| 项目 | 内容 |
|---|
| 题型 | Agree/Disagree（观点类） |
| 话题 | 环境类/城市规划 - 交通政策 |
| 关键词 | private cars, banned, city centres |
| 考察能力 | 评估激进城市政策的利弊 |
【开头段】
├── 背景：congestion and pollution increasingly severe
├── 让步：sympathise with motivations
├── 立场：complete ban excessive and impractical
└── 预告：nuanced approach
【主体段1 - 支持禁止】
├── 引出：Proponents make compelling arguments
├── 论点1：pollution → health problems
├── 论点2：congestion → economic loss
├── 论点3：hostile to pedestrians
└── 证据：Oslo, Madrid, Ghent成功案例
【主体段2 - 反对禁止】
├── 转折：However, raises concerns
├── 公平问题：dependent groups（disabilities, elderly等）
├── 核心表达：disproportionately affect
├── 实际问题：without adequate alternatives
└── 后果：displace rather than solve
【主体段3 - 折中方案】
├── 过渡：more balanced approach
├── 具体措施：congestion charges, low-emission zones等
├── 配套要求：must be accompanied by investment
└── 重新定义目标：unnecessary, not criminalised
【结尾段】
├── 重申目标：worthy goal
├── 反对方法：neither feasible nor fair
├── 替代方案：graduated restrictions
└── 升华：accommodate human diversity
| 词汇/短语 | 含义 | 用法示例 |
|---|
| excessive and impractical | 过度且不切实际 | a complete ban would be excessive |
| pedestrianised zones | 步行区 | pedestrianised zones can revitalise |
| outright ban | 完全禁止 | an outright ban raises concerns |
| disproportionately affect | 不成比例地影响 | disproportionately affect those who... |
| blanket prohibition | 一刀切的禁令 | a blanket prohibition |
| displace traffic | 转移交通流量 | simply displace traffic elsewhere |
| congestion charges | 拥堵费 | congestion charges can reduce car use |
| low-emission zones | 低排放区 | low-emission zones |
| graduated restrictions | 渐进式限制 | graduated restrictions |
| one-size-fits-all | 一刀切的 | not impose one-size-fits-all solutions |
这些表达可以用于其他政策类话题：
| 原句 | 可迁移到 |
|---|
| "sympathise with the motivations behind such proposals" | 任何需要承认对方立场的话题 |
| "disproportionately affect vulnerable groups" | 社会政策、税收、医疗等话题 |
| "accompanied by substantial investment in..." | 需要配套措施的政策讨论 |
| "a more nuanced approach" | 任何需要提出折中方案的话题 |
| "restrict rather than prohibit" | 烟酒管控、网络监管等话题 |
