写英语对话作文怎么写

⑴ 用下面的对话写一篇英语作文

初一就这么难的题目了啊,现在的教育真不得了了.我编的对话不知道有没有超出初一的范围,楼主先看看吧.
A:Hey Tom,look at my new PSP!
B:Cool!What can it do?
A:You can use it to listen to musics,play video games and read e books.
B:Gee!It's really a powerful machine.
A:Of course,nowadays the technology is developing faster and faster.
B:Yes,and a lot of inventions are coming out every day.
A:I think people now are enjoying the conveninece brought by these inventions.
B:I agree with you.For example cars shorten the real distance of the world,while internet shorten the visual space of the world.
A:Exactly,and that's why now the world is called "Village of Earth".
B:But although people gain convenience from inventions,they have paid some cost.
A:What kind of cost?
B:Those advanced machines make people much lazier and unhealthier than before.
A:I can only partially agree with you.Many people will use machines to do their work,so they are becoming lazier.
B:So you don't think people are getting unhealthier?
A:Of course not.As medical techonology is so advanced,new medicine can cure all kinds of diseases.
B:But don't you think these diseases are caused by people's laziness?
A:Er,maybe you are right.But it will make people invent better medicines.
B:As you know in ancient times,people didn't have such effective machines,they can only rely on their hands and hardwork.
A:You mean we should do more exercise everyday to keep healthy?
B:You mean it.In a word,inventions have advantages as well as disadvantages.We should make good use of them.
A:You are right.

⑵ 怎么 写 几个 英语对话短文

你也得说是什么主题啊.

⑶ 怎么写英语对话

看你是什么学段，初中阶段的话，课本上面的对话、短语和相关的课文文章都是很好的例子，学好一门语言学科，需要多读，多说。多背。

⑷ 英语对话作文怎么写接着写

⑸ 写英语作文，用对话的形式

你好，刚刚给你发过去了，绝对原创，希望能被采纳。

⑹ 英语对话改写成短文

how was you weekend?

你周末过得怎么样？

It was great. So,what did you do?

太棒了。那么，你做了什么？

on Saturday morning I palyed tennis.

星期六早上我打网球。

on Saturday afternoon I weet to the beach ，and on Saturday night I weet to the movies . cool.

星期六下午我去海滩，星期六晚上我去看电影。凉的

Then，on Sunday morning I cleaned my room ，Sunday afternoon ，I played soccer .and on sunday night .

然后，周日早上我打扫房间，周日下午我踢足球，周日晚上。

I did my homework.

我做了家庭作业。

⑺ 英语对话作文的格式应该怎么写

英语作文的书写格式·英文书写和移行

英文书写应符合书写规范，英文字母要写清楚、写整齐、写美观，字母的大小和字母之间的距离要匀称。书写应做到字形秀丽漂亮，通篇匀称和谐。

写英文字母要掌握正确笔顺。如字母i，应该先写下面的部分，然后再打点。有的学生却按写汉字的习惯从上到下写，写快了，就会把点和下面的十笔连在量起，显得十分别扭。字形t应为两笔。不少人却将两笔合成一笔，看上去不像t，倒像l或是e，难以辨认。另外，把r写成v，把q写成把g，把k写成h等等，都是中学生书写中常见的毛病。

不少人在四线三格的练习纸上书写尚有规矩，能按字母的占格、高低和大小要求书写，但在白纸或横线纸上书写，却显得十分幼稚拙劣。字母或跳上跳下，或一律写成同一高度，占上中两格的字母与占中下两格的字母完全没有高低之别。这些现象都要防止。

另外，书写时还要注意词与词之间要保持一定的距离，不能紧靠在一起。字母之间的连写也应该按照习惯，不能随意乱来。

在一篇字数有限的作文里，我们还要注意尽量不把一个单词拆开移行。万一要移行，则必须以音节为单位进行，如revolution这个词，依照音节移行的原则可以按re-，revo-, revolu-这几种方法移行。在移行时，我们还应特别注意以下几点:

1. 单音节词不能移行，即使是字母较多的单音节词，如through等也不能例外。

2．缩略词如Mr.，Dr.等不能和后面的名字拆开移行。

缩略的专用名词如U．K.，U．S．A等也不能拆开移行。

3．时间、量度及货币单位应视为一个整体；不能分开移行。如；

11：00P.M.应写在一行内，不能将11：00和P．M．分开移行；写38℃时，不能将36和C分开移行。

4．由“年、月、日”表示的日期，如果必须分开移行只能将“月、日”与“年”分开。如January 6，1980不能将January和6分开移行，但可以把January 6，和1980分成两行。

5．含双写辅音字母的单词，在移行时要将辅音字母拆开。如better可拆成better，necessary可拆成necessary。

但如果双写辅音字母属于词根，后面又加了后缀，就不能将两个辅音字母拆开。如drill加上-ing后构成了drilling，就不可以将它拆成成dril-ling，而只能拆为drilling。

⑻ 英语对话作文

“Don't scientists have a responsibility to use animals in order to find cures for human diseases?”

Ecating people and encouraging them to avoid fat and cholesterol, quit smoking, rece alcohol and other drug consumption, exercise regularly, and clean up the environment will save more human lives and prevent more human suffering than all the animal tests in the world. Animal tests are primitive, and modern technology and human clinical tests are much more effective and reliable.
Even if we had no alternative to using animals, which is not the case, animal testing would still be ethically unacceptable. As George Bernard Shaw once said, “You do not settle whether an experiment is justified or not by merely showing that it is of some use. The distinction is not between useful and useless experiments, but between barbarous and civilized behaviour.” After all, there are probably some medical problems that can only be cured by testing on unwilling humans, but we don’ conct such tests because we recognize that it would be wrong to do so.

“If we didn’t use animals, wouldn’t we have to test new drugs on people?”

The choice isn’t between animals and people. There is no guarantee that drugs are safe—even if they have been tested on animals—because the physiological differences between humans and other animals prevent the results of animal tests from being accurately extrapolated to humans. Some drugs that have been approved through animal tests can cause serious and unexpected side effects for humans. A 2002 report in the Journal of the American Medical Association found that in the last 25 years, more than 50 FDA-approved drugs had to be taken off the market or relabeled because they caused “adverse reactions.” In 2000 alone, the prescription drugs removed from the market were the popular heartburn drug Propulsid (removed because it caused “fatal heart rhythm abnormalities”), the diabetes drug Rezulin (“removed after causing liver failure”), and the irritable-bowel-syndrome treatment Lotronex (“removed for causing fatal constipation and colitis”). According to the study’s lead author, “Millions of patients are exposed to potentially unsafe drugs each year.”

If the pharmaceutical instry switched from animal experiments to quantum pharmacology and in vitro tests, we would be better protected from harmful drugs, not less protected.

“If we didn’t test on animals, how would we conct medical research?”

Human clinical and epidemiological studies, studies on cadavers, and computer simulations are faster, more reliable, less expensive, and more humane than animal tests. Ingenious scientists have used human brain cells to develop a model “microbrain” that can be used to study tumors and have also come up with artificial skin and bone marrow. Instead of killing animals, we can now test irritancy on egg membranes, proce vaccines from cell cultures, and perform pregnancy tests using blood samples. As Gordon Baxter, cofounder of Pharmagene Laboratories—a company that uses only human tissue and computers to develop and test its drugs—says, “If you have information on human genes, what’s the point of going back to animals?”

“Doesn't animal experimentation help animals by advancing veterinary science?”

The point is not whether animal experimentation can be useful to animals or humans; the point is that we do not have the moral right to inflict unnecessary suffering on those who are at our mercy. Saying that it’s acceptable to experiment on animals to advance veterinary science is like saying that it’s acceptable to experiment on poor children to benefit rich ones.

“Don’t medical students have to dissect animals?”

No, they don’t. In fact, more and more medical students are becoming conscientious objectors who choose to learn by assisting experienced surgeons instead of by using animals. In Great Britain, it is against the law for medical students to practice surgery on animals, and British physicians are just as competent as those who were ecated elsewhere. Many of the leading U.S. medical schools, including Harvard, Yale, and Stanford, now use innovative, clinical teaching methods instead of cruel animal laboratories. Harvard, for instance, offers a cardiac-anesthesia practicum in which students observe human heart bypass operations instead of performing terminal surgery on dogs. The Harvard staff members who developed this practicum have recommended that it be implemented elsewhere.

“Should we throw out all the drugs that were developed and tested on animals? Would you refuse to take them?”

Unfortunately, a number of things in our society came about through the exploitation of others. For instance, many of the roads that we drive on were built by slaves. We can’t change the past; those who have already suffered and died are lost. But what we can do is change the future by using non-animal research methods from now on.

“Don't scientists care about the animals they experiment on? Doesn't their research depend on the animals’ well-being?”

Investigations at even the most prestigious institutions show that this is simply not the case. At the City of Hope in California, one of the country’s most prominent research facilities, animals starved to death and drowned in their own feces. Many experimenters become calloused after years of research and don’t see the animals’ suffering. They treat animals like disposable tools and consider proper animal care to be too expensive.

“Don't peer-review and animal-care committees prevent animal cruelty at institutions?”

No, because many such committees are composed mainly or completely of people who have vested interests in the continuation of animal experimentation. Members of the public were not allowed access to committee meetings until lawsuits were filed.

“Cats and dogs are killed in pounds anyway, so why not let them be used in experiments to save lives?”

A painless death at an animal shelter is a far cry from a life of severe pain and deprivation and an agonizing death in a laboratory.

“Would you support an experiment that would sacrifice 10 animals to save 10,000 people?”

No. Look at it another way: Suppose that the only way to save 10,000 people was to experiment on one mentally challenged orphan. If saving people is the goal, wouldn’t that be worth it? Most people would agree that it would be wrong to sacrifice one human for the “greater good” of others because it would violate that indivial’s rights, but when it comes to sacrificing animals, the assumption is that human beings have rights and animals do not. Yet there is no logical reason to deny animals the same rights that protect indivial humans from being sacrificed for the common good.

“What about experiments in which animals are observed and not harmed?”
If there really is no harm, we don’t object. But “no harm” means that animals aren’t isolated in barren, cold steel cages because even confinement causes stress and fear, as shown by the differences in blood pressure between caged and free animals. Caged animals also suffer because they are prevented from performing their normal behaviors and social interactions.

“If you were in a fire and could save either your child or your dog, who would you choose?”

I would save my child, but that’s just instinct. A dog would save her pup. Regardless, my choice proves nothing about the moral legitimacy of animal experiments. I might save my own child instead of my neighbor’s, but that hardly proves that experimentation on my neighbor’s child is acceptable.

“Why Should Animals Have Rights?”

Supporters of animal rights believe that animals have an inherent worth—a value completely separate from their usefulness to humans. We believe that every creature with a will to live has a right to live free from pain and suffering. For more information, click here.

EU proposes to strengthen protection of animals used in scientific experiments

The European Commission on Wednesday proposed legislation to strengthen the protection of animals used in scientific experiments and to minimize the number of animals being tested on.

The proposal, which intends to strengthen existing European Union (EU) legislation, asks ethical evaluations to be carried out before projects using animals are authorized and lays down minimum requirements on housing and animal care.

The proposed directive covers all live non-human vertebrate animals plus certain other species likely to experience pain. The use of non-human primates is subject to restrictions, and the use of great apes -- chimpanzees, bonobos, gorillas and orangutans -- is banned in scientific proceres. Only when survival of the species itself is at stake, or in the case of an unexpected outbreak of a life-threatening or debilitating disease in human beings, can a member state exceptionally be granted permission for their use.

The proposal seeks to ensure that animals are used only where no other means are available. Their use must be fully justifiable and the expected benefits must outweigh the harm caused to the animals. The proposal would also ensure that animals receive suitable care and treatment such as appropriately sized cages and an environment adapted to each species.

The proposal would also require projects involving animals to be authorized by a competent authority before they can go ahead. Organizations wishing to breed, supply or use animals would be obliged to seek authorization for their activities and for the personnel working with the animals.

"It is absolutely important to steer away from testing on animals. Scientific research must focus on finding alternative methods to animal testing, but where alternatives are not available the situation of animals still used in experiments must be improved," said EU Environment Commissioner Stavros Dimas.

⑼ 如何写三明治的英语对话作文拜托各位了 3Q

A:I'm hungry. Let's make a sandwich. B:That sound good.How do we make a sanwich? A:First,put the butter on the bread. B:And then? A:Cut ut an onion and a tomato. B:Ok. A:Add them to the bread. Next put some lettuce and some chicken slices on the bread.And put the relish on the chicken. Finally , put another bread on the top.