, оговоркой и переходом (it follows that; by the same token; this is not to say; which brings me to); вывод-принцип (in short).
Образец ответа
Should our town charge for parking outside schools at drop-off time?
The goal is not in dispute: nobody wants forty cars on the pavement at half past eight while children walk between them. What is contested is the means — a £2 charge for stopping within 100 metres of the school gates — and the assumption behind it: that a charge will move cars rather than simply move money.
The strongest case against the charge, at its strongest, is not that parents dislike paying. It is that the charge falls hardest on families from the two villages with no morning bus, for whom driving is the only way to school, while families who can walk already do. To be fair to the objectors, that is a legitimate concern with a number behind it: about a fifth of pupils live outside walking distance.
Granted, then, a flat charge is unfair to that fifth. Nonetheless, the objection holds only for them, and it does not touch the main point: the other four fifths who drive could walk, and a charge is the cheapest way to make them think about it. Even though a charge is a blunt tool, a blunt tool that removes thirty cars is better than a sign that removes none. Even if the villages were exempted, the pavement would still clear.
Which brings me to the alternative the council has not weighed: a five-minute drop-off zone, free, with a charge only for staying longer. On the same criteria — safety, fairness, cost — it scores as well on safety, better on fairness and needs no exemptions. By the same token, it raises less money, which is not to say it fails; the money was never the goal.
It follows that the principle should be «move the cars, not the cost». In short: a drop-off zone first, a charge only if it fails, and a village exemption however the scheme is designed.
lightbulbЭссе с альтернативами: goal not in dispute / what is contested → strongest case against (честно) → granted … nonetheless; even though / even if; however … → holds only for, the general point stands → alternative on the same criteria → it follows that, in short.
Закрепите урок: упражнения со словами, фразами и грамматикой с проверкой и повторением.