今天先读文章。所有语法、词汇、短语和发音都从这篇文章里学，不需要先读一页操作说明。
01 · Anchor passage
A school measured roadside air quality at different times and moved outdoor exercise away from peak traffic.
/ə skul ˈmɛʒɚd ˈɹoʊdˌsaɪd ɛɹ ˈkwɑləti æt ˈdɪfɹənt taɪmz ænd muvd ˈaʊtˌdɔɹ ˈɛksɚˌsaɪz əˈweɪ fɹʌm pik ˈtɹæfɪk./
一所学校在不同时间测量路边空气质量，并将户外运动远离交通高峰期。
A school measured roadside — 保留结构，替换真实细节。At first, this looked like a small decision about pollution, but its result soon became visible.
/æt fɚst, ðɪs lʊkt laɪk ə smɔl dɪˈsɪʒən əˈbaʊt pəˈluʃən, bʌt ɪts ɹɪˈzʌlt sun bɪˈkeɪm ˈvɪzɪbəl./
起初，这看起来像是一个关于污染的小决定，但其结果很快就变得显而易见。
result — 保留结构，替换真实细节。The case raises a broader question: how contaminated air, water, and soil affect life.
/ðə keɪs ˈɹeɪzɪz ə ˈbɹɔdɚ ˈkwɛst͡ʃən: haʊ kənˈtæməˌneɪtɪd ɛɹ, ˈwɔtɚ, ænd sɔɪl əˈfɛkt laɪf./
该案提出了一个更广泛的问题：受污染的空气、水和土壤如何影响生命。
question — 保留结构，替换真实细节。The first result looked promising; however, the longer-term evidence remained uncertain.
/ðə fɚst ɹɪˈzʌlt lʊkt ˈpɹɑməsɪŋ; ˌhaʊˈɛvɚ, ðə ˈlɔŋɡɚ tɚm ˈɛvədəns ɹɪˈmeɪnd ʌnˈsɚtən./
第一个结果看起来很有希望；但是，长期证据仍然不确定。
result — 保留结构，替换真实细节。The example draws attention to a harmful pollutant, which can shape how people respond to pollution.
/ðə ɪɡˈzæmpəl dɹɔz əˈtɛnʃən tə ə ˈhɑɹmfəl pəˈlutənt, wɪt͡ʃ kən ʃeɪp haʊ ˈpipəl ɹɪˈspɑnd tə pəˈluʃən./
这个例子提请注意有害污染物，它可以决定人们如何应对污染。
harmful pollutant — 保留结构，替换真实细节。A closer look at a water contamination reveals a practical side of pollution that general opinions often miss.
/ə ˈkloʊsɚ lʊk æt ə ˈwɔtɚ kənˌtæməˈneɪʃən ɹɪˈvilz ə ˈpɹæktɪkəl saɪd əv pəˈluʃən ðæt ˈd͡ʒɛnɚəl əˈpɪnjənz ˈɔftən mɪs./
仔细观察水污染可以揭示一般观点常常忽视的污染的实际一面。
water contamination — 保留结构，替换真实细节。People usually notice the value of pollution only after a real event changes their routine.
/ˈpipəl ˈjuʒəli ˈnoʊtɪs ðə ˈvælju əv pəˈluʃən ˈoʊnli ˈæftɚ ə ɹil ɪˈvɛnt ˈt͡ʃeɪnd͡ʒɪz ðɛɹ ɹuˈtin./
人们通常只有在真实事件改变他们的日常生活之后才会注意到污染的价值。
usually — 保留结构，替换真实细节。A clear explanation can change how people understand and respond to pollution.
/ə klɪɹ ˌɛkspləˈneɪʃən kən t͡ʃeɪnd͡ʒ haʊ ˈpipəl ˌʌndɚˈstænd ænd ɹɪˈspɑnd tə pəˈluʃən./
清晰的解释可以改变人们对污染的理解和应对方式。
clear — 保留结构，替换真实细节。A useful question about pollution focuses on what happened, why it matters, and what should happen next.
/ə ˈjusfəl ˈkwɛst͡ʃən əˈbaʊt pəˈluʃən ˈfoʊkəsɪz ɔn wʌt ˈhæpənd, waɪ ɪt ˈmætɚz, ænd wʌt ʃʊd ˈhæpən nɛkst./
关于污染的一个有用的问题集中在发生了什么、为什么重要以及接下来应该发生什么。
question — 保留结构，替换真实细节。A concrete example of pollution makes the central idea easier to understand and evaluate.
/ə ˈkɑŋkɹit ɪɡˈzæmpəl əv pəˈluʃən meɪks ðə ˈsɛntɹəl aɪˈdiə ˈiziɚ tə ˌʌndɚˈstænd ænd ɪˈvæljuˌeɪt./
污染的具体例子使中心思想更容易理解和评估。
example — 保留结构，替换真实细节。The meaning of pollution becomes clearer when people connect it to a real experience.
/ðə ˈminɪŋ əv pəˈluʃən bɪˈkʌmz ˈklɪɹɚ wɛn ˈpipəl kəˈnɛkt ɪt tə ə ɹil ɪkˈspɪɹiəns./
当人们将污染与真实经验联系起来时，污染的含义就变得更加明确。
meaning — 保留结构，替换真实细节。People can describe an experience when a real situation involving pollution requires action.
/ˈpipəl kən dɪˈskɹaɪb ən ɪkˈspɪɹiəns wɛn ə ɹil ˌsɪt͡ʃuˈeɪʃən ɪnˈvɑlvɪŋ pəˈluʃən ɹiˈkwaɪɚz ˈækʃən./
人们可以描述当涉及污染的真实情况需要采取行动时的经历。
describe an experience — 保留结构，替换真实细节。People can compare two responses to pollution only when they use the same criteria.
/ˈpipəl kən kəmˈpɛɹ tu ɹɪˈspɑnsɪz tə pəˈluʃən ˈoʊnli wɛn ðeɪ juz ðə seɪm kɹaɪˈtɪɹiə./
人们只有使用相同的标准才能比较两种对污染的反应。
compare — 保留结构，替换真实细节。A convincing view of pollution gives a reason and then tests it against a concrete example.
/ə kənˈvɪnsɪŋ vju əv pəˈluʃən ɡɪvz ə ˈɹizən ænd ðɛn tɛsts ɪt əˈɡɛnst ə ˈkɑŋkɹit ɪɡˈzæmpəl./
对污染的令人信服的看法给出了一个理由，然后用一个具体的例子来检验它。
example — 保留结构，替换真实细节。Debates about pollution become difficult when people treat a partial truth as a complete explanation.
/dɪˈbeɪts əˈbaʊt pəˈluʃən bɪˈkʌm ˈdɪfɪkʌlt wɛn ˈpipəl tɹit ə ˈpɑɹʃəl tɹuθ æz ə kəmˈplit ˌɛkspləˈneɪʃən./
当人们将部分事实视为完整的解释时，有关污染的争论就会变得困难。
Debates about pollution become — 保留结构，替换真实细节。A stronger position acknowledges a reasonable objection, sets clear limits, and still explains why one conclusion is preferable.
/ə ˈstɹɔŋɡɚ pəˈzɪʃən ækˈnɑlɪd͡ʒɪz ə ˈɹiznəbəl əbˈd͡ʒɛkʃən, sɛts klɪɹ ˈlɪmɪts, ænd stɪl ɪkˈspleɪnz waɪ wʌn kəŋˈkluʒən ɪz ˈpɹɛfɚəbəl./
更强硬的立场承认合理的反对意见，设定明确的限制，并仍然解释为什么一个结论更可取。
clear — 保留结构，替换真实细节。This balance does not weaken the argument; it makes the judgement more precise, credible, and useful.
/ðɪs ˈbæləns dʌz nɑt ˈwikən ðə ˈɑɹɡjəmənt; ɪt meɪks ðə ˈd͡ʒʌd͡ʒmənt mɔɹ pɹɪˈsaɪs, ˈkɹɛdɪbəl, ænd ˈjusfəl./
这种平衡并不削弱这一论点；它使判断更加准确、可信和有用。
This balance does not — 保留结构，替换真实细节。The result matters because it shows whether a response to pollution worked in practice.
/ðə ɹɪˈzʌlt ˈmætɚz bɪˈkʌz ɪt ʃoʊz ˈwɛðɚ ə ɹɪˈspɑns tə pəˈluʃən wɚkt ɪn ˈpɹæktɪs./
结果很重要，因为它表明对污染的反应在实践中是否有效。
result — 保留结构，替换真实细节。Personal experience can introduce pollution, but a wider judgement also needs evidence.
/ˈpɚsənəl ɪkˈspɪɹiəns kən ˌɪntɹoʊˈdus pəˈluʃən, bʌt ə ˈwaɪdɚ ˈd͡ʒʌd͡ʒmənt ˈɔlsoʊ nidz ˈɛvədəns./
个人经验可能会带来污染，但更广泛的判断还需要证据。
personal experience — 保留结构，替换真实细节。A sensible choice about pollution compares immediate convenience with longer-term effects.
/ə ˈsɛnsɪbəl t͡ʃɔɪs əˈbaʊt pəˈluʃən kəmˈpɛɹz ɪˈmidiɪt kənˈvinjəns wɪθ ˈlɔŋɡɚ tɚm ɪˈfɛkts./
关于污染的明智选择是将眼前的便利与长期影响进行比较。
choice — 保留结构，替换真实细节。The main advantage of one response to pollution should be clear enough to observe or measure.
/ðə meɪn ædˈvæntɪd͡ʒ əv wʌn ɹɪˈspɑns tə pəˈluʃən ʃʊd bi klɪɹ ɪˈnʌf tə əbˈzɚv ɔɹ ˈmɛʒɚ./
一项污染对策的主要优势应足够明确，以便观察或衡量。
clear — 保留结构，替换真实细节。A clearly defined problem makes it easier to choose an appropriate response to pollution.
/ə ˈklɪɹli dɪˈfaɪnd ˈpɹɑbləm meɪks ɪt ˈiziɚ tə t͡ʃuz ən əˈpɹoʊpɹiɪt ɹɪˈspɑns tə pəˈluʃən./
明确定义的问题可以更容易地选择适当的污染应对措施。
problem — 保留结构，替换真实细节。A practical solution to pollution should fit local needs and remain realistic over time.
/ə ˈpɹæktɪkəl səˈluʃən tə pəˈluʃən ʃʊd fɪt ˈloʊkəl nidz ænd ɹɪˈmeɪn ˌɹiəˈlɪstɪk ˈoʊvɚ taɪm./
切实可行的污染解决方案应符合当地需求，并随着时间的推移保持现实。
practical solution — 保留结构，替换真实细节。The main challenge is to respond to pollution without creating a larger problem elsewhere.
/ðə meɪn ˈt͡ʃælɪnd͡ʒ ɪz tə ɹɪˈspɑnd tə pəˈluʃən wɪˈðaʊt kɹiˈeɪtɪŋ ə ˈlɑɹd͡ʒɚ ˈpɹɑbləm ˈɛlˌswɛɹ./
主要挑战在于在别处不造成更大的问题的情况下对污染作出反应。
problem — 保留结构，替换真实细节。Strong evidence helps people judge pollution without relying on a single attractive story.
/stɹɔŋ ˈɛvədəns hɛlps ˈpipəl d͡ʒʌd͡ʒ pəˈluʃən wɪˈðaʊt ɹiˈlaɪɪŋ ɔn ə ˈsɪŋɡəl əˈtɹæktɪv ˈstɔɹi./
有力的证据帮助人们在不依赖单一的有吸引力的故事的情况下判断污染。
strong evidence — 保留结构，替换真实细节。People need realistic support to maintain a balance between the benefits and costs of pollution.
/ˈpipəl nid ˌɹiəˈlɪstɪk səˈpɔɹt tə meɪnˈteɪn ə ˈbæləns bɪˈtwin ðə ˈbɛnəfɪts ænd kɔsts əv pəˈluʃən./
人们需要现实的支持来维持污染的收益和成本之间的平衡。
maintain a balance — 保留结构，替换真实细节。A positive change in pollution becomes credible when people can explain how it happened.
/ə ˈpɑzɪtɪv t͡ʃeɪnd͡ʒ ɪn pəˈluʃən bɪˈkʌmz ˈkɹɛdɪbəl wɛn ˈpipəl kən ɪkˈspleɪn haʊ ɪt ˈhæpənd./
当人们能够解释污染是如何发生的时，污染的积极变化就会变得可信。
positive change — 保留结构，替换真实细节。Practical support can help people respond to pollution without removing individual responsibility.
/ˈpɹæktɪkəl səˈpɔɹt kən hɛlp ˈpipəl ɹɪˈspɑnd tə pəˈluʃən wɪˈðaʊt ɹiˈmuvɪŋ ˌɪndɪˈvɪd͡ʒuəl ɹiˌspɑnsɪˈbɪləti./
实际支持可以帮助人们应对污染，而无需免除个人责任。
support — 保留结构，替换真实细节。The most practical lesson is that pollution should be judged through real effects rather than attractive slogans.
/ðə moʊst ˈpɹæktɪkəl ˈlɛsən ɪz ðæt pəˈluʃən ʃʊd bi d͡ʒʌd͡ʒd θɹu ɹil ɪˈfɛkts ˈɹæðɚ ðən əˈtɹæktɪv ˈsloʊɡənz./
最实际的教训是，应通过实际效果而不是有吸引力的口号来判断污染。
rather than — 保留结构，替换真实细节。Cost, access, time, and trust may alter the outcome even when the original idea appears sensible.
/kɔst, ˈækˌsɛs, taɪm, ænd tɹʌst meɪ ˈɔltɚ ðə ˈaʊtˌkʌm ˈivən wɛn ðə ɚˈɪd͡ʒənəl aɪˈdiə əˈpɪɹz ˈsɛnsɪbəl./
即使最初的想法看起来很合理，成本、访问、时间和信任也可能会改变结果。
even when — 保留结构，替换真实细节。Good decisions connect a clear purpose with evidence, human experience, and the willingness to revise a weak approach.
/ɡʊd dɪˈsɪʒənz kəˈnɛkt ə klɪɹ ˈpɚpəs wɪθ ˈɛvədəns, ˈhjumən ɪkˈspɪɹiəns, ænd ðə ˈwɪlɪŋnəs tə ɹɪˈvaɪz ə wik əˈpɹoʊt͡ʃ./
好的决定会把明确目标、事实证据、人的真实经验，以及修正薄弱方案的意愿联系起来。
clear — 保留结构，替换真实细节。When those parts stay connected, the topic becomes easier to discuss in daily conversation and in an IELTS answer.
/wɛn ðoʊz pɑɹts steɪ kəˈnɛktɪd, ðə ˈtɑpɪk bɪˈkʌmz ˈiziɚ tə dɪˈskʌs ɪn ˈdeɪli ˌkɑnvɚˈseɪʃən ænd ɪn ən aɪ ɛl ti ɛs ˈænsɚ./
当这些部分保持连贯时，无论日常交流还是 IELTS 回答，这个主题都会更容易展开。
When those parts stay — 保留结构，替换真实细节。A school measured roadside air quality at different times and moved outdoor exercise away from peak traffic.
/ə skul ˈmɛʒɚd ˈɹoʊdˌsaɪd ɛɹ ˈkwɑləti æt ˈdɪfɹənt taɪmz ænd muvd ˈaʊtˌdɔɹ ˈɛksɚˌsaɪz əˈweɪ fɹʌm pik ˈtɹæfɪk./
At first, this looked like a small decision about pollution, but its result soon became visible.
/æt fɚst, ðɪs lʊkt laɪk ə smɔl dɪˈsɪʒən əˈbaʊt pəˈluʃən, bʌt ɪts ɹɪˈzʌlt sun bɪˈkeɪm ˈvɪzɪbəl./
The case raises a broader question: how contaminated air, water, and soil affect life.
/ðə keɪs ˈɹeɪzɪz ə ˈbɹɔdɚ ˈkwɛst͡ʃən: haʊ kənˈtæməˌneɪtɪd ɛɹ, ˈwɔtɚ, ænd sɔɪl əˈfɛkt laɪf./
The first result looked promising; however, the longer-term evidence remained uncertain.
/ðə fɚst ɹɪˈzʌlt lʊkt ˈpɹɑməsɪŋ; ˌhaʊˈɛvɚ, ðə ˈlɔŋɡɚ tɚm ˈɛvədəns ɹɪˈmeɪnd ʌnˈsɚtən./
The example draws attention to a harmful pollutant, which can shape how people respond to pollution.
/ðə ɪɡˈzæmpəl dɹɔz əˈtɛnʃən tə ə ˈhɑɹmfəl pəˈlutənt, wɪt͡ʃ kən ʃeɪp haʊ ˈpipəl ɹɪˈspɑnd tə pəˈluʃən./
A closer look at a water contamination reveals a practical side of pollution that general opinions often miss.
/ə ˈkloʊsɚ lʊk æt ə ˈwɔtɚ kənˌtæməˈneɪʃən ɹɪˈvilz ə ˈpɹæktɪkəl saɪd əv pəˈluʃən ðæt ˈd͡ʒɛnɚəl əˈpɪnjənz ˈɔftən mɪs./
People usually notice the value of pollution only after a real event changes their routine.
/ˈpipəl ˈjuʒəli ˈnoʊtɪs ðə ˈvælju əv pəˈluʃən ˈoʊnli ˈæftɚ ə ɹil ɪˈvɛnt ˈt͡ʃeɪnd͡ʒɪz ðɛɹ ɹuˈtin./
A clear explanation can change how people understand and respond to pollution.
/ə klɪɹ ˌɛkspləˈneɪʃən kən t͡ʃeɪnd͡ʒ haʊ ˈpipəl ˌʌndɚˈstænd ænd ɹɪˈspɑnd tə pəˈluʃən./
A useful question about pollution focuses on what happened, why it matters, and what should happen next.
/ə ˈjusfəl ˈkwɛst͡ʃən əˈbaʊt pəˈluʃən ˈfoʊkəsɪz ɔn wʌt ˈhæpənd, waɪ ɪt ˈmætɚz, ænd wʌt ʃʊd ˈhæpən nɛkst./
A concrete example of pollution makes the central idea easier to understand and evaluate.
/ə ˈkɑŋkɹit ɪɡˈzæmpəl əv pəˈluʃən meɪks ðə ˈsɛntɹəl aɪˈdiə ˈiziɚ tə ˌʌndɚˈstænd ænd ɪˈvæljuˌeɪt./
The meaning of pollution becomes clearer when people connect it to a real experience.
/ðə ˈminɪŋ əv pəˈluʃən bɪˈkʌmz ˈklɪɹɚ wɛn ˈpipəl kəˈnɛkt ɪt tə ə ɹil ɪkˈspɪɹiəns./
People can describe an experience when a real situation involving pollution requires action.
/ˈpipəl kən dɪˈskɹaɪb ən ɪkˈspɪɹiəns wɛn ə ɹil ˌsɪt͡ʃuˈeɪʃən ɪnˈvɑlvɪŋ pəˈluʃən ɹiˈkwaɪɚz ˈækʃən./
People can compare two responses to pollution only when they use the same criteria.
/ˈpipəl kən kəmˈpɛɹ tu ɹɪˈspɑnsɪz tə pəˈluʃən ˈoʊnli wɛn ðeɪ juz ðə seɪm kɹaɪˈtɪɹiə./
A convincing view of pollution gives a reason and then tests it against a concrete example.
/ə kənˈvɪnsɪŋ vju əv pəˈluʃən ɡɪvz ə ˈɹizən ænd ðɛn tɛsts ɪt əˈɡɛnst ə ˈkɑŋkɹit ɪɡˈzæmpəl./
Debates about pollution become difficult when people treat a partial truth as a complete explanation.
/dɪˈbeɪts əˈbaʊt pəˈluʃən bɪˈkʌm ˈdɪfɪkʌlt wɛn ˈpipəl tɹit ə ˈpɑɹʃəl tɹuθ æz ə kəmˈplit ˌɛkspləˈneɪʃən./
A stronger position acknowledges a reasonable objection, sets clear limits, and still explains why one conclusion is preferable.
/ə ˈstɹɔŋɡɚ pəˈzɪʃən ækˈnɑlɪd͡ʒɪz ə ˈɹiznəbəl əbˈd͡ʒɛkʃən, sɛts klɪɹ ˈlɪmɪts, ænd stɪl ɪkˈspleɪnz waɪ wʌn kəŋˈkluʒən ɪz ˈpɹɛfɚəbəl./
This balance does not weaken the argument; it makes the judgement more precise, credible, and useful.
/ðɪs ˈbæləns dʌz nɑt ˈwikən ðə ˈɑɹɡjəmənt; ɪt meɪks ðə ˈd͡ʒʌd͡ʒmənt mɔɹ pɹɪˈsaɪs, ˈkɹɛdɪbəl, ænd ˈjusfəl./
The result matters because it shows whether a response to pollution worked in practice.
/ðə ɹɪˈzʌlt ˈmætɚz bɪˈkʌz ɪt ʃoʊz ˈwɛðɚ ə ɹɪˈspɑns tə pəˈluʃən wɚkt ɪn ˈpɹæktɪs./
Personal experience can introduce pollution, but a wider judgement also needs evidence.
/ˈpɚsənəl ɪkˈspɪɹiəns kən ˌɪntɹoʊˈdus pəˈluʃən, bʌt ə ˈwaɪdɚ ˈd͡ʒʌd͡ʒmənt ˈɔlsoʊ nidz ˈɛvədəns./
A sensible choice about pollution compares immediate convenience with longer-term effects.
/ə ˈsɛnsɪbəl t͡ʃɔɪs əˈbaʊt pəˈluʃən kəmˈpɛɹz ɪˈmidiɪt kənˈvinjəns wɪθ ˈlɔŋɡɚ tɚm ɪˈfɛkts./
The main advantage of one response to pollution should be clear enough to observe or measure.
/ðə meɪn ædˈvæntɪd͡ʒ əv wʌn ɹɪˈspɑns tə pəˈluʃən ʃʊd bi klɪɹ ɪˈnʌf tə əbˈzɚv ɔɹ ˈmɛʒɚ./
A clearly defined problem makes it easier to choose an appropriate response to pollution.
/ə ˈklɪɹli dɪˈfaɪnd ˈpɹɑbləm meɪks ɪt ˈiziɚ tə t͡ʃuz ən əˈpɹoʊpɹiɪt ɹɪˈspɑns tə pəˈluʃən./
A practical solution to pollution should fit local needs and remain realistic over time.
/ə ˈpɹæktɪkəl səˈluʃən tə pəˈluʃən ʃʊd fɪt ˈloʊkəl nidz ænd ɹɪˈmeɪn ˌɹiəˈlɪstɪk ˈoʊvɚ taɪm./
The main challenge is to respond to pollution without creating a larger problem elsewhere.
/ðə meɪn ˈt͡ʃælɪnd͡ʒ ɪz tə ɹɪˈspɑnd tə pəˈluʃən wɪˈðaʊt kɹiˈeɪtɪŋ ə ˈlɑɹd͡ʒɚ ˈpɹɑbləm ˈɛlˌswɛɹ./
Strong evidence helps people judge pollution without relying on a single attractive story.
/stɹɔŋ ˈɛvədəns hɛlps ˈpipəl d͡ʒʌd͡ʒ pəˈluʃən wɪˈðaʊt ɹiˈlaɪɪŋ ɔn ə ˈsɪŋɡəl əˈtɹæktɪv ˈstɔɹi./
People need realistic support to maintain a balance between the benefits and costs of pollution.
/ˈpipəl nid ˌɹiəˈlɪstɪk səˈpɔɹt tə meɪnˈteɪn ə ˈbæləns bɪˈtwin ðə ˈbɛnəfɪts ænd kɔsts əv pəˈluʃən./
A positive change in pollution becomes credible when people can explain how it happened.
/ə ˈpɑzɪtɪv t͡ʃeɪnd͡ʒ ɪn pəˈluʃən bɪˈkʌmz ˈkɹɛdɪbəl wɛn ˈpipəl kən ɪkˈspleɪn haʊ ɪt ˈhæpənd./
Practical support can help people respond to pollution without removing individual responsibility.
/ˈpɹæktɪkəl səˈpɔɹt kən hɛlp ˈpipəl ɹɪˈspɑnd tə pəˈluʃən wɪˈðaʊt ɹiˈmuvɪŋ ˌɪndɪˈvɪd͡ʒuəl ɹiˌspɑnsɪˈbɪləti./
The most practical lesson is that pollution should be judged through real effects rather than attractive slogans.
/ðə moʊst ˈpɹæktɪkəl ˈlɛsən ɪz ðæt pəˈluʃən ʃʊd bi d͡ʒʌd͡ʒd θɹu ɹil ɪˈfɛkts ˈɹæðɚ ðən əˈtɹæktɪv ˈsloʊɡənz./
Cost, access, time, and trust may alter the outcome even when the original idea appears sensible.
/kɔst, ˈækˌsɛs, taɪm, ænd tɹʌst meɪ ˈɔltɚ ðə ˈaʊtˌkʌm ˈivən wɛn ðə ɚˈɪd͡ʒənəl aɪˈdiə əˈpɪɹz ˈsɛnsɪbəl./
Good decisions connect a clear purpose with evidence, human experience, and the willingness to revise a weak approach.
/ɡʊd dɪˈsɪʒənz kəˈnɛkt ə klɪɹ ˈpɚpəs wɪθ ˈɛvədəns, ˈhjumən ɪkˈspɪɹiəns, ænd ðə ˈwɪlɪŋnəs tə ɹɪˈvaɪz ə wik əˈpɹoʊt͡ʃ./
When those parts stay connected, the topic becomes easier to discuss in daily conversation and in an IELTS answer.
/wɛn ðoʊz pɑɹts steɪ kəˈnɛktɪd, ðə ˈtɑpɪk bɪˈkʌmz ˈiziɚ tə dɪˈskʌs ɪn ˈdeɪli ˌkɑnvɚˈseɪʃən ænd ɪn ən aɪ ɛl ti ɛs ˈænsɚ./
02 · Vocabulary
n./phrase · 污染物
a key idea used when discussing pollution
harmful pollutant
n./phrase · 污染
a key idea used when discussing pollution
water contamination
adv. · 通常
in the way that happens most often
usually study
adj. · 清楚的
easy to hear or understand
a clear answer
n. · 问题
a sentence that asks for information
ask a question
n. · 例子
something that shows what you mean
give an example
n. · 意思
the idea expressed by a word
guess the meaning
v. · 描述
to say what someone or something is like
describe an experience
v. · 比较
to examine how things are similar or different
compare two options
n. · 原因
a cause or explanation
give a reason
n. · 结果
something that happens because of an action
as a result
n./v. · 经历；体验
knowledge gained by doing something
personal experience
n. · 选择
an act of choosing between possibilities
make a choice
n. · 优点
a condition that gives a benefit
main advantage
n. · 问题
a situation that needs a solution
solve a problem
n. · 解决办法
a way of solving a problem
practical solution
n./v. · 挑战
a difficult task that tests ability
face a challenge
n. · 证据
facts that support a claim
strong evidence
v. · 维持
to keep something at the same level
maintain a balance
n./v. · 改变
to become different
positive change
n./v. · 支持
help that makes something possible
support an idea
03 · Chunks
harmful pollutant污染物；保留结构，替换一个真实细节。water contamination污染；保留结构，替换一个真实细节。usually study通常；保留结构，替换一个真实细节。a clear answer清楚的；保留结构，替换一个真实细节。ask a question问题；保留结构，替换一个真实细节。give an example例子；保留结构，替换一个真实细节。guess the meaning意思；保留结构，替换一个真实细节。describe an experience描述；保留结构，替换一个真实细节。04 · Grammar
这个结构负责把事实、原因、条件或立场组织成一个边界清楚的复杂句。
结构：main clause + logical relationship + supporting clause
原文证据：The first result looked promising; however, the longer-term evidence remained uncertain.
常见错误：先保证两个分句都完整，再追求句式复杂度；不要用连接词拼接残句。
你的替换：保留结构，把主题换成自己的工作、生活或学习经历。
05 · Pronunciation
练法：慢读单词 → 读完整搭配 → 回到原句；每一步只录一遍，听完再修正。
06 · Spiral review
Day 338、Day 336、Day 332、Day 325、Day 309
07 · Speak with AI
你是我的一对一英语口语教练。今天是 Day 339，主题是 pollution，程度目标是 B2→C1。
先让我用自己的话复述今天的文章；一次只问一个问题，并等待我回答。
如果我卡住，只给 2–4 个关键词或一个句首，不要直接给完整答案。
请引导我使用这些词：pollutant, contamination, usually, clear, question, example, meaning, describe, compare, reason, result。
我的回答至少包含：一个事实、一个原因、一个具体例子、一个结果或判断。
每轮结束后只纠正最影响理解的 1 个语法问题和 1 个发音问题，然后让我重新回答同一个问题。
最后让我脱稿回答：How is pollution connected to your real life, and what have you learned from it?
结束时用中文列出：做得好的证据、需要修正的两点、三个可复用句型、明天应复习的内容。08 · Imitation
必须回收
pollutant, contamination, usually, clear, question, example, meaning, describe, compare, reason, result09 · Three-hour path