【紧急求拍砖】还有5天 第二次写 argue60求指点！
本帖最后由 飞天小雯子 于 2012-11-27 19:06 编辑The following appeared in a letter from a firm providing investment advice to a client.
"Homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last year that region experienced twenty days with below-average temperatures, and local weather forecasters throughout the region predict that this weather pattern will continue for several more years. Furthermore, many new homes have been built in this region during the past year. Because of these developments, we predict an increased demand for heating oil and recommend investment in Consolidated Industries, one of whose major business operations is the retail sale of home heating oil."
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
The manager recommends the client to invest in consolidated industries pointing out that the demand for home heating oil is sure to increase in this area, which seems reasonable. To evaluate his argument more accurately, however, requires further evidence, which I will discuss as follow.
Firstly, in order to corroborate his argument that demand for home heating oil will increase the manager implies that winter in this region will be colder than before. So the first piece of evidence we need to evaluate the manager's claim would be unequivocal statistics indicating future winter temperatures. If it turned out that there were 30 days with below-average temperature in winter in this region before, or that the number of days suffering below-average temperature remained unchanged while the average temperature had risen to some extent recently, the implication would be conspicuously weakened by either of them, because winter in last year as well as following years may be actually warmer than before. Moreover, since the weather forecast predicted that the weather pattern last year would continue for several years, strong evidence demonstrating the accuracy of the weather forecast's former predictions may be useful to assess the validity of this prediction. The evidence, however, is very likely to weaken the prediction and then the manager's argument since several years is too long a period for a weather prediction to be accurate.
Another piece of evidence that might be helpful to evaluate the argument is one including detailed information about the new homes built here. That information may firstly include a comprehensive survey of several preferences of the newcomers. It’s not sure whether they prefer to spend winter holidays outside the area, nor is it clear whether they prefer a more effective heating resource such as natural gas instead of oil. If the reality turns out to be either one of them, the manager's argument will be weakened to great extent, since the argument’s assumption that there will be more people living here is undermined. Secondly, if additional information about the newly-built houses indicating that they have applied more effective thermal insulation materials to help withstand the severe coldness, which means there won’t be a tremendous increase in the demand for heating, the manager’s argument would be seriously weakened.
To fully examine the argument as well as the recommendation, we need more specific evidence describing the background information of the investment. If it is the case that future sale’s market is tiny or probable profitability ratio is low, the advice will not be taken at all. A further analysis of the extra benefit this investment can bring about will strengthen the recommendation. It is no doubt that the client would be more likely to be persuaded if the manage provide evidence showing that this investment can generate higher or more stable profits than the others.
To sum up, the evidence of the argument is too meager to be evaluated objectively and accurately which means to assess it effectively we may need more information about the future winter temperatures, about preferences of the newcomers, about materials applied in the newly-built house, about the background information and probable extra benefit of the investment and so on.
==下面是最开始写的，不用再帮我看了~~~==
550 words
In this argument, the author claims that the demand for heating oil would increase and thus recommend his client to invest in consolidated industries. To support the claim, the author points out that the winters in this region were bitterly cold and residents there used oil as fuel for heating traditionally and that the region will experience a weather pattern in which there are twenty days with below-average temperature. In addition, he states more homes have been built recently implying an increasing demand. However, close scrutiny of the argument reveals that inadequate evidence has been displayed to support the deduction and the recommendation.
First of all, the argument fail to provide evidence to support the assumption that during the period of establishing the industries the tradition of using fuel as major heating resource would remain unchanged. Chances are that new energy resources such as natural gas have been introduced to this region as a substitute for oil as fuel for heating. Moreover, the mere fact that the weather pattern in which there are 20 days with below-average temperatures will continue for several years doesn’t necessarily mean that winter in the following years will be colder than those previously. Perhaps the average temperature has increased appreciably during recent years and using oil as fuel for heating is no longer needed.
Secondly, the stories of new homes having been built in this region amount to scant evidence at best of the increasing demands. The author doesn’t make it clear if more people have left out of the region because of the severe weather so that the amount of residents living here has decreased as a matter of fact. Even if people haven’t left out, it is possible that the newly-built houses are of such high quality that it can withstand the chilliness, and as a result, the demand for heating wouldn’t increase substantially. Moreover, the residents moving into this area may probably be those who moved out of even colder areas, accustomed to cold weather and not inclined to use oil fuel for heating.
Thirdly, the author assume without warrant that the client can benefit the most by investment in a consolidated industries whose major business operation is retail sale of home heating oil. On one hand, further research and analysis of the market in that region is lacked to convince the client that the company should focus on retail sale in order to make considerable profits. Perhaps there is a company supply with home heating oil already and the price they charge is rather competing, and then such an investment can probably end in huge loss. On the other hand, without analysis of whether the company should focus on retail sale or wholesale, it’s too haste to draw the conclusion that the investment in the former one is more profitable.
In sum, the author’s evidence doesn’t warrant the argument as well as the recommendation. To support his deduction he must first provide that the demand of residents in this area is genuinely increasing, a comprehensive survey of demands for oil fuel may be useful for this purpose. To better buttress the recommendation, the author should offer detailed information about the type which the business should be. A specific research and analysis would be more convincing including information of target customers, the marketing environment as well as the competitors.
肿末木有人理我啊~~捉急啊 啊啊 ！！！ 本帖最后由 Dr_JohnDoe 于 2012-11-26 14:19 编辑
首先告诫LZ，散贴一般是不会有人来批的。
这篇要求的是specific evidence，但你是按assumption的思路写。不过还好，oil这题确实是有assumption题的，考试的时候看清楚就行。
In this argument, the author claims that the demand for heating oil would increase and thus recommend his client to invest in consolidated industries. To support the claim, the author points out that the winters in this region were bitterly cold and residents there used oil as fuel for heating traditionally and that the region will experience a weather pattern in which there are twenty days with below-average temperature. In addition, he states more homes have been built recently implying an increasing demand. However, close scrutiny of the argument reveals that inadequate evidence has been displayed to support the deduction and the recommendation.
LZ走的绝对是北范路线。不知道你这篇是否限时了。真实考试中每秒钟都是弥足珍贵的，与其在开头把原文复述一遍，不如开门见山地说自己要攻击哪些点。
First of all, the argument fail to provide evidence to support the assumption that during the period of establishing the industries（不太明白这句） the tradition of using fuel as major heating resource would remain unchanged. Chances are that new energy resources such as natural gas have been introduced to this region as a substitute for oil as fuel for heating. Moreover, the mere fact that the weather pattern in which there are 20 days with below-average temperatures will continue for several years doesn’t necessarily mean that winter in the following years will be colder than those previously. Perhaps the average temperature has increased appreciably during recent years and using oil as fuel for heating is no longer needed（no longer needed有点夸张了，也许说fuel的需求量会减小会更好）.
你的第一意群段攻击了两个假设：（1）人们会继续使用燃油取暖（2）冬天会被以往更冷。首先，第二个假设的论述似乎忽略了天气预报员的预测。其次，这两个假设没有建立联系。其实它们是为“该地区用油量会增长”而服务的。也就是说，如果这两个assumption不成立了，那么就不能说用油量会增加，大家也就不用投资这个版块了。（务必说明assumption不成立会对原论断有何影响）
Secondly, the stories of new homes having been built in this region amount to scant evidence at best of the increasing demands. The author doesn’t make it clear if more people have left out of （没有这种说法）the region because of the severe weather so that the amount of residents living here has decreased as a matter of fact（恰恰相反，我们就是不知道到底有没有decrease）. Even if people haven’t left out（leave out是遗漏的意思）, it is possible that the newly-built houses are of such high quality that it can withstand the chilliness（怎么抵御严寒？是用oil还是用新技术？）, and as a result, the demand for heating wouldn’t increase substantially. Moreover, the residents moving into this area may probably be those who moved out of even colder areas, accustomed to cold weather and not inclined to use oil fuel for heating.
这一段的攻击点是围绕新房子展开的。主要逻辑是：（1）可能由于寒冷的天气，会有一部分人搬出去（所谓的“left out of”） （2）高质量的房子能抵御严寒 （3）新来的居民来自更冷的地方，所以不会觉得这里冷。总体看来，这一段LZ的问题已经开始凸显了。
首先，搬出去是不太现实的，一般居民都习惯了严寒，不可能随随便便就离开。更好的逻辑是，他们冬天会出去度假。
其次，高质量的房子，到底是怎么个高质量法？如果这些房子还是用的heating fuel，那么需求量不是一样会上升么？除非用的是隔热材料或者新能源。
最后，外来居民习惯寒冷，实在是很牵强。不知道LZ是南方人还是北方人。一般需要供暖设施的地方，冬天都是非常冷的，再抗冻也受不了。就好像南方人到北方来一样，不用暖气是吃不消的。
我建议的攻击逻辑是：（1）房子可能比较贵，不会有人搬进去 （2）冬天太冷，很多人会出去度假
Thirdly, the author assume without warrant that the client can benefit the most by investment in a consolidated industries whose major business operation is retail sale of home heating oil. On one hand, further research and analysis of the market in that region is lacked to convince the client that the company should focus on retail sale（这里是建议投资者，而不是建议公司） in order to make considerable profits. Perhaps there is a company supply with home heating oil already and the price they charge is rather competing（competitive）, and then such an investment can probably end in huge loss（这是argument的大忌：泛泛而谈，却又不说到底是怎么导致的）. On the other hand, without analysis of whether the company should focus on retail sale or wholesale, it’s too haste(hasty) to draw the conclusion that the investment in the former one is more profitable.
这一段的攻击点是CI公司。但你的攻击逻辑我没太看懂。注意，这篇argument是诱骗投资者去投资CI公司，所以大费周章地说用油量会增长，而CI公司的主营业务优势就是fuel的零售。假设你是投资者，你手里攥着的都是血汗钱，你会随随便便因为这么弱的逻辑去投资吗？
站在投资者的角度来看，你关心的应该是这个公司目前的业绩（利润率）如何，在fuel的市场到底占有多大的份额（share of market），而不是去关心那些边角料的东西。
In sum, the author’s evidence doesn’t warrant the argument as well as the recommendation. To support his deduction he must first provide that the demand of residents in this area is genuinely increasing, a comprehensive survey of demands for oil fuel may be useful for this purpose. To better buttress the recommendation, the author should offer detailed information about the type which the business should be. A specific research and analysis would be more convincing including information of target customers, the marketing environment as well as the competitors.
总结：
LZ绝对是走的北美范文路线，模板痕迹非常重，但主要问题不在这里。
你的文章提到的攻击点太多，但都没有充分展开，而且没有用一条清晰的逻辑联系起来。
这道题的思路，应该是:
不知道现在天气是不是更冷了（要和前几年比较），天气预报也未必准确（以年为单位的预测很难准确），就算天气变冷了，也不知道用油量是否上升（也许只是稍微变冷了一点）。
虽然建了新房子，但不知道会不会有人住进去（可能房子太贵），不知道他们会不会用新能源，不知道他们冬天是否会出去旅游（当地居民的生活习惯一般不太会改变，主要是针对新来的居民进行论述）。
就算用油量确实会增长，也不一定要投资CI。天大地大，那么多公司，你凭什么就让我去投资你们？你们和其它公司相比优势在哪里？ Dr_JohnDoe 发表于 2012-11-26 09:28 static/image/common/back.gif
首先告诫LZ，散贴一般是不会有人来批的。
这篇要求的是specific evidence，但你是按assumption的思路写。 ...
谢谢 你的批评非常非常及时和有用！！！！再次万分感谢 飞天小雯子 发表于 2012-11-26 14:00 static/image/common/back.gif
谢谢 你的批评非常非常及时和有用！！！！再次万分感谢
别客气，我也是半斤八两，祝你杀G成功 根据3L童鞋的建议，我重写了一版 又给他改了一次，然后他又提出很独到的见解，主要是怎么针对EVIDENCE写，我打算再改一次，这里把我重写的和他的批改贴来给大家参考。。。。。
17:48-- 19:38 (写作+修改) 110mins 539 words
In this argument, the manager recommends the client to invest in Consolidated industries by pointing out that the demand for home heating oil is sure to increase in that area. However, the manager fails to offer sufficient evidence to support his argument, which I will discuss as follow.
First of all, in order to justify that the demand for home heating oil will increase, the manager implies that the winter in this region will be colder than before. A close scrutiny of the implication, however, reveals many flaws overlooked by the manager. The mere fact that the pattern where there are 20 days with below-average temperature will continue doesn’t necessarily mean that the weather will be colder than before. Perhaps there were even more days with below-average temperature in the previous years. Or perhaps the number of days with below-average temperature remains unchanged while the average temperature has risen to some extent that the winter was actually warmer than before. Even if winter in last year was indeed colder than before, the weather forecast’s prediction that weather pattern will continue for several years can barely be accurate and convincing, since several years is too long a period for weather forecast to be accurate. Therefore, the manager fails to demonstrate that winter in this region will be colder in the following years.
What’s more, even if the coldness in winter in this area will be severer in the following years, warrants are lacked to claim an increasing demand for home heating oil. Although the manager tells a story of newly-built homes here indicating that there will be more people and thus more demand, which seems reasonable, the manager fails to provide evidence to validate that the influx of newcomers will actually result in an increasing population in winter in the right place . Perhaps many newcomers prefer to spend their winter holidays out of town, which means the number of people here in winter will change little. Even if population does increase here in winter, chances are that they would prefer a more effective heating resource such as natural gas instead of oil. Furthermore, it’s possible that newly-built homes won’t suffer the same chillness to the original ones, because new houses may apply more effective thermal insulation materials, which enables homes to withstand severe coldness. All the above mentioned possibilities expose a dearth of evidence to expect an increasing demand for home heating oil in this region.
Last but not least, no evidence shows that the investment in consolidated industries will have an appreciable return. Even if the demand of home heating oil is increasing, an investment in consolidated industries may end in loss. Because evidence including a research of the future sales market and an analysis of cost-effect is absent to judge whether the investment will gain profit . On the other hand, the manager fails to provide evidence of attractive benefits from investing in Consolidated Industry such as higher return or much more stable profit than investing in other companies to convince the client to invest right in consolidated industries instead of others.
In sum, in the manager’s seemingly logical argument, evidence is particularly scant in every single step of his reasoning, which is hardly helpful to strengthen the argument to persuade the client to invest in consolidated industries in this region.
这里提几点语言上的建议：
（1）不要滥用长句，除非你真的很有把握。也不要害怕短句子会让ETS觉得你幼稚，其实短句子读起来是很舒服的，阅卷人都想舒服，不想难受。
（2）注意断句，哪怕是长句。不要生硬地用连词把两个分句连起来，可以考虑用which means, which implies代替。或者直接分两句：Perhaps….. In this case/if this is the case, …..（也许是怎么怎么样的。如果是这样，那么…..）
（3）你的句子比较冗长。注意活用指代名词（those, that, such），会让你省掉很多废话。好文章是简洁明快，而不是又臭又长的。
总而言之，不要害怕把句子写短。最重要的是，要写清楚。
还有，最重要的一点，恐怕你没有搞清楚evidence类的题目应该怎么写：
Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.
首先，你要说明需要什么具体证据。所谓具体，可能会类似这样：
（1）我需要一个关于XXX的调查
（2）论者应该告诉我XXX方面的数据
（3）我需要知道XXX的具体原因
其次，注意“how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument”，这是重头戏。就是说，你必须要说明这些证据是怎么加强或者削弱原论断的。比如说：
假如调查显示XXX，那么论者的XXX结论就站不住脚。反之，如果结果是XXX，那么论者的XXX说法就有可能是对的。
Evidence的写法，详见这篇OG上Dr. Karp：
It might seem logical, at first glance, to agree with the argument in Dr. Karp’s article
that children in Tertia actually are raised by their biological parents (and perhaps even,
by implication, that an observation-centered approach to anthropological study is
not as valid as an interview-centered one). However, in order to fully evaluate this
argument, we need to have a significant amount of additional evidence. The argument
could end up being much weaker than it seems, or it might actually be quite valid. In
order to make that determination, we need to know more than analyze what we learn.
The first piece of evidence that we would need in order to evaluate Dr. Karp’s claims
is information about whether or not Tertia and the surrounding island group have
changed significantly in the past 20 years. Dr. Field conducted his observational study
20 years ago, and it is possible that Tertia has changed significantly since then. For
example, if we had evidence that in the intervening years Westerners had settled on
the island and they introduced a more typical Western-style family structure, it would
certainly weaken Dr. Karp’s argument. In that case, the original study could have been
accurate, and Dr. Karp’s study could be correct, as well, though his conclusion that Dr.
Field’s method is ineffective would be seriously weakened.
Another piece of evidence that might help us evaluate this claim involves the exact
locations where Dr. Karp’s interviews took place. According to this article, Dr. Karp and
his graduate students conducted interviews of “children living in the group of islands
that includes Tertia.” If we were to learn that they never interviewed a single Tertian
child, it would significantly weaken the conclusion. It could turn out to be the case, for
example, that children on Tertia are raised communally, whereas children on other
islands nearby are raised by their biological parents.
In order to fully evaluate this article, we would also need to learn more about the
interview questions that Dr. Karp’s team used. What exactly did they ask? We don’t
know, nor do we know what the children’s responses actually were. What did they say
about their biological parents? The mere fact that they speak more frequently about
their biological parents than they do about other adults does not mean that they are
raised by their biological parents. It would significantly undermine Dr. Karp’s argument
if it turned out that the children said things like how much they missed their parents or
how their parents had left them in a communal environment. Without knowing WHAT
the children said, it is hard to accept Dr. Karp’s conclusion.
It is slightly more difficult to discuss the evidence we might need in order to
evaluate the more interesting claims in Dr. Karp’s article, namely his extension of the
results of his study to a conclusion that interview-centered methods are inherently
more valid than observational-centered approaches. In order to fully evaluate this
claim, in fact, we would need to look at many more examples of interview-based and
observation-based anthropological studies and we would also need to look into
different study designs. Perhaps Dr. Field did not conduct an effective observational
study, but other observational approaches could be effective. In order to make such
grandiose claims, Dr. Karp really needs a lot of additional evidence (ideally a meta -
analysis of hundreds of anthropological studies).
Clearly, then, we need to have additional evidence in order to get a more complete
understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of Dr. Karp’s article. We need to know
about Tertia and the surrounding islands, whether or not they have changed over the
past 20 years. We also need to know about study design (Dr. Karp’s and Dr. Field’s).
And we really need a lot more information if we want to extend the results of a study
about one island culture to all anthropological fieldwork.
我想你应该能稍微体会出，evidence到底应该怎么写。而且，你看OG的范文，真的没有什么长难句，也没有什么特别花哨的词。就是很朴素，读起来很舒服，很流畅。
517words
The manager recommends the client to invest in consolidated industries pointing out that the demand for home heating oil is sure to increase in this area, which seems reasonable. To evaluate his argument more accurately, however, requires further evidence, which I will discuss as follow.
Firstly, in order to corroborate his argument that demand for home heating oil will increase the manager implies that winter in this region will be colder than before. So the first piece of evidence we need to evaluate the manager's claim would be unequivocal statistics indicating future winter temperatures. If it turned out that there were 30 days with below-average temperature in winter in this region before, or that the number of days suffering below-average temperature remained unchanged while the average temperature had risen to some extent recently, the implication would be conspicuously weakened by either of them, because winter in last year as well as following years may be actually warmer than before. Moreover, since the weather forecast predicted that the weather pattern last year would continue for several years, strong evidence demonstrating the accuracy of the weather forecast's former predictions may be useful to assess the validity of this prediction. The evidence, however, is very likely to weaken the prediction and then the manager's argument since several years is too long a period for a weather prediction to be accurate.
Another piece of evidence that might be helpful to evaluate the argument is one including detailed information about the new homes built here. That information may firstly include a comprehensive survey of several preferences of the newcomers. It’s not sure whether they prefer to spend winter holidays outside the area, nor is it clear whether they prefer a more effective heating resource such as natural gas instead of oil. If the reality turns out to be either one of them, the manager's argument will be weakened to great extent, since the argument’s assumption that there will be more people living here is undermined. Secondly, if additional information about the newly-built houses indicating that they have applied more effective thermal insulation materials to help withstand the severe coldness, which means there won’t be a tremendous increase in the demand for heating, the manager’s argument would be seriously weakened.
To fully examine the argument as well as the recommendation, we need more specific evidence describing the background information of the investment. If it is the case that future sale’s market is tiny or probable profitability ratio is low, the advice will not be taken at all. A further analysis of the extra benefit this investment can bring about will strengthen the recommendation. It is no doubt that the client would be more likely to be persuaded if the manage provide evidence showing that this investment can generate higher or more stable profits than the others.
To sum up, the evidence of the argument is too meager to be evaluated objectively and accurately which means to assess it effectively we may need more information about the future winter temperatures, about preferences of the newcomers, about materials applied in the newly-built house, about the background information and probable extra benefit of the investment and so on.
这是第三次写~自己改完后的 看来小蚊子也是1201G啊，好吧。。。我也是，加油，打倒一坨屎。。。
The following appeared in a letter from a firm providing investment advice to a client."Homes in the northeastern United States, where winters are typically cold, have traditionally used oil as their major fuel for heating. Last year that region experienced twenty days with below-average temperatures, and local weather forecasters throughout the region predict that this weather pattern will continue for several more years. Furthermore, many new homes have been built in this region during the past year. Because of these developments, we predict an increased demand for heating oil and recommend investment in Consolidated Industries, one of whose major business operations is the retail sale of home heating oil."Write a response in which you discuss what specific evidence is needed to evaluate the argument and explain how the evidence would weaken or strengthen the argument.550 wordsIn this argument, the author claims that the demand for heating oil would increase and thus recommend his client to invest in consolidated industries. To support the claim, the author points out that the winters in this region were bitterly cold and residents there used oil as fuel for heating traditionally and that the region will experience a weather pattern in which there are twenty days with below-average temperature. In addition, he states more homes have been built recently implying an increasing demand. However, close scrutiny of the argument reveals that inadequate evidence has been displayed to support the deduction and the recommendation.感觉你的作文模板化太强了，第一段整个都是模板化语言。。。。。。。
First of all, the argument fail to provide evidence to support the assumption that during the period of establishing the industries the tradition of using fuel as major heating resource would remain unchanged. Chances are that new energy resources such as natural gas have been introduced to this region as a substitute for oil as fuel for heating. Moreover, the mere fact that the weather pattern in which there are 20 days with below-average temperatures will continue for several years doesn’t necessarily mean that winter in the following years will be colder than those previously. Perhaps the average temperature has increased appreciably during recent years and using oil as fuel for heating is no longer needed.这一段你前面一个观点说的是民众的能源来源可能改变，后面说的是这个气候问题，我觉得你完全可以将一个观点说透彻，没有必要将第二个逻辑错误写出来，因为分析透彻一个逻辑错误貌似比点出逻辑错误有用！
Secondly, the stories of new homes having been built in this region amount to scant evidence at best of the increasing demands. The author doesn’t make it clear if more people have left out of the region because of the severe weather so that the amount of residents living here has decreased as a matter of fact. Even if people haven’t left out, it is possible that the newly-built houses are of such high quality that it can withstand the chilliness, and as a result, the demand for heating wouldn’t increase substantially. Moreover, the residents moving into this area may probably be those who moved out of even colder areas, accustomed to cold weather and not inclined to use oil fuel for heating.Thirdly, the author assume without warrant (warranting)that the client can benefit the most by investment in a consolidated industries whose major business operation is retail sale of home heating oil. On one hand, further research and analysis of the market in that region is lacked to convince the client that the company should focus on retail sale in order to make considerable profits. Perhaps there is a company supply with home heating oil already and the price they charge is rather competing, and then such an investment can probably end in huge loss. On the other hand, without analysis of whether the company should focus on retail sale or wholesale, it’s too haste to draw the conclusion that the investment in the former one is more profitable.In sum, the author’s evidence doesn’t warrant the argument as well as the recommendation. To support his deduction he must first provide that the demand of residents in this area is genuinely increasing, a comprehensive survey of demands for oil fuel may be useful for this purpose. To better buttress the recommendation, the author should offer detailed information about the type which the business should be. A specific research and analysis would be more convincing including information of target customers, the marketing environment as well as the competitors.
逻辑上没有什么大问题，但是就是觉得你的作文太模板化了，看你的字数是有550WORDS，但是你的模板化语言估计占了大概有两百字吧，这个模板化在第一段和最后一段体现的尤其突出，你不信可以去看看OG的官方文章，上面就没有这么模板的语言，还有你的长难句貌似用的有点过了，有的句子说是化是有点语法错误，还是从最简单的句子写起吧，最后不要盲目追求文章的长度而忽略的文章的实质，这是一个AW4的学姐跟我说的，我能看得就只有这么多了，希望能帮到你，我也是个AW渣，也同为本周考，为1201G的加油。。。。顺便帮我看看我的AW，站内PM你。。:lol:lol timohuu 发表于 2012-11-27 16:45 static/image/common/back.gif
The following appeared in a letter from a firm providing investment advice to a client."Home ...
亲。。。。我已经改到3.0版本了 你肿末无视了最新的。。。T T 飞天小雯子 发表于 2012-11-27 17:49 static/image/common/back.gif
亲。。。。我已经改到3.0版本了 你肿末无视了最新的。。。T T
额，小蚊子同学我没往后看，见谅见谅。。。。 Dr_JohnDoe 发表于 2012-11-26 09:28 static/image/common/back.gif
首先告诫LZ，散贴一般是不会有人来批的。
这篇要求的是specific evidence，但你是按assumption的思路写。 ...
什么是散贴？ 你的argue写太长了些...还有五天就考试了，对自己的要求就不在是精益求精，而是在有效时间内，保证作品的质量。这个阶段是巩固深化你的现有基础，而不是继续接收新的信息，贪多嚼不烂，这样反而会让你找不到自己的风格了...这在考场上是比较不利的。考试还是蛮紧张的，记得我考试的时候，抽到的argue是熟悉的，但还是会在写的时候自我的否定，重新去构思下布局，时间浪费了些，差点没写完。保证自己脑中对于自己问题的熟练度很重要哦
页:
[1]