Parks— Part 1 Relatório

Sugestão: Improve grammatical accuracy, reduce hesitations and unclear words, and organize the answer with a clear topic sentence plus specific supporting details. Avoid incorrect or confusing vocabulary (e.g., 'apartheid' is wrong here). Use linking phrases to connect ideas. Keep the answer within 3–4 sentences.

Exemplo: Yes, I enjoyed going to parks as a child. In my hometown we did not have proper public parks, but we often played on my family's farm and explored a nearby small mountain. Those outdoor spaces let us run around and play games with friends most weekends.

Sugestão: Be concise and clear: state the main point, give one reason with a specific detail, and end with a brief future plan. Eliminate filler words and unclear phrases like 'do more interview with those kind of instruments.' Use linking words (however, because, so) to structure the response.

Exemplo: Yes, I still enjoy visiting parks, especially green, outdoor areas. However, I rarely go now because I am busy with work and study. I hope to visit parks more often in the future when I have more free time.

Sugestão: Provide a clear topic sentence and use specific reasons with cleaner vocabulary. Reduce hesitations and repeat words. Use linking words (because, for example, therefore) and more precise phrases (e.g., 'improves air quality'). Keep to 2–3 sentences.

Exemplo: Yes, I would like more parks in my city because they improve people's health and the environment. For example, more trees would absorb carbon dioxide and improve air quality, making the city a nicer place to live.

Sugestão: Answer with a clear topic sentence naming specific places, give one brief reason for each choice, and avoid repetition and filler. Use correct names (e.g., 'Venice' instead of 'Genucia' if you mean it) and accurate descriptions. Keep it to 3 sentences maximum.

Exemplo: Yes, I would like to visit several parks in the future. I want to see the cherry blossoms in Kyoto because I have seen photos of pink trees, and I would also like to visit the beaches and tropical gardens in Bali for their beautiful landscapes.

× Yes, when I was a child, I was loved to play a lot, but uh, at my hometown, uh, we didn't have like an apartheid because our hometown is like a local area.

✓ Yes, when I was a child, I loved to play a lot, but in my hometown we didn't have a park because our hometown is a rural area.

The phrase 'I was loved to play' uses passive voice incorrectly; the correct active form is 'I loved to play' (subject + past verb). 'At my hometown' should be 'in my hometown' (preposition use). 'Apartheid' is the wrong word; context requires 'park'. 'Local area' is better expressed as 'rural area.' Suggestions: use active verbs for personal habits and choose correct prepositions (in for locations) and precise nouns.

× We did have a farm that we go to play in it uh, every now and then.

✓ We had a farm that we went to and played in every now and then.

Mixing 'did have' with present verbs 'go' is inconsistent. When describing past habitual actions, use past tense for all verbs: 'had', 'went', 'played'. Also remove redundant 'in it' and place adverbial phrase appropriately. Suggestion: keep tense consistent for actions in the past.

× And we also have like kind of mountain.

✓ And we also have kind of a mountain.

The phrase lacks the article 'a' before 'mountain' and 'have like kind of' is colloquial. Use 'kind of a mountain' to be grammatical. Suggestion: include articles with singular countable nouns and avoid filler words like 'like' where possible.

× So yes, we go, we go through to Blazer.

✓ So yes, we used to go to Blazer.

The original repeats present-tense 'we go' and includes unnecessary preposition 'through to.' For past habitual action, 'used to go to' or 'we went to' is appropriate. Suggestion: choose a single clear tense and correct verb phrase for habitual past actions.

× Yes, I love to go, uh, espe uh, to the outdoor places and the green area, but I don't have like an opportunity like, uh, when I was in, I was young, uh, because now I'm an adult and have a lot of things to do and, umm, but maybe in the future I will try to do more interview with those kind of instruments.

✓ Yes, I love going to outdoor places and green areas, but I don't have the same opportunities I had when I was young because now I'm an adult and have a lot of responsibilities. Maybe in the future I will try to spend more time with those kinds of activities.

Use 'love going' (gerund) for general preference rather than 'love to go' (both possible but gerund flows better). 'I don't have like an opportunity like, uh, when I was in, I was young' is ungrammatical; replace with 'I don't have the same opportunities I had when I was young.' 'Have a lot of things to do' is informal; 'responsibilities' is clearer. 'Do more interview with those kind of instruments' is unclear and ungrammatical; likely intended 'spend more time on those kinds of activities.' Suggestions: simplify and use gerunds for activities, compare past and present with 'same as' and use plural agreement 'kinds' with 'those'.

× Yes, it's one of the positive things that I would love to, uh, have it in my city because it's not just as it were, uh, people's health.

✓ Yes, it's one of the positive things I would love to have in my city because it's good for people's health.

'Have it' is unnecessary; say 'have' only. The phrase 'not just as it were, uh, people's health' is ungrammatical; meaning is likely 'good for people's health.' Remove filler and redundant words. Suggestion: use concise clauses and place articles correctly ('people's health' is fine without extra words).

× It's good also for the environment, uh, because uh, the more, uh, area, if we have like more trees, the, uh, the carbon dioxide, uh, that put in the air would be less and the air would be more.

✓ It's also good for the environment because if we have more trees, the amount of carbon dioxide released into the air would be less and the air quality would be better.

The original has disfluent fillers and incorrect noun phrases ('the more area'), and missing noun 'amount' for 'carbon dioxide.' 'That put in the air' should be passive or use 'released into the air.' 'The air would be more' is incomplete; use 'air quality would be better.' Suggestion: remove fillers, use clear conditional structure 'if' + present simple for general truth, and choose precise nouns like 'amount' and 'air quality.'

× Yes, I like to go. I don't have like a name, a name, I don't know like a name of the card, but I would love to go to Kyoto because I see that in Kyoto they have like you know, trees that is pink, pink.

✓ Yes, I would like to go. I don't know the name of the park, but I would love to go to Kyoto because I have seen that they have pink trees there.

'I like to go' is vague; 'I would like to go' matches the future intent. 'I don't know like a name of the card' contains wrong nouns and articles; correct is 'I don't know the name of the park.' 'Trees that is pink' has subject-verb agreement error and should be 'trees that are pink.' Also change 'I see that in Kyoto they have' to 'I have seen that they have' (present perfect) or 'I know they have.' Suggestion: use correct articles, plural agreement 'trees are', and appropriate tense for experience 'I have seen.'

× Yes, I would love to to go to Kyoto to see it, but also I would love to go to Bali and Genucia, those kind of those two like places.

✓ Yes, I would love to go to Kyoto to see them, and I would also love to visit Bali and Genoa; those kinds of places appeal to me.

Duplicate 'to' should be single. Replace 'see it' with 'see them' if referring to trees or 'see it' if referring to the park; here 'them' fits 'trees.' 'Genucia' is likely 'Genoa'—correct proper noun. 'Those kind of those two like places' is ungrammatical; use 'those kinds of places' or 'places like those.' Suggestion: correct place names, avoid repetition, and use plural forms consistently.