Task 2 of Mae from Dewsbury (comments and edited version)

by Admin

Note:


Words or phrases that have been changed or needs changing are highlighted. The reasons are in parenthesis.

To better understand the changes and the comments, please READ the original essay, Task 2 by Mae from Dewsbury, UK and compare by paragraph.
__________________________________________________________________

Individuals have several views on punishment set for a certain crime. (order of words and use of preposition) Although, there are some benefits of fixed punishment, (comma) I believe that the crime should be weighed (weight is a noun; weigh is a verb and should be in past participle) before a decision is rendered. (choice of word)

Firstly, it is close to say that most of the time, (comma) fixed punishment can gradually reduce a crime. It is evident when offences reduce in number suddenly ( order of words) after legislation (legistlation for what?) is implemented. For example, in countries like Saudi Arabia, (comma) murder is considered a major offence. (full stop) Committing such crime will result in cutting the head (beheading is a better word; it shows your depth of vocabulary) of the one who is responsible in killing the individual. (accused, culprit or the guilty can be used to save you time and for better vocabulary). These circumstances result (plural verb) in fear of the public in ending someone's (possessive case) life due to the thought of ending their lives in a very tragic way as pay back (consequence?) to their wrong doing. (too verbose or wordy, can just say, "These circumstances instill fear on the public's mind.")

(new paragraph) Secondly, most people will consider (second thought?) before performing such crime when they know that the consequences will put them in a certain scenario that cannot be resolved (past participle) by money.

Moreover, people would be fearless (?) in doing small (petty is a better term) crimes that can be bailed out (bailable is the right term) rather than heavy (heinous) crimes with punishments. (This last statement is quite vague and contradictory to your first argument)

On the other hand, I would (delete) agree that punishment shouldn't (contraction of should not, therefore needs an apostrophe) be fixed. This is because some people being accused in performing (of committing should be used instead) a crime wouldn't (won't) have the time to defend themselves (right use of reflexive pronoun) and would be punished (past participle) without fair amount of time. For instance, if a person is granted to be (omit, not necessary; sentence is better without this) sentenced by death, (comma) he will no longer benefit to get a parole if he proves his innocence someday. (full stop) Having fixed punishment will hinder ( hinder should be used but deter is the most appropriate term) most criminals in appealing due to limited amount of time given to them. This is because the judge will decide based on the crime committed instead of looking in (at) different perspectives such as other (delete) circumstances that acquire (?) during the crime.

In conclusion, both sides give benefit in giving due punishment to those who commit crime. However, my opinion remains that fair trial should be implemented instead of judging based in what is written in the law.(the law says)

_______________________________________________________________

General comments:

On Grammatical Range and Accuracy

1. There are few grammatical errors, but these are not so serious. They can be rectified through constant practice.

2. You tend to use too many words/phrases when a single word will do. Avoid verbosity in academic writing. "Less talk, less mistake" as the saying goes.

4. You need more practices on the uses of punctuations.

5. BE verbs are always followed by past participle.

On Task Response

1. Word count: 325 words. This is too long. You may need the full 60 minutes in the actual exam to write task 2 alone. In this case, you leave nothing to proofread your work for possible spelling and grammatical errors.

2. The question is not fully satisfied. Note that the question asks you to give your opinion on "the circumstances of an individual crime, and the motivation for committing it". You should have given more arguments like if someone accidentally killed somebody because he was defending himself (principle of self-defence), will he be punished the same way as well?

3. Your conclusion needs reworking. Can be better than this.


On Lexical Resource

1. Would have been better if some good vocabulary had been used like:

behead instead of cutting head

heinous instead of heavy crime

accused/guilty/culprit instead of someone who committed the crime

deter instead of hinder

Using synonyms does not only save you time but also gives an impression that you know the language. Notice that the number of words in the edited version has reduced significantly.

On Coherence and Cohesion

This is where you scored best. You used some transition signals that make your sentences and paragraphs stick together.

Keep on writing and eventually, you will get the desired score because someone who has persistence and perseverance DESERVES it.

Good try.

__________________________________________________

Edited Version (294 words)

Individuals have several views on punishment set for a certain crime. Although, there are some benefits of fixed punishment, I believe that the crime should be weighed equally before a decision is rendered.

Firstly, it is close to say that most of the time, fixed punishment can gradually reduce a crime. It is evident when offences reduce in number suddenly after legislation setting a heavy punishment for a particular crime is implemented. For example, in countries like Saudi Arabia, murder is considered a major offence. Committing such crime will result in beheading of the culprit or the guilty person. This instills fear on the public's mind.

Secondly, most people will have second thought before committing such crime when they know that the consequences will put them in a certain scenario that cannot be resolved even with money involved. Moreover, people will have fear in doing petty crimes and most especially heinous ones that are not bailable.

On the other hand, I agree that punishment shouldn't be fixed. This is because some people being accused of committing a crime won't have the time to defend themselves and will be punished without fair trial. For instance, if a person is sentenced by death, he will no longer benefit to get a parole if he proves his innocence someday. Having fixed punishment will deter most criminals in appealing due to limited amount of time given to them. This is because the judge will decide based on the crime committed instead of looking at a different angles or reasons on why such crime was committed.

In conclusion, both sides give benefits in giving due punishments to those who commit crime. However, my opinion remains that fair trial should be implemented instead of judgement based on what the law says.


Click here to post comments

Join in and write your own page! It's easy to do. How? Simply click here to return to Free Proofreading.