Should Sundays Be Car-Free

Evidence and civic choices

Вы научитесь: К концу этого задания вы сможете сравнивать мнения о местной политике, находить доказательства и уступки и предлагать взвешенную рекомендацию.

Режим погружения

ЧтениеB2Сложно? Смотрите A1

Should Sundays Be Car-Free

Evidence and civic choices

Режим погружения

00:0000:00

1×

Шаг 1 из 9

Перед чтением

Два автора местной газеты спорят о том, стоит ли раз в месяц по воскресеньям закрывать центр города для машин.

Ключевые слова

concedes: "concedes" значит "признаёт", то есть соглашается, что другой отчасти прав.
overstated: "overstated" значит "преувеличенный", то есть представленный больше, чем он есть на самом деле.
take the edge off congestion: "take the edge off congestion" значит "немного уменьшить пробки".
pilot scheme: "pilot scheme" — это небольшой пробный проект, который проводят до того, как правило станет постоянным.
disproportionately: "disproportionately" значит "несоразмерно", то есть сильнее затрагивает одну группу, чем другие.

Текст · часть 1 из 4

Maya Chen, transport planner: A monthly car-free Sunday would be a sensible traffic-calming measure, provided that residents were given clear notice. In comparable towns, air-quality readings improved, while cafés and markets reported more visitors. Critics argue that local businesses would lose customers; however, that assumption overlooks pedestrians who might spend longer in the centre. Since the proposal concerns only one day each month, it is a modest intervention that could take the edge off congestion without transforming daily routines.

Вопросы

Вопрос 1:

Which evidence does Maya use to support the proposal?

Показать перевод

Какое доказательство Майя приводит в поддержку предложения?

Comparable towns recorded cleaner air and more visitors.

Social-media approval guaranteed higher sales.

Текст · часть 2 из 4

Daniel Brooks, shopkeeper: The idea sounds attractive, but its benefits may be overstated. A single Sunday of cleaner air would not prove that pollution had been reduced throughout the year, and nearby streets could become more crowded. Families who rely on cars, including those with mobility difficulties, might be affected disproportionately. Unless public transport capacity were increased first, the scheme could shift inconvenience rather than solve it. The council should not introduce a rushed policy merely because it is popular on social media.

Вопросы

Вопрос 2:

What assumption does Daniel challenge?

Показать перевод

Какое предположение оспаривает Дэниел?

That one cleaner Sunday would demonstrate year-round pollution reduction.

That independent data should be collected before the trial.

Текст · часть 3 из 4

Maya concedes that access matters and agrees that public transport must be planned carefully. Daniel, in turn, accepts that a quieter centre could benefit residents and businesses, especially if visitors were encouraged to arrive by bus or bicycle. Both writers therefore support further evidence, although they interpret uncertainty differently: Maya sees it as a reason to test the idea, whereas Daniel sees it as a reason to delay.

Вопросы

Вопрос 3:

Which concession does Daniel make?

Показать перевод

Какую уступку делает Дэниел?

A quieter centre could benefit residents and businesses.

The policy should immediately be expanded nationwide.

Текст · часть 4 из 4

A balanced recommendation might be that a pilot scheme be introduced for three months, with exemptions for essential access. Beforehand, transport capacity should be assessed, and independent data should be collected on air quality, sales, congestion, and accessibility. Although this approach would not satisfy everyone, it would allow the council to act cautiously rather than defensively. The policy could then be continued, revised, or abandoned according to the evidence.