寄托家园留学论坛
标题: [1010G精英组] ISSUE&ARGU 习作 by Group Energy [打印本页]
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-4-17 22:53:10 标题: [1010G精英组] ISSUE&ARGU 习作 by Group Energy
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-6-21 12:07 编辑
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○
〓〓☆★◎1010G精英组◎10GAW◎E组总贴◎★☆〓〓
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○ |
================================================================================
★组员列表★
================================================================================
昵 称 寄托ID 组号
组 长：Finn ID：kingwyf87------------------01
组 长：shevava ID：shevava--------------------03
组员02：Cypher ID：Cypher ---------------------04
组员03：深川翼 ID：深川翼-----------------------05
组员04：SandraShan ID：SandraShan----------------06
组员05：nanfeng25899 ID：nanfeng25899-------------07
组员06：LEO ID：zmssghh---------------------08
组员07：pennyclever ID：pennyclever-----------------09
组员08：Hebill ID：hebill-------------------------10
组员09：小肯0113 ID：小肯0113---------------------11
组员10：Bobbie ID：BobbieZZ---------------------12
================================================================================
★组群说明★
================================================================================
论坛发帖规范详见：
https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=1042201
修改习作指南：
https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=670640&extra=page%3D1%26amp;filter%3Ddigest
建议使用IE核心的浏览器浏览和编辑帖子，非IE核心的浏览时帖子格式会有问题。
IE内核的浏览器主要包括IE系列、360、腾讯、世界之窗、遨游、搜狗等，推荐使用搜狗[IE模式]浏览编辑帖子
================================================================================
★习作发帖及修改流程★
================================================================================
1、组员新建word文档，开始写作。(word正文样式设置为：中文五号字，Times New Roman字体，
西文五号字，Times New Roman字体，单倍行距)
2、将自己完成后的习作从word里直接复制粘贴到组里的主贴中。
3、修改他人习作时先将他人习作粘贴到word里，检查word正文样式设置为：中文五号字，
Times New Roman字体，西文五号字，Times New Roman字体，单倍行距。
4、习作修改时，批注要有不同颜色的标注，具体形式按照自己的习惯，没有统一要求。修改完成后，
通过QQ离线文件或者邮件形式发送至对方QQ，并告知对方。
5、接收到别人修改后，再将别人修改的内容从word里粘贴回自己原习作的楼层中。
================================================================================
★作业说明★
================================================================================
1、两周大群T一次人，所以组内默认大家都会好好写习作。
2、习作可以补交，但不可拖欠。
3、每次作业都会公布所有组员的拍文顺序，如果你拍的人当天没有写文你就可以不改了，但如果对方补
交后通知你，组员仍要补拍。
4、第二天要交的作业 头一天晚上10:00~11:00 集中在组内总贴占座。
5、如果第二天不能写文的就在所占楼层中说明，以后可以补交到当时所占的楼层中。
================================================================================
★彻底解决word粘贴掉色问题★
================================================================================
1、重新把所有文本粘贴到文本文件TXT里。
2、新建一个word 把正文样式改为中文五号字，Times New Roman字体，西文五号字，
Times New Roman字体。
3、从文本文件TXT中粘贴内容只word中，设置好颜色，检查一下中英文字体是否都为：
Times New Roman。
4、文章首、尾均回车换行。
5、复制word中内容到论坛的帖子里。（首、尾均回车换行也要复制！）
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-4-17 22:53:22
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-4-26 15:47 编辑
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
【1010G精英组】E小组第1次作业
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
Argument53
Thirteen years ago, researchers studied a group of 25 infants who showed signs of mild distress
when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as an unusual odor or a tape recording of an unknown voice.
They discovered that these infants were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in
early autumn, a time when their mothers' production of melatonin—a hormone known to affect
some brain functions—would naturally increase in response to decreased daylight. In a follow-up
study conducted earlier this year, more than half of these children—now teenagers—who had
shown signs of distress identified themselves as shy. Clearly, increased levels of melatonin before
birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life.
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
写作样式模板
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
===========
Logical Chain
===========
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
=======================
Revised By
=======================
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
拍文顺序
1--->5
2--->4
3--->1
4--->3
5--->7
6--->2
7--->9
8--->6
9--->8
说明：1--->5 表示1号拍5号的习作
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1, study --> unfamiliar stimuli --> signs of mild distress
2, study --> infants had shown signs of distress identified themselves as shy
3, study --> infants to have been conceived in early autumn
4, mothers' production of melatonin in early autumn
1,2,3,4--> increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life
===========
论点提纲
===========
1、25个婴儿不能代表全部个体。
2、没有说明increased levels of melatonin与mild distress的因果关系。
3、没有排除其他引起shyness during infancy的原因。
===========
习作正文
===========
In this argument, the arguer cites a study of a group of infants who were exposed to unfamiliar stimuli turn out to show signs of distress and the follow-up indicated that such shyness still exiting when the babies grown-up. The study also finds that most of those infants were conceived in autumn in which season the melatonin increased in mothers’ body. Based on these facts, the author concludes that it is the increased levels of melatonin before birth that causes babies to be shy and such shyness continues into later life. The argument, however, depends on quite a few assumptions which render it as unconvinced as it stands.
The threshold problem with this argument is the study itself. According to the study, the author points out that there are only 25 infants, involved in the research, who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli. It is entirely possible that the chosen babies may all have some kinds of birth defect instead of unfamiliar stimuli, which are responsible for the mild distress. In order to strong the reliability of the study, the research’s sample must be sufficient in size and representative of the whole infants.
Yet another problem is that even it is the unfamiliar stimuli that cause the mild distress of infants, the arguer gives no evidences to imply that a causal relationship between the increased melatonin in mothers’ body and the mild distress of infants. It is also likely that the increased hormones are just a normal of physiological changes of women and have nothing to do with the mild distress. Without other supporting details to establish the cause-and-effect between the mild distress of infants and increased melatonin of women, the arguer cannot confirm his conclusion base on the unpersuasive facts.
Finally, the arguer fails to rule out other factors which result in the shyness of teenagers in the follow-up study. Common sense tells us that as the baby grown up children are more or less appearing to be shy especially when they are facing strangers. But when the strangers become to be familiar ones the children may not show any shyness at all. If the author put this situation considering as the continuing mild distress of infants, the conclusion cannot be reliable. Even the infants are still shy when they grown up, there are also other possibilities, such as their living environment where they may feel lonely that make they continue to have mild distress even worse. The author fails to concern the other factors which may make the children shy, which put his conclusion untrustworthy.
To sum up, the conclusion, which is made by the author who has disregarded or chosen to ignore several aspects of his conclusion, is on the basis of scant credibility. To better bolster the reliability of his conclusion, the author must give more reliable information about the study. I would also need to know whether the mild distress of children somehow connected with melatonin of women. Only more supporting details can the author draw his conclusion.
=======================
Revised By Shevava
=======================
个人观点，望交流…
蓝色为结构句 红色为有疑问的地方 绿色为值得借鉴的地方
In this argument, the arguer cites a study of a group of infants who were exposed to unfamiliar stimuli turn out to show signs of distress and the follow-up indicated that such shyness still exiting when the babies grown-up. The study also finds that most of those infants were conceived in autumn in which season the melatonin increased in mothers’ body. Based on these facts, the author concludes that it is the increased levels of melatonin before birth that causes babies to be shy and such shyness continues into later life. The argument, however, depends on quite a few assumptions which render it as unconvinced as it stands.
The threshold problem with this argument is the study itself. According to the study, the author points out that there are only 25 infants, involved in the research, who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli. It is entirely possible that the chosen babies may all have some kinds of birth defect instead of unfamiliar stimuli, which are responsible for the mild distress. In order to strong
the reliability of the study, the research’s sample must be sufficient in size and representative of the whole infants.
Yet another problem is that even it is the unfamiliar stimuli that cause the mild distress of infants, the arguer gives no evidences to imply that a causal relationship between the increased melatonin in mothers’ body and the mild distress of infants. It is also likely that the increased hormones are just a normal of physiological changes of women and have nothing to do with the mild distress. Without other supporting details to establish the cause-and-effect between the mild distress of infants and increased melatonin of women, the arguer cannot confirm his conclusion base on the unpersuasive facts.
Finally, the arguer fails to rule out other factors which result in the shyness of teenagers in the follow-up study. Common sense tells us that as the baby grown up children are more or less appearing to be shy especially when they are facing strangers. But when the strangers become to be familiar ones the children may not show any shyness at all. If the author put this situation considering as the continuing mild distress of infants（？不太明白，求交流）, the conclusion cannot be reliable. Even the infants are still shy when they grown up, there are also other possibilities, such as their living environment where they may feel lonely that make they continue to have mild distress even worse. The author fails to concern the other factors which may make the children shy, which put his conclusion untrustworthy.
To sum up, the conclusion, which is made by the author who has disregarded or chosen to ignore several aspects of his conclusion, is on the basis of scant credibility.
To better bolster the reliability of his conclusion, the author must give more reliable information about the study. I would also need to know whether the mild distress of children somehow connected with melatonin of women. Only more supporting details can the author draw his conclusion.
结构清晰，清楚地指出argument三方面的逻辑错误，一目了然…；
论证，可以通过直接说理、举例子进行论述，比较有说服力…但是，个人觉得第四段的举例子可以更详细一些；
逻辑，首段描述后直接点题，第一段说了25个样本问题，通过样本小的缺点以及随机性，说明原文逻辑的缺陷，合情合理；第二段说因果关系，这个我觉得是不是说一下怎么才能得到这种关系，比如说加一个对照组啊什么的更有说服力呢？第三段的举例说孩子对陌生人一般都会害羞，对陌生人就不会，我觉得这说明了研究结果是普遍的，然后说明这种研究结果不能说明argu中的结论是不是更好，另外，通过列举他因说明原推论的逻辑不严密性，合情合理。
=======================
Revised By nanfeng25899
=======================
批改标注:
1。红色，表示“错误”
2。洋红，表示“用法欠妥当”
3。蓝色，是我的批注
4。绿色，表示“很精彩的文字”
In this argument, the arguer cites a study of a group of infants who were exposed to unfamiliar stimuli turn out to show signs of distress and the follow-up indicated that such shyness still exiting when the babies grown-up.【我个人认为这句话的语法有点问题，of后的是不能接一句话的，建议改成that; exiting应该是exist,而且我觉得可能用remain更好】The study also finds that most of those infants were conceived in autumn in which season the melatonin increased in mothers’ body. Based on these facts, the author concludes that it is the increased levels of melatonin before birth that causes babies to be shy and such shyness continues into later life. The argument, however, depends on quite a few assumptions which render it as unconvinced as it stands.【句型很好】
【本段小结】
逻辑很清晰。从第一段能看出作者的逻辑：前提---à结论----à谬误的简单指出。
2． 缺点一：在复述原题的时候，建议精炼语言，可以适当的换一些词汇表达
3． 缺点二：语法的正确性有待加强。
4．缺点三：我个人的建议是第一段可以写成：结论---à前提----à谬误的简单指出 的顺序
The threshold problem with this argument is the study itself. 【没有指出具体的谬误点】According to the study, the author points out that there are only 25 infants, involved in the research, who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli. It is entirely possible that the chosen babies may all have some kinds of birth defect instead of unfamiliar stimuli, which are responsible for the mild distress.
【这样写的话，从句的which指代不是很明确，建议把instead放在后面】In order to strong the reliability of the study, the research’s sample must be sufficient in size and representative of the whole infants.
【本段小结】
逻辑链很清晰。TS指出谬误，然后解释谬误，最后纠正谬误。
2． 缺点一：TS没有指出谬误点
3． 缺点二：在解释谬误的时候最好深入一点，比如可以说“即使证明了他们没有defect也不能说这25个孩子代表正题”。
Yet another problem is that even it is the unfamiliar stimuli that cause the mild distress of infants, the arguer gives no evidences to imply that a causal relationship between the increased melatonin in mothers’ body and the mild distress of infants. It is also likely that the increased hormones are just a normal【形容词】 of physiological changes of women and have nothing to do with the mild distress. Without other supporting details to establish the cause-and-effect between the mild distress of infants and increased melatonin of women, the arguer cannot confirm his conclusion base on the unpersuasive facts.【很长，很正确，很强大】
【本段小姐】
论证很严谨。第一句起到了承上启下的作用，很好。
缺点一：希望词汇的使用多样化，比如increased用了很多次，可以用rising, mounting等替代。
Finally, the arguer fails to rule out other factors which result in the shyness of teenagers in the follow-up study. Common sense tells us that as the baby grown up children are more or less appearing to be shy especially when they are facing strangers. 【as后面接的是从句吧，时态应成is growing up; are more or less appearing 最好改成appear to; facing也可以吧，但是改成encountering更好】But when the strangers become to be familiar ones the children may not show any shyness at all. If the author put this situation considering as the continuing mild distress of infants,【有一点难懂和中国化，建议改成If the author doesn’t take this situation into consideration when analyzing the causes of shyness更好】
the conclusion cannot be reliable. Even the infants are still shy when they grown up, there are also other possibilities, such as their living environment where they may feel lonely that make they continue to have mild distress even worse.【语法上不太正确，表达上很中国式。1.还是grown up的问题 2.living environment建议改成surroundings更好3.最后的定从有点牵强，可以改成such as their longly surroundings that result in the enduring mild distress even worse】
The author fails to concern【这个词是使。。。关心的意思，一般主语是事情，可以用exclude】 the other factors which may make the children shy, which put 【用在这里不太好】his conclusion untrustworthy.
【本段小结】
1．解释谬误较之前深入一些。作者本段举了个陌生人的例子，比较形象。
2．缺点一：语言上的硬伤比较堵，而且有的句子感觉有点中国化和晦涩。
3．缺点二：词的选用有待加强。
To sum up, the conclusion, which is made by the author【明显是凑字数用的吧。。。】 who has disregarded or chosen to ignore several aspects of his conclusion, is on the basis of scant credibility. To better bolster the reliability of his conclusion, the author must give more reliable【convincing or cogent】 information about the study. I 【建议把本句改成被动】would also need to know whether the mild distress of children somehow connected with melatonin of women. Only more supporting details can the author draw his conclusion.【only后面接状语】
【本段小结】
逻辑很明显。指出前面的谬误后，呼吁更多的证据。
缺点一：语法错误
缺点二：有的语句略显冗长。
【综合测评】
本文作者的逻辑很清晰，也有一些很不错的表达方式。但是作文上的硬伤很多，这很可怕，比如很多的语法错误。而且词汇的选取上页有待加强。最后，就是希望作者多看一些外国的人文章，尽量减少中国式思维，中国式英语（虽然我也有）。
作者: nanfeng25899 时间: 2010-4-17 22:54:48
本帖最后由 nanfeng25899 于 2010-4-24 20:37 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1.本题共4句，第四句为结论（由clearly看出）
2.逻辑链：第1，2，3句共同推出第4句。第1.2句推导出结论前半句；第3句推出结论后半句。
===========
论点提纲
===========
1.25个人的样本无法代替整体
2.melatonin的对shyness的作用没有明确指出
3.性格的影响因素很多，无法证明证明shyness会在将来持续
===========
习作正文
===========
Argument53
In this argument, the author opinion that the increasing melatonin result in shyness which last in the later life is well-presented seems to be undoubted. To support his view, the author quotes the result of a research which was conducted 13 years ago to demonstrate the correlation between the shyness and melatonin. Then in order to strengthen the conclusion, there is also a follow-up study to keep track of the quo state of 25 children. However, there are some lethal flaws in this “obvious” logic.
To begin with, when it comes to the outmoded infants’ research, we can’t arrive at the conclusion using just 25 children cases instead of the whole group. Perhaps those children have the inherent deficiencies in response to the mentioned stimuli, that is , the author fails to illustrate the direct evidence to substitute they are born in normal conditions .Even if the author gives us their proof that they are in good condition , this small sample is impossible to generalize the entire group, as with the fact that we can not say human beings are all male because you are a boy. Therefore, to establish a cogent result , the birth condition should be provided and the sample must be amplified.
In addition, the function of melatonin is even not explained. The author’s opinion is correct only in the case that this kind of hormone has the substantial influence on the system of forming shyness. If the outcome of this substances is even not related with the system, how could the author say the link between melatonin and shyness? Meanwhile, any personality is the consequence of intricate reactions in our body so that it’s unrealistic to exclude other factors such as our friends, our life. So the author is ought to control other distinguish parameter in this study.
Finally, no evidence can prove this effect will continue in their rest life. In the era of constantly changing society, there is nothing that stay still, not to speak of people’s characters. These children, these teenagers, are so-called shy, which is likely to be caused by their parents’ over-protection or the other boy bullies. But when entering into society and getting rid of the ivory tower, the brawny guys maybe no longer the shy boys or girls.Without taking the future condition into account, the reason why this shyness will sustain cannot convince me.
In the nutshell, because of those fallacies, the conclusion is conspicuously reluctant. To make the conclusion more convincing, the author should enlarge the sample and supply the more facts about the basic information of those children, which is the only way to support his idea.
=======================
Revised By Finn
=======================
In this argument, the author opinion (author’s opinion)
that the increasing melatonin result in shyness which last in the later life is well-presented seems to be undoubted
(语法有问题result in …is….两个动词吗？). To support his view, the author quotes the result of a research which was conducted 13 years ago to demonstrate the correlation between the shyness and melatonin (shyness和melatonin的修饰可以说的具体一些). Then in order to strengthen the conclusion, there is also a follow-up study to keep track of the quo state of 25 children (感觉没有说完，是怎么样支持作者的论点的？补充完整). However, there are some lethal flaws in this “obvious” logic.
To begin with, when it comes to the outmoded infants’ research, we can’t (正式问题中尽量避免’s形式 用of代替)
arrive at the conclusion using just 25 children cases instead of (我理解你的意思但instead of 不是代表的意思 representative of) the whole group. Perhaps those children have the inherent deficiencies in response to the mentioned stimuli, that is , the author fails to illustrate the direct evidence to substitute (这个词用在这里想表达什么意思呢？) they are born in normal conditions.
Even if the author gives us their
(怎么变成their了？)
proof that they are in good condition,
this small sample is impossible to generalize the entire group (可以参考一下精彩句型表达类似问题是怎么写的), as with the fact that we can not (正式体中写作cannot 没有中间空格 注意)
say (这个词不正式)
human beings are all male because you are a boy (？？这句话好奇怪啊 你想表达什么意思呢？). Therefore, to establish a cogent result, the birth condition should be provided and the sample must be amplified. (参考精彩句型的写法)
In addition, the function of melatonin is even not (be) explained (clearly). The author’s opinion is correct only in the case that this kind of hormone has the substantial influence on the system of forming shyness. If the outcome of this substances is (主谓一致) even not related with the system, how could the author say (换词汇)
the link between melatonin and shyness? (疑问句还是少用吧)
Meanwhile, any personality is the consequence of intricate reactions in our body so that it’s unrealistic to exclude other factors such as our friends, our life. So the author is ought to control other distinguish parameter in this study. (如你所说中国式思维及语言 感觉这段写的不好 想攻击的点表达不清)
Finally, no evidence can prove this effect will continue in their (指代不清)
rest life. In the era of constantly changing society, there is nothing that stay still, not to speak of people’s (..of..) characters (感觉表达不好 呵呵). These children, these teenagers (删), are so-called shy, which is (主谓一致) likely to be caused by their parents’ over-protection or the other boy bullies (这个词组用法很有问题). But when entering into society and getting rid of the ivory tower, the brawny guys maybe no longer the shy boys or girls. (真的是这么表达的吗？我感觉你写了很多没见过的怪异表达哈哈)
Without taking the future condition into account, the reason why this shyness will sustain cannot convince me (句意不完整).
In the nutshell, because of those fallacies, the conclusion (谁的？)
is conspicuously reluctant. To make the conclusion more convincing, the author should enlarge the sample and supply the more facts about the basic information of those children, which is the only way to support his idea.
作者: Cypher 时间: 2010-4-17 22:55:10
本帖最后由 Cypher 于 2010-4-19 20:45 编辑
==================================================================================================
【1010G精英组】E小组第一次作业
==================================================================================================
===========
Argument53
===========
Thirteen years ago, researchers studied a group of 25 infants who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as an unusual odor or a tape recording of an unknown voice. They discovered that these infants were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in early autumn, a time when their mothers' production of melatonin—a hormone known to affect some brain functions—would naturally increase in response to decreased daylight. In a follow-up study conducted earlier this year, more than half of these children—now teenagers—who had shown signs of distress identified themselves as shy. Clearly, increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life.
===========
Logical Chain
===========
按句子分：
①→②→④上半句
②+③→④下半句
===========
论点提纲
===========
1、Melatonin的功效不一定与distress有关,就算有关也并不一定为由其导致的,有可能只是巧合。(因果谬误-非因果-让步后 同事关系错误)
2、Mild distress和shyness是不同的概念。（错误归纳-定义不清）
3、不能由十几岁时的状况推出他们的shyness会持续下去。（错误归纳-从过去推将来）
===========
习作正文
===========
This argument concludes that increased levels of melatonin before birth cause lifelong shyness which begins in infancy. The argument cites a study involving 25 infants with higher levels of melatonin received before birth, which lead to their mild distress in infancy and future shyness in their teenage years. However, the argument suffers from several flaws, which render it unconvincing.
To begin with，the argument appears to suffer from two logical problems, either of which makes the argument’s results unreliable. First, the author fails to specify which kind of “brain function” melatonin affects. Otherwise, no connection between increased levels of melatonin and infants’ distress can be proved. Second, even assuming that melatonin do affect brain functions related to infant distress, the conclusion that the former is the cause of the latter cannot be drawn. It is entirely possible that the increased melatonin’s effect on infant distress is too slight to be appreciable or the distress was caused by other factors, such as infant’s instinctive response to unfamiliar stimuli. Without ruling out all other such factors it is unfair to conclude that increased levels of melatonin caused the infants to show distress in response to unfamiliar stimuli.
In addition, the argument relies on the assumption that the distress shown by the 25 infants in their infancy indicates their shyness during that period. Yet this is probably not the case, especially if the infants tend to react positively in response to unfamiliar stimuli and show great interest to unknown external world, then how high the melatonin levels before birth are do not account for their shyness in teenage age. Without a clear definition of infants’ acts recognized as “a signal of mild distress”, it is impossible to assess the strength of the argument.
Even if the increased levels of melatonin before birth do cause shyness during infancy and their teenage time, the study’s claim that this shyness continues into their later life is unjustified. The author’s inference that incentives which cause shyness will remain effective in the future as they were in the past, rests on poor assumption that in the test subjects’ later life all conditions upon which their effectiveness depend have remained unchanged. Perhaps the effects of melatonin were attenuated over time. Or perhaps their ability of communication with unfamiliar people will be fostered in future education. Indeed, the other test subjects who did not identify themselves as shy indicates the possibility of changes reducing shyness in the foreseeable future.
In sum, the argument is weak on several grounds. To strengthen it the argument’s proponent must provide clear evidence that increased levels of melatonin will affect brain functions and lead to shyness in infancy. Moreover, the arguments proponent must provide evidence that the specific factors which have caused shyness will last until their later life.
=======================
Revised By BridgeRain
=======================
Waiting……
作者: zmssghh 时间: 2010-4-17 22:55:21
本帖最后由 zmssghh 于 2010-4-18 23:11 编辑
=======================================================================================================================================
【1010G精英组】E小组第一次作业
=======================================================================================================================================
Argument53
Thirteen years ago, researchers studied a group of 25 infants who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as an unusual odor or a tape recording of an unknown voice. They discovered that these infants were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in early autumn, a time when their mothers' production of melatonin—a hormone known to affect some brain functions—would naturally increase in response to decreased daylight. In a follow-up study conducted earlier this year, more than half of these children—now teenagers—who had shown signs of distress identified themselves as shy. Clearly, increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life.
=======================================================================================================================================
今天实在是没时间了，逻辑链明天补上……不好意思……
=======================================================================================================================================
提纲：
1：作者在M素的含量和与婴儿的SHYNESS之间强加了因果，但没有给出有力的证明
2：即便1中的因果关系是存在的，25个采样数字显然是不充足的，不具代表性
3：两个实验间时间间隔长，未能证明日后的SHYNESS是由小时候的SHYNESS延续而来
正文：In the argument, the author claims that shyness during one's life is result from the increased levels of melatonin before birth. In supporting his conclusion, the author cites a study which shows that children born in autumn, who claims themselves to be shy in a later research, are more likely to distress under unfamiliar stimuli. Although seems to be convincing at the first glance, this argument suffers several logical flaws.
First, the author draws the conclusion that it is the level of the melatonin that results in the shyness during infancy, which he fails to give any evidence to support. It can be the case that some other factors, including other hormones or the climate, may in fact cause the shyness of the infants. Without ruling out these factors, it is impossible for the author to draw any convincing conclusion.
Even if the conclusion above made by the author is acceptable, the number of the infants involved in the study--25--is obviously insufficient. As we all know, the conclusion of the research must depend on sufficient number of accidentally sampling. The fact that only 25 infants were studied makes the research lack of representative. It is entirely possible that the study were conducted in autumn, making the majority of the involved infants born in autumn. In this case, the conclusion based on the research is really questionable.
In addition, even if the first research was well conducted, the conclusion that the shyness during infancy continues into later life is weak in fact, as the result of the second research cited by the author lend little support to it. First, the person, who identified himself to be shy, may not be shy at all, as different person has different definition of shyness. Additionally, thirteen years have passed since the first study was conducted. It is very likely that many other factors, environment and experience for example, that may cause their shyness. Unless taking these alternatives into account, the author cannot draw any reliable conclusion.
In all, the author's conclusion that increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and later life is unconvincing. To strengthen his argument, the author has to cite the results of some well conducted studies instead of the weak one in the argument. He also has to give founded evidence to prove that the shyness during infancy, caused by the levels of melatonin, continues into later life.
作者: SandraShan 时间: 2010-4-17 22:55:40
本帖最后由 SandraShan 于 2010-4-20 21:50 编辑
==================================================================================================
【1010G精英组】E小组第一次作业
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
Argument No.53★作业链接★【1010G精英组】[E小组] Argument53 - by SandraShan
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
（第一次写，字数貌似不够，还不到三百字，~~~~(>_<)~~~~ ）
Argument53·Thirteen years ago, researchers studied a group of 25 infants who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as an unusual odor or a tape recording of an unknown voice. They discovered that these infants were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in early autumn, a time when their mothers' production of melatonin—a hormone known to affect some brain functions—would naturally increase in response to decreased daylight. In a follow-up study conducted earlier this year, more than half of these children—now teenagers—who had shown signs of distress identified themselves as shy. Clearly, increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life.
=======================
Logical Chain
======================= 1调查发现25个婴儿受到不熟悉的刺激表现的distress
2研究发现在早秋（母亲分泌一种影响大脑功能的激素）时他们更可能be conceived
3跟踪调查发现超过一半的孩子(now teenagers)觉得自己有害羞
4产前增加的melatomin导致婴儿期的害羞，并且他们将来也会害羞
=======================
论点提纲
=======================
1.研究只是针对25个人，不能代表全体
2没能说明melatomin与婴儿害羞的必然联系，也可能是其他因素导致的
3即使在婴儿期有影响，那也不一定会影响他将来，其他还有很多外界条件的影响
=======================
习作正文
=======================
The argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. Only by making a survey of 25 infants, the author concludes that they are more likely to show shy during infancy and the shyness continues into later life , due to the secretion of their mothers’ melatonin
which is a hormone known to affect some brain functions . the argument for this study seems logical.
However, It is mentioned in the argument that the researchers studied a group of 25 infants, then the author draws a series of conclusions. Obviously, the limitation of the survey group is not convincing. Numbers of accidental factors when selecting the survey group are liable to be ignored.
In addition, the author failed to point out the exact relationship between the increasing secretion of their mothers’ melatonin and infants’ shyness. It is probable that the inexperienced mothers failed to take in enough nutrition which are necessary for the infants , or they suffered the irradiation of some ray without conscious.
What’s more, even though we assume that the infants’ shyness are the result of the increased melatonin in mothers’ body, the conclusion cannot be drawn that this shyness continues into their later life. The author failed to consider other possible alternatives to their later life. Such alternatives may include the outside environment they live, the people they get along with or the education they receive. All these elements may contribute to that
reaction.
Overall, the survey seems logical as presented above. However, before any final conclusions are made about infants’ shyness, eyes should be broaden on the other issues which might be connected with them.
=======================
Revised By zmssghh
=======================
蓝色为结构句
红色为有疑问的地方
绿色为值得借鉴的地方
The argument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. Only by making a survey of 25 infants, the author concludes that they are more likely to show shy during infancy and the shyness continues into later life , due to the secretion of their mothers’ melatonin
，which is a hormone known to affect some brain functions . the argument for this study seems logical. (我觉得第一段列举的错误不全，当时我上韦晓亮的课的时候他说首段要将主要的逻辑错误全部列举出来 ，还有你的大小写有问题，标点也有一些问题，需要注意细节，写完之后现在WORD里修改一下吧……)
However, It is mentioned in the argument that the researchers studied a group of 25 infants, then the author draws a series of conclusions. Obviously, the limitation of the survey group is not convincing这句话逻辑有问题. Numbers of accidental factors when selecting the survey group are liable to be ignored.这句话也有问题 看不懂的
In addition, the author failed to point out the exact relationship between the increasing secretion of their mothers’ melatonin and infants’ shyness.（应该是说没有给出足够的证据来支持他们之间的关系） It is probable that the inexperienced mothers failed to take in enough nutrition which are necessary for the infants , or they suffered the irradiation of some ray without conscious. [l1]
What’s more, even though we assume that the infants’ shyness are the result of the increased melatonin in mothers’ body, the conclusion cannot be drawn that this shyness continues into their later life（让步逻辑，呵呵 值得学习）. The author failed to consider other possible alternatives to their later life这句话有点问题. Such alternatives may include the outside environment they live, the people they get along with or the education they receive. All these elements may contribute to that
reaction.
Overall, the survey seems logical as presented above. However, before any final conclusions are made about infants’ shyness, eyes should be broaden on the other issues which might be connected with them.（我觉得最后一段可以点出作者应该怎么改正，虽然这是XDF的模板了，可能用得比较烂了，不过凑字数很有好处哈 ）
我觉得总体来说如果是第一次写的话已经挺不错的了，逻辑相对完整，但是对每个错误的分析都不够深入，不够“鲁棒”，而且个别句子写的比较有问题，注意标点左右的格式，因为e-rator的判卷是比较机械的。继续努力吧 呵呵
[l1]我觉得这段写的有点短了，这个强加因果的错误是A中的一个大错误了，写这么少的字数的话很难达到400以上的。我觉得你可以多看几篇例文，从中学习一下如何把这个错误写的更详细一些。毕竟字数还是挺重要的嘛。
作者: shevava 时间: 2010-4-17 22:55:41
本帖最后由 shevava 于 2010-5-16 20:50 编辑
==================================================================================================
【1010G精英组】E小组第一次作业
==================================================================================================
Logical chain
The infants are more likely to be conceived in early autumn, when their mother’s production of melatonin increases.
The 25 infants studied showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli.
So
Increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness.
The follow-up study showed that more than half of the children have the signs of distress identified themselves as shy.
So
This shyness continues into later life.
==================================================================================================
反驳论点提纲：
分别针对以上两个逻辑错误进行反驳
1、实验的局限性
2、其他条件应同样会影响shyness
==================================================================================================
习作：
Through the two studies of the researchers about the 25 infants, and, a few years later, teenagers, the writer drew the conclusion that the levels of melatonin shape great influence on the shyness of the infants which continues into later life. Obviously, there are several restrictions for the writer to reach the conclusion directly.
First of all, without another control, with the only one group of the infants statistics gleaned, it is hard for the researcher to contract that the increase of melatonin before birth, as the only element, results in the shyness. It is probable that other factors that may be ignored by the researchers cause shyness. If another control group of infants were observed and the melatonin were changed as the merely factor, the result would have been more convincing. In addition, how the melatonin affects the brain function and whether the mother’s production of the melatonin will affect the infants are not referred. At last, as a matter of statistics, 25 is a so small sample that will limit the accuracy of the research.
The other follow-up study of the teenagers conducted a few years later, did demonstrate that signs of distress identified as shyness were found, but the characteristics of a person, including whether he is shy or not, are not only related to the nature when he is born. As we all know, many conditions, as far as the environment where he lives, other genetic factors and the education he receives are concerned, also greatly affect the characteristics of a person. In other words, the shyness of the teenagers studied may originate from the closed environment or the few communication with the outside. Especially, when a person is struck by great changes in his life, for example, the death of one who means a lot to him, the move of living environment, or the family accident and so on, the person will burden great pressure if the changes cannot be resolved appropriately.
Overall, the writer cannot give enough evidences and information for conclusion that the increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life. Therefore, if the factors discussed above had been intended and the research is conducted more scientifically, the argument would have been more convincing and logically acceptable.
作者: 深川翼 时间: 2010-4-17 22:58:53
占座。。。终于进来了。哈哈
作者: pennyclever 时间: 2010-4-18 00:12:41
本帖最后由 pennyclever 于 2010-4-19 23:21 编辑
=================================================================================================
【1010G精英组】E小组第一次作业
=================================================================================================
Logic chain
1.先给出一项关于25个婴儿的跟踪研究调查
2.发现一种母亲怀孕是分泌的激素M，可以使婴儿紧张
3.孩子十几岁时候的调查表明，现在表现出害羞症状
4.得出结论，出生前的M激素导致婴儿时期的害羞，并将害羞延续
=================================================================================================
反驳提纲：
1.没有科学证据说明M激素是导致Shy而不是其他刺激
2.M激素作用对象是母亲还是孩子?
3.害羞有可能是生活环境和经历影响的，没有排除此影响
4.而且25人的小样本实验，证据不充分
=================================================================================================
习作：
The argument is seemly well-presented ,but this is nowhere more ridiculous that draw a conclusion, high level of melatonin lead baby in shy, by a follow-up investigation of a group of 25 infant.
Argument ignores a necessary premise, the melatonin did really have an effect in baby or children shy? The arguer did not provide any scientific research to explain the function of a hormone or what is it in a role. They are not even given any information about whether the baby will have affection. Although the arguer said melatonin is a hormone known to affect some brain functions, but he didn’t point out the real impact is to mother or baby.
The argument of conclusion is not convincing, they just have the only research in a group of 25 babies without any information of children’s living environment and their experience for these ten years. So we can’t rule out the affection of environment factors on child personality. What’s more, we got no idea from the arguer that any data show that the baby is shown as shy not sensitive issue, so we can’t judge the performance is not come with physical discomfort. And the survey only tracked 15 infants, the sample is relatively small and not convincing.
It is presumptuous to judge that high level of melatonin will lead children became shy and continued into later life according to this simple and small sample inquiry. To increase the persuasiveness author also need to provide convincing scientific research information and using the most same conditions and change one side in experiment, also need to investigate a larger sample at the same time.
=================================================================================================
AGUMENT53批改 by nanfeng25899
批改标注:
1。红色，表示“错误”
2。洋红，表示“用法欠妥当”
3。蓝色，是我的批注
4。绿色，表示“很精彩的文字”
The argument is seemly well-presented ,but this is nowhere more ridiculous that draw a conclusion, high level of melatonin lead baby in shy, by a follow-up investigation of a group of 25 infant. 【语法上有些问题，注意句子的结构问题】
【本段小结】
1．
缺点一：看来作者没有看过一些范文的写法，第一段么有充分的展开。建议使用逻辑链：结论---à前提----à谬误的简单指出
2．
缺点二：语法的正确性有待加强。
Argument【the argument比较好】
ignores a necessary premise, the melatonin did really have an effect in baby or children shy? 【有些怪异，可以用whether的句型代替】The arguer did not provide any scientific research to explain the function of a hormone 【不可数】or what is it in a role【这么写有点问题】. They are not even given【even don’t present】 any information about whether the baby will have affection
【意思表达上有问题，affection是喜爱的意思】. Although the arguer said melatonin is a hormone known to affect some brain functions【功能的意思不可数】, but he didn’t point out the real impact is to mother or baby. 【有点中国式英语，说实话这句话我也不知怎么改。。。
】
【本段小结】
1.
缺点一：逻辑链很清晰。首先点出谬误，然后解释，但后面可以加上纠正谬误的部分
2．
缺点二：词汇的精准把握不够【词性，意思，单复数】
3．
缺点三：中国式的思维痕迹比较中，句子的意思表达上不够流畅。
4．
缺点四：语法的掌握上欠缺。
The argument of conclusion【the conclusion即可】
is not convincing, they just have the only research in a group of 25 babies without any information of children’s living environment and their experience for these ten years.【1。没有连词2。 their experience for these ten years改成their experiences in the past ten years】
So we can’t rule out the affection 【喜爱的意思，用该用influence】of environment【environmental】
factors on child personality. What’s more, we got no idea from the arguer that any data show that the baby is shown as shy not sensitive issue【句子有点晦涩，最好不要一个句子里有同一个词shown；as shy not sensitive issue比较怪】, so we can’t judge the performance【最好用shyness】 is not come with【doesn’t result from】 physical discomfort. And the survey only tracked 15 infants, the sample is relatively small and not convincing.【没连词】
【本段小结】
1
缺点一：逻辑链很清晰。首先点出谬误，然后解释，但后面可以加上纠正谬误的部分(同上)
2．
缺点二：词汇的挑选有问题
3．
缺点三：句子没有连接词的问题很严重，意思表达不流畅。。
4．
缺点四：语法的掌握上欠缺。
It is presumptuous【这个词好像是冒昧放肆的意思，用在这里不太合适】 to judge that high level of melatonin will lead children became shy and continued into later life【语法上的问题，表达不怎么清晰】 according to this simple and small sample inquiry. To increase the persuasiveness【意思是“口才好，有说服力”，改成strengthen the conclusion】 author also need to provide convincing scientific research information and using 【用use】the most same conditions and change one side in experiment,【中国式英语，不太好】 also need to investigate a larger sample at the same time.【语法有问题】
【本段小结】
1
缺点一：结尾段看得出来首尾相应
2．
缺点二：中国式的语言比较多
3．
缺点三：意思表达不是很流畅。。
4．
缺点四：语法的掌握上欠缺。
5．
缺点五：词汇的选择
【综合测评】
可能由于这是作者第一次写ARGUMENT首先字数上有些少，建议首段展开一些，谬误最好写3点，个个深入一些：指出-解释-纠正；语法上的问题有点突出，希望作者注意；词汇的选择有的不是很合适，还需要注意单复数等问题；中国式的语句有点多希望作者尽量多读一些外国的文章。
这是我第二次评价别人的作文，多有不足请包含~~~~
作者: BridgeRain 时间: 2010-4-19 00:01:56
=======================================================================================================================================
【1010G精英组】E小组第一次作业
=======================================================================================================================================
Argument53
Thirteen years ago, researchers studied a group of 25 infants who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as an unusual odor or a tape recording of an unknown voice. They discovered that these infants were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in early autumn, a time when their mothers' production of melatonin—a hormone known to affect some brain functions—would naturally increase in response to decreased daylight. In a follow-up study conducted earlier this year, more than half of these children—now teenagers—who had shown signs of distress identified themselves as shy. Clearly, increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life.
=======================================================================================================================================
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-4-19 00:10:06
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-4-26 15:47 编辑
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
【1010G精英组】E小组第2次作业
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
Issue130
"How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. Unfortunately,
we have not yet learned how to raise children who can help bring about a better society."
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
写作样式模板
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
=======================
Revised By
=======================
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
拍文顺序
1-->4
2-->3
3-->7
4-->9
6-->1
7-->8
8-->6
9-->2
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-4-19 00:12:19
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-8 16:46 编辑
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 对孩子的社会化教育是很有必要的
2 除了社会化教育外还有其他的教育因素也很重要
3 如今人们已经有了比较丰富的教育社会化手段，并取得了很好的效果
===========
习作正文
===========
The author claims that the destiny of society upon how children are socialized, but people do not really understand how to educate children for the progress of society. Admittedly, it is important for children to be socialized as members of society, but it cannot guarantee that our society will become a better one. Moreover, in my observation, people nowadays pay lots of attentions on socialized education. Children have to know well about social skills and using them to work together, which has been crossing different cultures and nations.
First of all, it is true that the socialization is one of important part of education for children, which will be helpful to develop a better society. Faced with increased complex task, people are required more sense of cooperation with each other. Even if a person with full of professional knowledge cannot meet the demands of today’s society. He has to learn how to do the group work which can make more great contribution than one individual. The education of such skills must be given to the people when they are children in which time it is easier for them to learn and practice their socialization abilities. For example, children who have been provided the social education often show the characteristic of braveness, leadership, cooperation, and honesty, which are all significant quality for the progress of society.
Nevertheless, socialization is just only one of important aspects to which individuals will ultimately contribute to a better society. There are still other factors which are as the same vital as socialization for children education, such as thinking skills, intellectual knowledge, moral principles. Critical thinking provides one the ability of evaluating, integrating, and assimilating what he has learned; intellectual knowledge equips one the ability of innovation which is the significant in intellectual development; moral principles gives one the ability of self-discipline which can make sure the development of society can be controlled by the right moral principles. One cannot image that learning innumerous of knowledge without critical thinking makes one grasp nothing, scientific fruition without innovation makes nothing improvement of technological development, and social progress without sense of justice makes a great threat to all human beings.
In addition, the author asserts that we have not yet learned how to raise children who are supposed to bring us a better society. By his assertion, we are not placed enough attention to enhance the children’s socialization skills, but to my observation it is not the case. Children from high school have learned more and more social skills which bring them into further touch with society. School pushes them to join more and more social activities such as volunteer jobs, community activities, and different kinds of lectures. Even in summer or winter vacation, teachers often encourage their students to take internships in companies, where they can learn lots of social skills such as team work and social courtesy. Moreover, with help of modern technology in media, which involves cultures, custom, and ideals of our society form different nations and counties, children can well-learn to be part of the society.
To sum up, it is true that if the children are not well-socialized, our society will be not progress in a better way. Nevertheless, there are many factors, besides socialization, that we should pay much attention for children education. Nowadays people are highly valued the socialization, and provide more such skills training courses and practice opportunities, which make the children well-socialization and to bring a society for future generations.
=======================
Revised By SandraShan Waiting…
=======================
|
作者: pennyclever 时间: 2010-4-19 08:51:14
本帖最后由 pennyclever 于 2010-4-19 17:49 编辑
今天翻译课题，有空就写，上午想了很久没什么思路，希望开始的Issue写作之前组里能做Brain Storm
作者: SandraShan 时间: 2010-4-19 18:40:01
本帖最后由 SandraShan 于 2010-4-27 23:48 编辑
纠结中~
作者: shevava 时间: 2010-4-19 18:47:08
本帖最后由 shevava 于 2010-4-24 09:15 编辑
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 对孩子的社会化教育是很有必要的
2 除了社会化教育外还有其他的教育因素也很重要
3 如今人们已经有了比较丰富的教育社会化手段，并取得了很好的效果
===========
习作正文
===========
Children are the future of a nation, and whether they are cultivated well determines the future destiny of the people. As Mao Zedong once said, "Children are like the rising sun at 7.am or 8.am; the future of the country belongs to them." However, are the children the only factor determining the destiny f society? I don't agree.
Children are the creatures of the society. Since they are born, they are affected by the customs inherited by the society, so that the habits of the society are the habits of theirs, the beliefs their beliefs. In another sense, children not only have the responsibility of handing down the customs of society, but also make contribution to promote the development of society. If they are not socialized well enough, the destiny of society will be on edge of losing its glamour, for the essence of the culture cannot be inherited and the society will lose her foundation of existence.
However, although children play an important part on determining the destiny of society, many other factors, say, economic, technology, and so on, their strength cannot be ignored. If the economic or technology of the nation lags behind, there is no need to say the destiny of society. The basis of the economic determines the upper structure, without the basis, a nation hardly can have the right of decision on the world.
Nowadays, nations place more and more attention on the development of economic and technology. Meanwhile, the cultivation of children also is emphasized. For example, in China, students in primary school are only taught the general curriculums, such as math, science, and so on, and the grade was the only standards to weigh how the student learned. But now, there are practice curriculums and music, drawing added, which greatly improving the skills of practicing and reasoning, and gradually make the children more adapt to the society.
Yet, a lot of problems are barring the development of children, for example, playing too much video game, instilling in the internet. At their young age, maybe some of them cannot control of themselves and this may do great harm to them if they are not reminded. Therefore, the government should pay special attention to these problems, and if necessary, some laws or policies can be legislated. Besides, some parents spoiled their children, and do not let them do manual work and protect their children at all aspects, which may weaken the ability of addressing things independently after they step into the society.
Simply put, children are not the only factor determining the destiny of society, but without children who are well socialized, there will be no future of the society. The government of the nation shoulder the responsibility of building and developing the society nowadays, and more importantly, they also have the obligation to cultivating the children, depending on whom the future are.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: nanfeng25899 时间: 2010-4-19 20:41:30
本帖最后由 nanfeng25899 于 2010-4-21 07:12 编辑
===========
论点提纲
===========
1.
未学会培养孩子社会化--à无法带来更好的社会
2.
培养孩子社会化--à将来会变得更好
3.
孩子的社会化不是影响将来社会的唯一因素
===========
习作正文
===========
When asked about whether or not we have learned to raise the children who will bring us a better society, the speaker claim that we haven’t master this crucial “technique”, which will determine the future of our society. Undoubtedly, our society’s destiny might be affected by the socialization of our kids, however, its statue should not be overemphasized as many factors will have a influence on our future.
As for the speaker’s conclusion, if those future’s owners are not socialized , how do they, who lack of the basic communication skills and team spirit, live a better life themselves, not to speak of a better society. As the rapid development of China, “Guanxi”, which is originated from the internet, has become a new word in the English vocabulary. This word typically stands for the essence of Chinese business culture, that is, how to cooperate with others determines your business career to some extent. Therefore, without the fundamental skills, even if you’re the professor of Peking University, you perhaps are not eligible as a successful businessman who boosts the economy most.
On the contrary, social children do make a great contribution to better the society.In most cases, the most meaningful breakthrough is not achieved by individual, but a team no matter how many people involved in it. Being a team, negotiation, communication and cooperation play the key role in the study. The brainstorm is one way to exchange the distinguish ideas and create new views among college students when they needs some inspirations. In this way, they are indeed out of box, and get the innovative results. It’s those seminal perspectives that become the motivation of the society change, a better society. So, one of the most useful ways to improve our society is, admittedly, to socialize our offspring.
Of course, I concede the speaker’s assertion that society’s fate depends on how social the children are, but there must also be other factors which decide the prospect of our society, ranging from personal belief to intelligence. For instance, as one of the three global religions, the Christian impart the doctrine of universal love to the adherents who believe they will go to the paradise by doing a lot of deeds after their deaths. There is no doubt that those followers will be the good citizens even the great scientists whose inventions are the milestone in the history of human beings like Isaac Newton. Thus, the personal conviction, in this sense, is one kind of impulsion to the better society instead of the obstacle. What is more, intelligence level is still the inevitable limitation to the development, because this internal and physical factor does restrict how much information or knowledge we can absorb. And some study just point out that our ancestors’ brain volume is much smaller than ours. As a result, I deem that even though they are socialized, they cannot better the society in the way we do now.
To sum up, the socialization is one of the significant ingredients in the form of our future; yet taking other parameters into consideration are indispensable. As far as I’m concerned, when weighing up the factors affecting the society’s destiny, the speaker should and must consider all of them discreetly.
终于写完了！！！
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: Cypher 时间: 2010-4-19 20:53:24
占一个先
菜鸟一只很不熟练，期中考试又来了，所以最近可能会落下点进度，希望组长谅解啊。。。
作者: zmssghh 时间: 2010-4-19 23:17:01
本帖最后由 zmssghh 于 2010-5-1 22:55 编辑
===========
论点提纲
===========
（由于第一篇ISSUE不知道应该是怎么写 就写的很发散 第三段好像确实跑题了 呵呵 以后再改吧 ）
1 对孩子的社会化教育是很有必要的
2 然而当今社会人们普遍过于重视社会化而忽视了其他方面的塑造
3 言传不如身教
===========
习作正文
===========
It has been long claimed that children are the future of our world, to which i cannot agree more. However, the debate, which concerned with the most significant characteristics children should have to boost our world to a more harmonious one, never stop at all. From my point of view, several characteristics, including socialization, are essential for the next generation to achieve our expectation. Unfortunately, people now have hardly adopt any
effective method to convey these good fret to the next generation.
Just as the speaker has claimed, whether a person is well-socialized can really play an important role in determining his contribution to our society in the future. Socialization, defined as one's ability to adapt himself to the society, is an indispensible character for people living in such a society, which is running under so many certain rules. If a person is not well-socialized, it will be of great possibilities that he will suffer a lot in the process of finding his own role in this "big well-operated
machine" while others, who are well-socialized, are more likely to enjoy a meaningful life, in which masses of good can be done to our world. Thus, the extent to which children are socialized can, to some degree, determines our society's future.
Unfortunately, many parents, having realized the importance of the people's socialization, pay too much attention to teach their children how to survive in the society, ignoring the fact that many other fret, such as honesty, loyalty and diligence, can also play an important, even decisive, role in shaping a person. As a result, many children, nowadays, lack the basic virtue that is needed to be a member of a better society. When you chat with the teenagers, you will easily find out the fact that many of them have cheated in the examination to get a good result and some of them may even prefer to access success in some dishonorable way, which, to a certain extent, is the outcome of excessive socialization. Want to become the monitor of the class? Just send presents to the tutor. Want a chance for internship? Flatter as hardly as you can. That is what in the head of some teenagers now.
Here comes the problem: how can we guide children to help building a better society where no evil is tolerated? From my perspective, we can easily find the answer in an old Chinese saying--"example is better than percept."
We have been long teach children to be kindhearted, veracious and hard-working while ourselves kept to be indifferent, hollow and hedonistic, which leads to the result that many children now just copy the evil we do while leaving whose good things we teach them behind their mind. Thus, the key to the problem is not finding a way on how to teach but finding a way on how to restraint ourselves in order to guide the next generation, in a invisible way, to learn by themselves how to be bring about a more harmonious world.
作者: BridgeRain 时间: 2010-4-21 22:27:37
先占
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-4-22 10:44:10
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-4-26 15:48 编辑
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
【1010G精英组】E小组第3次作业
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
Argument51
The following appeared in a medical newsletter.
"Doctors have long suspected that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing
quickly after severe muscle strain. This hypothesis has now been proved by preliminary results
of a study of two groups of patients. The first group of patients, all being treated for muscle injuries
by Dr. Newland, a doctor who specializes in sports medicine, took antibiotics regularly throughout
their treatment. Their recuperation time was, on average, 40 percent quicker than typically
expected. Patients in the second group, all being treated by Dr. Alton, a general physician, were
given sugar pills, although the patients believed they were taking antibiotics. Their average
recuperation time was not significantly reduced. Therefore, all patients who are diagnosed with
muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment."
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
写作样式模板
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
===========
Logical Chain
===========
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
=======================
Revised By
=======================
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
拍文顺序
1-->3
2-->6
3-->8
4-->1
6-->9
7-->4
8-->7
9-->2
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-4-22 15:10:41
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-8 16:47 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1 The first group of patients, all being treated by given antibiotics --->40 percent quicker than typically expected
2 The second group of patients, all being treated by given sugar pills ---> average recuperation time was not significantly reduced
1,2---> all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 两个对照组实验对象的条件可能不一致
2 实验对象的样本数不足且实验结果描述不清，使实验结果不可信
3 实验结果可能受到其他因素的影响
===========
习作正文
===========
In this argument, the arguer concludes that the patients of muscle strain would be well treated if they take antibiotics. To give good reason for this conclusion, the author cites a recent comparison experiment showing that the patients treated with antibiotics recover quicker than the patients treated with sugar pills. The argument relies on several doubtful assumptions which make his conclusion therefore unconvincing, such as the subjects are sufficient and under the same condition in two groups, and no other factors to affect the comparison result.
To begin with, a threshold problem with the argument is that the author assumes that the patients involved in the group of doctor Dr. have the same the condition of muscle strain as the patients treated by Dr. Alton. It is entirely possible that the most patients in the group of Dr. Newland are young and healthy, while the ones in that of Dr. Alton are old vulnerable people and have not been better taken care by others as soon as they get hurt. It is therefore the different condition of subjects instead of antibodies that result in length of recovery time. The argument fails to account for different conditions of treated patients, thus the author cannot make any sound conclusion.
In the second place, even the patients in the Dr. Newland’s group are parallel to that in the Dr. Alton’s group; the author also fails to indicate that the patients involved in the study are representative of all patients with muscle strain. Maybe, the comparison experiment only involves a few people, so that the author using the comparison is not statistically reliable to draw such conclusion. Even the experimental subjects can be representative of all patients, the experiment result are also unpersuasive to support the author’s conclusion, considering that the vague words used in the experimental interpretation. We cannot be sure that the patients in the Dr. Newland’s group recover better and with less recuperation time compare with those in Dr. Alton’s group.
Finally, another problem is that the author fails to consider other possibilities of treatment which may turn out to be more effective to deal with the severe muscle strain. Even the antibodies are the most effective ones, the common sense and experience tells us that the antibodies may not suit for everybody in light of they may allergy to the some kinds of antibodies. Without knowing more information from the patients, rashly advising them to using these antibodies would make the situation even worse. In short, without better evidence accounting for no other ways that can better to treat the muscle strain and the antibodies can be safely used in people, the author cannot convince me about his conclusion.
To sum up, the conclusion, which is made by the author who has disregarded or chosen to ignore several aspects of his conclusion, is on the basis of the scant credibility. To better bolster the reliability of the arguer’s conclusion, I would need more information about the study’s patients, whose size, condition, and other aspects, are comparable. I would also need to know whether there are other medical treatments, other than antibiotics, in order to revaluate the author’s conclusion more credible.
=======================
Revised By Cypher Waiting…
=======================
作者: shevava 时间: 2010-4-22 15:40:31
本帖最后由 shevava 于 2010-5-16 20:50 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
In this argument, the author points out the conclusion is that all patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would be well advised to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. Why should the patients take antibiotics as author claimed? The reason is that the author believes secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. To support his conclusion, the author gives many reasons. But after a careful examination, there are many flaws.
First of all, for an experiment to be accurate, it must have an eligible control. But, as we can get the information from the article, we could not ensure that the patients, in the two groups, are same. Perhaps, they are in the different races, in the different age and in the different living environment. Those all can affect the accurate of the experiment. A young people should have a shorter recuperation time than old person has. A people who get much nutrition everyday should have a shorter recuperation time than a poor people who cannot get enough food every day. A people who exercises frequently should have a shorter recuperation time than a “couch potato” should have.
We also doubt about the effect of the different doctors. Common sense tells us a doctor who specializes in sports medicine should have more experience about the muscle strain than a general physician. We could not ensure whether the sports doctor has several tricks what can make the muscle strain cure quickly. Another problem that weakens the logic of this argument is that the author does not tell us the accurate effect, what the sugar pills may cause. It still has a possibility that the sugar pills can delay the cure of the muscle strain.
What's more. The author implies every muscle strain may cause the infections. But there is no direct evidence to prove that. And the author ignores the advert of the antibiotics. As we know, antibiotics can cause anorexia, weakness and other illness.
To sum up, this argument fails to substantiate his claim that all patients who are diagnosed will muscle strain would be advice to take antibiotics as part of their treatment. To strengthen the argument, the author should present an eligible control, and give us more information about the effect of sugar pills. It is also necessary that the author should provide more evidence about the relation between the muscle strain and secondary infections.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: nanfeng25899 时间: 2010-4-22 22:56:08
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1。前提：医生长期以来怀疑二次感染会阻碍患者恢复
2．前提的论证：题目中的研究
3．结论：肌肉拉伤的患者应服用抗生素
===========
论点提纲
===========
1前提的成立建立在实验的基础之上，而题目未说明试验中肌肉拉伤的患者一定会二次感染
2 即使患者都有二次感染的现象发生，题目中也未提及患者的基本信息
3 不能说二次感染会阻碍患者恢复，推出建议患者服用抗生素
，因为抗生素会有其他的副作用
===========
习作正文
===========
At the end of this letter, the speaker draws the conclusion that taking antibiotics will be an sensible supplement for all the patients with muscle strain, based on the fact the secondary infections will prolong the healing process. However, this premise is substantiated by a plausibly preliminary result of the study of two groups, which are treated by different specialized doctors respectively. Therefore, although this statement seems to be well-reasoned, the logical procedure is unconvincing.
First of all, the precondition about the secondary infection largely rests on the outcomes of the study, whereas the speaker provides no explicit evidence that the patients suffering from muscle strain must get secondary infections. Without 100% possibilities that the contamination will occur to them, the speaker cannot convince us of the deduction efficiently, let alone the credulity of the final conclusion. So, in order to make the consequences of the experiment, more direct proof ought to show to us,.
Yet even if the fallacy mentioned above is corrected, the lack of the information about basic conditions of the patients and the changing parameters such as the different doctors in the study will undermine the premise. If the age of the patients varies in the large span or their ability to restore from the pain is different from each other, it’s unrealistic to compare their recuperation time. On the other hand, the totally distinguish doctors who belongs to the two realm of medicine is bound to have a influence over the recovering time. For instance, the first doctor is more likely to cure the patient whose muscle pain is caused by sports for less time. Unless the speaker demonstrates more specific facts about the patients and rules out the affecting ingredients, the hypothesis can be suffice to be ensured.
Finally, the argument also fails to take the byproduct of the antibiotics, which leads to the unwarranted assertion that every patients including the one who are perhaps allergic to this kind of medicine should take it. Despite the fact that antibiotics will shorten the time for patient, we should be conscious of the exception when attempting to make the claim. And if these special groups are overlooked, no more severe results will be brought about to those innocent people. As a result, only when we figure out all the possible problems it will result in can we make the conclusion more grounded.
Overall, the argument which appears to the effective one should be strengthened at least by providing the full-developed stuff to confirm the link between the secondary infection and the muscle strain, conducting the study in the same situation such as the same doctors and the patients of the same age, and work out the problems of the antibiotics. Otherwise, the conclusion can not to say meaningful and trustful.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: Cypher 时间: 2010-4-22 23:08:16
本帖最后由 Cypher 于 2010-5-7 13:10 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
===========
论点提纲
===========
1.缺病人信息
2.为之两组受伤状况是否相同
3.两组医生不同
4.不能为所有的病人推荐使用抗生素
===========
习作正文
===========
In this medical newsletter, the author proposed that all patients diagnosed with muscle strain should take antibiotics, which were proved to be helpful in quicker recuperation, as part of their treatment. To support his proposal, the author cited the results of a study of two groups of people—the group who took antibiotics regularly under the guide of a specialized sports-doctor recovered more quickly than the group who took sugar pills instead under the guide of a general physician. However, a close scrutiny and further contemplation will reveal the lack of strictness and validity of the study.
To begin with, the author doesn’t provide any basic information about the patients in these two groups, thus, render the results of the study, which the proposal rested on, susceptible to doubt. General scientific knowledge tells us that the consistency of the two groups in every aspect designed in a contrast trial should be guaranteed at the first place; otherwise the results might be questionable. Such factors as health conditions, variation in age and physique, dietary habits of the patients might be attributable to the speed of restoration thus affecting the accuracy of the trial. Without eliminating these possible differences between the two groups, the author couldn’t safely rely on the study to offer any advice.
Moreover, another loophole hidden in this study that leaves the results of the study unconvincing is that we are not informed of the severities of muscle strain the two groups of patients suffered. It is totally possible that the group under the guide of the specialized doctor suffered far less heavy muscle strain than the group treated by the general physician, therefore, the former group recovered in a much shorter time than the latter.
Yet, the author also overlooks the possible fact that the specialized doctor is more experienced in treating sport-related injuries and could carry out a more systematical and elaborate rehabilitation schedule, which is more scientific for patient’s recovery, than a general physician can.
Finally, neither did the author provide any relevant data to prove that every patient diagnosed with muscle strain would suffer from secondary infections nor did he supply any evidence to substantiate the necessity of everyone’s intake of antibiotics. Granted that each patient diagnosed with muscle strain would suffer from secondary infections, there is no need of taking antibiotics for everyone, in that presumptuous use of antibiotics might lead to serious allergy or other side effects that may cause harmful impacts on the patients.
To sum up, the proposal relying on the study is questionable. To better appraise the proposal given by the author, I would need to know more about the basic information concerning the patients selected in the trials and the differences between the rehabilitation schedules made by the two doctors. I would also need more information about whether the sugar pills that the second group took had counteractive effects on them.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: zmssghh 时间: 2010-4-22 23:19:10
===========
Logical Chain
===========
===========
论点提纲
===========
提纲：
开头：复述题目说明有错误。
1. 未提供调查人数，样本可能不足。同是未提供病人的详细信息，病人体质可能不同。
2. 未考虑医生不同
3. 结论说所有的病人都得吃这种药，然而未给出服用抗生素的负面作用，可能只适合部分重病人群
总结：提供更多有关research的以及使用抗生素的正面负面作用的信息
===========
习作正文
===========
In the argument, the author advised that patients who are diagnosed with muscle strain would take antibiotics when being treated. In supporting his recommendation, the author cites a research, in which one group of patients, taking antibiotics as part of their treatment, recuperate much quicker than another group of patients, taking sugar pills as a substitute. However, failing to give sufficient convincing evidences makes the author's argument questionable.
First, the author fails to give more detailed information of the patients involved in the research. It might be the case that only an insufficient number of patients take part in this research, which, as a result, makes the research lack of persuasion. It is also possible that there is great difference between the physique of the patients in the two groups. It can be the case that most of the patients who take antibiotics also have a good physical condition, which, undoubtedly, will help them to recover from the muscle strain quickly. On the contrary, the patients, who take sugar pills instead of antibiotics, generally hold a bad physique, which might make their recovery time much longer.
What's more, when doing contrastive research, we have to change only one factor while keeping the other factors essentially the same. In the research cited in the argument, we find that the doctors of the two groups, who play an important role in the research, are not the same one. It is of great possibilities that Dr. Newland is much more experienced than Dr. Alton in treating muscle strain. In this case, the difference between the speed in which patients recuperate could more likely due to the method used to treat the patients rather than the medicine they take. With all the possibilities above, the result of the research lend little support to the author's recommendation.
In addition, even if the antibiotics do help patients to heal quickly after muscle strain, the author fails to give the information whether antibiotics have some negative effect on the patients. It is very likely that the use of massive amount of antibiotics would bring a lot of bad influence, or disease even more harmful than muscle strain, to the patients. If so, the use of the antibiotics should be restricted to the cases of some patients who really get a severe muscle strain. Thus, the author's recommendation that all the patients who strain their muscle should take antibiotics can be totally a negative one, which may make things worse for the patients.
In all, all the evidences the author give cannot lend a strong support to his recommendation. In order to persuade us, the author has to give more detailed information about the research. What's more, he also has to give more information about the effect antibiotics have on patients, both positive ones and negative ones.
作者: pennyclever 时间: 2010-4-23 11:46:10
昨晚写完了但是断网了... 我下午上完英语课了来帖..
作者: SandraShan 时间: 2010-4-23 21:16:44
本帖最后由 SandraShan 于 2010-4-27 01:07 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1、专家怀疑二次感染阻止肌肉受伤病人的恢复
2、以对两组病人的研究为前提来证明上述假设
3、一组在整个治疗过程中服用抗生素，40%的人恢复时间快了
4、另一组服用糖（病人认为是抗生素），恢复时间没有明显减少
3，4——>所有被诊断患有muscle strain的都应该被建议服用抗生素作为他们治疗的一部分
===========
论点提纲
===========
1没有说明二次感染与抗生素的关系
2研究的两组病人，没有说明具体的数目和其他的情况，使结果没有可靠性
3即使结果正确，也不能建议所有的 muscle strain的病人服用抗生素，要考虑到病人的实际情况，如可能有的人抗生素过敏等
===========
习作正文
===========
This newsletter to the arguer begins by stating the hypothesis that secondary infections may keep some patients from healing quickly after severe muscle strain. Then, by making a comparison of two groups of patients’ recuperation time, the arguer drew the conclusion that anyone who was diagnosed with muscle strain had better take antibiotics, since the study showed that their recuperation time was significantly reduced than typical expected.
However, the argument contains several facets that are questionable. To start with, the author failed to point out the exact relation between infection and taking antibiotics. The arguer didn’t clearly inform us whether it is the antibiotics that prevent patients from being secondary infected.
Furthermore, the reliability of the survey is still open to question. Apart from saying two groups of patients, the arguer said nothing about the comparison objects. If it was limited to only few patients or they were of different ages and physical conditions, the results might be attributable to those particular individuals. Hence, the generalization drawn might not apply to most people.
Last but not least, even if the result is reliable, the comment that all the muscle strained patients should take antibiotics is still unconvincing. The problem that undermine the argument is that the arguer overlook other factors that result in the muscle strain and the side effect of the antibiotics. As we all know , the antibiotics are used to kill bacterial which may not be needed for some patients. On the other hand, for people who are allergic to antibiotics, taking them would cause severe consequence.
In conclusion, the argument, while it seems logical at first, has several flaws as discussed above.The argument could be improved by providing more information about the causal relationship that taking antibiotics efficiently reduces the probability of being secondary infected.It could be further improved by listing out the details of the survey and giving a convincing ending.
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-4-26 13:27:09
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-4-27 15:23 编辑
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
【1010G精英组】E小组第4次作业
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
Argument45
The following appeared as an editorial in a wildlife journal.
"Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic region. They search for food by moving over ice from
island to island during the course of a year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain
the plants on which they feed, and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice to cover the
sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. Unfortunately, according to reports
from local hunters, the deer populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global
warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that the decline in arctic deer
populations is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the
frozen sea."
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
写作样式模板
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
===========
Logical Chain
===========
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
=======================
Revised By
=======================
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
拍文顺序
1-->5
3-->4
4-->8
5-->10
6-->9
7-->1
8-->6
9-->7
10-->3
说明：1-->5表示1号拍5号的习作
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-4-26 13:27:21
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-4-30 00:44 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1 reports from local hunters---> the deer populations are declining
2 recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt
1,2---> the decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.
===========
论点提纲
===========
1、调查报告的准确性
2、全球变暖与种群数量下降的关系
3、种群的下降可能与其他的因素有关系
===========
习作正文
===========
In this journal, the editor concludes that the reason of declining in arctic deer populations is that deer populations are unable to follow their age-old migration patterns because of the recent global warming trends. To strengthen his conclusion, the author points out a fact that the local hunters report the deer populations are declining, and global warming have caused the sea ice to melt. The arguer depends on quite a few unconvinced assumptions, which render it unpersuasive as it stands.
In the first place, the author fails to consider the reliability of the reports which are made by the local hunters. It is entirely possible that the hunters, who have seen numbers of deer but not report. Even the local hunters reported the fact, the author still cannot be sure that the deer populations are decreasing indeed. Maybe, the deer is so afraid of human beings that they avoid to be seen by human. The hunters, therefore, only see a part of deer populations, and most of them hide themselves well. Since the author inadequately to this concern, he cannot justify about his conclusion based on these reports.
In a addition, these reports are the truth and can be trusted, the arguer provide no evidence the establish a causal relationship between the decline in the arctic deer populations and the recent global warming trends. Although, the world is suffering the global warming recently, the author is unfair to assert that it is the warming weather that affect this area and resulting in declining of the deer populations. It is highly likely that the global warming is not affect this local area where the sea covered with ice is actually unchanged at all. Without additional supporting information, the editor cannot make any sound conclusion.
The last but not the least, even the global warming may one of reasons that causes deer populations declined, the author fails to ignore other possibilities. It is entirely possible that the deer populations in this local area are infected with a kind of severe disease which is the main reason to be blamed for the diminishing of the deer populations. Under this situation, the global warming may cause a little decreasing of the deer populations, which can be totally negligible. Without eliminate other alternative explanations, the author cannot convince me about his conclusion.
To sum up, the conclusion, which is made by the editor, who has disregarded or chosen to ignore several aspects of his conclusion, is on the basis on scant credibility. To better bolster the reliability of the author's conclusion, the arguer must give more information about the deer populations in that area. I would also need to know whether there are other ways to explain the declining deer populations expect the factor of global warming.
=======================
Revised By nanfeng25899
=======================
批改标注:
1。红色，表示“错误”
2。洋红，表示“用法欠妥当”
3。蓝色，是我的批注
4。绿色，表示“很精彩的文字”
In this journal, the editor concludes that the reason of declining in arctic deer populations is that deer populations are unable to follow their age-old migration patterns because of the recent global warming trends. To strengthen his conclusion, the author points out a fact【fact不可数】 that the local hunters report the deer populations are declining, and global warming have caused the sea ice to melt. The arguer depends on quite a few unconvinced assumptions【有点没有说玩的感觉】, which render it unpersuasive as it stands.
In the first place, the author fails to consider the reliability of the reports which are made by the local hunters. It is entirely possible that the hunters, who have seen numbers of deer but not report.【应该是to report】Even 【是even if吧】the local hunters reported the fact, the author still cannot be【前后时态不一致】 sure that the deer populations are decreasing indeed. Maybe, the deer is so afraid of human beings that they avoid to be【应该avoid doing】 seen by human. The hunters, therefore, only see a part of deer populations, and most of them【them的指代问题，我知道你想说的是deer，不过按照前一句为hunters】 hide themselves well. Since the author inadequately to this concern【since为因为的意思时，应该加上句子】, he cannot justify about【justify及物，去掉about】his conclusion based on these reports.
In a addition,【。。。应该是in addition】 these reports are the truth and can be trusted, the arguer provide no evidence the【to】 establish a causal relationship between the decline in the arctic deer populations and the recent global warming trends. Although, the world is suffering the global warming recently, the author is unfair to assert 【有点费解，改成it is unfair to assert 好点吧】that it is the warming weather that affect this area and resulting 【去掉and或者将resulting改成result】 in declining of the deer populations. It is highly likely that the global warming is not affect【两个动词】this local area where the sea covered with ice is actually unchanged at all.【有点费解】 Without additional supporting information, the editor cannot make any sound conclusion.
The last but not the least, even【even是甚至的意思，even if/though为即使的意思】 the global warming may one of reasons that causes deer populations declined【cause 没有这个用法吧。。。改成the decline of the deer】, the author fails to ignore【表达错了。。。】 other possibilities. It is entirely possible that the deer populations in this local area are infected【应该是deer感染而不是populations】with a kind of severe disease which is the main reason to be blamed for the diminishing of the deer populations. Under this situation, 【最好写 circumstance】the global warming may cause a little【有点怪】 decreasing of the deer populations, which can be totally negligible. Without eliminate【eliminating】 other alternative explanations, the author cannot convince me about【of】his conclusion.
To sum up, the conclusion, which is made by the editor, who has disregarded or chosen to ignore several aspects of his conclusion, is on the basis on scant credibility.【改成based on the scant credibility】 To better bolster the reliability of【最好把粉色删了】the author's conclusion, the arguer must give more information about the deer populations in that area. I would also need to know whether there are other ways to explain the declining deer populations expect the factor of global warming.
综合评价：
1．语法方面的错误还是相对多了一点，应该着重注意一下
2．单词的很多用法不太熟悉，用之前不确定的查一查
3．有些地方表达意思不是很通畅和易懂
4．最好用词在多元化一些
作者: Cypher 时间: 2010-4-26 13:36:05
占
作者: hebill 时间: 2010-4-26 13:49:10
占个地板先 O(∩_∩)O~
作者: shevava 时间: 2010-4-26 17:32:02
本帖最后由 shevava 于 2010-5-16 20:55 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
The author of the editorial concludes that the decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea. To support the conclusion the author cites the reports from local hunters which indicate that the populations of arctic deer are declining, and these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt. The author also points out that the arctic deer search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of a year, because their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed, and cold enough during a period of the year, for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. This argument suffers from a series of poor assumptions, which render it wholly unpersuasive as it stands.
To begin with, accurately, the reports which indicate the populations of arctic deer is declining coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, but the reports haven't indicated that the ice in Canada's arctic region melt as well. And even if the ice there has melt, that doesn't mean the arctic deer are unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.
In the second place, as the absent of evidence to prove the arctic deer are unable to search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of a year as their age-old always do, there is direct and persuasive evidence to justify the decline in arctic deer population is the result of the global warming trends. There is no proof to indicate the reason of decline is because the arctic deer cannot find food by moving over ice. Too many possibilities there to make the population decline, for example, the climate make them vulnerable to ill, then even dead. Or the food they live rely on is die out.
Finally, there is no evidence to justify the local hunters' reports are reliable. The author overlooks to give the justifiable static to show the population in arctic deer is really decline. The author just tells us the reports from the local hunters indicate that the populations of arctic deer are declining, without any other detail of the reports. Therefore, he is failed to convince us that the truth of the reports.
In conclusion, the argument is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the author must give enough detail of the reports to indicate the populations are actually declining. And rule out the other possibility lead to the decline except the arctic deer cannot find food. We also need more information about the deer are unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: nanfeng25899 时间: 2010-4-26 18:08:05
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1．
前提一：北极鹿每年通过冰块岛移
2．
前提二：当地的猎人报告鹿的数量在下降
3．
前提三：全球变暖
4．
结论：北极鹿的数量下降是无法岛移的结果
===========
论点提纲
===========
1．攻击点一： 猎人报告的可信性（当地猎人=所有猎人?猎人的报告=整个北极?）
2．攻击点二： 全球变暖=北极变暖？
3．攻击点三： 变暖=无法进行岛移？
===========
习作正文
===========
The conclusion that the decrease of the arctic deer is due to being unable to move over ice between different islands seems to plausible and tenable, however, the logic of this journal is actually indefensible because of the questionable reports from the local hunters about the population of deer and the misunderstanding of global warming’s influence on the arctic.
First of all, the survey’ credibility is unwarranted. The local hunters are unrepresentative of the whole hunters in the arctic, that is, we cannot infer the slump of the deer from their reports without ruling out other alternatives. Perhaps the time when they go out to hunt for deer is just different from the time when the deer seek for their food. In addition, the hunters are also likely to give the deceptive information to the local government in order to veil the fact that too much deer is killed by them. Therefore, to make it sound, the author does need to provide us more reliable evidence to substantiate the credulity of this report.
Like what I mentioned at the beginning, the global warming does not stand for the rising temperature in arctic. What exactly is the global warming? Briefly, it means the rise of global average temperature rather than the change in one region. For instance, under the circumstances that in the world the temperature of all the areas but two is constant during the same period, the former’s temperature soars by 50 degree Celsius, yet the latter drops by 10 degree Celsius. Then we can tell everyone we are suffering from the global warming. If the arctic were the former one, of course, the conclusion based on this assumption is unacceptable.
Finally, even if the climate in arctic is becoming warmer, the failure of moving is also likely to have nothing to do with the mounting temperature. In this article, the author state that the deer just need to move to another island in some specific time in a year, not always, which means if the arctic warming happens in non-migration time there is no obstacle for them to move. What’s more, it’s still possible that the occurrence of warming is within their moving spell, whereas no explicit evidences, like the detailed statistics about warming, can demonstrate that the change of temperature is high enough to melt the ice.
Overall, the reasoning behind the decreasing population appears to be trustful and well-reasoned. However, only by offering more information in detail about the population change, the hunting habit of hunters, the statistics about global warming and the temperature change in arctic can the author convince us of his conclusion.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: SandraShan 时间: 2010-4-26 22:35:05
本帖最后由 SandraShan 于 2010-5-3 21:16 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1、2北极鹿靠着冰在岛屿间的移动来搜寻食物3北极鹿的栖息场所
1、2、3à介绍鹿的生活习性
4根据当地捕猎者的报道，鹿的数量在减少
5由于这种报道与全球气候变暖导致冰融化相一致
4、5à北极鹿的减少是由于他们不能在冰上移动
===========
论点提纲
===========
1. 当地捕猎者的报道不能说明鹿的数量真的减少了
2.全球变暖不一定导致北极的冰雪融化
3.未排除其它可能导致鹿数量减少的因素
===========
习作正文
===========
In this analysis, the arguer claims thatglobal warming trends, which have caused the sea ice to melt, is the reasonthat the deer population are declining, for deer cannot be able to across thefrozen sea as their age-old migration patterns. To support the statement, thearguer cites the reports from local hunters saying that the populations of thedeer are declining. In addition, the arguer reasons that this phenomenon is theresult out of global warming trends. This argument, which sounds lucid andlogical at first glance, suffers from several critical fallacies.
First of all, the reliability of reportscited by the arguer is open to question. The local hunters might just give outtheir conclusion by counting the populations of deer in a limited area. Surelytheir conclusion isn’t meaningful to the statistics of the deer populations.Besides, maybe it’s due to the local hunters’ over hunting which shooed thedeer to other places of Canada, while the total populations of the deer are notsignificantly declining. Other possibilities may exit to make the conclusion unconvincing.
In the second place, even if we acceptthe reports, the argument remains questionable. The arguer also failed to pointout a causal relationship between the recent global warming trendsand the decline in the arctic deer populations. And no direct evidence isprovided to support that global warming trends have caused the sea ice to melt.Then how can the arguer state that it is the melting of the ice that results inthe he decline in arctic deer populations.
What’s more, the arguer failed toconsider other factors that may decline the populations of the deer. Thespreading of disease and the shortage of food may as well be the origin of deer’spopulations declining. Obviously, the arguer only presented a one-sided reason.
In conclusion, the argument, while itseems logical at first, has several flaws as discussed above. It can beimproved by offering more details about the reports, more information aboutglobal warming and other factors of their living conditions in arctic can theauthor convince us of his conclusion.
作者: 深川翼 时间: 2010-4-26 22:53:07
本帖最后由 深川翼 于 2010-4-30 17:46 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1．
The arctic deer travel over the ice covering the sea separating the islands.
2．
According to reports from local hunters, the deer populations are declining.
3．
Recent global warming trends have caused the sea ice to melt.
4．
The conclusion:The decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea.
===========
论点提纲
===========
1．攻击点一： 报告的可信度，调查是否持续足够长的时间，是否覆盖足够大的范围。
2．攻击点二： 物种数量下降的原因不可能只有一个方面，还有食材，气候，是否有更多猎人捕捉等都会影响鹿的数量。
3．攻击点三： 即使全球变暖使冰块融化，是否能确定剩余的冰块不够鹿迁移用，毕竟北极的冰块有很多很多。
===========
习作正文
===========
In the argument, the author comes to the conclusion that the decline in Arctic deer population is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea because of the recent global warming trends. To strengthen his argument, the author takes the reports from local hunters that the deer populations are declining and the recent global warming trends causing the sea ice to melt as evidences. However, I would play the devil's advocate and cast doubt on this dubious assertion.
First and foremost, the acuity of the surveys conducted by local hunters remains doubtful. Whether the reports were taken during enough span of time or covering adequate space is a key point to the correction of the result. From the statement above, we cannot make a conclusion that the survey is good enough for us to make any decision relevant to the decline of Arctic deer.
What's more, I strongly argue that the decline of Arctic deer is the result of global warming causing ice to melt. As what we all have learned in biology, there are many aspects influencing the number of a group of animals, such as the food they feed, the change of the climate, the number of hunters hunting for them and so on. Similarly, the declining number of Arctic deer may be caused by the hunters doing more hunting or fewer plants on which they feed or something else. Making such a conclusion just by the ice which allows them to travel melt by the global warming is not cogent.
Eventually, whether the number of ice is not adequate for Arctic deer to travel remains to be seen. Though global warming causes some pieces of ice melting, there should be a lot of ice remained in Arctic area which is large enough more than we can imagine. Maybe there is enough ice left for them to use, so what the conclusion says is not reasonable according to my opinion.
In sum, though the argument seems through and logically persuasive, it indeed has many fallacies inside. To make the argument more convincing, the author should establish a more accurate result of the decline of Arctic deer. And to better evaluate the viability of the argument, I would also like to know that whether the reports are accurate enough, whether there are some other factors causing the decline and whether the ice in Arctic area remains enough for these deer to travel. Only by being provided with these evidences can we fully substantiate that the argument is reasonable.
=======================
Revised By Finn
=======================
语法问题
批注
In the argument, the author comes to the conclusion that the decline in Arctic deer population is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea because of (because of /result of是不是有点重复了global warming trends可以放在前面说 再考虑下语法有点乱) the recent global warming trends. To strengthen his argument, the author takes the reports from local hunters that the deer populations are declining and (用and连接应该是并列关系但后面又用了causing 感觉前后又有点因果关系 有点乱 呵呵) the recent global warming trends causing the sea ice to melt as evidences. However, I would play the devil's (？想表达什么意思？不理解 固定搭配？回头给我说说哈) advocate and cast doubt on this dubious assertion.
First and foremost, the acuity of the surveys conducted by local hunters remains doubtful. Whether the reports were taken during enough span of time or covering adequate space (span…后面这半句可以参考一下规范的表达是怎么说的) is a key point to the correction of the result. From the statement above, we cannot make a conclusion that the survey is good enough for us to make any decision relevant to the decline of Arctic deer.
(本段内容略显单薄，说理应该更充分，或列举他因什么的 仅仅说理不合适)
What's more, I strongly argue (不合适吧 suspect？感觉这句话写的不正式) that the decline of Arctic deer is the result of global warming causing ice to melt. As what we all have learned in biology, there are many aspects (factors) influencing the number of a group (还需要用group修饰吗？) of animals, such as the food they feed, the change of the climate, the number of hunters hunting for them (分词修饰多余删) and so on. (正式文体还是不要用so on了) Similarly (跟什么类似？), the declining number of Arctic deer may be caused by the hunters doing more hunting or fewer plants on which they feed or something else.
(前面说的时候就详细说 后面又来了一句感觉有点重复) Making such a conclusion just by the ice which allows them to travel melt by the global warming is not cogent. (语言有问题 首先是头重脚轻可以考虑用倒装 用被动语态更合适)
Eventually, whether the number of ice (冰的数量？什么意思) is not adequate for Arctic deer to travel remains to be seen (语法不对travel remains 你想表达什么？). Though global warming causes some pieces (短语虽然有付出代价的意思 但用在这不合适) of ice melting, there should be a lot of ice remained in Arctic area which is large enough more than we can imagine. Maybe there is enough ice left for them to use, so what the conclusion says is not reasonable according to my opinion.
(这一段的内容也略显单薄，感觉这段攻击的点找的不好 我没太搞懂你想表达的意思 呵呵)
In sum, though the argument seems through and logically persuasive, it indeed has many fallacies inside. To make the argument more convincing, the author should establish a more accurate result of the decline of Arctic deer. And to better evaluate the viability of the argument, I would also like to know that whether the reports are accurate enough, whether there are some other factors causing the decline and whether the ice in Arctic area remains enough for these deer to travel. Only by being provided with these evidences can we fully substantiate that the argument is reasonable. (结尾相比你中间正文段都写的多，应该多下点笔墨在正文)
建议：1、正文第三段攻击点选择有点偏
2、中国式思维及语言，可查阅规范的表达方法
3、部分模式化句型可以参考精彩表达中的表达方法
4、多阅读英文的相关表达方法
5、逻辑性不强，句子衔接不紧密
作者: pennyclever 时间: 2010-4-27 11:26:12
占.................
作者: taoseo 时间: 2010-4-28 00:15:37
提示: 作者被禁止或删除 内容自动屏蔽
作者: zmssghh 时间: 2010-4-28 10:11:08
本帖最后由 zmssghh 于 2010-4-28 11:52 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1：deer每年通过浮冰迁徙
2：当地的hunter报告deer的数量减少
3：正好现在气候变暖导致了sea ice的融化
4：结论：deer因为不能迁徙了而数量减少
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 作者未提供作report的hunter和详细信息，可能他们并不善于寻找deer导致了错误的调查结果
2：作者没有证明全球变暖导致了deer栖息地的冰川的融化，进而也就没有证明deer真的不能迁徙了
3：作者没有证明不能迁徙是导致他们数量减少的原因，还可能是别的原因
===========
习作正文
===========
In the argument, the author argue that global warming, which leads to the melt of the sea ice, results in the decline in the number of the total arctic deer that are not able to migrate annually as usual. To strengthen his conclusion, the author offers some information about the arctic deer and their habitat as well as some reports from the local hunters. Although seems to be convincing at first glance, the author's conclusion, from the logical point of view, suffers some fault which cannot be ignored.
To begin with, the author fails to give any detailed information, such as the number of the hunters and whether the hunters are experienced in observing arctic deer, about the local hunters who offers the reports, which makes the result of the report lack of credibility. If the number of the hunters is insufficient or they are fresh in doing such a job, it would be possible that the arctic deer may have migrated to another area well the hunters only search for the arctic deer in their former habitat, which, in no doubt, can lead to a wrong conclusion.
Thus, as the author's conclusion is totally based on this questionable report, the argument made by the author is really weak.
What's more, even if the reports offered by the hunters are authentic, the author have failed to give any convincing evidence to prove the view that the global warming does make the arctic deer unable to migrate annually. It is very likely that global warming, though causing some sea ice to melt, fails to have any effect on the sea ice in Canada's arctic region. In this case, arctic deer will, in contrast with the argument, be able to follow their age-old migration patterns. Thus, it is unadvisable for the author to draw any conclusion before giving some reasoned evidence in proving the relationship between global warming and the changes in arctic deer's migration patterns.
The last but not least, even if the global warming does cause the sea ice to melt in Canada's arctic region and then lead to the arctic deer unable to migrate annually, the argument doesn't provide any suasive evidence to support the causal relationship between the reduce of the arctic deer populations and the changes in their migration patterns. There are a lot of factors, including the changes of the environment, the natural enemy and the lack of food, that may cause the decreasing of the population. Without ruling out all these possibilities, it is impossible for the author to give any cogent argument.
In all, the author makes many logic faults in the argument, making his conclusion unpersuasive. Unless offering more detailed information about the hunters and more well-founded evidence about the relationship between global warming and declining of the deer populations, the author cannot convince us of his conclusion.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-4-28 11:34:32
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-4-29 18:46 编辑
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
【1010G精英组】E小组第5次作业
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
Issue50
In order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university level, all faculty should
be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses
they teach."
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
写作样式模板
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
=======================
Revised By
=======================
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
拍文顺序
1-->8
3-->5
4-->9
5-->3
6-->7
7-->11
8-->10
9-->4
10-->1
11-->6
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-4-28 11:35:05
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-8 16:49 编辑
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 进行非学术性的职业可能对学生带来好处
2 并不是所有老师都适合从事非学术型职业的工作
3 从事非学术型职业的工作的时间很可能会影响老师对学生的教育时间从而降低教学质量
===========
习作正文
===========
Is it necessary that spending time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses teachers teach, in order to improve the quality of instruction at the college and university? Although I agree with the speaker's assertion that it is benefit for teachers to work outside the academic world which may improve the quality of instruction, the speaker also ignores that working outside maybe nothing help to the courses teachers teach, sometimes, even harm to their academic.
Admittedly, working outside the academic world may have many benefits, to some extent, for teachers who work in a college or a university. Working outside would give a teacher with an open mind and relate the courses they teach more closely to the society. Suppose that a scientist, whose major is computer science, cannot constrict his study only in academic professions. In order to know better that what products do the market really requires, the scientist must spend some time working outside. Under this situation, the scientist can teach their students both the academic in books and also the experience in the really world. After graduating from the college or university, the students may easily find high paid jobs. Thus, the quality of instruction at college and university level would be improved.
However, working outside, sometimes, may not suite for all faculties in university. Take the theorist for example. These kinds of faculties do not need much more experiences which can be gained directly from working outside. Form the fact that plant Uranus was a bit out of its normal orbit, some mathematicians logically reasoned the existence of a new plant, Neptune, and even precisely calculated its position according to the Newton's theory of universal gravitation nearly two hundred years ago. In this situation, working outside can be viewed as wasting time, even if the scientist had spent a little time. It is, therefore, entirely possible that the Neptune haven’t be discovered yet. The experiences of working outside contribute noting to help the scientist to calculate the position of the Neptune.
In addition, working outside the academic world may even ruin the quality of instruction at the university level. On the one hand, the time teachers spend on working outside is supposed to use for teaching the students or doing reaches inside the academic world. Without paying much attention and enough time to the academic courses, the students cannot learn well from their teachers. On the other hand, because of working outside, many complicated things may bother theaters. They have to spend less time both on their academic researches and teaching, which will result in failing in gained support form projects, and even worse teachers would lose their jobs due to the poor quality of teaching courses.
To sum up, I agree with that it is good for teachers working outside the academic world. Such experiences will let teachers combine their teaching of both theoretical and practical skills. However, the speaker also fails to consider that working outside maybe nothing help to the courses they teach, sometimes, even harm to the academic.
=======================
Revised By Hebill Waiting…
=======================
作者: zmssghh 时间: 2010-4-28 11:45:14
额……又一ISSUE……先占……
作者: Cypher 时间: 2010-4-28 11:45:24
占
作者: SandraShan 时间: 2010-4-28 11:55:43
占~
作者: hebill 时间: 2010-4-28 14:15:16
占~ 小宇宙 爆发吧。。。。
作者: nanfeng25899 时间: 2010-4-28 16:40:54
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 . 正文段一：在有些领域中，像商科类中的金融的老师就应该参加所教课程的一些工作，这样可以让自己的知识与时俱进，验证自己的理论是否适合市场需要
2．正文段二：有的学科像理论物理，却没有相对应的工作
3．正文段三：有的学科像哲学，需要独立的思考
===========
习作正文
===========
Is it necessary for all faculty to spend time working outside world in professions relevant to what they teach in the university, which ultimate purpose is to improve the quality of instruction? The author claims so, however, the idea that the teachers are ought to take the part-time jobs may not have the same beneficial impact on some disciplines as on others because of their own features in the process of teaching.
Undoubtedly, the teachers of some subjects such as finance or other majors in business school should put what they teach in their classes into practice, due to the fact that the economy tendency varies from day to day and the knowledge in this capricious area is updating gradually. The teacher must keep the pace of the change, or their students will exert the obsolete theories on the finance system which perhaps results in the pandemic crisis just like the one in 2008. Bruised by that crisis and starring at the declining applicants, masses of teachers in the business school are beginning to reconsider what they impart to those futures’ businessman. If their theories are out of date and cannot reach the basic goals of pump- priming the economy, the existence of the college and university is meaningless.
Yet when it comes to weigh up the value of working outside for some other disciplines, it seems not to be valuable as it appears. In the society, not all the subjects are able to succeed finding the corresponding jobs or titles. Like the theoretical cosmology, the Hawking’s research field is a case in point. As one of great achievers in the world history, the fully-equipped labs are his secondary homes and the accumulated books are the resource of his inspiration and the place where he can contact other great minds. No one will force him to work outside because it’s unrealistic to apply his theory to the tangible world in the same way as finance does. As a result, spending their precious thinking time on less effective seems not to be a sensible way to improve the quality of instruction.
Finally, the same condition goes for philosophy, which features with the dependent thinking rather than the tangible work. The majority of philosophers like Plato or Aristotle devote their most time into thinking general and fundamental problems concerning matters such as existence, knowledge, values, reason, mind, and language, which is just what the most philosophical professors should follow. Therefore, compared with wasting time working outside, always considering the mundane stuffs and thus relatively cutting down the time of thinking, it will be wiser for those teachers to indulge themselves in the academic world.
Overall, requiring all faculty seek for work really makes little sense. To be honest, whether or not they should hunt for a job outside their college or university largely depends on whether the practical experience play a crucial role in the instruction.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: shevava 时间: 2010-4-28 20:53:45
本帖最后由 shevava 于 2010-5-16 20:53 编辑
===========
习作正文
===========
As for the teacher of college, who always faced with complex and controversial knowledge, it is necessary for them to have opportunities to join the practice of unprofessed experience. From these practice, teachers get to know how to bridge knowledge to practice, which really improve their qualities of instruction. Next I would like to show some of these evidences.
In my view, the students now are no more than little youngs who are always anxious about everything around them. In contrast, it is a hard work for professors if they not only want to impact knowledge to students but even like to make their classes more fantastic. Then the question comes out. How can the teacher finish this hard work? Let's have a look at Harvard University. Annul, in Harvard University Business School, they always invites many business men who are famous around the world, meanwhile, show numbers of lectures about their lives, business, families, peers and of course about themselves. From these lessons, we can believe reasonably that students there must enjoy thus classes.
Then it is objective to see that the speed of our society developing so fast that once we stop paying attention for only a minute, we will be amazing at there emerging something we don't know ever again, especially for the field of education. It is the common sense that the most advanced technology always occurs in our college. But these mechanized technology apply firstly in public live, during these process, these characters, abilities and disadvantages will surely get a change which even more advance than these first appearance. For instance, the application of the net, which was invested because the need of countless numbers exits. However as these tenants in restaurants always comes and does, it's very difficult to register them, which directly led to the new apply. Thus, we can see it clearly that if we want to catch up with our life in University, it's better for teacher to go out and have experience in society. Without these experiences which deems as necessary in their teaching, it cannot say he is a teacher with vigor and vibrancy.
On the opposite, it will be an unexpected phenomena that if teachers devote themselves in experience of society unduly. Don't forget, allow or advice these professors to go the society is a good measure to improve their teaching skills, cultivate their temperament, broaden knowledge, which will provide useful guidance for students to develop not only "faculties" but also the ability how to transform these "faculties" into profitable applications. Obviously, teachers in these academic areas should devote all their time into university life, working outside merely serving as detrimental to their educational responsibility and scientific reasarch. There is a story talking about people like these reverse their primarily aims. In ancient of China, there is a man like the tree very much, he want his tree to be the highest one with green leaves, exuberance of foliages and beautiful characters. But he just attend to the truffles and neglect the essentials. Even drop the substance of the root. The result of this is that he cannot got a tree in his heart. Just like our education, these professors who engage the work in society will be pretty good, but if they only concentrate on these details they would not enable get a progress in their enterprises.
作者: 深川翼 时间: 2010-4-28 23:26:17
本帖最后由 深川翼 于 2010-4-30 00:18 编辑
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 . 正文段二：当今社会信息高速发达社会发展很快，不去掌握现实生活需要学习什么样的知识而专注于课本是不能够有所得的
2．正文段三：教师必须将他们所学所教的应用到相关领域的实际中去
3．正文段四：一个大学的好坏与否正在于它能否给同学指明一个前进的方向
4. 正文段五：并非所有的学术领域都需要这样的实践经验
===========
习作正文
===========
A heated discussion springs up to whether all faculty at the colleges and universities should be required to spend time working outside the academic world in professions relevant to the courses they teach recently.Every coin has two sides.In the stand of my eyes,the decision will benefit both the universities and the college students rather than having harmful impacts on them.However,this opinion is not absolutely right,either.
In modern times,technology and the society is developing rapidly.What we have learned yesterday might not be useful on tomorrow morning,let alone what those faculty learned twenty years ago or more.In order to keep pace with the increasing development of modern knowledge and technology,faculty at the college should go outside the academic world to see whether what they have learned by heart is out of date.If so,they should try to obtain the new ones to make sure that their students could get the latest information.Only in this ways can knowledge be a powerful tool.
Besides keeping up with the latest information,this decision also helps the faculty put what they have learned and taught into practice.No one can reach the summit of knowledge without putting it into practice.Here we use the phrases "in professions relevant to the courses they teach",which means they do not work in those fields that have no relevance to benefiting their teaching but those that can help them think more cogently and insightly.Practice makes not only perfect,but also meaningful courses.
What I want to emphasize at last is that when we judge a college or university good or not,whether the faculty has some experience outside the academic world relevant to what they teach is a key point.The experience will help teachers plan their professional careers better which also has a leading instruction to their students when they take up.That's the true meaning of college learning.
However,I have some different ideas about whether all faculty should take actions.Everybody has diverse interests.Those fields that need complex analysis only might not be studied outside the computing world.And going too far is as bad as not going far enough,meaning redundant outside work may do harm to instruction.It is up to the college and university to make the final decision.
In conclusion,working outside the academic world relevant to the courses will improve the quality of the college and university level most time.Colleges and universities should analyse their situation and resourses to see whether their faculty need the experience and how long the working hour is the best.Knowledge is a complex identification that needs time to make it.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: 小肯0113 时间: 2010-4-29 10:47:44
本帖最后由 小肯0113 于 2010-5-13 22:16 编辑
===========
论点提纲
===========
部分同意这个观点，理由：
1、其好处在于可以帮助教授更好的理解学科领域。如心理学如果有社会学的帮助能更好理解社会现象等。交叉领域的研究是学术研究的下一个方向，比如社会心理学的广泛应用。
2、但浪费教授在本学科研究的时间，反而降低质量，大学教授更多需要的是specialist，可以作为鼓励，但不应作requirement。
同时学生在选择老师时也有不同的考虑。
3、可以增加课堂讨论，鼓励学生独立、全面思考，教授的任务是启发学生进行多角度思考而非教给他们现成的答案。
===========
习作正文
===========
I partially agree with the claim thatcollege or university faculty need to work on those relevant area other thanhis/her academic world. It is necessary for everyone to have some “newexperiences”, but we need to think about under which circumstances those “newthings” will benefit us, same as university professors.
It is obvious that professors willbenefit from study out of their own field. For instance, a psychologist dealwith people’s behavior and thought, with the support of socialist, he/she canhave a better understanding of behavior of individual that surrounded bystrangers. In a related world, nothing is isolated, obtaining relations betweendifferent phenomenon and predict the outcome of a decision are the essence ofacademic study. Professors can’t avoid dealing with the complicated phenomenonor social fact. It is necessary for them to know other world and take it aspreparation for their own study. Not only having more knowledge helpsprofessors to obtain a better understanding of the area they are studying butalso leading them to the interdisciplinary study. With the development ofacademic research in single discipline in last a few decades, research areabecomes more and more narrow, and interdisciplinary study will be the trend ofnext a few decades. Like Ruth Duncan said, “bring together theinterdisciplinary components and getting them working truly in collaboration isa key challenge.” In order to catch up this train of interdisciplinary study,professors should have a broader mind and a broader scope of knowledge. Think different,do different. Social Psychology, as the branch of Sociology and Psychology, hasbeen extensively used in media, crime, politic science and other areas todetermine people’s behavior and its impact. The only way to keep theirmotivation of academic research is to let them know more. From this point, therequirement is acceptable for faculties in college or university.
However, I believe that it is better toencourage faculties to study other area than requiring them to do so. Somepeople may be defended by “requiring” things especially specialists. They arewell-educated, and have their own plan of what they want to do. Some want tofocus on their own area, and work hard, try to deepen the understanding. Weshould respect their decision as specialists and individual. And also, time islimited. We can’t “require” professors spend 24 hours on teaching, studyingtheir own area and reading science journals of the related subjects. They mayknow fewer but know the information better. Meanwhile, students will chooseprofessors by taking different classes. Some students want a solid singlesubject background to support his/her study. Options and competitions exists atthe same time, and people will choose their own way, as students or professors.
Some people take professors as edifiers,not to tell students the answer but leading them finding the answer. There arelots of methods to achieve this goal, like encouraging discussion, giving themhomework, or cultivating independent thinking ability. I had a class called “Mediaand Society”. We don’t have textbook and exams on the class, but we need towrite opinion paper independently and work on a group project of the topic wechoose. The professor said, it’s more important for students to know why thanwhat, think than memorize. As long as the idea of knowing things in differentway exists in one’s mind, he/she not necessary to perceive new thing bythemselves. I think it is more effective that professors obtain an open mindand inspire students to do research and discover the answers.
To sum up, universities can encourage ormotivate faculties to spend time working on relevant subject. Just don’t use itas a requirement. Let faculties grasp the initiative of their own career, andlet students to choose what kind of professor they want.
=======================
Revised By nanfeng25899
Ipartially agree with the claim that college or university faculty need to workon those relevant area other than his/her academic world. It is necessary foreveryone to have some “new experiences”, but we need to think about under whichcircumstances those “new things” will benefit us, same as universityprofessors.
It is obvious that professors will benefit from study out of their own field.For instance, a psychologist deal 【deals】with people’s behavior and thought, with thesupport of socialist, he/she can have a betterunderstanding of behavior of individual that surrounded by strangers. 【没连词】In a related world【有点别扭，改成in the interdependentworld会不会好一点？】, nothing is isolated, obtainingrelations between different phenomenon and predict【predicting】 the outcome of a decision are the essence ofacademic study【没有连词】.Professors can’t avoid dealing with the complicated phenomenon or social fact.It is necessary for them to know other world and take it as preparation fortheir own study. Not only【前置倒装】 having more knowledge helpsprofessors to obtain a better understanding of the area they are studying butalso leading them to the interdisciplinary study. With the development ofacademic research in single discipline in last a few decades, research areabecomes more and more narrow, and interdisciplinary study will be the trend ofnext a few decades. Like Ruth Duncan said, “bring together the interdisciplinarycomponents and getting them working truly in collaboration is a key challenge.”In order to catch up this train of interdisciplinarystudy, professors should have a broader mind and a broader scope of knowledge. Thinkdifferent, do different. Social Psychology, as the branch of Sociology and Psychology,has been extensively used in media, crime, politic science and other areas todetermine people’s behavior and its impact. The only way to keep theirmotivation of academic research is to let them know more. From this point, therequirement is acceptable for faculties in college or university.
However, I believe that it is better to encourage faculties to study other areathan requiring them to do so. Somepeople may be defended by “requiring” thingsespecially specialists. They are well-educated, and have their own plan of whatthey want to do. Some want to focus on their own area, and work hard, try todeepen the understanding. We should respect their decision as specialists andindividual. And also, time is limited. We can’t “require” professors spend 24hours on teaching, studying their own area and reading science journals of therelated subjects. They may know fewer but know the information better.Meanwhile, students will choose professors by taking different classes. Somestudents want a solid single subject background to support his/her study.Options and competitions exists【exist】 at the same time, and people will choosetheir own way, as students or professors.
Some people take professors as edifiers【？】, not to tell students the answer but leadingthem finding the answer. There are lots of methods to achieve this goal, likeencouraging discussion, giving them homework, or cultivating independentthinking ability. I had a class called “Media and Society”. We don’t havetextbook and exams on the class, but we need to write opinion paperindependently and work on a group project of the topic we choose. The professor said, it’s more important for students toknow why than what, think than memorize. As long as the idea of knowingthings in different way exists in one’s mind, he/shenot necessary to perceive new thing by themselves.【语法有点问题，而且有点费解】 I think it is moreeffective that professors obtain an open mind and inspire students to doresearch and discover the answers. 【这句话感觉和这段的主题不太协调，而且又没说完的感觉】
To sum up,universities can encourage or motivate faculties to spend time working onrelevant subject. Just don’t use it as a requirement. Let faculties grasp theinitiative of their own career, and let students to choose what kind ofprofessor they want.
=======================
作者: pennyclever 时间: 2010-4-29 22:09:33
占..最近忙复习 = =
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-4-30 00:47:07
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-3 22:01 编辑
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
【1010G精英组】E小组第6次作业
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
Argument188
A new report suggests that men and women experience pain very differently from one another,
and that doctors should consider these differences when prescribing pain medications. When
researchers administered the same dosage of kappa opioids—a painkiller—to 28 men and 20
women who were having their wisdom teeth extracted, the women reported feeling much less
pain than the men, and the easing of pain lasted considerably longer in women. This research
suggests that kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required,
whereas men should be given other kinds of pain medication. In addition, researchers should
reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women.
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
写作样式模板
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
===========
Logical Chain
===========
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
=======================
Revised By
=======================
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
拍文顺序
1-->4
3-->5
4-->6
5-->1
6-->11
7-->10
8-->7
10-->8
11-->3
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-4-30 00:47:25
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-8 16:50 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1 the women reported feeling much less pain than the men
2 the easing of pain lasted considerably longer in women
1 2 --> that kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required whereas men should be given other kinds of pain medication
1 2 --> researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women.
===========
论点提纲
===========
1、调查的样本数量不具有代表性,除了拔牙的疼痛性以外还有其他的疼痛性
2、2、可能有其他原因导致男性疼痛时间长，仅仅缓解疼痛时间的长短不能说明kappa opioids对女性比对男性更好
3、kappa opioids也许对男性也是最有效的，也可能不需要对所有的药进行重新评估
===========
习作正文
===========
In this report, the author concludes that kappa opioids, a kind of painkiller, are the best for women to relieve the pain of teeth extracted, while men should be treated with another medicine. In addition, the arguer recommends that effects of all medications should be reevaluated in the light of differences between men and women. To strengthen his conclusion, the author points out a report, the after effect of using opioids, which shows that the women feel less pain than the man, and the effects lasted longer in women. The arguer depends on quite a few unconvinced assumptions, which render it unpersuasive as it stands.
To begin with, the problem that seriously weakens the logic of this argument is that the report is based on too small a sample to be reliable. Only 28 men and 20 women cannot make me to trust the author’s conclusion. It is entirely possible that the 28 men are the same kind of people who are insensitive to the kappa opioids. The effects of that medicine will show the same results in men and women. In addition, considering the report just involved the teeth extracted, one of innumerous pains, the author cannot convinced me that kappa opioids is better for women. Maybe, the kappa opioids can treat for other pains which have the same effects in both women and men.
In the second place, the arguer fails to consider that there are other factors to cause the different results between women and man. Most of these 28 men may take another medicine which reduces the real effects in the responds to the kappa opioids. Moreover, the lasted longer effects in women are not a pervasive reason for author to support his conclusions. It is entirely possible that the medicine used for the men cost less time for the whole treatment. Compare with men, the medicine for women spend much time and may have some bad side effects. Without ruling out other possibilities, the arguer cannot convince me that whether kappa opioids are more suitable for women instead of men or not.
The last but not the least, even the effect of using kappa opioids for women is better than it is down with man, the author still cannot conclude that that medicine is not the best for the men. Common sense tells us maybe that kappa opioids, though unsatisfied, are the best way for the moment to be used as treatment for men. Even the effects of taking kappa opioids vary in deferent sexes, it is no necessary for researchers to reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women, since the kappa opioids are just exceptions and the cost of reevaluation cannot afforded by the researchers.
To sum up, the conclusion, which is made by the editor, who has disregarded or chosen to ignore several aspects of his conclusion, is on the basis on scant credibility. To better bolster the reliability of the author's conclusion, the arguer must give more information about the report that testing a new medicine performance on women and man. I would also need to know whether there are other ways to explain the deferent results between women and man. And I also need other supporting details about whether it is worthy or not to reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women.
=======================
Revised By /ka深川翼 Waiting…
=======================
作者: 深川翼 时间: 2010-4-30 17:35:58
本帖最后由 深川翼 于 2010-5-7 12:35 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1 前提一：the women reported feeling much less pain than the men, and the easing of pain lasted considerably longer in women.
2 前提二：doctors should consider these differences when prescribing pain medications
3 结论一：
kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required, whereas men should be given other kinds of pain medication
4 结论二：researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 调查的人数太少，不够充足不具有说服力
2 其他的一些男女之间不同的因素也可以导致他们对疼痛感受的不同
3 kappa opioids 被结论为在何种疼痛场合都给女性开是没有根据的
===========
习作正文
===========
In this argument, the author suggests that kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required while it should be the last choice for men as pain medication. Moreover, the author claims that researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women. I find the author's dual suggestion specious on several grounds.
The threshold problem with the argument involves the statistical reliability of the study mentioned in it. The number of male subjects, 28, as well as the number of female subjects, 20 seems to be too limited to constitute a statistically significant example. Moreover, the author provides little detail information concerning these subjects so that these subjects might not be well representative of the overall male and female populations. That is, before confirming the statistical significance and randomness of the two groups of subjects, the author cannot justifiably analyze the different feelings between men and women suffering from pain.
Furthermore, the author fails to inform us whether there are some other initial differences between the male group and the female group. Lacking such critical information, it is entirely possible that the result of the study could be explained by other difference instead of sexual disparity. Perhaps these men are older than those women on average and thereby, they felt much more pain. Or perhaps the health condition of these men is worse than that of those women. Either scenario, if true, would serve to weaken the author's assumption that it is the sex disparity that results in the different feelings of pain.
Finally, even I were to admit that the sex disparity is indeed the direct explanation to the result of the study, however, the author hastily generalizes that kappa opioids is the best choice for every kind of pain medication. Yet is might not necessarily the case. The author fails to consider the possibility that kappa opiniods may have no effect on some certain kinds of pain and that there may be some other medicine which has better effect than kappa opioids has. In addition, the author's sweeping conclusion is unwarranted that the effects of all medications on men versus women should be reevaluated. In all likely hoods, the effects of some certain medications have already been accurately evaluated and the purposed reevaluation may just a waste of time and money.
In conclusion, the author's claims are not well supported by the study cited in the argument. To make these two claims persuasive, the author needs to prove the reliability of the result of the study and the necessity to reevaluate the effects of all medications.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: nanfeng25899 时间: 2010-4-30 18:50:51
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1 前提一：一份新的报告指出男女对痛的感觉不同，医生应该在开止痛药是考虑这一点
2 前提二：在28名男子和20名女子的试验中，女性的痛楚小且止痛时间长
3 结论一：在开止痛药时，应该给女性K，给男性其他的药
4 结论二：应该对其他的药物进行新的评估
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 研究对象过少，且研究的结果不可信
2 在开处方药时，应该根据实际情况来决定开什么止痛药，而不是一定要开K
3 应该对其他药重新评估的结论太武断
===========
习作正文
===========
The argument seems to be very reasonable and well-presented, but not to cover those facts. First of all, the generalization and reliability is really questionable. Also, the conclusion that doctors ought to prescribe the kappa opioids for women and other kind of medicine for men does not differentiae the type of the pain. Again, there are no explicit reasons to suspect the effects of other medications because of the research’s outcome.
To begin with, in accessing the result of the research, the researchers do not take into account the assumptions as well as the quantity and randomness of the sample. The research is presumes on the facts that the kappa opioids can ease the pain of the extraction of the patients’ wisdom teeth, but no obvious evidence is informed us about the effects of this medicine. If the kappa opioids is to cure the throat pain or others, there is no point conducting this experiment. In addition, the 28 men and 20 women is impossible to be representative of all the patients suffering from the teeth pain because their age or other inherent factors will largely decide their ability to recover, which is likely to collect the inaccurate even incorrect information.
What’s more, when it comes to the prescription issue for the patients, no matter what the causes of the pains are, the doctor should give the kappa opioids to women and others to men, which really make little sense. Even if the research’s consequences are tenable, there is a good chance that the kappa opioids is not the optimal option for pain which result from other diseases. Even this choice will be a extremely hazardous one for the patients just allergic to this medication. Therefore, it’s necessary for the doctors to figure out the roots of the pains and offer the grieve patients the most effective way to get rid of the pain.
Finally, reevaluating the effects of all medications seems to be slightly ridiculous, just like the following instance. In the middle examination, the cheat of a student who always skips classesand goes against the school’s principle can not means the possibility that all other students also do same. Just as with a student cheating can not be a sign of the others’, the distinguish effects of the kappa opioids can not demonstrate that the same situation goes for other medications. In order to be sure of whether the other medications have distinctive influence between men and women, more relevant evidence should be presented.
To sum up, before the author arrives at the ultimate conclusion, the randomness and the quantity of sample should be basically warranted. And it’s also indispensable to identify the origin of the pain ahead of prescribing and unnecessary to revaluate other medicines unless other facts are showed to us.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: Cypher 时间: 2010-4-30 23:33:33
本帖最后由 Cypher 于 2010-5-7 13:14 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
A report suggests that KO should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required while men should be given other kinds. To support his recommendation, the speaker cites a research consisted of 28 men and 20 women who were given the same dosage of KO when they were having their wisdom teeth extracted. The result indicates that the women reported much less pain than the men and the easing of pain lasted considerably longer in women. Although the suggestion is ostensibly credible, closer scrutiny and consideration would reveal the hidden flaws in the line of reasoning.
To begin with, the sample of the report could not be representative to illustrate the result of the research. Only 28 men and 20 women were involved in the research, which, compared with the general population, is far too small a number to be based on to draw any conclusion whatsoever. Unless the speaker could provide a more persuasive research to represent the overall population, we could not be convinced of his advice.
Yet, the speaker unfairly makes the assumption that it is due to KO's function that the women reported less pain and the easing of pain lasted longer in women. Unfortunately, the speaker provides no evidence to justify the assumption and it is entirely possible that the hormones the men and women secreted inside their body differ in function thus causing different effects on men and women as described in the title. Or perhaps women are stronger in will than men are and they can endure more keen and painful feelings or even they do not tend to concede they are suffering from pain. Without ruling out all these possibilities, the speaker could not overemphasize the effectiveness of KO.
Another flaw that weakens the suggestion is that the effectiveness of KO has only been tested on a specific occasion where the women were having their wisdom teeth extracted, no more tests relevant to the effect of the KO were conducted. Therefore it is too reckless for the speaker to allege that KO can be prescribed in all cases of pain medication. Without further research to verify the presumption that KO can be applied in all pain-easing cases, we cannot accept the suggestion made by the speaker.
Furthermore, the speaker unreasonably recommends that men should be given other kinds of pain medication. The research presents no provide evidence to validate KO's ineffectiveness in easing pain for men. The speaker overlooks the possibility that KO indeed worked so well on the men. However, there is no any clinical evidence concerning other painkiller's effect on men, it is possible that KO is far more effective in men than any other painkillers. Without taking these possibilities into consideration, the speaker could not convince us that men need to be given other kinds of pain medication.
In sum, the speaker's suggestion is untenable as discussed above. To bolster his recommendation, the speaker should provide a more statistically reliable research which is sufficient in size to be representative. More evidence is also needed to convince me that KO works better on women than on men and KO is not as effective on men as other pain medications are. I would also need other relevant clinical evidence to warrant the suggestion that the effects of all medications on both genders should be reevaluated and it is actually feasible.
作者: 小肯0113 时间: 2010-4-30 23:38:49
占~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
作者: shevava 时间: 2010-5-2 00:41:11
本帖最后由 shevava 于 2010-5-7 15:49 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
前提:
the women reported feeling much less pain than the men, and the easing of pain lasted considerably longer in women.
doctors should consider these differences when prescribing pain medications
结论：
kappa opioids should be prescribed for women whenever pain medication is required, whereas men should be given other kinds of pain medication
researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
This recommendation suggests that due to the research report which reveals that kappa opioids have more efficient on women than men, and men should be given other kinds of pain medication. The report also suggests that researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women. However, the report provides insufficient information to support its conclusion.
First, the reports cites that the researchers administered the same dosage of kappa opioids to 28 men and 20 women who were having their wisdom teeth extracted, which is lack of essential information about the exactly age of these men and women. As far as I know, when the wisdom teeth appear is vary from age and gender, perhaps those women can feel much less pain than men just because they have early appeared wisdom teeth and thus those teeth have worse condition that the nerve beneath the teeth is dead, which means the nerve could not feel pain anymore.
Second, the report does not provide the exactly definition of pain. As a common practice, the feeling of pain is different from person to person. Since the report fails to bring out how they measure the feeling of pain, the feelings just reported by those men and women is not accurate enough to make a judgment. It is entirely possible that these women could bear more pain than these men, therefore the women may report much less pain.
Third, since the report only shows the results of 28 men and 20 women while using the same dosage of kappa opioids, I will doubt if it is reliable in statistic. Because of the quantity of sample in this experiment is apparently insufficient, we can reasonable assume that there is a possibility that those men could not bear more pain than women and when we acquire more men to this experiment, we may have a definitely different result.
Finally, the report makes a hasty generation while it is suggesting that researchers should reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women. The kappa opioids have less effects on men does not indicate that all medications will also have the weak effects as kappa opioids. Maybe there are some medications that could make men feel less pain than women.
In sum, the recommendation provides unreliable evidence to support this argument as it stands. To strengthen this argument, the report should provide the detail information about the exact age of those men and women and it should also acquire more participants enough to make these experiment statistically reliable. In addition, the report should also provide the approach they use to measure the pain that the participants are feeling. Thus, the recommendation can be a convincible one for researchers to reevaluate the effects of this kind of medications.
作者: SandraShan 时间: 2010-5-2 15:53:13
本帖最后由 SandraShan 于 2010-5-3 21:13 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1研究表明；男人和女人对疼痛的感觉不一样，医生在开药的时候要考虑到这一点
2试验：给28个男人和20个女人拔智齿的人服用相同剂量的kappaopioids，女人反应她们的痛比男人们轻，而且药效持续的时间更长
2->3实验表明，当女人们需要止痛药时，应该给她们kappaopioids，而男人们应该给其他的种类的药
研究者应该重新估计男人和女人对所有药物的反应.
===========
论点提纲
===========
1、1、试验样本数目过少且数目不同，未排除其他因素，没有说服力
2、止痛药不一定非要是kappaopioids，可能会产生不良影响
3、即使试验结果是正确的，那也没必要对所有药物都做重估
===========
习作正文
===========
In this argument, the arguer concludes that whenever pain medication is required, kappa opioids should be prescribed for women but not for men and all the medicines should be tested, owing to the different feelings when men and women are suffering from pain, and the research which suggests that women feel much less and short time pain than men when administered kappa opioids. The argument presented above is relatively sound; however, it contains several facets that are questionable.
In the first place, it is apparently unconvincing to get the assertion without the guarantee that the women and men are of the similar conditions, which include number, age and especially their health conditions. With these things into consideration, the results may be quite different. It is entirely possible that most of the selected women happen to assimilate the painkiller very well ,while the men are suffering from other pains which cannot be eased by kappa opioids.
What is more, the research is just take wisdom teeth extracted as an example to show there are differences between women and men. Hence, the painkiller- kappa opioids is only one kind of pain medications specially for that kind of pain. It must be arbitrary to apply it to other situations. In addition, even if it does have obvious effect on people, side effect should be taken into mind.
The last but not the least, regardless of the ignorance of factors listed above, there is no necessity to reevaluate the effects of all medications on men versus women. We may agree with the fact that difference existed between men and women, whereas, most medicines are designed for general person and doing that kind of research would be not only waste of time, but also money.
To sum up, the argument relies on several ambiguous researches which render it unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen it, the author should provide firm details about the credibility of the research. The author should also take particular analysis in particular cases when patients taking painkillers. And actual limited situations should also take into account.
作者: zmssghh 时间: 2010-5-2 23:11:16
占楼 记得以前写过的 呵呵 去找找哈
作者: hebill 时间: 2010-5-3 20:19:52
占座~~~
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-5-3 21:29:09
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-5 23:41 编辑
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
【1010G精英组】E小组第7次作业
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
Argument035
The following appeared in the summary of a study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia.
"Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches.
Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates, for the past several decades food-processing
companies have also been adding salicylates to foods as preservatives. This rise in the commercial
use of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline in the average number of headaches
reported by participants in our twenty-year study. Recently, food-processing companies have found
that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods. With this new use for salicylates, we can
expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia."
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
写作样式模板
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
===========
Logical Chain
===========
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
=======================
Revised By
=======================
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
拍文顺序
1-->11
3-->5
4-->8
5-->6
6-->7
7-->1
8-->4
10-->3
11-->10
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-5-3 21:38:50
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-8 16:51 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1 Salicylates used to treat headaches
2 food-processing companies have also been adding salicylates to foods as preservatives
3 a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants in our twenty-year study
4 salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods
1 2 3 4--> a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 salicylates不一定是缓解头痛的药物
2 调查样本很少不可信
3 salicylates与头痛人减少没有必然的因果关系
===========
习作正文
===========
In this summary, the arguer concludes that the number of headaches in the city of Mentia would continually steady decreasing. To strengthen his conclusion, the author cites a study, which shows the salicylates are help to treat the headaches and they can also be used as flavor additives for food. The author depends on quite a few assumptions, which render it unpersuasive as it stands.
The threshold problem with this argument is that the author fails to think it is the salicylates in the foods that contribute to treat the headaches. It is entirely possible that other materials which also can treat the headaches. Even the salicylates may work to help to relieve the headaches, the author also providence to prove that the salicylates are the main ingredient for treating the headaches.Without ruling out this alternative explanation, the author cannot convince me about his conclusion.
Another flaw in this summary is about the study itself. Maybe, only a few people have been involved in this survey. It is likely that the salicylates are helpless for treating the headaches. People who used the food with salicylates just take other medicines for treating the headaches. Under this situation, the increasing adding salicylates to foods as preservatives and declining of headaches citizen is just coincidence and has nothing in causal relationship. In order to make sure of the reliability of the study, the samples must sufficient in size, and representative of the entirely population of the people in the whole areas.
The last but not the least, even the salicylates, which are effective for treating the headaches, the author gives no evidence to make sure the declining in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia. Maybe, people who live in Mentia do not eat such foods which contain the salicylates. Even the citizens who eat the food with salicylates, the arguer still cannot convince me that the number of headaches will be going to reduce. There are many possibilities that the citizens in that area may be infected with some kind of diseases which caused the number of headaches even high.
To sum up, the conclusion, which is made by the author, who has disregarded or chosen to ignore several aspects of his conclusion, is on the scant of credibility. To better bolster the reliability of arguer's conclusion, the author must give more information about the study. I would also need to know more information about the people in Mentia.
=======================
Revised By nanfeng25899 Waiting…
=======================
作者: SandraShan 时间: 2010-5-3 21:55:09
我占~
作者: nanfeng25899 时间: 2010-5-3 21:58:38
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1.
由1,2句--à第3句
2.
由3,4句---à第5句结论
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 S和A同化学家族，但是么有证据或研究表明它可以治疗头痛
2 研究报告的可信性令人质疑，因为首先没有提供患者的个人资料（随机性和实验前提），此外由于是一份20年的调查报告，所以没有考虑到社会和人们的变化
3．S使用的新途径不一定会减少将来的头痛，因为还有很多其他的原因会造成头痛
===========
习作正文
===========
The conclusion that the new use of saliculats will be likely to cut down the number of the headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia seems to be logical and trustful, but is not well -reasoned. However, before we infer this "obvious" prospect based on the correlation between the decline of the headaches and the rise in commercial application of the saliculates, we need to focus on some questionable issues.
First of all, the decrease of headaches in the future is on the basis of the assumption that saliculates is definitely a kind of medicine to help us to get rid of the headaches.
In the argument nothing else is mentioned except that salicylates are a member of the same chemical family as aspirins which are functional to cure the headaches. What if the salicylates are just the criminals to result in the suffering of headaches or no link with them? The same chemical family is not a sign of the same function, just as with the case, which is a common phenomenon everywhere, that the children in a family are different from each other in many aspects. Overall, there is no explicit evidence is provided to us to substantiate the salicylates' effects of treating the headaches.
Also, the credulity of the twenty years study is really ought to be suspected because of lack of the essential information of the patients and the long period of the research. To begin with, the patients are likely to not be selected at random so that the outcome is imprecise. For example, if salicylates are conducive to help those at the age bracket of thirty decrease the headaches, it's impossible to arrive at the issue that the same situation goes for the children or the olds. And in order to get the accurate consequences, whether they actually have headaches should be diagnosed in the convincing ways. In addition, with the rapid development of the medical technology and the constant change of people's life habits, it is unrealistic to take this twenty-year-old study as a reference to figure out the relation between the salicylates and headaches.
Finally, a continued decline in the number of headaches depends on many factors which are just overlooked by the speaker. Using the salicylates as flavor additives does not mean its effects, if it really does a favor of reducing the headaches, will not be changed due to the overdose of it. For some kinds of medications, overuse of them will transfer them from the panacea to extremely lethal substances, especially the Chinese medicines. What' more, the increasing pressure, the prolonged working times and other alternatives, which will result in the headaches, may also be the obstacles to decline of them. Without ruling out all those possibilities, the future is perhaps not bright as we have expected unless we can offer more substantial proof to fortify our hope.
This argument, at first glance, appears to be meaningful and give us the hope of the coming reduce of headaches, but the reasoning behind it needs
more direct facts such the specific function of salicylates, the randomness and basic information of the sample, and the record of the relevant change of people’s life and our medical care.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: shevava 时间: 2010-5-3 23:52:22
本帖最后由 shevava 于 2010-5-16 20:54 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
论据
1 Salicylates used to treat headaches
2 food-processing companies have also been adding salicylates to foods as preservatives
3 a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants in our twenty-year study
4 salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods
结论：
a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
In this argument, the author concludes that since the food-processing companies used salicylates as flavor additives, the numbers of headaches suffered by citizens of Mentia will decline. To support his conclusion, the author points out those salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin. In addition, he cited the use of salicylates as food preservatives as an example to substantiate the commercial use of salicylates contributes to the decline in average number of headaches. At the first glance, the argument seems to be somewhat convincing, but further consideration reveals that this argument suffers from 3 logic flaws which fail to make it persuasive.
To begin with, the author unfairly assumes that because salicylates are of the same chemical family as aspirin, the function of salicylates will perform the same as aspirin. However, the conclusion is open to doubt. Common sense tells me even of the same chemical the function may be different. The author needs to provide further evidence to support this conclusion.
Secondly, even granted salicylates function as aspirin, the author fails to establish a causal relationship between adding salicylates to foods as preservatives and the decline in average number of headaches. The result is unreliable because it fails to provide a counter group to substantiate it is salicylates that contribute to the decline of headache. There may be other possibilities that lead to the decline, such as other integrates in the food, the living habits of respondents. Since the author fails to rule out these factors, salicylates are responsible for the decline is unreliable.
In the third place, even granted the as preservatives the salicylates can result in decline headaches, the author unfairly assumes as additives salicylates will also have the same function. As all we know, preservatives and additives may not be comparable in many aspects, for example the producing procedure as well as function and so on. Maybe in the production of additives the salicylates changes into other chemical that have no influence to the headaches.
Before give my conclusion, I have to point out the study is lack of accurate data to strengthen its reliability. Also the function as pervert headaches is not equal to cure it. Last but not the least; he has to point out whether salicylates have some negative effects when used to cure headaches.
In sum, the author fails to convince me that the use of salicylate as flavor additives will lead to the decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia. To bolster it, the author needs to provide more information about how salicylates function to preserve and cure headaches. He also has to give more accurate data about how the study conducted, whether the respondents represent the local situation.
作者: Cypher 时间: 2010-5-4 12:12:33
占先
作者: hebill 时间: 2010-5-4 19:45:28
唔 要中期汇报了 加油 先占座
作者: zmssghh 时间: 2010-5-4 23:33:47
zhan
作者: 小肯0113 时间: 2010-5-5 09:04:47
占~~！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！！
作者: 深川翼 时间: 2010-5-5 13:42:40
占
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-5-5 23:32:02
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-8 16:36 编辑
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
【1010G精英组】E小组第8次作业
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
Issue48
"The study of history places too much emphasis on individuals. The most significant events and
trends in history were made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose
identities have long been forgotten."
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
写作样式模板
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
=======================
Revised By
=======================
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
拍文顺序
1-->5
3-->4
4-->8
5-->11
6-->10
7-->1
8-->6
10-->7
11-->3
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-5-5 23:33:54
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-8 16:53 编辑
===========
论点提纲
===========
1、 历史上确实铭记的是集体的力量
2、科技领域人们铭记的是个人
3、艺术领域人们也铭记的个人
===========
习作正文
===========
Is it true that the most significant events and trends in history are made possible not by the famous few, but by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten? Although, I agree that, sometimes, we may only remember the most important event, not people, the speaker's accession ignores that people remember the famous few in most situation.
Admittedly, groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten, but only because the events which involve large quantities of people. Thus, descendants often remember the event, but not their names. There is an example which illustrates the point well. The Great Wall, which is in china, was built by millions of people in ancient china. People, all of the world, nowadays, are surprised with the great project. However, people only to remember the Great Wall, not any Chinese person who built it. For thousands of years, historians have focused their main attentions on the events which contribution to the history development and human civilization. Any single individual has only limited power, while the groups of people have the unlimited one which can create the history and can be remembered as famous events of what they had done for generations.
Whereas, if the events or trends which is made by famous few, people always remember him/her no mater many years later. Profound scientific inventions and discoveries of the past are nearly all attributable not to forgettable groups of people but to certain key individuals. Take the discovery of the Neptune for example. From the fact that the Uranus was a bit pulled out of its normal orbit, some mathematicians logically reasoned the existence of a new unseen plant, and even calculated the position. Just a year later, the Neptune was discovered just around the predict position, and people remember both the scientist and the event. We cannot imagine that our society could develop so quickly without the contribution of outstanding scientists such as Newton, Einstein and we can only imagine that humanity is still groping in the darkness of ignorance.
In addition, it is the same in the art area. We will find that it is filled with names of eminent or famous persons from giant musicians and art masters. As we known, Beethoven, who is one of the most famous musicians, had composed numbers of marvelous music in his life. He focused on his work even when he lost hearing and finally gained his glory. Beethoven is remembered by people forever. Another example is Monet. As we know, Monet, who is one of the most famous artist. His famous work, "Impression: Sunrise", was not understood by people at first time, since a large amount of blue was used as the sunlight. But, the work eventually earns its reputation, and led the name of impressionism. People remember Monet, as well as his work, and the impressionism also accepted by people even in today.
=======================
Revised By nanfeng25899 Waiting…
=======================
作者: SandraShan 时间: 2010-5-5 23:43:55
先占上~
作者: nanfeng25899 时间: 2010-5-6 05:59:16
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 无名的大众确实在历史上重大事件的促成上起到了巨大的作用
2 但是，那些少数的名人却起到了不可或缺的作用
3 历史研究只能更多地关注个人，因为他们在历史重大事件上起了不可或缺的作用，而且有记录可循
===========
习作正文
===========
Do the distinguished few make the most significant events and trends come true? Look at those who are well-known for all, Abraham Lincoln, George Washington, and Benjamin Franklin. It’s those famous but minor people that play the indispensible roles in the history of United States. Admittedly, nothing will be achieved without the power of the groups whose names have no access to know, but in most cased the famous few are the most active catalysts in the promoting of the history.
Indeed, in the majority of the great events, the role of those anonymous individuals can not be ignored, because just like a sophisticated machines which consists of endless cogs assembled in a complex and interdependent way, the lack of any gadgets will definitely result in the failure of the production. The same situation goes for one of the most miraculous building, the Egyptian Pyramid serving as the tomb for the country’s pharaohs and their consorts. The pyramids, which are famous for its complicated internal structure and the secrets behind the symbolism, are the outcome of the slaves’ endless work and the large scale of casualty, however, their efforts have sank into oblivion. So when we want to attribute the great accomplishment to someone, rather than the imperious pharaoh, our gratitude and compliments should be poured to those anonymous salves.
However, no matter what we mean to produce, the operators of machines are most vital parts. Like the pyramids, even if the pharaohs do not carry the gigantic stone on the basis of the fabulous buildings or even design their own “palaces”, those miracles will not be showed in the eyesight of human beings without the purpose of being their places to preserve their bodies. And another example is the abolition of slavery in the Unite States. Before Lincoln came up with the Emancipation Proclamation, the appeal of abolitionism had lasted in decades. Why was the slavery arrogated until Lincoln showed up? Weren’t there enough people who could not withstand the suffering of the unfair and bestial torments any more? Or isn’t there anyone who were longing for throwing away this inhumane regulations and indeed spared no effort to contribute to the abolition? Definitely no. Yet if we want to shape the world in our own ways, someone of intelligent and charisma is necessary to realize our goals. Without his determination to lead slaves to get rid of the slave holders and intransigence with those who oppose the ideas in order to protect their own rights, the abolition will be unrealistic.
For historians, it is the detailed records of those famous few that help them promote the understanding of their history rather than those who have been forgotten. When we are talking with Americans about the abolition of slavery, it’s no more natural than associating with this milestone with the great leader, Abraham Lincoln. Also, when appreciating the splendid pyramid, most of us will think about the prosperity of that decade and the august pharaoh instead of the slaves. To be honest, it’s not the fault of historians to place too much emphasis on the individuals, because there are no available documents about those anonymous individuals to let the currents know their thoughts, compared with the books of the well-known few written in the elaborate way to applaud what they have contributed to the nation or the world. Therefore, delving into the few individual is the most effective way and accessible way for those scholars to study our history.
While we, of course, can not neglect the endeavor of forgettable individuals, without bellwether------the famous few, people are not likely to be organized in order, if so, nothing significant will be possible.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: Cypher 时间: 2010-5-6 12:46:06
占
作者: shevava 时间: 2010-5-6 12:55:12
本帖最后由 shevava 于 2010-5-7 16:14 编辑
===========
习作正文
===========
Nowadays most historians like to study the famous history figures who have vital impact on promoting or restricting the advance of human civilization. We also note that some celebrity's biography keep best-selling for many years in book stores, and TV programs concerning about the elites are very popular with audience. Some people criticize that this phenomenon is irrational as the history trends is impelled by the unknown groups of people in fact. However, from my point of view, I fundamentally disagree with this attitude.
People like and even need to learn about the famous individuals for the reason that by observing those famous ones' behaviors we have got access to the life of history society. As we know, the length of human history is so long and the composition of human society is so complex that we have no time or energy to detect all details of history. Fortunately, there are a lot of historical records serving to help us know the characteristics of ancient days. In the past, it is definite that the written documents were most likely to record the activities of those in power such as Kings and generals alike. Since the majority of people determined the destiny of the nation to great extent, studying them is a shortcut of learning history. Besides, if we want to acquaint with some ancient culture, the best way is to refer to some famous people's masterpieces. For instance, when it comes to Hellenism, we will instantly bring some household names into mind--such as Socrates, Plato, Aristotle, etc.
Admittedly, the ordinary individuals' contribution to the development of humankind cannot be neglected. After all, history is composed of numerous of unknown people, and many of them even give great value to society. A telling example comes from China's Resistance War against Japanese Aggression, in which enormous Chinese soldiers died in the battles without leaving their names in the world. But Chinese people will inscribe these heroes in the heart because they made inerasable contributions to the establishment of China.
However, even if the ordinary groups of people have influenced the society to some extent, the vitality of history events and trends is in hand of a few famous people who roll the history wheels. When thinking of some invention, creativity, or milestone making the world different, it is natural to think about a relevant history celebrity, no matter in industry, business, or policy. Without Watt, there would come no Industry Revolutionary, at least would not come so fast, and a series of social transforms would not follow. In the realm of business, no one can neglect Henry Fort, the man who put the world on wheels by Assembly Line. As to the fast development of China in the past decade, we cannot help but memorize Deng Xiaoping who created "Reform and Opening up" policy.
In conclusion, by any measure the famous figures' impact on our world is far more profound than do those ordinary people. To better study history, we must give enough attention to the celebrities from whom we can benefit a lot.
作者: 深川翼 时间: 2010-5-6 23:03:04
本帖最后由 深川翼 于 2010-5-7 12:50 编辑
===========
论点提纲
===========
1、开头结尾强调两方面因素缺一不可
2、论述个人对历史所做的重要贡献
3、论述普通人民群众对历史所做的重要贡献
===========
习作正文
===========
Through all the history records, we can easily find society elites like kings, bishops, generals, magnates or even mercenarys. The histrionics place so much emphasis on these individuals that they almost forget the real composition of the society, the fundamental citizens. Recently, a heated discussion was held up by two groups of people. Some scholars indicate that the most significant events and trends in history were made by famous few, while many individuals hold the opposite view.
These scholars hold this view for the following reasons. Firstly, the social elites are the most impressive ones in the society. Their opinions or even theis bad temper can affect the society greatly. If they want to make some changes, perhaps it will succeed sooner or later. But if some farmers or workers who live at the bottom of the society want to make significant events, the possibility of success will be reletively low. Secondly, the social elites have much wilder relationships than the ordinary people. The can effectively use their social resource to help them fulfill their dreams. Thus it is highly possible that they may achieve their goals at last and make some siginificant events. While the common ones have less friends or we may say less "useful friends" and it is hard for them to win finally. Human resource is as important in history as it is in today's world. Thirdly, the ability each social elite owns is of course stronger than the common ones, which might be the reason for which they get out from hundreds of millions of people and become a elite. The ability each one owns have much to do with the possibility that one will succeed, and almost no people will believe in a person whose ability is reletively low. This common one may not get support and fundings from other ones. From the three reasons above, the scholars believe that the most significant events and trends are offen made by the famous few.
On the contrary, many individuals hold the different view. They assert that the meanful events are made possible by groups of people whose identities have long been forgotten. They provide the following reasons. First of all, maybe the social elites make some decisions and they are supported by the famous ones around them, but can they succeed at last only by this small group of people? When in Qin dynasty, the famous politician Shangyang came up with many changes in law to promote the economics and politics, and these suggestions are both supported by the king and the fellowships. But without the support of the citizens, could he succeed and make the Qin a strong country? Or if these changes are harmful to the ordinary people, will it last long? Maybe the Qin dynasty will soon die, let alone to say that it will last long or even become a strong country. What's more, if a big change is taking place, it is highly possible that it has been wildly acknowledged by the common citizens. The change has fully emerge in people's hearts and almost all the people hold the opinion that it will benefit each individuals and the whole country. If no one make the change, the change will happen sooner or later for everyone has realized the advantage of the change. If this were true, can we merely say that it is some famous few that solely make the most siginificant change without people's help?
In the end, I must point out that both the famous few and the ordinary group of people is indispensable to the social change. If no one support the change, the social elites themselves cannot make it. While if no one act as a bellweather in the progress, the change may delay at last, the significant events may become vacuum at last. So I srtongly indicate that both these two factors are indispensible.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: hebill 时间: 2010-5-7 10:16:17
占座。。。。
作者: 小肯0113 时间: 2010-5-7 12:44:58
占~
作者: zmssghh 时间: 2010-5-7 12:59:08
ZHAN
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-5-7 14:28:45
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-9 22:11 编辑
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
【1010G精英组】E小组第9次作业
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
Argument161
In a study of reading habits of Leeville citizens conducted by the University of Leeville, most
respondents said they preferred literary classics as reading material. However, a follow-up study
conducted by the same researchers found that the type of book most frequently checked out of each
of the public libraries in Leeville was the mystery novel. Therefore, it can be concluded that the
respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits.
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
写作样式模板
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
===========
Logical Chain
===========
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
=======================
Revised By
=======================
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
拍文顺序
1-->7
3-->10
4-->3
7-->4
10-->11
11-->1
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-5-7 14:29:08
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-14 12:09 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1 most respondents said they preferred literary classics as reading material
2 the type of book most frequently checked out of each of the public libraries in Leeville was the mystery novel
1 2 --> the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits
===========
论点提纲
===========
1、样本的数量是否能代表居民地区的阅读习惯
2、图书馆借阅的图书不能代表阅读习惯
3、两个调查可能间隔的时间较长从而导致阅读习惯的改变
===========
习作正文
===========
In this argument, the author cites to two studies of reading habits of Leeville citizens, which are conducted by the University of Leeville. Based on the information in the two studies, the arguer concludes that the respondents in the first study did not provide true information about their reading habits. This argument suffers some critical flaws that after close scrutiny of evidence that seriously undermine the conclusion and accordingly is not thoroughly well-reasoned. The main flaws of the argument will be discussed respectively.
To begin with, the reliability of results from the first study is open to doubt. The author false to consider that the quantities of respondents can represent the reading habits of Leeville citizens. Without the information about the size of sample, we cannot justify the results are worthy to be trusted. Even if the number of respondents is large enough for the study, the author still cannot hastily assume that the results are reliable. The interviewers must consist of people with different ages of citizens, for example, children, adults and the old, as well as different jobs for example, teachers, students, doctors and lawyers. It is highly possible that the respondents are all from the same narrow area, such as universities, which obviously cannot represent the reading habits of local citizens.
Another problem that seriously weakens for the logic of this argument is that the arguer cannot point out that the local citizens have changed their reading habits as they borrow more mystery novels from the public libraries in Leeville. Common sense tells us that mystery novels people pay much attention to may be because that novel book is published recently, and publisher may exaggerate the quality of the book in order to attract people with the aim at good selling on their books. It is also possible that the most checked out mystery novels are the ones which the professors in universities advise their students read as references. Students borrow the mystery novels having a purpose to better understanding the courses and to get high scores. Therefore, the most checked out books do not mean the reading habits of local citizens.
The last but not the least, even if the responds respondents are sufficient enough and representative of the whole local citizens, and even if the most borrowed mystery novels does indeed indicate that the changing reading habits of local citizens, the conclusion remains doubtful since the arguer fails to take the factor—time interval between the two studies—into consideration. Everything will be changed because of the fast development of modern society. The first study conducted maybe twenty years ago in which time people might prefer reading material of literary classics as there were so little books. But now, uncountable books with different types are available to meet the need of local citizens. They may just find that the mystery novels make them exciting for the boring and busy life. Of course, the reading habits will change with the passing of time. Therefore, the author is unfair to conclude that the results are unreliable the first study.
To sum up, this argument, while seems well-supported at first, has several flaws as discussed above. Hence it is unacceptable and not persuasive as it stands. Yet, it could be substantiated by provide more detailed information about the two studies, such as the size of survey, and the constituent of respondents. In addition, to further bolster the conclusion, the arguer should furnish a demonstration that local citizens have changed their reading habits form the follow-up study. Accordingly, only with more logical reasoning could this argument turn out to be more than emotional appeal.
=======================
Revised By 小肯0113
=======================
In this argument, the author cites to two studies of reading habits(habit泛指) of Leeville citizens, which (both)are conducted by the University of Leeville. Based on the information in the two studies, the arguer concludes that the respondents in the first study did not provide true information about their reading habits. However, this argument suffers some critical flaws that after close scrutiny of evidence that seriously undermine the conclusion and accordingly is not thoroughly well-reasoned(?这句不太对). The main flaws of the argument will be discussed respectively.
To begin with, the reliability of (the) results from the first study is open to doubt. The author false(d) to consider that the quantities（if the quantity） of respondents can represent the reading habits of(去掉reading habits变成can represent all the Leeville citizen ) Leeville citizens. Without the information about the size of sample, we cannot justify the results are worthy to be trusted. Even if the number of respondents is large enough for the study, the author still cannot hastily assume that the results are reliable(?是not reliable 吧). The interviewers must consist of people with different ages of citizens, for example, children, adults and the old, as well as different jobs, for example, teachers, students, doctors and lawyers. It is highly possible that the respondents are all from the same narrow area, such as universities, which obviously cannot represent the reading habits of local citizens.(我个人觉得做推断不是非常合适，可以不要highly)
Another problem that seriously weakens for（weaken用做动词不要for） the logic of this argument is that the arguer cannot point out that the local citizens have changed their reading habits as they borrow more mystery novels from the public libraries in Leeville(?没明白这句话的逻辑意思及它与下文的关系). Common sense tells us that mystery novels people pay much attention to（people pay more attention to mystery novels） may be because that novel book is published recently, and publisher may exaggerate the quality of the book in order to attract people with the aim at good selling on their books. It is also possible that the most checked out mystery novels are the ones which the professors in universities advise their students read as references(这个点很好). Students borrow the mystery novels having a purpose to better understanding the courses and to get high scores. Therefore, the most （frequently）checked out books do not mean（equal比mean更恰当） the reading habits of local citizens.
The last but not the least, even if the responds(不要它，因为有了respondents） respondents are sufficient enough and（can， 少动词，and前后要对称） representative of the whole local citizens, and even if the most borrowed mystery novels does indeed indicate that the changing reading habits of local citizens, the conclusion remains doubtful since the arguer fails to take the factor—time interval between the two studies—into consideration. Everything will（would） be changed because of the fast development of modern society. The first study conducted maybe twenty years ago in which time people might prefer reading material of literary classics as there were so little books. But now, uncountable books with different types are available to meet the need of local citizens. They may just find that the mystery novels make them exciting for the(and escape from the, for 在这里不恰当，exciting for sth.—对什么感到兴奋) boring and busy life. Of course, the reading habits will change with（during） the passing of time. Therefore, the author（It 不要the author） is unfair to conclude that the results are unreliable the first study.
To sum up, this argument, while（不要） seems well-supported at first(though), has several flaws as discussed above. Hence it is unacceptable and not persuasive as it stands. Yet, it could be substantiated by provide more detailed information about the two studies, such as the size of survey, and the constituent of respondents. In addition, to further bolster the conclusion, the arguer should furnish a demonstration that local citizens have changed their reading habits form the follow-up study. Accordingly, only with more logical reasoning could this argument turn out to be more than emotional appeal. （总结得很好~~）
文章写得很扎实，每一段的阐述也很不错
同时有一些很经典的“错误”， 比如结构对称的问题，
和几个介词的搭配，我发现for用得很多，但是可能要加深对for这个介词的理解，特别是用做连词接原因的时候
另外可以多用几个句型， it is……等等之类的可以多写写，练练
作者: shevava 时间: 2010-5-7 16:19:45
本帖最后由 shevava 于 2010-5-16 20:49 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
Arguments:
In a study of reading habits, most respondents said they preferred literary classics as reading material;
However,
Another research found that the type of book most frequently checked out of each of the public libraries in Leeville was the mystery novel.
The respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits.
===========
论点提纲
===========
1\调查本身可能存在的局限性：样本太少；所取人群可能不经常去图书馆；
2\即使调查本身正确性毋庸置疑，但是也可能有其他原因造成这种结果。比如说图书馆文学方面的书较少；大家可能都去买文学方面的书，而不是去图书馆借；
3\即使上面的都对，也可能是有阅读习惯的改变导致这种调查结果的变化：比如说在第一个实验中，可能当时文学盛行；而在第二个实验时，出现了像哈利波特等这种畅销书，带动了人们对科幻小说兴趣；就像现在3D电影的盛行必然会使更多的人们关注这项题材。
===========
习作正文
===========
In the argument, the writer simply listed the different conclusions of two studies conducted by the same group of researchers, and without any comparison between the two researches, a conclusion that the respondents of the first study misrepresented their reading habits. Clearly, there are many other factors can result in the differences of the conclusions.
Firstly, without any explicit information about the researches, the two themselves may have limitations to the accuracy of their outcomings. As we all know, in order to elaborate the conclusions drawn from the comparison between two groups, many factors, such as the size of the group, the constitution of the group people, affect the final results. In the argument, the two researches are possible to have a small number of Leeville citizens, so that without enough people included in the researches, the random may turn out. On the other hand, whether the two groups of the people concluded people from all professions, from different ranges of ages, also determines the accuracy of conclusions, because while some writers are interested in the literary classics, the children prefer to read cartoon books.
Secondly, even if the accuracy of the studies is believable, the reasons why they have different results vary. For example, it is possible that with greater interest in the literary classics, the citizens would like to buy books from stores or online, instead of borrowing them from libraries, so that they can keep the books. Moreover, maybe the lack of literary classics in the libraries makes it inconvenient for the citizens to borrow.
Last but not least, even if all of the reasons listed above are false, the change of the reading habits of the citizens is really probable to happen, without knowing how long it is between the two researches, just as a saying, ”impossible is nothing”, especially in such a long time and changing world. The social environment affects the trends of fad. For example, companioned by the fad of 3D movies, such as Avatar, Alice, the focuses on the techniques, the subjects of 3D movies, will certainly increase. Therefore, maybe the first study was taken at a time when the literary classics were popular, while the followed-up study was taken when the mystery novel such as Harry Potter series, was in fashion. It is unavoidable that the type of book most frequently checked out of each of the public libraries in Leeville was the mystery novel.
All in all, the argument needs to provide more information about the two researches and the backgrounds when the researches were taken. If in that case, the argument will be more believable.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: nanfeng25899 时间: 2010-5-7 23:54:29
本帖最后由 nanfeng25899 于 2010-5-10 22:20 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1 前提一：由L大学的调查得出多数被访者倾向于古典文学
2 前提二：在由相同的调查人员做出的另一份报告中发现L公共图书馆经常被借阅的书是神秘小说
3 结论：第一次的被访者错误的表达了他们的阅读习惯
===========
论点提纲
===========
1没有直接的证据说明第一个实验中回答问题的人就是那些去图书馆的人,公共图书馆并不是能阅读到古典小说的唯一途径，读者也可以去买书或者私人图书馆。
2 对于古典小说和神秘小说的定义很模糊，神话小说可能也是文学作品。
3没有提供两次调查的具体时间，调查的结果可能与不同时间的流行趋势有关。
===========
习作正文
===========
The reasoning behind this argument seems to be logical and tenable, however, the conclusion that the respondents fail to represent their opinion on the reading habits bases on a few assumptions which are not substantiated by the obvious and explicit evidences.
There I will point out those fallacies one by one.
This argument arrives at the conclusion under the circumstances that the respondents in the first study are those who will go to the public libraries in their spare time. Yet the public libraries are not the only source of the literary classics. With the shopping online more mature, getting their favorite books on the websites such as Amazon have become a more convenient and cheaper choice than the traditional one, that is, turning to the libraries . So it’s not necessary to waste one hour or more on the way to the libraries enduring the crowd on the bus or subway, and what you need is just to click a button and wait for the books patiently. In addition, even if some still opt for the conventional way and enjoy the quiet atmosphere in the libraries, the public ones are not always the ideal options, because the private museums which are open to the citizens for free with their spacious reading rooms and rich stock of the various books are on the rapid increase. Instead of walking to the libraries miles away, more people will take the second win-win choice. Therefore, without considering the other possibilities, the creditability of the deduction by the comparison of the researches will be largely undermined.
Also, the potential presumption behind this argument is that the literary classics are not the mystery novels. But what is the definition of the “literary classics”? Are they the ones which are just written in the past and makes great achievements? In this definition, many books are the combination of the elements of the mystery and literature, such as Homeric epic which has a high status in the history. What’s more, everyone has their own criterion to judge the type of the books, which will result in the imprecise answers in the first study. As a result, the arguer’s conclusion is plausible without a reasonable definition of those two types of the books.
Finally, the distinguish outcomes of the studies may also result from the fashion in the different period. Maybe when the first study is on the going, the government is publicizing the significance of the literary classics to the cultivation of individuals, thus raising residents’ interest on the literature. However, after a few weeks, there is a hot series featuring with the plot of the mystery which brings about the soaring enthusiasm about this kind of book thereby leading to the mounting numbers of big fan of mystery novel. With the lack of the clear time span between the studies and the essential description of the vogue in current society, the trend will have great influence on the consequences of the two studies.
In the nutshell, although the argument, at first glance, appears to be trustful and reliable, it does include several flaws which must be correct. By reckoning for the consistency of the two separate study, the diverse accesses to the literary books and ephemeral fad can the arguer reach a more valid conclusion.
=======================
Revised By FINN
=======================
语法问题 批注 精彩句子
The reasoning behind this argument seems to be logical and tenable, however, the conclusion that the respondents fail to represent their opinion on the reading habits bases on a few assumptions which are not substantiated by the obvious and explicit evidences.
There I will point out those fallacies one by one (这个短语是不是有点口语化？…respectively).
This argument arrives at the conclusion under the circumstances that the respondents in the first study are those who will go to the public libraries in their spare time(题目中有这个暗示了吗？题目说是调查当地居民的阅读习惯，只是由大学具体来进行调查，这里有说暗示着被访者常去图说馆一说？). Yet (,) the public libraries are not the only source of the literary classics. With the shopping online more mature (核对下是不是可以这么说，popular), getting their favorite books on the websites such as Amazon have become a more convenient and cheaper choice than the traditional one, that is, turning to the libraries . So it’s (正式文体中应该避免缩写) not necessary to waste one hour or more on the way to the libraries enduring the crowd on the bus or subway, (“.” 前一个意群感觉已经结束了) and what you need is just to click a button and wait for the books patiently. In addition, even if some still opt for the conventional way and enjoy the quiet atmosphere in the libraries, the public ones are not always the ideal options, because the private museums which are open to the citizens for free with their spacious reading rooms and rich stock of the various books are on the rapid increase (and跟什么做并列呢？如果是which… and … 并列后面which做什么差分呢？如果是spacious reading rooms and ….那并列之后应该是名词性的结构但你并列的部分怎么有are呢？本句写的过于冗长 容易出错 可以使用非谓语而避免使用复杂的从句嵌套). Instead of walking to the libraries miles away, more people will take the second
(可以进一步说明下 你前写的太长了后面可能会让人忘了指代的是什么) win-win choice. Therefore, without considering the other possibilities, the creditability of the deduction by the comparison of the researches will be largely undermined.
(我感觉段的论点选的不好，我现在还是不明白到底是你从题目中揣测出作者有这种暗示还是仅仅是你做这种假设？)
Also, the potential presumption behind this argument is that the literary classics are not the mystery novels. But what is the definition of the “literary classics”? Are they the ones which are just written in the past and makes great achievements? In this definition, many books are the combination of the elements of the mystery and literature, such as Homeric epic which has a high status in the history. What’s more, everyone has their own criterion to judge the type of the books, which will result in the imprecise answers in the first study. As a result, the arguer’s conclusion is plausible without a reasonable definition of those two types of the books.
(这段写的论点也很牵强，其实题目还有很多比较明显的错误可以攻击，走这种非主流会拿高分？另外，这段写的像Issue个人觉得。。。)
Finally, the distinguish outcomes of the studies may also result from the fashion in the different period. Maybe when the first study is on the going, the government is publicizing the significance of the literary classics to the cultivation of individuals, thus raising residents’ interest on the literature. However, after a few weeks, there is a hot series featuring with the plot of the mystery which brings about the soaring enthusiasm about this kind of book thereby leading to the mounting numbers of big fan(s?) of mystery novel. With the lack of the clear time span between the studies and the essential description of the vogue in current society, the trend will have great influence (differences) on the consequences of the two studies. (这段攻击的点选的是比较普遍的 但感觉列举他因时有一点偏激呵呵)
In the nutshell, although the argument, at first glance, appears to be trustful and reliable, it does include several flaws which must be correct. By reckoning for the consistency of the two separate study, the diverse accesses to the literary books and ephemeral fad can the arguer reach a more valid conclusion.
小结：1、语法错误较少
2、逻辑攻击点选择的不好
3、句式需要加强，进一步掌握长难句的写法
作者: Cypher 时间: 2010-5-8 22:56:48
本帖最后由 Cypher 于 2010-5-13 16:16 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
慢慢梳理中...后期补上
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
In this short passage, the author concludes that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits. To support his conclusion, he cited a study in which most respondents said they preferred literary classics and a follow-up one conducted by the same group of people revealed that the type of book most frequently checked out of the public libraries was the mystery novel. However, close scrutiny and consideration would reveal the hidden flaws in the line of reasoning.
To begin with, the two studies were questionable in both sample and procedure. The author fails to provide relevant information about the contents of the study. Perhaps only a small group of people were involved in the study and only those who preferred literary classics actively responded. Or perhaps the questions asked in the study were implicit or misleading thus the respondents gave false answers. Moreover, differences in education background and degree of civilization of the two groups of people involved in the study might also be attributable to the different results of the two studies. Without providing a more convincing study in both sample and procedure, the author could not rely on current ones to draw any conclusion.
Another fatal flaw that weakens the conclusion is the time interval between these two studies. The longer the time span between these two studies, the more likely there would be significant changes in demographic constituent or people's reading inclination and habits, the less valid the effectiveness of two studies are.
Furthermore, the author rests on the false assumption that the type of book most frequently checked out of public libraries reflects what people preferred. It is entirely possible that all these public libraries are abundant in mystery novels but scarce in supply of literary classics, thus resulting in the former's most frequently checking out. Common sense tells us that mystery novels are more pervasive in markets and have a bigger group of authors than literary classics, so it is reasonable to see more mystery novels than literary classics in libraries. Without taking this possibility into account, the author could not convince us that mystery novels are more prevailing among readers.
Finally, the author merely focuses on the area of public libraries. Perhaps most people in this area tend to read in university libraries rather than in public ones. Or perhaps, instead of borrowing books, they choose to buy some from private bookstores or online sellers on the Internet. Without eliminating all these alternative possibilities, the author couldn't justify his conclusion by just examining the condition in public libraries.
In sum, the conclusion reached by the author is untenable as discussed above. To bolster his assertion, he should conduct a more scientific and rigorous study to scrutinize the propensity and habits of readers in this area. To better assess his recommendation I would need more evidence concerning the time interval between these two studies and the amount of mystery novels as well as literary classics available in public libraries.
=======================
Revised By nanfeng25899
=======================
批改标注:
1。红色，表示“错误”
2。洋红，表示“用法欠妥当”
3。蓝色，是我的批注
4。绿色，表示“很精彩的文字”
In this short passage, the author concludes that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits. To support his conclusion, he cited a study in which most respondents said they preferred literary classics and a follow-up one conducted by the same group of people revealed that the type of book most frequently checked out of the public libraries was the mystery novel. However, close scrutiny and consideration would reveal the hidden flaws in the line of reasoning.
To begin with, the two studies were questionable in both sample and procedure. The author fails to provide relevant information about the contents of the study. Perhaps only a small group of people were involved in the study and only those who preferred literary classics actively responded. Or perhaps the questions asked in the study were implicit or misleading thus the respondents gave false answers. Moreover, differences in education background and degree of civilization of the two groups of people involved in the study might also be attributable to the different results of the two studies.
【1 这句话的谬误好像和第一段的the same group相悖。2 be attributable to这个词组用反了】Without providing a more convincing study in both sample and procedure, the author could not rely on current ones to draw any conclusion.
Another fatal flaw that weakens the conclusion is the time interval between these two studies. The longer the time span between these two studies, the more likely there would be significant changes in demographic constituent or people's reading inclination and habits, the less valid the effectiveness of two studies are.【没有深入的分析，有点摆句子的感觉。。。】
Furthermore, the author【是结论不是作者吧。。。】 rests on the false assumption that the type of book most frequently checked out of public libraries reflects what people preferred. It is entirely possible that all these public libraries are abundant in mystery novels but scarce in supply of literary classics, thus resulting in the former's most frequently checking out. Common sense tells us that mystery novels are more pervasive in markets and have a bigger group of authors than literary classics, so it is reasonable to see more mystery novels than literary classics in libraries. Without taking this possibility into account, the author could not convince us that mystery novels are more prevailing among readers.
Finally, the author merely focuses on the area of public libraries. Perhaps most people in this area tend to read in university libraries rather than in public ones. Or perhaps, instead of borrowing books, they choose to buy some from private bookstores or online sellers on the Internet. Without eliminating all these alternative possibilities【选其中一个词其实就成了】, the author couldn't justify his conclusion by just examining the condition【感觉上有点怪】 in public libraries.
In sum, the conclusion reached by the author is untenable as discussed above. To bolster his assertion, he should conduct a more scientific and rigorous study to scrutinize the propensity and habits of readers in this area. To better assess his recommendation I 【we】would need more evidence concerning the time interval between these two studies and the amount of mystery novels as well as literary classics available in public libraries.
综合评价：
1 谬误上，感觉是列举的感觉，最好深入分析一下，一般找2-3个谬误即可‘找的谬误点没有什么问题，但是第二段的攻击点和第一段的陈述相反。。。
2 语言上，有点套句型的感觉
3 语法上，有些主语的问题，其他的错误几乎没有
4 理解上，比较通顺
作者: SandraShan 时间: 2010-5-9 05:21:10
本帖最后由 SandraShan 于 2010-5-16 08:23 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
Study1: respondents saidthey preferred literary classics as reading material
Study2: the type of book most frequently checked out of each public library wasthe mystery novel
è
The first study had misrepresented their readinghabits
===========
论点提纲
===========
1.调查样本问题。没说两个调查人群的关系。Study1中的有些人可能更倾向于自己买书而不是去图书馆借书
2.没有界定mysterynovel和classic
3.两个study间隔时间是否过长，人们阅读习惯是否已经发生了改变
===========
习作正文
===========
This argument is underpinned by two separated surveysthat conducted by the university ofLeeville. The first one shows that literaryclassics are the reading materialpreferred by citizens. The other one showsthat the type of book mostfrequently checked out of each of the public librarieswas the mystery novel. According to them, the arguer deduces that therespondents in the first study had misrepresented their readinghabits. However,this argument can’t be convinced because it defies simplelogic and suffers fromseveral fallacies.
To begin with, the arguments does not account for the possibility that thesurvey samples themselves wereflawed. The author failed to give out therelationship between the respondentsof two separated surveys. It is likely thatthose people who answered the first survey didn’t in favor of borrowing books from library. Instead,buying their preferable books is a relatively more commonly used methods .Thus,the representativenessof the results is open to doubt.
Secondly, the author fails to distinguish definitions of these two types ofreading material. Due to the fact that differentpeople have differentdefinition about literary classics, lots of respondentsin the first study mayinclude mystery novel into literary classics. For thisreason, differentdefinitions about literary classics according to different people areresponsible for the difference in the results of these two studies.Accordingly,the result of the two studies is unconvincing.
Thirdly, the arguer does not inform us of the time interval between the twostudies is. It is possible that residents of Leevillechanged their readinghabits during that period. This possibility further weakens theconclusion that the first respondents misrepresented their readinghabits.
In conclusion, the argument, while it seems logicalat first, has several flawsas discussed above. in order to strengthen the deductionof his article, theauthor has to research more in order to eliminate the otherpossibilities that Ihave just mentioned.
=======================
Revised By FINN
=======================
语法问题 批注 精彩句子
This argument is underpinned by two separated surveys that conducted by the university of Leeville. The first one shows that literary classics are the reading material preferred by citizens. The other (second) one shows that the type of book most requently checked out of each of the public libraries was the mystery novel. According to them (?指代清楚), the arguer deduces that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading
habits. However, this argument can’t be convinced because it defies simple ogic and suffers from several fallacies.
To begin with, the arguments does not account for the possibility that the survey samples themselves were (前后时态不一致 描述事实一般现在时就可以了)
flawed. The author failed (fails) to give out the relationship between the respondents of two separated surveys. (作者给出了这两个调查的关系 follow-up就是关系啊) It is likely that those people who answered the first survey didn’t in favor of borrowing books from library. Instead, buying their preferable books is a relatively more commonly used methods(想表达的是？) .Thus, the representativeness of the results is open to doubt.(前面说的 relationship后面结束说的是representativeness不一致，注意逻辑表达的一致性) (没太看懂你列举他因时想表达的是什么)
Secondly, the author fails to distinguish definitions of these two types of reading material. Due to the fact that different people have different definition about (on) literary classics, lots of respondents in the first study may include mystery novel into literary classics. For this reason, different definitions about literary classics according to different people are responsible for (这个短语的意思是…有责任而不是对….的回应) the difference in the results of these two studies. (前后两句话有些冗余了different people respond to different answers for the two studies as non-uniform definitions on literary classic ) Accordingly, the result of the two studies is unconvincing. (这一句写得没有逻辑的连贯性)
Thirdly, the arguer does not inform us of the time interval between the two studies is(删). It is possible that residents of Leeville changed their reading habits during that period. (逻辑说明不深入) This possibility further weakens the conclusion that the first respondents misrepresented their reading habits.
In conclusion, the argument, while it seems logical at first, has several flaws as discussed above. in (In) order to strengthen the deduction of his article, the author has to research more in order to eliminate the other possibilities that I have just mentioned.
小结：1、注意避免小的语法错误
2、注意均衡每段的字数，作为习作整体字数较少，逻辑论证略显单薄
3、句式需要加强，进一步掌握长难句的写法
4、逻辑攻击应该进一步深入
Revised By Finn
2010-5-10
作者: 小肯0113 时间: 2010-5-9 14:47:31
本帖最后由 小肯0113 于 2010-5-15 00:44 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
受调查者说自己偏好经典/古典文学
图书馆出借的书却以 神秘小说居多
两个调查者主导者一样，
结论前者错误
===========
论点提纲
===========
没有说明两个调查的具体时间，因为阅读习惯容易受流行文化的影响
只能说明more people want to try mystery book versus buy them。
也许是misinformed
===========
习作正文
===========
According to the two unrelated conclusions of the studies about reading habit of Leeville citizen, conducted by University of Leeville, the author believes that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits when they said that they prefer classic literary materials but the most frequently checked out books at public library are mystery novel. It is assertive to say the conclusion of first study is wrong, but put it into certain circumstances first. Reasons are presented below.
First of all, the author didn’t state the specific time when those two studies were conducted. As we know, time is one of the most important elements in research, the author must state the specific time of the studies to make it more receivable. Certain time periods can have different pop cultures, which are influential to reading habits of citizen. For instance, The Da Vinci Code was really popular at 2004-2005, and raised the fashion of mystery novels. But people don’t always read books like The Da Vinci Code, as they move on from one pop culture to another. On the other hand, reading habits mean people choose certain materials to read in a stable, long-term fashion. Citizens in Leeville may prefer classic literature but are also influenced by certain pop culture of “fashion” at certain time period. Because of the lack of time evidence, the author can’t just say the citizen misrepresent their reading habits.
Secondly, people tend to try those books that they are not sure they will like it. It is possible that people like to try mystery book than own it. The second study just shows that people borrow more mystery books than literary classics which mean people don’t want to pay for the mystery book. Leeville citizens may prefer paying for literary classics other than borrowing it. For example, one of my friends who enjoy reading classic literature always buys books instead of borrowing them, because he can make notes on the book and he can read it whenever he wants. The author needs more details to support his/her conclusion. He/she must show the numbers in certain time period of different type of books are sold at the local book store and then compare it with the numbers concluded in the second study and come up with the solution.
However, it is possible that the respondents are misinformed or the study itself lacks a confirming measure. Maybe respondents have different understanding of “prefer” when it comes to buying or borrowing a book, or there is no question to confirm if the respondent respond the study seriously. Also, it is true that respondents may lie in a questionnaire or an interview to make themselves seem more cultured and educated, but that’s not the majority.
In conclusion, it is necessary for the author of the conclusion to show more details to support his idea. As every study is conducted in a certain circumstance, researchers must consider their study under it; in that way they can say the result of their study is reliable or right.
=======================
Revised By hebill
According to the two unrelatedconclusions of the studies about reading habit of Leeville citizen, conductedby University of Leeville, the author believes that the respondents in thefirst study had misrepresented their reading habits when they said that theyprefer classic literary materials but the most frequently checked out books atpublic library are mystery novels. It is assertive to say the conclusion offirst study is wrong, but put it into certain circumstances first. Reasons are presented below.
First of all, the author didn’t state the specific timewhen those two studies were conducted. As we know, time is one of the mostimportant elements in research, （缺少连接词这里）the author must state the specific time of the studies to make itmore receivable. Certain（改为different 是不是会更贴切） time periods can have（generate，产生） different pop cultures, which are influential to reading habitsof citizen. For instance,
The Da Vinci Code was
really popular at2004-2005, and raised the fashion of mystery novels. But people don’t alwaysread books like
The Da Vinci Code, as they move on fromone pop culture to another. On the other hand, reading habits mean peoplechoose certain materials to read in a stable, long-term fashion. Citizens inLeeville may prefer classic literature but are also influenced by certain popculture of “fashion” at certain time period. Because of the lack of timeevidence, the author can’t just say the citizen misrepresent their readinghabits.论述的时候最好再写上因为达芬奇密码的风靡，图书馆在那段时间借阅mystery book的数量就会猛增，而这很有可能正是第二个调查的时间段，由此推出第一个调查很有可能并不是misrepresent。
Secondly, people tend to try those books that they are notsure they will like it. It is possible that people like to try mystery book rather thanown it. The second study just shows that people borrow more mystery books thanliterary classics which means people don’t want to pay for themystery book. Leeville citizens may prefer paying for literary classics otherthan borrowing it. For example, one of my friends who enjoy reading classicliterature always buys books instead of borrowing them, because he can makenotes on the book and he can read it whenever he wants. The author needs moredetails to support his/her conclusion. He/she must show the numbers in certaintime period of different type of books are sold at the local book store and then ，compare it with the numbers concluded in the second study and comeup with the solution.
However, it is possible that the respondents aremisinformed or the study itself lacks a confirming measure. Maybe respondentshave different understanding of “prefer” when it comes to buying or borrowing abook, or there is no question to confirm if the respondent respond the studyseriously. Also, it is true that respondents may lie in a questionnaire or aninterview to make themselves seem more cultured and educated, but that 这个that指代的是什么，似乎不太明确，是说“大家想让自己看起来更有文化的”这个现象吗？’s not the majority.
In conclusion, it is necessary for the author of theconclusion to show more details to support his idea. As every study isconducted in a certain circumstance, researchers must consider their studyunder it; 还有他们对待preferred book 和一般书籍的不同态度，这个应该在总结里提到的。in that way they can say the result of their study is reliable orright.
=======================
红色是我觉得需要修改的地方
以上我自己的一点修改意见，也请小肯多多指教，互相切磋，共同杀G ^_^
=======================
作者: hebill 时间: 2010-5-9 15:44:08
本帖最后由 hebill 于 2010-5-9 23:32 编辑
Argument 161
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1 most respondents said they preferredliterary classics as reading material.
2 a follow-up study conducted by the same researchers found that thetype of book most frequently checked out of the public libraries in Leevillewas the mystery novel.
3 conclusion: the respondents in the firststudy had misrepresented their reading habits.
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 whether the number of the respondents islarge enough to represent the whole inhabitants in Leevile is a factor thatshould be reconsidered. （这条后来没有写，觉得不好说理，毕竟是科学的研究，样本数量应该不是问题）
2 when did the follow-up study conduct? wasit close enough to the former one ?if not, researchers can't affirm that thetwo surgeries are relative.
3 the researchers have failed to considerother causes accounting for the consequence. During the time frame of thefollow-up study, there were likely to be a time when some best-selling moviesadapted by mystery novels were released/showed.
4 One may borrow books from publiclibraries. Obviously it is not the only way for citizens to get reading material.They are more likely to collect his/her favorite books from bookstores.
5 Again, the demographics of the populationare important. It is possible that a quite large number of inhabitants visitingthe libraries more frequently are teenagers for whom the mystery novels aretheir special loved ones.（这条没有写，觉得和第二条有重叠）
===========
习作正文
===========
The argument in related to disagreement with studies of reading habits of Leeville citizens seems logical, but not very reasonable. It is stated that in the first study, most respondents showed their preference with literary classics as reading material while a follow-up study organized by the same researchers found that the mystery novels were most frequently checked out of the public libraries in Leeville., the author of this argument therefore affirms that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits. However, the author ignored the fact that social problems with complexity usually lied in factors of various aspects.
To begin with, the arguer is failing to consider other possible reasons accounting for the difference between two studies. When did the follow-up study conduct? Was it a quite long interval between the two researches? If so, researchers can hardly allege that the two surveys are related with each other. As time goes by, people in Leeville may alter their reading habits thoroughly. At the time when the first research was conducted, it is possible that more senior citizens in Leeville preferred literary classics as reading material. Then there was such a big time span between the two surveys that when it came to the second survey, the proportion of the population was transformed, that is to say more younger people inhabited in Leeville. So teenagers and younger people regarding the mystery novels as their favorites consisted the majority of the population. In addition, obviously, except the public libraries, citizens can get reading material in many other ways. Students can borrow books from libraries in their school. Adults may buy books from bookstores while some other preferred to read online. Researchers can hardly evaluate the reading habits of people in Leeville merely from the data of public libraries.
Moreover, some incidents may lead to the different preferences in two surveys. Such incidents may include the fact that at the time when the second study went, there was likely to be a best-selling movie adapted by mystery novels, which accounted for the popularity of mystery novels. People were easily affected by mass media. In other words, mass media played an important role in reading habits of people. People may change their reading habits temporarily due to their guide.
Overall, the argument is well-presented as stated above, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. It is reasonable for them to doubt their results of studies. However, the conclusion should be made after the researchers evaluate all possible factors and causes for the inconformity between the two studies.
=======================
Revised By shevava
=======================
作者: shevava 时间: 2010-5-9 17:50:56
来晚了......
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-5-9 22:14:02
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-19 01:15 编辑
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
【1010G精英组】E小组第10次作业
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
Argument007
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper.
"In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member
of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council,
because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past
year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the
local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green,
the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
写作样式模板
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
===========
Logical Chain
===========
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
=======================
Revised By
=======================
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
拍文顺序
1-->10
6-->4
4-->3
7-->1
3-->6
11-->7
10-->11
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-5-9 22:15:57
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-11 23:18 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1 Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition
2 Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council
3 the number of factories in Clearview has doubled---> air pollution levels have increased
4 local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses
5 3,4---> the current members are not protecting our environment
1,2,5--> we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 不能说明市委委员没有很好地保护环境
2 没保护好不是Frank Braun问题
3 Ann Green是否比Frank Braun胜任
===========
习作正文
===========
In this letter, the author appeals to elect Ann Green rather than Frank Braun as the mayor of Clearview, because the arguer believes Ann Green can well handle the environmental problems. Then, the author points out the fact—the increasing air pollution and the growing number of patients with respiratory illnesses in local hospitals—to strengthen his conclusion. This letter suffers some critical flaws that after close scrutiny of evidence that seriously undermine the conclusion and accordingly is not thoroughly well-reasoned. The main flaws of the argument will be discussed respectively.
To begin with, the author provides no evidence to prove the Clearview town suffering severe environmental problems. On the one hand, with the development of modern industrialization, the pollution to local area is inevitable. What’s more, the environment itself has the natural self-purification capability as long as the pollution is not so bad. On the other hand, the growing number of patients with respiratory illnesses in local hospitals does not necessarily indicate that the degree of pollution has been escalating. It is highly possible that the local hospitals are good at treating respiratory illnesses. Hence, the patients from the neighborhood are crowding into the Clearview town, which is the real explanation for the increasing numbers of patients in the loacl area.
In the second place, even if the Clearview town has a harsh pollution problem, the author is also unfair to blame the members of the Clearview town council for their not protecting local environment. There is no cause-and-effect relationship between the doubled number of factories in Clearview and the escalating pollution problem. It is entirely possible that the tail gas from innumerable cars and the large quantity of living garbage result in pollution even worse. In addition, the council members may not have enough power to well control the situation of pollution as laws are imperfect in Clearview. Maybe, the council members are trying their best to take serious measures to improve the legal system and to implement and enforce the law. However, this will take time to fulfill members’ promises, and the severe situation of pollution problem is just for the time being.
The last but not the least, even if the council members are not protecting local environment, the letter depends on the unwarranted assumption that Frank Braun is not concerned about and should be responsible for the listed environmental problems. Maybe, he realizes the situation that the current council members take no count of environmental problems. That’s why Frank Braun takes the mayoral election as an opportunity to justify the mistakes. In addition, just because Ann Green from the Good Earth Coalition, while Frank Braun from the Clearview town council, the letter provides no other reliable evidence to indicate Ann Green would do better job than Frank Braun in dealing with the pollution problem.
To sum up, this argument, while seems well-supported at first, has several flaws as discussed above. Hence it is unacceptable and not persuasive as it stands. Yet, it could be substantiated by provide more detailed information about the pollution problem in Clearview town. In addition, to further bolster the conclusion, the arguer should provide trustworthy evidence that the Ann Green is the best candidate for the mayor of Clearview rather than Frank Braun. Accordingly, only with more logical reasoning could this letter turn out to be more than emotional appeal.
=======================
Revised By nanfeng25899
=======================
批改标注:
1。红色，表示“错误”
2。洋红，表示“用法欠妥当”
3。蓝色，是我的批注
4。绿色，表示“很精彩的文字”
In this letter, the author appeals to elect Ann Green rather than Frank Braun as the mayor of Clearview, because the arguer believes Ann Green can well handle the environmental problems. Then, the author points out the fact—the increasing air pollution and the growing number of patients with respiratory illnesses in local hospitals—to strengthen his conclusion. This letter suffers some critical flaws that after close scrutiny【意思上感觉有点重复scrutiny就是仔细检查的意思】 of evidence that seriously undermine the conclusion and accordingly is not thoroughly well-reasoned.【语法有问题，that是flaw的定语从句么？】 The main flaws of the argument will be discussed respectively.
To begin with, the author provides no evidence to prove the Clearview town suffering severe environmental problems. On the one hand, with the development of modern industrialization, the pollution to local area is inevitable. What’s more, the environment itself has the natural self-purification capability as long as the pollution is not so bad.【环境的自净能力其实一直都有，并不是以环境污染的严重程度为条件的，建议前面改成承受污染的能力】 On the other hand, the growing number of patients with respiratory illnesses in local hospitals does not necessarily indicate that the degree of pollution has been escalating.【escalate这个词用的很好】 It is highly possible that the local hospitals are good at treating respiratory illnesses. Hence, the patients from the neighborhood are crowding into the Clearview town, which is the real explanation for the increasing numbers of patients in the loacl area.
【本段的攻击的两个点其实我建议分开说，可能深入一点更有说服力吧。比如第一个谬误，工厂并没有说是否会污染环境】
In the second place, even if the Clearview town has a harsh pollution problem, the author is also unfair to blame the members of the Clearview town council for their not protecting local environment. There is no cause-and-effect relationship between the doubled number of factories in Clearview and the escalating pollution problem. It is entirely possible that the tail gas from innumerable cars and the large quantity of living garbage result in pollution even worse. In addition, the council members may not have enough power to well control the situation of pollution as laws are imperfect in Clearview. Maybe, the council members are trying their best to take serious measures to improve the legal system and to implement and enforce the law. However, this will take time to fulfill members’ promises, and the severe situation of pollution problem is just for the time being.
【本段谬误的攻击点有点牵强，council的政策肯定会影响到环境，如果是实施的不好，这也应该是council的责任吧，也应该责备他们。个人看法。。。】
The last but not the least, even if the council members are not protecting local environment, the letter depends on the unwarranted assumption that Frank Braun is not concerned about and should be responsible for the listed environmental problems. Maybe, he realizes the situation that the current council members take no count of environmental problems. That’s why Frank Braun takes the mayoral election as an opportunity to justify the mistakes. In addition, just because Ann Green from the Good Earth Coalition, while Frank Braun from the Clearview town council, the letter provides no other reliable evidence to indicate Ann Green would do better job than Frank Braun in dealing with the pollution problem.
To sum up, this argument, while seems well-supported at first, has several flaws as discussed above. Hence it is unacceptable and not persuasive as it stands. Yet, it could be substantiated by provide【providing】 more detailed information about the pollution problem in Clearview town. In addition, to further bolster the conclusion, the arguer should provide trustworthy evidence that the Ann Green is the best candidate for the mayor of Clearview rather than Frank Braun. Accordingly, only with more logical reasoning could this letter turn out to be more than emotional appeal.
综合评价：
1 这篇文章明显比你以前写得好很多，很多句子和词用的很好~~~语法错误很少
2 个人觉得有的谬误可能分开写更有说服力，其实指出的谬误不在于多，关键在于找到关键的谬误后，深入地分析它们。
作者: nanfeng25899 时间: 2010-5-9 22:24:07
本帖最后由 nanfeng25899 于 2010-5-13 21:21 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1 前提一：因为A是GEC的成员，而F是C委员会的承运，且当前的委员并没有保护我们的环境
2 前提二：C去年的工厂书翻了一倍，空气污染水平翻了两倍，当地医院因呼吸道就诊的的数量增加了25%
3 结论：我们选A，环境问题就会被解决
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 工厂数量的增加并不能说明环境污染程度的加深，题目中未告知工厂是否会造成污染，若不是反而正说明了过去政府的成功之处
2 呼吸道疾病的患者增加还有可能是因为老化或者是因为经济发展人数增加，从而使病人的数量有所增加
3 即使环境污染确实严重，并不能说明F没有起到正面的作用，只是他的声音为其他人淹没了
===========
习作正文
===========
The argument, at the first glance, seems to be reasonable and trustful, but it does mask the fact that maybe Frank Braun is the better choice than Ann Green, which just features with the mark of the label--a member of the
Good Earth Coalition. Just based on the several plausible evidence, we can not arrive at the conclusion that electing Ann Green will the best solution to the environmental problems.
The first evidence demonstrated by the arguer is the doubled number of the factories in the Clearview, which appears to be very tenable to substantiate the failure of working out the pollution by Frank Braun. Yet no evidence about whether those factories are the criminals of the "severe environmental problems" is showed to us. It is more likely that they are friendly to the environment even conducive to reduce the pollutants, that is, they are, on the contrary, the assistants of relieving the contamination. In addition, if they are green company, they will be beneficial to not only the surrounding but also the citizens by providing more green jobs and stimulating the economy. So if that is the case, why do we choose Frank Braun?
Again, the arguer illustrates another fact, 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses, which just result from his failure of recognizing other alternatives that may also be the cause of the mounting figure of the patient.
For instance, with people older and older, our bodies become so fragile that it will easier that we infect with diseases such as respiratory. Maybe last year, the increasing old is the right cause of the soaring patients other than the pollution. In addition, there is also a good chance that those new patients are just the outcome of the new workers appealed by the new factories. Therefore, without taking other possibilities into consideration, condemning Frank Braun' fault on the environmental issue is too early.
Finally, even though the facts in the argument does means the severe pollution in this town, Frank Braun may also acts as the positive role in denying the policies which will be detrimental to the environment. However, his voice is just overshadowed by the others’ opinions in the Clearview council. How can we judge a leader using the policies made by those real criminals? If so, how could you say that because Ann Green is one member of Good Earth Coalition he is sure to be the key to solving the pollution? It is possible that he just wants to have a mark of the environmentalist, but actually he is not. So do not rush to make decisions and please think twice before you go to vote.
Perhaps weighing up those facts in the arguments, you will be resolute to vote for Ann Green, whereas before that you'd better know those evidences clearly and logical, not literally. Thinking about the facts behind the statement will be helpful for you to make a right decision.
=======================
Revised By 小肯
=======================
The argument, at the first glance, seems to be reasonable and trustful, but it does mask the fact that maybe Frank Braun is the better choice than Ann Green, which just features with the mark of the label--a member of the Good Earth Coalition.(?)And just based on the several plausible evidences, we can not arrive at the conclusion that electing Ann Green will be the best solution to the environmental(?) problems.
The first evidence demonstrated by the arguer is the doubled number of the factories in the Clearview(that the number of factories in Clearview doubled), which appears to be very tenable to substantiate the failure of working out the pollution (problem) by Braun?. Yet no evidence about whether those factories are the “criminals” of the "severe environmental problems" is showed to us. It is more likely (possible) that they are friendly to the environment even conducive to reduce the pollutants, that is, they are, on the contrary, the assistants of relieving the contamination. In addition, if they are green (environmental-friendly) company, they will be beneficial
to not only the surrounding but also the citizens (benefit to the surrounding and the citizen as well)by providing(creating) more green jobs and stimulating the economy. So if that is the case, why do we choose Frank Braun? (? 是要说为什么不选braun才对吧)
Again, the arguer illustrates another fact, 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses, which just result from his/her failure of recognizing other alternatives that may also be the cause of the mounting figure of the patients. For instance, with people getting older and older, their bodies become more fragile that it would be easier infect (for disease to violate) with diseases such as respiratory (加disease). Maybe last year, the increasing old is the right cause (real reason) of the soaring patients other than the pollution (Maybe in last year, the real reason of soaring patients is the aging problem other than the pollution). In addition(可以用furthermore, additional用过几次了), there is also a good chance that those new patients are just the outcome of the new workers appealed by the new factories（？没明白这句）. Therefore, without taking other possibilities into consideration, condemning Frank Braun' fault on the environmental issue is too early（这句写得好）.
Finally, even though the facts in the argument does means（proved there are，不用means） the（去掉） severe pollution in this town, Frank Braun may also acts as the positive role in （the situation by）denying the policies which will be (more) detrimental to the environment. However,(It is possible that,去掉However) his voice is just overshadowed by the others’ opinions in the Clearview council. How can we judge a leader (member who in charge of) using the policies (but) made by those real criminals? If so, how could you(can we不要how can you) say that because Ann Green is one（a） member of Good Earth Coalition so that he/she is surly to be the key to solving the pollution? It is possible that he/she just wants to have a mark(to be labeled as a environmentalist后面全不要) of the environmentalist, but actually he is not. So do not rush yourself to make decisions and please think twice before you (go to不要) vote.
Perhaps weighing up those（the superficial 不是those） facts in the arguments（argument）, you will be resolute to vote for Ann Green, whereas before that you'd better know those evidences clearly and logical, not literally. Thinking about the facts behind the statement will be helpful for you to make a right decision.（最后一句好）
论点1.、3写得比较好，逻辑层次都很清楚
第2点阐述感觉没走开，我觉得你应该是想表达一个人不能代表全部的整体，他想为镇上的人民谋福利但是他却做不到让整个council跟着他走。
这点没说清楚
最后一段的总结很好
有个小建议，少用长的复杂的倒装句。便随状语短一点方便阅读，当你不确定人民是男是女时，用he/she表示。
作者: shevava 时间: 2010-5-9 22:54:34
本帖最后由 shevava 于 2010-5-16 20:46 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
Basis：
the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved
Arguments：
1\Ann Green ，a member of the Good Earth Coalition，
所以，the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved
所以，elect Ann Green
2\ Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council，
The current members are not protecting our environment
During the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses
所以，不能elect Frank Braun
Conclusions:
In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 环境污染可能有其他原因造成
2 不一定是Frank Braun问题
3 Ann Green不一定能改变现在这种情况
===========
习作正文
===========
Assuming that Ann Green , a member of the Good Earth Coalition, was elected the mayor, the environmental problems would be solved. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer presents many evidences in order to prove the other candidate would not make good access to the environmental problem. However, what the arguer determines from is that Frank Braun, the other candidate, is a member of the Clearview town council, whose current members are not protecting our environment. Obviously, through scientific scrutiny and analysis, logical flaws are contained.
The arguer failed to consider the possible alternatives of the fact that air pollutions have increased, and more patients with respiratory illness were treated in the local hospital. It is possible that the sharp increase of the amount of cars caused the air pollution problem. Worsely, the harmful gas brought by the burning oil into the air not only polluted the air, but also do great harm to the health of local people. Additionally, maybe with the new better medicine infrastructure and famous doctor of respiratory illness, more patients from other places came for better treatment. Furthermore, factories in Clearview, whose number doubled, probably are not the main cause of pollution, if they were equipped with equipment for environment protection. Reversely, it can make contribution to the development of the local economy.
Even if the environment problems are arisen by the doubtful decision of the Clear town council to build so many factories, there is not enough evidence provided to substantiate that Frank Braun was on the side. As we all know, the final decision need to be agreed with by the majority of the council before taken into act. What part did Frank Braun play during the process? How much did his advices weigh? These are all open to doubt.
Even assuming that Frank Braun is not protecting our environment, Ann Green, a member of the Good Earth Coalition, cannot be promised to be a voter of environment protection. The mere fact that Green is a member of The Good Earth Coalition hardly suffices to prove his/her willingness and ability to help solve Clearview’s environmental problems. As in reference to the pursuit of political feat, he may also greatly motivate economical development.
Overall, before the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview need more information about the two candidates, such as what will they do if they are selected, what are the concrete measures, how do these measure take effect, and so on. To make the argument more convincing and logical, the editor should provide the information discussed above, so that the people cannot be misconduct.
=======================
Revised By CYPHER
=======================
修改标识：
“Bold” 结构句，标出来方便理清思路。
“In Green” 牛X表达
“[In Blue]” 表示我在文中的批注。
“In Blue” 是我在文后的总结。
Assuming that Ann Green , a member of the Good Earth Coalition, was elected the mayor, the environmental problems would be solved. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer presents many evidences[我总觉得evidence是不可数的,我上网查了一下,可以参考这个http://forum.wordreference.com/showthread.php?t=666441,记得第一次改作文的时候给SHEVAVA哥指出来过...] in order to prove the other candidate would not make good access to the environmental problem. However, what the arguer determines from is that Frank Braun, the other candidate, is a member of the Clearview town council, whose current members are not protecting our environment.
Obviously, through scientific scrutiny and analysis, logical flaws are contained.
[此处有结构句可能比较好, 感觉还是应该先指出错误, 而不是第一句就纠错, 逻辑上不太合适]
The arguer failed to consider the possible alternatives of the fact[事实的另一种选择?个人觉得事实就是事实, 可能表达成另一种解释会比较好, 小建议…] that air pollutions have increased, and more patients with respiratory illness were treated in the local hospital. It is possible that the sharp increase of the amount of cars caused the air pollution problem. Worsely[嗯, 没查到这个词,应该有误], the harmful gas brought by the burning oil into the air not only polluted the air, but also do great harm to the health of local people. Additionally, maybe with the new better medicine infrastructure and famous doctor of respiratory illness, more patients from other places came for better treatment.[很好的解释啊,我顺便学了几个专业名词]
Furthermore, factories in Clearview, whose number doubled, probably are not the main cause of pollution, if they were equipped with equipment for environment protection. Reversely, it can make contribution to the development of the local economy.
[注:划线的部分我有点异见:
第一个划线的部分,我觉得你是想阐述:完全有可能是因为车多了,所以空气不好了,进而病人也增加了,是吧?但是不论原意如何,字面意思是没有对题目进行攻击的.我认为需要攻击的点是:环境根本就没有恶化,因而不能怪罪council的那帮老头.但是SHEVAVA哥的文章里并没有明确反对这一点,而是解释了空气污染的原因,而文章里并没有由空气污染的原因退出任何逻辑关系,因而我认为逻辑无效.
第二个划线的部分,我的观点还是和上面一样,应该攻击的是没有污染,而不是是什么造成了污染.
以上两点与怎么理解题意有关,其实若想论证污染的原因与city council无关也完全可行,但是我没在文中看见这层意思,能点明最好,不要在下一段才明确说出来.
另外一个建议,希望能先指出作者的错误,再阐述其有误,这样比较清晰明了.]
Even if the environment problems are arisen by the doubtful[doubtful做定语主要表诚信,名声不可信的.推荐用dubious] decision of the Clear town council to build so many factories, there is not enough evidence provided to substantiate that Frank Braun was on the side. As we all know, the final decision need to be agreed with by the majority of the council before taken into act. What part did Frank Braun play during the process? How much did his advices[advice绝大部分用法都应该是单数才对] weigh? These are all open to doubt.
Even assuming that Frank Braun is not protecting our environment[觉得过去式比较好], Ann Green, a member of the Good Earth Coalition, cannot be promised to be a voter of environment protection. The mere fact that Green is a member of The Good Earth Coalition hardly suffices to prove his/her[Ann应该是her, LOL] willingness and ability to help solve Clearview’s environmental problems. As in reference to the pursuit of political feat, he[乱了乱了…到底是男是女, 呵呵~] may also greatly motivate economical development[应该是economic development].
Overall, before the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview need more information about the two candidates, such as what will they do if they are selected, what are the concrete measures, how do these measure[-s] take effect, and so on. To make the argument more convincing and logical, the editor should provide the information discussed above, so that the people cannot be misconduct.
[全文总结
结构上:全部让步结构,很严谨,第一个攻击段三个点之间的关系不太明显,建议在第一句指出这三个错误,之后并列/递进结构分别攻击.
语言上:有很多很具体的表述,读来更能感觉到解释的合理和可行性,于是对原题的攻击也就更有效,强悍.
句式上:希望能在句首多用表逻辑的词,这样显得句间结构紧凑.
嗯,不多说了,主要的都在原文指出了.多多指教~
]
作者: SandraShan 时间: 2010-5-9 23:34:10
本帖最后由 SandraShan 于 2010-5-16 08:25 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
1.工厂数量翻倍,空气污染严重，呼吸病病人数多境
2.AG是Good Earth Coalition成员，FB是towncouncil成员且现在的委员不保护环境
3.1.2->市长选举中，应该选AG，才能解决环境问题
===========
论点提纲
===========
1不能武断的说现在的环境问题严重是当前的委员们不保护环境
2.即使是委员们的问题，也不能说因为FB是town council成员，就不能解决问题
3.不能说因为AG是GFC成员就能解决问题
===========
习作正文
===========
Grounding on the fact that the environment problems ofClearview was serious, the arguer deduced that the current town council membersdo nothing about protecting the local environment, and suggest residents ofClearview voting for Ann Green, a member of the Good Earth Coalition as the newmayor rather than voting for Frank Braun, the Clearview town council member.
However, this argument can’t be convincingbecause it defies simple logic and suffers from several fallacies.
In the first place, itis arbitrary to conclude that it is the town council’s responsibility thatresults in the serious problems of environment. Even though in Clearview thenumber of factories has been twice as much as the number of last year, thelevels of air pollution have increased and more patients infected withrespiratory illness are treated in local hospital, it is probably other reasonsbut the town council’s fault lead to that phenomenon. The factories increasedmight be specially built by the local town council to deal with the environment pollution problem. What ismore, considering that the air is flowing all thetime, Clearview may be the victim of the air pollution in other places aroundit. In addition, the respiratory illnesses patients are infected because oftheir old age and the older there is much more than before. Therefore, it isunconvincing to judge a thing only by its surface phenomenon.
Secondly, even if one accepts that we indeed should blamethe town council for its careless work,the argument remains questionable. We cannot do our judgment on a person onlyby where does he work. Maybe Frank Braun has thought of effective approaches tosolve the problems, however, the implement of these ways is against someone’spersonal interests who have the right to carry out it. Except that, we cannotdeny a person’s strong desire of protecting the environment only by he isn’t amember of the Good Earth Coalition. Besides, there is no doubt that as a memberof the Clearview town council, leadership and the ability to coordinate issuesare their basic characteristics, which are necessity to deal with things likethis.
Last but not least, even assuming that Frank Braun doesn’tcare about the environment there, we cannot ensure that Ann Green, a member ofthe Good Earth Coalition, to be the right person of the mayor. The argumentprovides no other reliable evidence to indicate Ann Green would do better jobthan Frank Braun in dealing with the pollution problem. The statementthat Green is a member of The Good Earth Coalition hardly suffices to prove hiswillingness and ability to help solve the environmental problems. Besides,he may lack of political experience which will arise moreproblems in power.
In conclusion, the argument, while it seems logical at first, has severalflaws as discussed above. The argument could be improved by providingevidence that it is the fault of the town council that leads to the confirmedpollution there. It could be further improved by ruling out capacity of Ann Green to support that if we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems inClearview will be solved.
=======================
RevisedBy Shevava
=======================
Grounding on the factthat the environment problems of Clearview was serious,the arguer deduced that the current town council members do nothing aboutprotecting the local environment, and suggest（ed） residents of Clearviewvoting for Ann Green, a member of the Good Earth Coalition as the new mayor ratherthan voting for Frank Braun, the Clearview town council member. However, this argument can’t be convincing because itdefies simple logic and suffers from several fallacies.
In the first place, it is arbitrary to conclude thatit is the town council’s responsibility that results in the serious problems ofenvironment. Even though in Clearview the number of factories has beentwice as much as the number of last year, the levels of air pollution haveincreased and more patients infected with respiratory illness are treated inlocal hospital, it is probably other reasons but thetown council’s fault lead to that phenomenon（谓语动词多了吧，把probably改成probable就好了吧）. The factories increased might be specially built by the local towncouncil to deal with the environment pollution problem. What is more,considering that the air is flowing all the time, Clearview may be the victimof the air pollution in other places around it. In addition, the respiratoryillnesses patients are infected because of their old age and the older there ismuch more than before. Therefore, it is unconvincing to judge a thing only byits surface phenomenon.（举了三条理由反驳观点）
Secondly, even if one accepts that we indeed shouldblame the town council for its careless work, the argument remainsquestionable. We cannot do our judgment on a person only by where doeshe work. Maybe Frank Braun has thought of effective approaches to solve theproblems, however, the implement of these ways is against someone’s personalinterests who have the right to carry out it. Except（besides?） that, we cannot deny a person’sstrong desire of protecting the environment only by he isn’t a member of theGood Earth Coalition. Besides, there is no doubt that as a member of theClearview town council, leadership and the abilityto coordinate issues are their basic characteristics, which are necessity(ies) to deal with things like this.(最后一句是说在town council 里的好处，更具体一点到 FB是不是更好)
Last but not least, even assuming that Frank Braun doesn’t care about theenvironment there, we cannot ensure that Ann Green, a member of the Good EarthCoalition, to be the right person of the mayor. The argument provides no otherreliable evidence to indicate Ann Green would do better job than Frank Braun indealing with the pollution problem. The statement that Green is amember of The Good Earth Coalition hardly sufficesto prove his willingness and ability to help solve the environmentalproblems. Besides, he may lack of political experience which willarise more problems in power.
In conclusion, the argument, while it seems logical at first, has several flawsas discussed above. The argument could be improved by providing evidence thatit is the fault of the town council that leads to the confirmed pollutionthere. It could be further improved by ruling out capacity of Ann Green tosupport that if we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearviewwill be solved.
结构上逐层让步很好…有头有尾，有论点有论据，结构完整…(不过好像听说用让步有一定的风险？忘了在哪儿看的了，说要慎用…是不是美国人不想中国人这么含蓄啊，想上来直接说要点…不过我这篇也是用让步写的，求交流哈…呵呵)
内容上，我跟你写的差不多，所以就没什太大的建议啦…
作者: hebill 时间: 2010-5-10 10:57:18
本帖最后由 hebill 于 2010-5-11 23:11 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
Conclusion: In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council
Reasons:
1 the current members are not protecting our environment
2 If we elect Ann Green,the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved.
===========
论点提纲
===========
1 不应该只从环保工作这一项指标上来指导 mayoral election，市长的工作并不只是为环保。
2 就算是只考虑环境污染问题，并非选一位环境组织的成员当市长，环境污染问题就能解决。
3 论者认为当前的市委没能保护本市的环境，举例说是过去几年工厂的数目加倍，空气污染的程度在上升，而当地医院治疗的呼吸病患者也比以前多了25%,然而这 一例证缺乏足够的论据。
4 就算当前的市委没有关心环境问题，不代表其中的每个成员都不关心或者无力解决。
===========
习作正文
===========
In this argument, the author called on people in Clearview to vote for Ann Green, of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun,of the Clearview town council. The reasoning seems somewhat logical. However, the reason provided is not convincing enough and thus comes to the conclusion unpersuasively in several respects.
To begin with, it is incomplete for people to judge candidates in mayoral election only from their work in environmental problems. Admittedly, environmental protection is vitally important for the mayor to engage in. But it is not his/her sole duty, the eligible candidate should behave well in many other ways, such as prominent political caliber, charisma,far-reaching social influence, good political achievements in the past and reasonable plans for Clearview in the future.
Even if people merely consider environmental pollution problems, it is unreasonable enough to count on the thorough solution by voting for a member of Good Earth Coalition. For one thing, as a member of Good Earth Coalition, Ann Green is not necessarily a person with great ambition in environmental issues. Perhaps she will pursue the rate of economic development at the cost of the surroundings. For another thing, hypothetically, she does show concern about the environmental problems, yet there are innumerable challenge confronting Ann Green which needs not only concern but also essential abilities such as cooperation with other departments and profound recognition of industrial process. Her desire of the environmental protection can not guarantee that she is able to alter the environment as people may expect. People can't allege that Ann Green can definitely solve all the environmental problems as long as she is elected mayor as no convincing evidence demonstrates that Ann will align all the related departments into this vital and complicated career with sufficient funds.
The arguer also illustrate his/her statement with the fact that during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. Unfortunately, the author is failing to consider whether the new factories are pollution-intensive industry. Or were there any efficient measures adopting in these firms? Without this critical information, it is hard to determine what role these factories played in environmental pollution as they were likely to either be less pollution industry or take efficient measures in the production process.
As to the air pollution, which is a severe fact that exists worldwide, on one hand, a conclusion can be rendered only when there are concrete statistics showing comparison of the air pollution in Clearview with in other similar cities or with in the same town formerly.(这句是不是病句？？？)On the other hand, air pollution may not be a problem that caused by this town itself,but a problem that generated from somewhere else as air flows. Moreover, the author acclaimed that air pollution is responsible for the increase of
patients with respiratory illnesses. However, One may inherit such illness or ail because of aging. there are no valid evidences that explain whether air pollution is related with the increase of patients.
Last but not least, even though present town council didn't pay much attention on environmental problems, it doesn't mean that none of members in the town council cares about this problem or face it powerlessly. As no evidence shows that Frank Braun ever destroyed the environment or put forward some measures on environmental damage, it is possible that he is concerned about environmental protection as well. Maybe his environmental proposal is ignored by present town council.
=======================
Revised By Finn ^_^
语法问题 批注 精彩句子
In this argument, the author called (我觉得用一般现在时描述结果或现象就可以了 不过这里可以用过去时) on people in Clearview to vote for Ann Green, of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for (for是不是可以删掉？) Frank Braun, of the Clearview town council. The reasoning seems somewhat logical. However, the reason (紧连着用了两个reason可以换一个别的词) provided is not convincing enough and thus comes to the conclusion unpersuasively in several respects.
To begin with, it is incomplete for people to judge candidates in mayoral election only from their work in (dealing with) environmental problems.Admittedly, environmental protection is vitally important for the mayor to engage in. But it is not his/her sole duty, the eligible candidate should behave well in many other ways, such as prominent political caliber, charisma, far-reaching social influence,
good political achievements in the past and reasonable plans for Clear view in the future.(本段是说市长的选举不应该只注重候选人是否能有效地解决环境保护问题)
Even if people merely consider environmental pollution problems, it is unreasonable enough (删) to count on the thorough solution by voting for a member of Good Earth Coalition. For one thing, as a member of Good Earth Coalition, Ann Green is not necessarily a person with great ambition (是想要表达Ａ可能不具备处理环境问题的能力这个意思？可用这个词表达合适吗？) in environmental issues. Perhaps she(可能A真是女的 但正式起见还是用名字吧 如果嫌麻烦可以只用Ann或者A(但要在前面注释一下)) will pursue the rate of economic development at the cost of the surroundings. For another thing, hypothetically, she does show concern about the environmental problems, yet there are innumerable challenge confronting Ann Green which needs not only concern but also essential abilities (difficulties) such as cooperation with other departments and profound recognition of industrial process(后面这半句想表达什么意思呢？). Her (还是用名字吧前面用的代词很多了) desire of the environmental protection can not (正式文体中写作cannot 没有空格 注意) guarantee that she is able to alter the environment as people may expect. People can't (正式文体中应避免使用缩写cannot) allege that Ann Green can definitely solve all the environmental problems as long as she is elected mayor as no convincing evidence demonstrates that Ann will align (前面使用了很多可以换一个词汇) all the related departments into this vital and complicated career with sufficient funds.(这句话写的有点罗嗦了) (本段说即使候选人注重环保问题但可能有很多因素让他们并不能很好地解决环保问题)
The arguer also illustrate his/her statement with the fact that during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased (表达不好), and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses (后面半句话没有说完意思啊 指出了这些事实是干什么用的？这里有别于中文的表达). Unfortunately, the
author is failing to consider whether the new factories are pollution-intensive industry. Or were (前后时态要统一，这里使用一般现在时就可以了) there any efficient measures adopting (措施是被采用 使用被动) in these firms? Without this critical information, it is hard to determine what role these factories played in environmental pollution as they were likely to either be less pollution industry or take efficient measures in the production process(然后呢？如果工厂这么做了后面的结果回事什么呢意思要表完整).(本段说题中的论据并不能说明当地环境问题严重了)
As to the air pollution, which is a severe fact that exists worldwide (这是形容词 应该后面加一个名词性短语), (前面的意思已经完整了要使用句号，但这样一来前面句子的结构不对还要修改一下) on one hand, a conclusion can be rendered only when there are concrete statistics showing comparison of the air pollution in Clearview with in (删) other similar cities or with in (删) the same town formerly (表达的不好). On the other hand, air pollution may not be a problem that caused by this town itself, but a problem that generated from somewhere else as air flows (题中说的是environmental problems 所以 air可能是其中一点 这一点驳的不好).
Moreover, the author acclaimed that air pollution is responsible for the increase of patients with respiratory illnesses. However, One (one) may inherit such illness or ail because of aging. there (There) are no valid evidences that explain whether air pollution is related with the increase of patients.(这段写的有点Issue的感觉 开头主题要把攻击的写的明确些 这一段可以考虑和上一段和一起)
Last but not least, even though present town council didn't (不要缩写) pay much attention on environmental problems, it doesn’t (不要缩写) mean that none of members in the town council cares about this problem or face it powerlessly. As no evidence shows that Frank Braun ever destroyed (?不是这么表达的吧) the environment or put forward some measures on environmental damage (这一点写的很奇怪啊), it is possible that he is concerned about environmental protection as well. Maybe his environmental proposal is ignored by present town council.(这段感觉写的不好可以考虑和第3段融合) (这段写Frank Braun可能很好地处理环境问题)
In a word, the author fails to provide sound evidence either to the achievements and abilities on environmental problems that ensure Ann Green to be elected (as the?)mayor or to the indifference of Fon (?) the same issue. He/she needs to collect more detailed information for the voter, and only in this way, may the argument be accepted.
小结：1、注意避免语言语法错误
2、正文有5段但段落之间的逻辑衔接性不好，正文第三段应该调整为正文第一段有两段可以跟正文其他段合并，详见注释
3、词汇、句式需要加强，进一步掌握长难句的写法
=======================
作者: zmssghh 时间: 2010-5-10 22:23:34
占
作者: Cypher 时间: 2010-5-11 00:15:17
本帖最后由 Cypher 于 2010-5-16 00:08 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
觉得没啥用, 没时间, 就不写了.
===========
论点提纲
===========
1.工厂数目倍增和呼吸疾病患者的增加不一定说明环境恶化了.
2.即使以上因素导致环境恶化, 也不一定与市委有关系.即使是市委的关系, Braun不一定是主要因素.
3.即使选Braun不会改善环境, 是GEC成员不能说明Green会支持.
4.即使3成立, Green不一定是唯一人选.
===========
习作正文
===========
The letter recommends that people in Clearview should vote for Ann Green, a member of Good Earth Coalition, instead of Frank Braun, a member of Clearview town council. To justify this recommendation, the author points out that the number of factories and patient with respiration illness, as well as air pollution levels had increased in the past year. At first glance, the argument might be somehow reasonable, close scrutiny of each of these evidence, however, reveals that none of them leads credible support to this recommendation, which render recommendation entirely unconvincing.
To begin with, the cited fact that the number of factories and patients with respiration illness had increased over the course of one year is scant evidence for the claim that the environment had worsened in Clearview. Perhaps the new factories were all environment-friendly ones and may have helped relieve the city’s environmental pressure. On the other hand, perhaps the increase of patients with respiratory illness was due to poor health care system but not environmental factors, and therefore renders the author’s inference unconvincing. Under either scenario, the author cannot convince me that the environment had worsened on the basis of these evidences.
Even assuming that the environment had worsened in over the past year, the mere fact that Braun is a member of city council would not suffice to prove that electing Braun would not help protecting the environment. Lacking information of the bills related to environmental protection the council had voted through and Braun’s voting record for those bills, it is entirely possible that no policies and laws harming environment were enacted and implemented in the previous year, or Braun had voted against those bills but somehow failed to change the result. In either case, it is impossible to weigh the evidence without more specific records.
Moreover, the author makes a dubious assumption that electing Green would solve the environmental problems because she is a member of the Good Earth Coalition. The author fails to rule out the possibilities that Green had not made any commitments on whether she would adopt any policies aimed at halting environmental worsening, or she joined the Good Earth Coalition just for popular vote. Under either scenario, I would not find the author’s argument the least bit compelling.
Finally, the argument suffers from “either-or” reasoning. Even assuming that Green would be a superior choice than Braun in solving environmental problems, it does not suffice to conclude that Clearwiew’s residents must vote for Green. However, the author overlooks the possibility that other candidates can better solve Clearview’s environmental problems.
In sum, the recommendation offered by the author is untenable as discussed above. To bolster his claim that electing Green would solve the environmental problems, the author needs to inform us of more detailed statistics that show the environment had worsened in the past year, and policies related to environmental protection that the city council had voted for and Braun’s voting record for those policies.
=======================
Revised By SandraShan
=======================
精彩(粉红) 结构(深蓝) 问题(正红)
(不好意思我粘上总掉色,只能这么注明一下了)
The letter recommends that people in Clearview should vote for Ann Green, a member of Good Earth Coalition, instead of Frank Braun, a member of Clearview town council. To justify this recommendation, the author points out that the number of factories and patient with respiration illness, as well as air pollution levels had increased in the past year. At first glance, the argument might be somehow reasonable, close scrutiny of each of these evidence, however, reveals that none of them leads credible support to this recommendation, which render recommendation entirely unconvincing.
To begin with, the cited fact that the number of factories and patients with respiration illness had increased over the course of one year is scant evidence for the claim that the environment had worsened in Clearview. Perhaps the new factories were all environment-friendly ones and may have helped relieve the city’s environmental pressure. On the other hand, perhaps the increase of patients with respiratory illness was due to poor health care system but not environmental factors, and therefore renders the author’s inference unconvincing. Under either scenario, the author cannot convince me that the environment had worsened on the basis of these evidences.
Even assuming that the environment had worsened in(应该去掉吧) over the past year, the mere fact that Braun is a member of city council would not suffice to prove that electing Braun would not help protecting（protect） the environment. Lacking information of the bills related to environmental protection the council had voted through and Braun’s voting record for those bills, it is(was) entirely possible that no policies and laws harming environment were enacted and implemented in the previous year, or Braun had voted against those bills but somehow failed to change the result. In either case, it is impossible to weigh the evidence without more specific records.
Moreover, the author makes a dubious assumption that electing Green would solve the environmental problems because she is a member of the Good Earth Coalition. The author fails to rule out the possibilities that Green had not made any commitments on whether she would adopt any policies aimed at halting environmental worsening, or she joined the Good Earth Coalition just for popular vote. Under either scenario, I would not find the author’s argument the least bit compelling.
Finally, the argument suffers from “either-or” reasoning. Even assuming that Green would be a superior choice than Braun in solving environmental problems, it does not suffice to conclude that Clearwiew’s residents must vote for Green. However（没有转折关系吧？）, the author overlooks the possibility that other candidates can better solve Clearview’s environmental problems.
In sum, the recommendation offered by the author is untenable as discussed above. To bolster his claim that electing Green would solve the environmental problems, the author needs to inform us of more detailed statistics that show the environment had worsened in the past year, and policies related to environmental protection that the city council had voted for and Braun’s voting record for those policies.
综合评价：
结构完整，论点论据清晰，逻辑层次清楚。内容上我也用了很多让步，那个shevava 说不太好，要慎用~我也不太清楚，咱们可以再讨论哈~总体上我感觉还是不错的~O(∩_∩)O~继续努力咯~
作者: 小肯0113 时间: 2010-5-11 14:57:47
本帖最后由 小肯0113 于 2010-5-15 00:47 编辑
===========
Logical Chain
===========
Ann Green is a member of the Good Earth Coalition
Frank Braun is a member of the Clearviewtown council
People would vote for Green because theyunhappy with the environment situation in town.
===========
论点提纲
===========
1\ she is a member of the XXX coalition doesn’t mean her policy will be betterthan Braun’s on environment aspect
2\ didn’t say what kind of factories theybuilt and no strong evidence that disease is related to the factories.
3\even if she has been elected, she stillhas limited power, can’t close done business, jobs and welfare system
===========
习作正文
===========
Theauthor showed a very
absolute attitudetowards who should be elected in next mayoral election. He/she complaints a lotabout environment issue in town and blame these problems to the town council,which represented by Frank Braun. But he failed to illustrate it with strongevidence and clear logic, in that way, his/her support to Ann Green seems to bearbitrary.
First of all, Green is a member of theGood Earth Coalition, but the fact doesn’t equal the environmental problemswill be solved. Yes, she may focus on environmental problems more than otherissues but it doesn’t mean Braun’s environmental policy will be useless orworse than hers. Apparently the author labeled Ann Green and her coalition with“environmental problem solver”, but we all know environment issue iscomplicated and it is piece of work needs cooperation. It is very dangerousthat Judging people and trusting them by their title. It seems like the author madethe mistake.
Secondly, the author explain his/herattitude of favor Ann Green by saying “For example, during the past year thenumber of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels haveincreased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients withrespiratory illness.”However, the author didn’t tell us what kind of factorieswas built in Clearview. Were they all related to air pollution? Do thosefactories equip with emissions treatment system as required? Furthermore, notall the respiratory illnesses are caused by air pollution. The author needs toshow more evidence to support his/her opinion, for instance, the factories nameand so on.
The last but not the least, even ifGreen is elected as a mayor, it is difficult to get the conclusion that theenvironment problems of Clearview will be solved. She needs to consider thingsother than environment, for instance, jobs, welfare system, tax income and soon. She can’t close those businesses that the author considers as the maincause of air pollution in town. Those factories bring tax income, create jobs,support the welfare system even the medical care. She has limited power; it isa little too demanding that hope she can “solve” the environmental problems.
To sum up, the authorshows a strong favor of Ann Green and The Good Earth Coalition. However, withoutmore details and evidence, the conclusion of mayoral election seems to beunthoughtful and unimpressive.
=======================
Revised By hebill
The author showeda very absolute attitude towards who should be elected in next mayoralelection. He/she complaints (前后时态一致)a lot aboutenvironment issue in town and blamed theseproblems to the town council, which represented by Frank Braun. But he（he/she） failed toillustrate it with strong evidence and clear logic, in that way, his/hersupport to Ann Green seems to be arbitrary.(Topic sentence)
Firstof all, Green is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, but the fact doesn’tequal(不等于，是不是用does not mean更好？)the environmental problems will be solved. Yes, she may focus on environmentalproblems more than other issues but it doesn’t mean Braun’s environmentalpolicy will be useless or worse than hers. Apparently the author labeled AnnGreen and her coalition with” environmental problem solver”, but we all knowenvironment issue is complicated and it is piece of work needs cooperation. Itis very dangerous that Judging people and trusting them by their title. Itseems like the author made the mistake.
Secondly,the author explained his/her attitude of favor（favoring/supporting）
Ann Green bysaying “For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearviewhas doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital hastreated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illness.” However, the authordidn’t tell us what kind of factories was built in Clearview. Were they allrelated to air pollution? Do those factories equip with emissions treatmentsystem as required? Furthermore, not all the respiratory illnesses are causedby air pollution. The author needs to show more evidence to support his/heropinion, for instance, the factories name and so on.
Thelast but not the least, even if Green is elected as a mayor, it is difficult toget the conclusion that the environment problems of Clearview will be solved.She needs to consider things other than environment, for instance, jobs,welfare system, tax income and so on. She can’t close those businesses that theauthor considers as the main cause of air pollution in town. Those factories bringtax income, create jobs, support the welfare system even the medical care. Shehas limited power; it is a little too demanding that hope she can “solve” theenvironmental problems.（这段感觉和第二段可以合并，另外可以加入一段写一下Braun也许具有更好的领导能力和素质，并且也爱好环保，只是现在的towncouncil 掩盖了他的声音，而且一直是towncouncil member的他，对医疗制度、税收、福利制度、就业率等方面会更有优势。）
Tosum up, the author shows a strong favor of Ann Green and The Good EarthCoalition. However, without more details and evidence, the conclusion ofmayoral election seems to be unthoughtful and unimpressive.（结尾我跟你的结构差不多，总觉得有点单薄，呵呵）
=======================
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-5-11 17:53:31
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-19 01:16 编辑
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
【1010G精英组】E小组第11次作业
〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓〓
Issue208
"The way people look, dress, and act reveals their attitudes and interests. You can tell much
about a society's ideas and values by observing the appearance and behavior of its people."
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
写作样式模板
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
=======================
Revised By
=======================
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
拍文顺序
1-->8
3-->7
10-->1
7-->10
8-->3
●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●○●
作者: kingwyf87 时间: 2010-5-11 17:53:45
本帖最后由 kingwyf87 于 2010-5-12 14:21 编辑
===========
论点提纲
===========
1、外貌、打扮、动作能够反映人们的兴趣和态度。
2、人们的兴趣和态度能反映社会的思想价值观。
3、然而在有些情况下，人们的兴趣和态度并不能真实地反映出社会的思想价值观。
===========
习作正文
===========
The issue of whether through the appearance and behavior of people can we learn much about the ideas and values of a society is a complex and controversial one. Different people hold different opinions due to their respective ways of looking at an issue. In my point of view, however, I agree that, to some extent, the way people look, dress, and act reveals their attitudes and their values of society, I hold the opinion that the author overlooks the function of appearance and behaviour of individuals in society. My view will be greatly strengthened by the following discussion.
To begin with, the look, dress, and act of people in society reveal their attitudes and interests. On the one hand, what people look and dress informe us their appearance. For example, we may assume a man whose head is bald and with thick glasses is a senior scholar as we may think that what's his look like is because of thinking too much about hard problems and spending too much time on reading innumerable books. If one always wearing some kind of sport shirt, we may naturally view him as a sportsman ora man who is crazing about sporting at least. On the other hand, it is the similar situation that we can know much about the behaviour of people through their acts. Imaging that a man who is fond of talking to others and enjoy good relationship among his friends or even unfamiliar people, we usually regard him as outgoing and open-minded, while a person who doesn't exactly express himself well, we may think he has a look of being buttoned in, a prisonor of his own nature. Although, this is some kind of subjective by judging someone from their appearance and behaviour, they do reveal some aspects of people.
In addition, the appearance and behaviour do indicate many aspects of a society. The development of human civilization as well as ideological gives a group people a unique way of thinking about beliefs, values, and ideas, and an understanding of how the world works and how they live and act in their own environment, which are been seen from their behaviour and appearance. A good example is that different national cultures shows differences both in appearance and behaviour. People in arabic countries are forbidden women to show their faces in the public as they have higher social standing than men. That is why we usually see the arabic women are alway wear a dark veiled. Compared with conservative culture in arabic countries, some nations seem to be completely different. People in Paris are more likely to dress in fashion no matter sex and age, which make France enjoy the well-famed reputation of opened and romantic. What's more, we may witness the changing of society the appearance and behaviour of people. Take China for example, decades ago, most Chinese people are extremely conventional. They dress like others, act like others, not talk to much to others, and not dare to express their own opinions. But now, with continuing development of reform and opening up of society, Chinese people are changing which can be seen form they dressing differently, more opened for communication, and sharing their own opinions with others.
However, we cannot count on observing the appearance and behavior of individuals to know well about society's ideas and values. Everyone is unique, which make their attitudes and interests unpredictable. Hostile people does not mean the society is hostile, and vice versa, which depends on different tendencys of ideology. In free societies, the diversity in appearances surely indicates a society that places high value on individual freedoms and cultural diversity. The American is one of such society, and everyone wants to go to US because of its freedom and democracy. People in this society are encouraged to be different with others in pursuit of something special and personally. In oppressed societies, however, people's customs and habits belie their true attitudes and values in any event. Take North Korea for example, government instead of its people determine the attitudes and interest in that country. People who against the will of authority must be faced to law. Just like a event happened last year, a men had been arrested because he saw the move of 2012 which is forbidden by the government. Under this situation, how can a individual show his true attitudes and interests as so small and powerless, thus how we can lean the ture ideas and values about a society?
To sum up, basing my conclusion on the illustrations and exposition mentioned above, accordingly, I hold that sometimes people look, dress, and act do reveals their attitudes and their values of society, but in some circumstance thing become more complicated. We cannot count on only observing the appearance and behavior of individuals to know well about society's ideas and values. What we saw may not what it is, and must evaluate all the cases to draw the trustworthy conclusion.
=======================
Revised By
=======================
作者: shevava 时间: 2010-5-11 18:16:11
本帖最后由 shevava 于 2010-5-16 20:48 编辑
===========
论点提纲
===========
===========
习作正文
===========
How the people look, dress, and act can reveal their attitudes and interests? The answer will be partly right, because, in some sense, the details presented by the people through his occasional performance are the real demonstration of his/her attitudes and interests. It is the same with relations between a society's ideas and values and the appearance and behavior of its people. In other words, the appearance and behavior of its people can reflect the society's ideas, and vice versa.
The behavior, values of the world and thinking are conditioned by the community since he was born, and during the process of growth, they are also influenced by the definite circumstances. Therefore, as a member of the society, their appearance and behavior are sculpted with the signs of the society to some extent that they differ with other ideas and values over the world distinctively. It can be said in the term that the people are the concrete reflection of the society, and without the concrete reflection, the society will be vacuum, not even to say its ideas and values. For example, with the great open and tolerance of the America, the people here are constructed to be brave to pursue of democracy and freedom.
The appearance and behavior of the people as a whole are determined by the society's ideas and values. The judgments of the good and the bad are conditioned by the tradition inherited from their forefathers. The history of one's life is accommodation to the life style and principles of the society. The black people is a case in the point that when they are looked down upon, they cannot enjoy many rights they ought to own, and they are slaved, however, in our modern society, with the fight down the racial discrimination, the black people are viewed as equal.
Reversely, the appearance and behavior and the people can also affect the ideas and values of the society to some extent, so that the progress of the society keep moving. When it comes to science, as an important member of the Renaissance, Copernicus presented the theory that the sun is the centre of the universe, which challenged the authority of the aristocracy, and promoted the change of the society. The case not only changed the society's ideas and values that they did not believe the church blindly, but promoted the progress of the society and humanity.
Overall, a society's ideas and values and the appearance and behavior of its people can play in a partnership, and they can affect and promote each other. The appearance and behavior of the people are the result of the society's ideas and values, and the society play an important role on the people.
| 欢迎光临 寄托家园留学论坛 (https://bbs.gter.net/) |
Powered by Discuz! X2 |