寄托家园留学论坛

标题: 0910AW 【同主题写作】第七期－－ARGUMENT101by wildrose800331 [打印本页]

作者: wildrose800331 时间: 2009-6-16 20:00:31 标题: 0910AW 【同主题写作】第七期－－ARGUMENT101by wildrose800331

本帖最后由 wildrose800331 于 2009-6-16 20:50 编辑

09.6.16
19：12
45mins
头晕
The company, mentioned in the argument, is ambitious about its new version of Wheat-O cereal in three regards: increasing sales, increasing profits and meanwhile, improving the health of its customers. The prospect is partly based on a recent survey, in which subjects eating soybeans at least five times a week had remarkably lower cholesterol levels than those eating no soybeans at all. It also depends on the decision of the cereal company that they will fortify the Wheat-O cereal with soy protein. This assumption, however, is at least premature or too optimistic to be true.
Firs of all, correlation of soybeans and lower cholesterol levels does not necessarily mean the causal relations between them, needless to presume that soy protein can cause lower cholesterol. The survey did not prove that soy beans can cause lower cholesterol levels, not did identify which element of soy beans, for instance soy protein, was linked to lower cholesterol level. Without evident effect of soy protein, the conclusion is groundless that fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein can lower cholesterol levels.
Moreover, the following presumptions about the bright blueprint are unwarranted and fallacious. Besides fortification or improvement of cereal, more considerations needs to be taken to increase sales, like advertising propaganda, popularization, promotion and free samples. In addition to the efforts of the company itself, it should pay at least equal attention to its competitors to ensure their advantages over others. Similarly, making profits is a more complicated process than increasing sales. Other factors should be taken into account, such as reducing cost, control inventory, and so forth. Hence, it is incredible to deduce that the company can increase sales and profits only by fortifying.
It is, as well, presumptuous to believe that fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein can improve the health of the customers. Since not all customers have cholesterol problems, they benefit little from the aspect of factual prerequisite. It is also likely that some customers have other healthy problems that have nothing with cholesterol, therefore soy beans has no impact on their problems.
All in all, the conclusion reached in the argument is lack of legitimacy and creditability. To make it more convincing, the author needs to point out that soy protein are the very element of soy beans associated with lower cholesterol levels. To solidify its deduction, the arguer should consider more variables, kick out other possibilities and then generate the only concluding one.

作者: xdjtf 时间: 2009-6-17 11:02:05

1# wildrose800331
The company, mentioned in the argument, is ambitious about its new version of Wheat-O cereal in three regards: increasing sales, increasing profits and meanwhile, improving the health of its customers. The prospect is partly based on a recent survey, in which subjects eating (who eat) soybeans at least five times a week had remarkably lower cholesterol levels than those eating(who take) no soybeans at all. It also depends on the decision of the cereal company that they will fortify the Wheat-O cereal with soy protein. This assumption, however, is at least premature or too optimistic to be true.
Firs of all, correlation of soybeans and lower cholesterol levels does not necessarily mean the causal relations( 个人感觉用 cause-effect relation好一点） between them, needless to presume that soy protein can cause lower cholesterol. The survey did not prove that soy beans can cause lower cholesterol levels, not did identify which element of soy beans, for instance soy protein, was linked to lower cholesterol level (第2句和第一句仿佛重复了，你的意思就是说相关性不代表因果性，并且没有证明即使起作用也不一定是蛋白质起作用，你第2句也是同一个意思）. Without evident effect of soy protein, the conclusion is groundless that fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein can lower cholesterol levels.（这一段的论据你的观点很明确，但是论证还是缺乏力度，没太论证清楚）
Moreover, the following presumptions about the bright blueprint are unwarranted and fallacious. Besides fortification or improvement of cereal, more considerations needs to be taken to increase sales, like advertising propaganda, popularization, promotion and free samples. In addition to the efforts of the company itself, it should pay at least equal attention to its competitors to ensure their advantages over others. Similarly, making profits is a more complicated process than increasing sales. Other factors should be taken into account, such as reducing cost, control inventory, and so forth. Hence, it is incredible（晕，这词都来，太夸张了吧。。） to deduce that the company can increase sales and profits only by fortifying.
It is, as well, presumptuous to believe that fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein can improve the health of the customers. Since not all customers have cholesterol problems, they benefit little from the aspect of factual prerequisite. It is also likely that some customers have other healthy problems that have nothing with cholesterol, therefore soy beans has no impact on their problems.（我觉得你这个可以反过来说，就说人们的健康不仅仅与cholesterol相关，还有很多因素比如人们的心理，运动量等等）
All in all, the conclusion reached in the argument is lack（lack) of legitimacy and creditability. To make it more convincing, the author needs to point out that soy protein are the very element of soy beans associated with lower cholesterol levels. To solidify its deduction, the arguer should consider more variables, kick out (rule out) other possibilities and then generate the only concluding one.
整体感觉你的文章思路很明确，只是论证方法和结构上还有一些问题
在结尾方面感觉你应该给出一些你的建议而不是一味重复上面的论述内容，或者可以适当肯定这篇文章可取之点
纯属个人感觉

作者: wildrose800331 时间: 2009-6-17 22:16:34

The company, mentioned in the argument, is ambitious about its new version of Wheat-O cereal in three regards: increasing sales, increasing profits and meanwhile, improving the health of its customers. The prospect is partly based on a recent survey, in which subjects eating (who eat) soybeans at least five times a week had remarkably lower cholesterol levels than those eating(who take) no soybeans at all. It also depends on the decision of the cereal company that they will fortify the Wheat-O cereal with soy protein. This assumption, however, is at least premature or too optimistic to be true.这里用分词作定语是可以的
Firs of all, correlation of soybeans and lower cholesterol levels does not necessarily mean the cause-effect relations between them, needless to presume that soy protein rather than other elements can cause lower cholesterol. Soy beans has not been proved to cause lower cholesterol levels in the survey. Even if it can lower cholesterol level, the effective elements in it are not necessarily soy protein. Thus it is groundless that fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein can lower cholesterol levels.（这一段的论据你的观点很明确，但是论证还是缺乏力度，没太论证清楚）
Moreover, the following presumptions about the bright blueprint are unwarranted and fallacious. Besides fortification or improvement of cereal, more considerations needs to be taken to increase sales, like advertising propaganda, popularization, promotion and free samples. In addition to the efforts of the company itself, it should pay at least equal attention to its competitors to ensure their advantages over others. Similarly, making profits is a more complicated process than increasing sales. Other factors should be taken into account, such as reducing cost, control inventory, increasing gross sales and so forth. Hence, it is incredible改成 unconvincing（晕，这词都来，太夸张了吧。。偶错误理解了意思换了哦） to deduce that the company can increase sales and profits only by fortifying.
It is, as well, presumptuous to believe that fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein can improve the health of the customers. Since not all customers have cholesterol problems, they benefit little from the aspect of factual prerequisite. It is also likely that some customers have other healthy problems that have nothing with cholesterol, covering diabetes, insomnia and others, therefore soy beans has no beneficial impact on their healty problems.（我觉得你这个可以反过来说，就说人们的健康不仅仅与cholesterol相关，还有很多因素比如人们的心理，运动量等等偶是不想扩大范围就针对大豆和胆固醇来说的）
All in all, the conclusion reached in the argument is lack（lack这里是啥意思？) of legitimacy and creditability. To make it more convincing, the author needs to point out that soy protein are the very element of soy beans associated with lower cholesterol levels. To solidify its deduction, the arguer should consider more variables, rule out（这个词偶喜欢谢谢啦) other possibilities and then generate the only concluding one.
整体感觉你的文章思路很明确，只是论证方法和结构上还有一些问题
在结尾方面感觉你应该给出一些你的建议而不是一味重复上面的论述内容，或者可以适当肯定这篇文章可取之点
纯属个人感觉

作者: eric_scut 时间: 2009-7-10 21:48:47

09.6.16
19：12
45mins
头晕
The company, mentioned in the argument, is ambitious about its new version of Wheat-O cereal in three regards: increasing sales, increasing profits and meanwhile, improv ...
wildrose800331 发表于 2009-6-16 20:00

The company, mentioned in the argument, is ambitious about its new version of Wheat-O cereal in three regards: increasing sales, increasing profits and meanwhile, improving the health of its customers. The prospect is partly based on a recent survey, in which subjects eating soybeans at least five times a week had remarkably lower cholesterol levels than those eating no soybeans at all. It also depends on the decision of the cereal company that they will fortify the Wheat-O cereal with soy protein. This assumption, however, is at least premature or too optimistic to be true.

Firs of all, correlation of soybeans and lower cholesterol levels does not necessarily mean the causal relations between them, needless to presume that soy protein can cause lower cholesterol. The survey did not prove that soy beans can cause lower cholesterol levels, not did identify which element of soy beans, for instance soy protein, was linked to lower cholesterol level. Without evident effect (显著效果?) of soy protein, the conclusion is groundless that fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein can lower cholesterol levels. (1. 这一段的论证上，应该是有一个让步关系存在的。大豆与低胆固醇的关联关系不意味着因果关系，即使是大豆导致低胆固醇，也没有证据表明是大豆里的大豆蛋白在起作用。这样子论证比较清晰。楼主的行文上给我的感觉是把这递进关系给并列化了。2. 另外，第1、2句话好像是同义重复了，冗余？3. 再提供一个思路，即使大豆蛋白导致低胆固醇，但是大豆蛋白和Wheat-O cereal的复合一定会有同样的效果，可能还会有副作用，有害健康。个人意见)

Moreover, the following presumptions about the bright blueprint are unwarranted and fallacious. Besides fortification or improvement of cereal, more considerations needs (主谓一致问题) to be taken to increase sales, like advertising propaganda, popularization, promotion and free samples. In addition to the efforts of the company itself, it should pay at least equal attention to its competitors to ensure their advantages over others. (这一句有点难理解，确保竞争对手比其它公司的优势？)
Similarly, making profits is a more complicated process than increasing sales. Other factors should be taken into account, such as reducing cost, control inventory, and so forth. Hence, it is incredible to deduce that the company can increase sales and profits only by fortifying.

It is, as well, presumptuous to believe that fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein can improve the health of the customers. Since not all customers have cholesterol problems, they benefit little from the aspect of factual prerequisite. It is also likely that some customers have other healthy problems that have nothing (to do) with cholesterol, therefore soy beans has no impact on their problems.

All in all, the conclusion reached in the argument is lack of legitimacy and creditability. To make it more convincing, the author needs to point out that soy protein are the very element of soy beans associated with lower cholesterol levels. To solidify its deduction, the arguer should consider more variables, kick out other possibilities and then generate the only concluding one.

(总体上写得很好。很佩服楼主的功底，句式、用词都值得我学习。)

作者: wildrose800331 时间: 2009-7-13 15:00:30

The company, mentioned in the argument, is ambitious about its new version of Wheat-O cereal in three regards: increasing sales, increasing profits and meanwhile, improving the health of its customers. The prospect is partly based on a recent survey, in which subjects eating soybeans at least five times a week had remarkably lower cholesterol levels than those eating no soybeans at all. It also depends on the decision of the cereal company that they will fortify the Wheat-O cereal with soy protein. This assumption, however, is at least premature or too optimistic to be true.

First of all, correlation of soybeans and lower cholesterol levels does not necessarily mean the causal relations between them, needless to presume that soy protein in soybeans can cause lower cholesterol. The survey did not prove which element of soy beans, for instance soy protein, caused lower cholesterol level, nor did not identify whether fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein can lower cholesterol levels. It is possibly the opposite that fortification of soy protein can increase cholesterol levels or bring out other side effects.

Moreover, the following presumptions about the bright blueprint are unwarranted and fallacious. Besides fortification or improvement of cereal, more considerations need (主谓一致问题) to be taken to increase sales, like advertising propaganda, popularization, promotion and free samples. In addition to the efforts of the company itself, it should pay at least equal attention to its competitors to ensure the advantages of the company over others. (确保自己比其它公司的优势？) Similarly, making profits is a more complicated process than increasing sales. Other factors should be taken into account, such as reducing cost, control inventory, and so forth. Hence, it is incredible to deduce that the company can increase sales and profits only by fortifying. It is, as well, presumptuous to believe that fortifying Wheat-O cereal with soy protein can improve the health of the customers. Since not all customers have cholesterol problems, they benefit little from the aspect of factual prerequisite. It is also likely that some customers have other healthy problems that have nothing (to do) with cholesterol, therefore soy beans has no impact on their problems.

All in all, the conclusion reached in the argument is lack of legitimacy and creditability. To make it more convincing, the author needs to point out that soy protein are the very element of soy beans associated with lower cholesterol levels. To solidify its deduction, the arguer should consider more variables, kick out other possibilities and then generate the only concluding one.

欢迎光临寄托家园留学论坛 (https://bbs.gter.net/)