Ошибки в эссе по английскому языку
Опыт написания эссе отсутствует у вчерашних школьников, пришедших обучаться в вузе, у них не сформирована социокультурная компетенция, необходимая для выполнения данного вида работы. Кажущаяся простота (небольшой объем, свободная композиция) создает ложное представление, что нет необходимости обучать студентов написанию эссе, т.к. в школе учат как писать сочинение – рассуждение на родном языке.Однако эссе все же отличается от школьного классического сочинения и для его успешного написания необходимо соблюдение определенных правил, принятых в стране изучаемого языка. Необходимо иметь представление об особенностях структуры текста, уметь четко формулировать тезис, соблюдать возможную логику изложения и т.д. Рассмотрим ошибки, которые наиболее часто встречаются в работах студентов:
- Неполное выполнение коммуникативной задачи, как результат невнимательного прочтения задания и отсюда, его не понимание.
- Неумение изложить свои мысли в письменном виде.
- Неправильное формулирование тезиса эссе, когда повторяется сама формулировка задания или формулируется тезис в виде вопроса, при этом позиция автора по предложенному вопросу четко не обозначается.
- Приводятся аргументы и доводы, противоположные сформулированному тезису.
- Орфографические и лексико-грамматические ошибки при оформлении своего текста.
Узнай стоимость
написание работы на заказ
Как написать эссе по английскому языку
Поскольку перечисленные трудности встречаются при написании любого типа эссе, целесообразно выделить умения, необходимые для выполнения такого вида письменной работы. К таким базовым умениям следует отнести: умение определять тип эссе, тему эссе, собирать, выбирать и отбирать информацию по этой теме, найти аргументы в защиту определенной точки зрения и возможные контраргументы.Этапы написания эссе следующие:
- подготовительный (pre-writing);
- собственно написание текста (while writing);
- оценочный этап, завершающий создание текста (post-writing).
- Внимательное прочтение задания и определение общей темы эссе.
- Концентрация внимания на глаголе, используемом в формулировке задания, что определит коммуникативную задачу, стоящую перед обучающимся.
- Коммуникативная задача подводит к цели создания текста.
- Затем следует выбор типа эссе, в чем помогут такие глаголы, как: аргументируй свою точку зрения, опиши, расскажи, убеди, объясни.
Нужна такая же работа?
закажи ее у наших авторов
Пример эссе по английскому языку
The music industry has been in a state of significant flux for more than a decade as music consumption has shifted online. From one perspective, this shift marks the downfall of the recording industry. Fans have little incentive to buy albums when they can instantaneously illegally download songs from peer-to-peer file sharing networks and other sources. And, the attention of consumers is increasingly drawn from music to an enormous and growing array of competing media and entertainment products. According to an NPD group study, in the third quarter of 2010, only 16.5% of American Internet users over the age of thirteen purchased music.2 When fans do purchase music, they would rather download individual tracks priced at $.99 than full-length albums at ten times the cost. As a result of all these factors and more, the value of the global recorded music industry has declined by one-third since 2004.On the other hand, the digital revolution brings new opportunities for growth and innovation in music distribution. There are now over 400 licensed digital music services worldwide, with thirteen million tracks licensed for digital use.Since 2004, the value of the US digital music market has increased by over 1,000% to around $4.6 billion.6 New companies, like Rdio and Mog, give consumers an alternative to piracy by allowing them to stream the music of their choice on-demand. A large percentage of the subscription and advertising revenue from these services goes directly into the pockets of artists, songwriters, labels, and publishers. Smaller artists, music’s new middle class, are leveraging social networking platforms to reach out to a global fan base. Through do-it-yourself distribution tools, artists can cut out middlemen and distribute music directly to their fans, earning more in royalties than they could have under traditional recording and publishing deals during the heyday of the compact disc. Some artists even raise money directly from their fans to support the production of new music.
To survive the digital transformation, all players in the music industry are rethinking music. Labels are rethinking their business models. Digital companies are rethinking channels of distribution. Artists are rethinking their relationships with fans and traditional sources of revenue. And, lawyers, academics, and policymakers are rethinking the legal landscape in an effort to meet the needs of creators and consumers in the digital age.
This introductory piece briefly describes the broad range of ways the music industry is reacting to and rethinking music and copyright law and policy. The accompanying papers included in this briefing book reflect the views of and provide additional context from a diverse range of stakeholders on some of today’s most pressing legal and policy issues.
The intersection of music and law begins with the very creative process itself. That process is becoming increasingly individualized, particularly when it comes to recording and distributing music. It is now possible to produce professional-level music recordings using only an iPad and its GarageBand app at a total cost of $505.The rise of inexpensive recording tools and channels for self-distribution has led some to avoid producers, studios, and labels.There may be fewer recording professionals, but anyone can record. Even more can remix.
A cursory review of popular music during the last twenty years reveals an increasing number of widely loved works that draw on or incorporate samples of pre-existing songs and recordings. YouTube is chock full of videos that mix and remix audio and visual elements, spawning entirely new genres of creative expression. Our culture increasingly placesan aesthetic premium on art that incorporates and builds upon pre-existing works. The Internet has allowed for such culture to flourish, providing the means of creation, distribution, and consumption of remixes, mashups, and works based on samples to a wide range of networked artists and consumers.
Girl Talk’s All Day, a 71-minute album released to much positive attention in November 2010, is made up entirely of 373 overlapping samples. (The album was produced on a laptop using Adobe Audition, which sells for about $350.)As might be inferred from the name of his label, Illegal Art, Girl Talk’s unlicensed sampling — the digital copying and reuse of the source songs and recordings — may constitute copyright infringement.
Some courts have held that sampling a small portion of a song does not infringe the rights of the composition owner. On the recording side, the Sixth Circuit has notably held that “a sound recording owner has the exclusive right to ‘sample’ his own recording,” no matter how small the amount.In addition to the simplicity of the “license or don’t sample” model advocated by the Bridgeport court, observers have argued that a rule requiring licensing is economically efficient: it prevents the market from being flooded with unlicensed remixes of the most popular songs, wasting them in “a scramble to use them up as quickly as possible.” Critics find the suggestion that fair use provides a defense to infringement in the case of samples troubling, as it provides no revenue to rights holders.
Samples may be used legally, by licensing sampled compositions and sound recordings from their owners. But, samplers often find the rights clearance process to be expensive and complex, slowing and stifling the creative process. Some argue this has decreased artists’ choice in samples, leading them to rely on “vanilla-wrap samples from sample libraries rather than on judiciously selected vintage records.”More problematically, there seems to be an underlying tension between sampling culture, which savors remixes and reworkings, and current US copyright law, which privileges originality and the singular author.
Advocates of a more liberal approach to sampling, remixes, and mashups argue that copyright owners may stifle creativity by refusing to license music because of a distaste for the new subject matter, simply out of whim, or a desire to extract maximum revenues from their superior bargaining positions.One proposed solution is a compulsory license for sampling. Just as Congress has chosen to provide set licensing rates for digital audio transmissions of sound recordings (pursuant to Section of the Copyright Act) and cover versions of musical compositions (pursuant to Section), advocates argue, there should set be set fees that allow artists to sample and remix copyrighted works. Others prefer a liberalized fair use test that could incentivize creative sampling to transform works.And, still others advocate a system of “free use,” at least for certain classes of uses and users, like the creative amateur.No clear route forward has emerged, but most parties agree that it is important to strike a balance between allowing for the creativity of remixers and compensating the initial artists.
