ARGUMENT134 [Victors小组]7月1日作业 by jennetrj

jennetrjUID: 2275453

ARGUMENT134 - The following was taken from a guide for aspiring writers.

"New writers usually cannot convince large, prestigious publishers that their work is marketable, so they must first publish with smaller, less well-known presses to establish a sales record. But the editors of Mystery Writers Magazine have good news for aspiring writers: the number of mystery novels published in the last two years has grown significantly, and more people read mysteries than any other type of novel. In addition, almost half of the mystery novels published last year were written by first-time novel writers. Since there is apparently an expanding market for mystery novels, all publishers will want to increase the number of mystery novels they publish. Therefore, new writers should write mystery novels to increase their chances for first-time publication with a larger, prestigious company."
WORDS: 544          TIME: 00:30:00         

In this argument, the author recommends new writers to write mystery novels so as to be more probable to have their first work published by larger prestigious company. To justify this recommendation, the author cites the news came from the editors of Mystery Writers Magazine, indicating that mystery novels were popular among people and those novels published in the last two years were increased. Moreover, the author claims that about half of mystery novels published last year were written by first-time novelists. However, close scrutiny reveals several flaws in it.

To begin with, the news cited in the passage is the biased one that showed little credit to support the assumption that mysterious novels were popular. Apparently editors of the magazine specialized in mystery novels would like to broaden their pool of candidates to ensure more original mystery novels, inevitably, they would like more writers to write such kinds of novels. Until the author shows other reliable evidence about the popularity of novels, the recommendation based on this could not be taken seriously.

Assuming that the news is credible, the author unfairly assumes that more people would like to read mystery novels that were written by first time writers. However, this is not the case. Maybe those new published mysterious novels written by new writers were on the worst-selling list, and the best selling mystery novels were still the ones written by famous novelists. Or perhaps it could be true that more people like to read novels other than mysteries. Without eliminating or even considering such possibility renders author's assumption that mysterious novels written by first-time writers were popular in the market.

Granted that new writers were success in writing mysterious novels in the last two years, no promise could be made that the trend will continue. No evidence provided in the passage supports it, Commonsense informs us that the popularity of reading is easy to change, and perhaps next month people are willing to read poems. Or maybe classical novels will get their reviving. Either scenario, if true, would serve to undermine author's conclusion that if new writers start their career in writing mysterious novels there would be the success.

Finally, the author hastily makes the conclusion that larger prestigious firms would publish work written by new writers since there's the possibility of best selling among those writers. Perhaps large firms care more about their repute and would not to endanger it just for some possibility of better sales records. Or even though the new writer is genius and the novel he/she wrote is welcomed in the market, it still bellows the threshold to attract large famous companies to publish the work. Until the author provide enough evidence to show the possibility for large firms to publish new writer’s work, I could not accept the recommendation.

In sum, the argument is groundless as it stands. To consolidate it, the author should provide more evidences--maybe by polls among the citizens--to show that mystery novels are popular. In addition, the author should assure us that those most popular ones were those written by the first time writers. To better assess the argument, we need to know whether large companies would like to have those first-time writer's work published so as to make profits.

coraoneUID: 2233021

收下了，改好发上来，加油 jennetrj      
已经可以限时了哦，很强！我限时一直失败哦郁闷

coraoneUID: 2233021

ARGUMENT134 - The following was taken from a guide for aspiring writers.

"New writers usually cannot convince large, prestigious publishers that their work is marketable, so they must first publish with smaller, less well-known presses to establish a sales record. But the editors of Mystery Writers Magazine have good news for aspiring writers: the number of mystery novels published in the last two years has grown significantly, and more people read mysteries than any other type of novel. In addition, almost half of the mystery novels published last year were written by first-time novel writers. Since there is apparently an expanding market for mystery novels, all publishers will want to increase the number of mystery novels they publish. Therefore, new writers should write mystery novels to increase their chances for first-time publication with a larger, prestigious company."
WORDS: 544          TIME: 00:30:00         

In this argument, the author recommends new writers to write mystery novels so as to be more probable to have their first work published by larger prestigious company. To justify this recommendation, the author cites the news came from the editors of Mystery Writers Magazine, indicating that mystery novels were popular among people and those novels published in the last two years were increased. Moreover, the author claims that about half of mystery novels published last year were written by first-time novelists. However, close scrutiny reveals several flaws in it.

To begin with, the news cited in the passage is the biased one that showed little credit to support the assumption that mysterious novels were popular. Apparently editors of the magazine specialized in mystery novels would like to broaden their pool of candidates to ensure more original mystery novels, inevitably, they would like more writers to write such kinds of novels. Until the author shows other reliable evidence about the popularity of novels, the recommendation based on this could not be taken seriously.(这一段的攻击点我不是很赞同，可以再考虑下)

Assuming that the news is credible, the author unfairly assumes that more people would like to read mystery novels that were written by first time writers. However, this is not the case. Maybe those new published mysterious novels written by new writers were on the worst-selling list, and the best selling mystery novels were still the ones written by famous novelists. Or perhaps it could be true that more people like to read novels other than mysteries. Without eliminating or even considering such possibility renders author's assumption that mysterious novels written by first-time writers were popular in the market.

Granted that new writers were success in writing mysterious novels in the last two years, no promise could be made that the trend will continue. No evidence provided in the passage supports it, Commonsense informs us that the popularity of reading is easy to change, and perhaps next month people are willing to read poems. Or maybe classical novels will get their reviving. Either scenario, if true, would serve to undermine author's conclusion that if new writers start their career in writing mysterious novels there would be the success.

Finally, the author hastily makes the conclusion that larger prestigious firms would publish work written by new writers since there's the possibility of best selling among those writers. Perhaps large firms care more about their repute and would not to endanger it just for some possibility of better sales records. Or even though the new writer is genius and the novel he/she wrote is welcomed in the market, it still bellows the threshold to attract large famous companies to publish the work. Until the author provide enough evidence to show the possibility for large firms to publish new writer’s work, I could not accept the recommendation.

In sum, the argument is groundless as it stands. To consolidate it, the author should provide more evidences--maybe by polls among the citizens--to show that mystery novels are popular. In addition, the author should assure us that those most popular ones were those written by the first time writers. To better assess the argument, we need to know whether large companies would like to have those first-time writer's work published so as to make profits.

语言上jennetrj米有任何问题，你很出色。逻辑上分析的也很到位。学习了。欢迎讨论
语言上再突出一点亮点，我觉得5分铁定没问题了。。6分很有希望，加油
coraone

[ 本帖最后由 coraone 于 2007-7-4 00:12 编辑 ]