TASK
Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they support/contradict specific points made in the reading passage.
The reading.
A fossil skeleton of a dinosaur called Sinosauropteryx, preserved in volcanic ash, was discovered in Liaoning, China, in 1996. Interestingly, the fossil included a pattern of fine lines surrounding the skeletal bones. Some paleontologists interpret the lines as evidence that Sinosauropteryx had feathers. However, critics have opposed the idea that Sinosauropteryx was a feathered dinosaur, citing several reasons. First, the critics points out that the fine lines may not even represent functional structures of a living dinosaur, but rather structures that were formed after the animal's death. After the animal died and was buried in volcanic ash, its skin may have decomposed into fibers. The skin fibers then became preserved as lines in the fossil; the lines were misinterpreted as evidence of feathers. Second, even if the fine lines are remains of real structures of a Sinosauropteryx, scientists cannot tell with certainty what part of the dinosaur's anatomy the structures were. Many dinosaurs had frills, ornamental fan-shaped structures growing out of some parts of their bodies. Some of the critics argue that the lines surrounding the skeleton are much more likely to be fossilized remains of frills than remains of feathers. A third objection is based on the fact that the usual functions of feathers are to help animals fly or regulate their internal temperature. However, the structures represented by the lines in the Sinosauropteryx fossil were mostly located along the backbone and the tail of the animal. This would have made the structures quite useless for flight and of very limited use in thermoregulation. This suggests that the lines do not represent feathers.
The Listening.
Discussion points.
TEST TAKER'S RESPONSE.
TEST TAKER’S RESPONSE.
Both the reading and the lecture are talking about a pattern of fine lines surrounding the skeletal bones. While the author of the article argues that there are three reasons that Sinosauropteryx was not a feathered dinosaur, the lecturer disputes the arguments presented in the article. According to the reading, the fine lines may not even represent functional structures of a living dinosaur because after the death of the animal, their skin may have decomposed into fibers which might be misinterpreted as evidence of deathers (feathers). This specific argument is challenged by the lecturer, who claims that if the skin could decompose into fibers, these fine lines would be (have been) found in other sites (too), which turns out to have nothing.(Omit it) Additionally, some other animals' functional structures were well preserved which indicates that these fine lines must be feathers. Secondly, the author contends that scientists cannot tell which part the structures were, if (or whether) the fine lines are remains of real structures of a Sinosauroptreyx. It is said in the article that the lines are much more likely to be fossilized remains of frills. The lecture, however, asserts that there is a chemical difference between feathers and frills. The fine lines contain some particular protein that only feathers have, which is strong evidence that Sinosauroptreyx was a feathered dinosaur. Finally, the author puts forth the idea that the location of the lines seems to have nothing to do with the functions of feathers, which makes the structures useless. In contrast, the lecturer's stance is that the (Omit the article) feather (feathers)can also be used to attract mates like peacoak (peacock). The lecturer goes on to say that scientists have found that the lines were colorful, which means that Sinosauropteryxs could use their feathers to (for) display.
COMMENTS.
Your description of the arguments is good though needs to be better than this. these simple grammar errors need to be addressed. avoid unnecessary words or clauses like “which turns out to have nothing”. Mind the use of prepositions too. These are very simple issues you should be able to address if you carefully read through the essay. There are some good sentence structures though.
The structure is standard. You developed a good introduction and main body. The response is well organized too. There is good cohesion. The paragraphs are well linked. You also linked the arguments well in the main body.
The subject matter is good. The introduction hints on the main argument of the reading and listening well. In the main body, you have presented the arguments from the reading and listening. You made a good extraction of the arguments and described them quite well.
In all, you just need to avoid the grammar errors by carefully proofreading your essay. The structure and description of the arguments are good.