 |
|
 |
|
 |
||||
|
||||||||
| The table below gives information about the underground railway systems in six cities. Summarize the information by selecting and reporting the main features, and make comparisons where relevant.  該圖表從三個(gè)不同方面展示了六個(gè)城市地鐵系統(tǒng)的特點(diǎn)。 The table demonstrates the features of the underground railway systems in 6 cities in three different aspects. 首先，這六個(gè)城市的地鐵系統(tǒng)是按年代順序開通的，其中倫敦是最早的(1863年)，而洛杉磯是最晚的(2001年)。地鐵系統(tǒng)在20世紀(jì)進(jìn)入全盛時(shí)期，四條地鐵線路分別在巴黎(1900年)，東京(1927年)，華盛頓(1976年)，以及洛杉磯(1981年)建立起來。 First, the subway systems in the six cities were opened in time sequence with London being the earliest (in 1863) and Los Angeles the latest ( in 2001 ). The underground railway system had their prime time in the 20th century, which saw the construction of 4 underground railway systems respectively in Paris (1900), in Tokyo (1927), in Washington DC (1976), and in Los Angeles (1981). 第二，依照從倫敦到洛杉嘰的排列順序，也是根據(jù)建造地鐵的年代順序，這六個(gè)城市地鐵線路長度基本上依次大幅降低。倫敦線路最長，394公里，巴黎第二，199公里，東京第三，155公里，華盛頓126公里。京都和洛杉嘰最有趣，分別只有區(qū)區(qū)11公里和28公里，難與前四名相提并論。 Second, seen from London to Los Angeles, which happened to be in chronological order of subway construction, the above-mentioned six cities roughly revealed a trend of sharp decrease in the length of the subway route. London ranked No. 1 in this respect, with a length of 394km; Paris came next with 199km; Tokyo was No. 3 with 155km; Washington DC ranked No. 4 with 126 km. Kyoto and Los Angeles were the most interesting, with merely 11km and 28km respectively, nothing comparable with the top 4 cities. 第三，在這六個(gè)城市每年地鐵運(yùn)送乘客的數(shù)量上我們看到一些令人難以預(yù)料的數(shù)據(jù)。東京成為領(lǐng)頭羊，有19億2千7百萬之多；巴黎名列第二，有11億9千1百萬；倫敦位居第三，為7億7千5百萬；華盛頓第四，1億4千4百萬；洛杉嘰和京都分別是5千萬和4千5百萬。因此，與其它城市相比可見差距之大。 Third, we see some really unexpected figures about the number of passengers transported by the subway system in these six cities. Tokyo took the lead with 1.927 billion; Paris came next with 1.191 billion; London was No. 3 with 775 million; Washington DC was No. 4 with 144 million. Los Angeles and Kyoto had 50 million and 45 million respectively. Therefore, we can see the big difference as compared with other cities. 總之，6個(gè)城市在地鐵的建設(shè)歷史、地鐵長度和年運(yùn)送旅客能力方面皆呈現(xiàn)出了很大的不同。 Overall, the six cities revealed great differences in the history of subway construction, the length of subway lines and the yearly passenger transportation capability. |
| 雅思考試論壇熱貼: |
【責(zé)任編輯：蘇婧 糾錯(cuò)】 |
|
閱讀上一篇：雅思A類作文中圖畫題的講解：原因說明 |
|
閱讀下一篇：烤鴨必讀：2008年夏季雅思寫作總結(jié) |
|
|
| 【育路網(wǎng)版權(quán)與免責(zé)聲明】 | |
| ① 凡本網(wǎng)注明稿件來源為"原創(chuàng)"的所有文字、圖片和音視頻稿件，版權(quán)均屬本網(wǎng)所有。任何媒體、網(wǎng)站或個(gè)人轉(zhuǎn)載、鏈接、轉(zhuǎn)貼或以其他方式復(fù)制發(fā)表時(shí)必須注明"稿件來源：育路網(wǎng)"，違者本網(wǎng)將依法追究責(zé)任； | |
| ② 本網(wǎng)部分稿件來源于網(wǎng)絡(luò)，任何單位或個(gè)人認(rèn)為育路網(wǎng)發(fā)布的內(nèi)容可能涉嫌侵犯其合法權(quán)益，應(yīng)該及時(shí)向育路網(wǎng)書面反饋，并提供身份證明、權(quán)屬證明及詳細(xì)侵權(quán)情況證明，育路網(wǎng)在收到上述法律文件后，將會(huì)盡快移除被控侵權(quán)內(nèi)容。 | |
報(bào)考直通車 |
視頻課程 |
| ·雅思聽力考試的最大障礙：詞匯聽不懂 |
| ·從劍橋聽力看出題難點(diǎn) |
| ·堅(jiān)持不懈訓(xùn)練雅思聽力方法 |
| ·雅思聽力備考關(guān)鍵：最后一堂課的“份量” |
| ·名師解析雅思聽力兩大誤區(qū) |
| ·聽力考試中的數(shù)字考點(diǎn) |
| ·10月24日雅思聽力考題回顧 |
| ·烤鴨必備 走近雅思聽力 |
| ·為什么聽力總是第二遍才能聽懂 |
| ·烤鴨，帶你走近雅思聽力！ |
