Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Nhóm 9 Thảo Linh Thiện Quyên Water and Oceans Art
Nhóm 9 Thảo Linh Thiện Quyên Water and Oceans Art
Nhóm 9 Thảo Linh Thiện Quyên Water and Oceans Art
Governments should invest these funds in public services instead.To what extent do you
=>It is often argued that the government should finance public services instead of spending its
budget on arts, music, and theatre. Although I agree that the government’s investments in
public services play a very important role, I think that proper funding of the arts sector is also
On the one hand, the government should definitely allocate a large part of its budget on public
services. This economic sector determines the overall quality of life, ensuring that some basic
services, like schools, hospitals, and roads, are available to all citizens irrespective of their
income or social status. Public services satisfy the primary needs of the society and thus
need proper funding, while artists and musicians are not curing diseases or building houses, so
their role is secondary. For example, any country can live without music concerts, but the
absence of medicine will create significant problems. That’s why the government should
On the other hand, arts, music, and theatre are not a waste of money, since they are an integral
part of society’s cultural and intellectual development and amusement. Firstly, art and
music draw people’s attention to diverse phenomena and represent the inward significance
of things. Quite often a single drawing, piece, or song can exhort myriads of people to
reconsider their attitude towards some situation. This way, art serves as a major source of
the nation’s personal and intellectual development. Moreover, visiting museums, watching
movies, and listening to music are common ways of relaxation and entertainment. Thus, the art
To conclude, though I agree that the government should allocate a large part of its budget on
such urgent needs of the society like public services, I think that arts, music, and theatre should
also be financed since they play an important role in people’s development and entertainment.
3. Art is considered an essential part of all cultures throughout the world. However, these
days fewer and fewer people appreciate art and turn their focus to science, technology
and business. Why do you think that is? What could be done to encourage more people
One of the crucial parts of the cultural heritage across the world is art. But, unfortunately,
in this world of competition, only a few individuals are interested in the arts. The majority of
people concentrate on Science, technology, and business as they offer better job prospects.
However, this situation can be overcome if appropriate measures are taken to attract
In the interconnected world, many people do not consider arts as an important subject. Instead,
they think that learning arts subjects may not help them professionally and monetarily, and
focusing on other subjects is the only gateway to success. To be more precise, art is usually
It is an acknowledged fact that art is the backbone of every culture, and absence of interest in
art will eventually lead to the decline of cultural heritage around the world. In order to avoid this
cultural ruin, it is immensely important to increase the awareness of art, and the governments
can revive interests in younger generations by constructing art galleries, organizing cultural
events, and maintaining museums. The government authorities should take the necessary steps
to bring alertness to artwork. This way, it will attract more individuals towards art, which will
help generate more revenue. Better financial prospects will boost and elevate the people to
To sum up, science, technology, and business are lucrative in terms of job prospects, but art
too can be a reliable source of livelihood. Thus, the government’s efforts can facilitate the
survival of art as it is the only way to keep our culture and traditions alive for future generations.
4. Most artists earn low salaries and should therefore receive funds from the government
in order for them to continue with their work. To what extent do you agree?
An artist’s livelihood depends upon the skillful display of their talents and mastery of the
creative arts, but they often struggle to make a modest living from it. This has invited discussion
about whether or not artists should receive financial aid from the government, which would
enable them to keep performing their art. Personally, I am of the opinion that the authorities
ought to directly fund the artisans to allow them to pursue their craft voluntarily and I will state
Firstly, creative arts are the prime source of income for most artists. Throughout history, many
luminaries, such as Vincent Van Gogh and John Keats, have been in dire straits financially,
which culminated in tragically short creative lives. Had the government provided pecuniary aid,
the world would have been blessed with more of their creative masterpieces. A notable example
in this regard is Satyajit Ray, whose magnum opus, Panther Panchali, would probably never
have seen the light of day had the government not stepped in and provided him with the funds
Secondly, artists are the torchbearers when it comes to preserving a country or a region’s
cultural heritage and traditions. By aiding artists financially, the government would also be
helping to preserve the cultural legacy and historical customs, which maintain the cultural
identity of any place. Lastly, by funding artists, the government would help create jobs and
encourage other people to pursue art as their vocation. This would bring communities together
by involving them in preserving the arts, nurturing their cultural consciousness, and continuing
However, in opposition to the aforementioned views, government funding of the arts could be
better utilised to strengthen the infrastructure of the country by investing in sectors such as
healthcare, education, or social services. Furthermore, there are many non-profit organisations
which work to provide funding to artisans and showcase their works which, some opine,
In conclusion, the government ought to support creative pursuits by offering financial assistance
to artists, which would enable them to stop worrying about sustenance and continue creating
works of cultural significance. One can only hope that this strategy is adopted by governments
across the world, which would enthuse more people to go into the arts and establish
themselves as artists.
- torchbearer: người đứng đầu, quan trọng nhất trong một nhóm, một t ổ ch ức
5. Museums and art galleries should concentrate on works that show history and
culture of their own country rather than works of the other parts in the world. To
what extent do you agree or disagree?
Museums and art galleries have played a major role in preserving and conveying
historical values for a long time. While many people suggest that they should focus
purely on displaying works that represent the nation’s culture and history, others with
contradicting views affirm that international works are also of great worth.
Personally, I think both viewpoints are equally valid.
On the one hand, there are reasons why it is believed that artifacts and works of
national value should be given priority. Firstly, museums and art galleries should be
places that honor indigenous history and culture. By going to these museums and
galleries, people will gain a deeper understanding of their nation, along with the
golden ages and hard times that the country has been through. The exhibitions
therefore serve an educational purpose as they instill patriotism and promote a
sense of national pride in the citizens of that country. Apart from that, such places
also help to preserve traditional and historical values. In the 21 st century, many
minority ethnic groups are in grave danger of losing their culture, and therefore, the
display of their works and artifacts will help to preserve their culture and the cultural
diversity of a nation.
On the other hand, showing international works of art has several merits. Works from
other parts of the world help to diversify the content of museums and art galleries.
Admittedly, even though the value of museums and art galleries cannot be denied,
their failure in adopting changes and updating collections has discouraged people
from visiting these places. For that reason, international works will add appeal and
aid museums and galleries in attracting more visitors. Furthermore, if museums
display international works, people will have more chance to gain knowledge and
insight into other cultures as well.
Technical terms:
1.Nowadays, it is possible to move ocean creatures from their natural habitats at sea and
have them relocated in amusement parks for the purpose of people's recreation. Do you
think the advantages of this outweigh disadvantages? Explain your reasons and support
=> Nowadays, a large number of the sea creatures are moved from their natural habitats to
the entertainment parks as sea life centres and ocean parks, which has a great impact on the
lives of the creatures. From my point of view, the demerits are outweighing the merits and the
To commence with, On the one hand, there is a plethora of disadvantages to move the animals
in the ocean parks. First and for most, in their early age, they are separated from their family
and mother to train them better to earn more money by giving thrilling performances, which will
create a huge impact on their growth and in the long run has become a reason for longevity
reduction. For example, Dolphin's average age is 20 years in natural habitats; while they live
only average 12 years in the amusement parks. Secondly, they have very less space to enjoy
their activity, they feel monotonous by living in a closed area, which affects their mental health.
Lastly, sometimes the new environment means the ocean parks are not suitable for their nature
and soul, that they might end up their lives at a very early stage, which becomes the reason for
On the other hand, by placing the creatures in the entertainment parks boosts the economy of
the country by providing knowledge and entertainment for the children. Moreover, many times
the main reason for the transfer is the scientific research to flourish their life by providing them
the required nutritions and medicines to combat from chronic disease such as cancer. For
instance, the Asiatic lions are under the scientific study because of they are about to extinct,
and trials are going on to protect them and increase their population.
In conclusion, however there are certain advantages to move sea creatures from their natural
habitats by feeding them sufficient nutritions and medicines; the disadvantages are many as it
decreases their longevity and which greatly impact on the balance of the food chain and
ecosystem.
2.Pollution of rivers, lakes and seas is a major concern for people who seek to protect
the environment.What are the possible causes of water pollution, and what effects
does this have on animal life and human society?
=> One of the most concern issues related to our surrounding is contaminated water
two main causes involved, and a multi-sided damaging effect on people and the
Apparently, the main factor is the issue of emissions from cars, industries and other
human activities, leading to form these threatened atoms more serious and
damaging pollutant particles, and particular area's free flow of water source is
tainted with these elements due to the lack of opportunity to distinguish drink
supplies from polluted range, as we are seeing in Eastern Europe today. These
countries are claiming that the accumulation system can be significant to contribute
protection project. The other major cause is that increasing dumping of waste
and some locomotives can be controversial to global extent, meaning that there is
irrigation by the way that some harmful particles is moving directly without secure
threats such as poaching, habitat loss and food chain disruption which is itself
dwindle the number of endangered animals, and thus called potential extinction, as
may indeed happen to the Asian tiger. Additionally, the response of the human life is
drought and lack of irrigation, affecting negatively the welfare of all of people,
To summarize, we see that emissions and dumping are the main origins of the
problem, and that the outcome on human and animals are exacerbated by
Noteworthy words:
2. atom: nguyên tử
3. particle: phần tử
3. Fresh water has always been a limited resource in some parts of the world.
problem.What are the causes of the increased demand and what measure
water due to different forces. There are a number of solutions which should be
implemented by both the authorities and individuals to deal with this issue.
demand of clean water. As a matter of fact, the global population has raised
significantly over the pass years. Therefore, it leads to an excessive need for clean
industrialization. In fact, a huge amount of polluted liquid is emitted into the aquatic
natural water.
effort to contribute to preserve water and protect the aquatic environment. Firstly,
one solution that yields some promising outcomes is that the authorities should
can limit the amount of water released as well as control the quality of used water of
factories. Another way, which has a long-lasting effect, is that people should reduce
their water waste. In other words, by saving the domestic use of water, residents
can help to preserve water resources for other regions that have difficulties
raising the demand for fresh water. The efforts of neither governments nor
3. consolidate: củng cố
4. Some people think that people should be given the right to use freshwater
as they like. Others believe governments should strictly control the use of
freshwater. Discuss both views and give your own opinion.
Water scarcity has become a major problem in the modern day, which poses the question of
whether people should still have free access to fresh water. Although some people argue
that it is their right to use water as they choose, I believe it is more beneficial if there are
restrictions on water use.
On the one hand, proponents of the idea that people should be able to freely use water often
state several reasons. Firstly, it is not always people's fault that water is wasted. In some
countries, bureaucracy, mismanagement and corruption are the main factors that jeopardize
water supply. Therefore, it is unjustifiable to force people into saving resources that they do
not waste in the first place. Secondly, it is the responsibility of the state to ensure that its
citizens have access to fresh water. The government should use taxpayers' money to
promote sustainable water management and improve the sewage system, allowing them to
supply and recycle water in a way that meets current needs without affecting future
generations.
On the other hand, other people believe that water shortages will become more severe
without government intervention. A large number of people still think that fresh water is an
unlimited natural resource. Setting maximum limits for water consumption or punishing those
who overuse water would surely raise people's awareness of the dire consequences of
abusing water resources, thereby discouraging them from misusing water. In addition, only
the government has a deep understanding of its current water situation. Therefore, only they
can take action accordingly to prevent drought and other emergencies that water shortages
can cause.
In conclusion, although household water use might not be the main culprit of water
shortages, I firmly believe that the government should control and regulate the water supply
in order to encourage efficient water use and protect the country from disaster.
5. A serious problem affecting countries right across the globe is the lack of
water for drinking, washing and other household uses. Why do many
countries face water shortages, and what could be done to alleviate the
problem?
Give reasons for your answer and include any relevant examples from your
own knowledge and experiences. You should write at least 250 words.
In today’s world, countries are increasingly facing severe lack of water for their
daily usage. A continuous rise of global warming is the root causing behind this
scarcity; however, self-awareness regarding environmentally hazardous activities
can address this issue effectively. I am going to elucidate the idea in detail.
Our reckless chemical usage is resulting in increased global warming which is one of
the major reasons behind the household water shortage. We are constantly
introducing air polluting chemicals, such as carbon monoxide, sulfur dioxide and
nitrogen oxides and applying heavy metals such as mercury, cadmium and lead
along with pesticide and herbicide. All these compounds work in synergy with each
other and heavily release carbon dioxide in the air. These thoughtless activities are
severely raising global warming which is causing increased temperature, abnormal
climate cycle, irregular rainfalls, and droughts in various regions. As a result, people
are increasingly suffering from the lack of water to meet their minimum household
needs.
However, properly maintaining the disposal of non-biodegradable items at
individual level could be a smart measure to curb this issue. This would improve the
environment by boosting the efficient recycling of plastics and metals. In fact, large
amounts of pollution could be easily controlled if each citizen contributes towards
maintaining a low emission atmosphere and restricts the usage of hazardous
chemical compounds. For instance, most of Europe's environment has no pollution,
as numerous citizens have opted for automobiles running on green fuels, and they
have controlled the usage of polluting elements. Therefore, it is about the mindset of
the people that needs to be transformed to save the environment which eventually
determines our freshwater availability.
In conclusion, excessive global warming causes a lack of water in many
countries. However, practicing environmentally friendly activities at an individual level
can effectively reduce this impact.