Unanswered [9] | Urgent [0]
  

Home / Writing Feedback   % width Posts: 4

TOEFL: Drivers have to pay a fee for driving in Rush Hour


chenwc1 1 / 1  
Aug 11, 2014   #1
I am taking my second TOEFL test on 16th in this month, I really appreciate that if someone could give me some feedbacks on my essay to help boost my scores!

Here is the essay:

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement? Drivers have to pay a fee for driving in busy city streets when there is a great amount of traffic.

Started in the late eighteenth century, the industrialization and urbanization witnessed the explosion in number of automobiles. The very fuel that they rely on, oil, has now become the dominant pollution of cities' environment. While critics castigating about the exorbitant use of oil and other insisting to charged drivers with extra fee during the rush hours for their selfish conducts, I hold the contention that no additional payment should be charged on them. The reasons are the followings.

Capitalism enfranchised people's right to own properties, and consequently, their rights to use them. Driving cars during the rush hours might is bound to polluting cities's environment, but laws protect drivers to do so, and accordingly, charging them extra fee might seems to be out of the jurisdiction. From another point of view, traffic jam is a natural phenomenon that nobody is able to shun or ban; so it is out of drivers' control. Why drivers should pay a fine only for driving their own cars in a particular time? Wars are notorious, but you can't blame the soldiers who are justing fight for their countries.

Buying a car spends hundreds of thousand; paying for all sorts of fee takes another several-these are all ready too much for most of the families to bear. Charging drivers one more fee makes no sense and is ridiculous. Majority of the families buy cars simply for a safer and easier conveyance, and charging them too much fee adds a lot to their burden and is actually jeopardizing their rights.

Rather than passively forcing drivers to pay another fee, government should instead, be more active on advocating the use of more efficient and environmental-friendly energy or planning out more reasonable and convenient layout that allow people to reach their destinations with less oil. Sometimes traffic jam occur only due to the malfunction of a traffic light, or unreasonable organization of roadways. In these cases, the one who should be charged for a fine is the city planner, not drivers. Simply put, charging drivers fees regardless of the causes of the problems could be ridiculous and even unlawful.

In conclusion, "rush hours" are usually not the direct consequence of drivers. Instead, the real causes of traffic jam may fall on various of grounds, and therefore, charging drivers for another fee for this could be unreasonable and irrational.

EF_Sheri - / 27 22  
Aug 13, 2014   #2
In the first paragraph, change "started" to "starting" and removed "the". The correct sentence should read: Starting in the late eighteenth century, industrialization, and urbanization witnessed the explosion in number of automobiles. However, there should be clarification at the end of the sentence. Number of automobiles? What does this mean? When considering your topic, one would assume this would mean the number of automobiles on the streets, but it still should be stronger. Also, in the second sentence, open with "oil" with "the very fuel they rely on" as the explanatory clause. See the attached file with editorial comments. : ) In the first paragraph, change "started" to "starting" and removed "the". The correct sentence should read: Starting in the late eighteenth century, industrialization, and urbanization witnessed the explosion in number of automobiles. However, there should be clarification at the end of the sentence. Number of automobiles? What does this mean? When considering your topic, one would assume this would mean the number of automobiles on the streets, but it still should be stronger. Also, in the second sentence, open with "oil" with "the very fuel they rely on" as the explanatory clause. See the attached image with editorial comments.

Castigating means criticizing and, of course, critics criticize. Choose a different word instead of critics. Perhaps, opponents.

The last sentence of the first paragraph is not needed. You summed up your argument in the previous sentence and the paragraphs that follow support your argument.

The last sentence of the second paragraph doesn't fit at all. I suggest you remove it.

Use my previous comments and the attached impage to take a closer look at the rest of your essay. Be careful to use correct words and grammar. When possible, simplify sentences as doing so will strengthen the points you are trying to make. :)



OP chenwc1 1 / 1  
Aug 13, 2014   #3
Thx a lot buddy!!! I really appreciate your patience!.

But I am confused by "Starting in the late eighteenth century, industrialization...." Why starting? Why not started?
dumi 1 / 6,928 1592  
Aug 23, 2014   #4
Started in theFrom the beginning of late eighteenth century, the industrialization and urbanization witnessed thean explosion in number of automobiles.

The reasons are the followings.

I feel this is not necessary. The reader anyway expects you to justify your opinion with convincing reasons in forthcoming body paras. Conclude your intro with a statement that clearly expresses your view.

Also, stay more aligned with your topic. The primary focus here is on drivers being charged during rush hours. You need to have more emphasis on that. Be more focused on what your prompt is asking you.


Home / Writing Feedback / TOEFL: Drivers have to pay a fee for driving in Rush Hour