Traffic and housing problems in major cities could be solved by moving large companies and factories and their employees to the countryside. Do you agree or disagree?
观点一： it might cost a lot when moving large companies and factories, since it will prove difficult to operate business in remote areas.
错误：是否容易做生意，带来经济效益并不能够解释是否应该将公司或者工厂移到市郊去。因为文章只在乎是否能够解决住房和交通问题，至于其中的经济得失不在文章讨论之列。
观点二：it is nearly impossible to move large companies and factories at once, for most of companies are large in size.
错误：能不能够将工厂和公司移到市郊也不在文章讨论范围。题目很明显已经作出一个假设，就是把公司和工厂搬到市郊是完全有可能的，目前所关注的是这个做法是否可以解决住房和交通问题。
观点三： sceneries are gorgeous at the countryside, and newcoming factories will injure the local environment.
是否影响当地环境造成污染并不重要。解决交通问题和解决污染问题没有任何关系，即便交通会产生污染问题!
Do you think old buildings should be broken down, and give place for modern buildings. How are the old buildings important in our society?
观点一： some old buildings attract multimillion tourists every year (such as the Great Wall), so to demolish it will mean a loss to the city where it is located.
本观点从旅游观光或者考古的角度说古老建筑并没有错，可是错在没有理解Building的含义，Building 不同于construction, 长城才算 construction。这道题和很多常见的雅思题不一样，就是考到了某种名词的确切意思，考生日后到了国外的大学会写很多essay, 而写一篇好的essay往往第一段就要解释或者界定文章题目的某个核心名词。我第一次看到上述的题目时，我的反应就是商业用楼，住宅用楼，工业用楼，而不是长城，金字塔，埃菲尔铁塔，因为Building的意思是a structure that has a roof and walls and stands more or less permanently in one place(摘自WORLD字典);有的考生或许会觉得在考场上没有字典去翻查一个名词，是不是很不公平，因为一篇严谨的文章需要资料去论证。然而，大家忽视了Building是一个非常简单的单词，它的词义已经到了常识的地步，如果这样的单词不认识，而产生审题的偏差，考不到理想分数也是当然。
观点二：old buildings are valuable assets for those archeologists to study the human activities before the War, since some records had turned ruins .
本来古老建筑可以用于考古价值无可厚非，但是是否只适合分析战争之前的人类行为就值得商榷。这句话最大的问题就是把古老建筑看作是考古学家唯一可以利用的物体去分析战争之前的人类行为。改正的方法很简单，把before the War去掉。
