刨根问底看范文之argument篇--第一集交通事故的困扰

jessicaluluUID：2471730

The agrument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. By making a comparison of the region of Forestville, the town with the higher speed limit and therefore automobile accidents, with the region of Elmsford, an area of a lower speed limit and subsequently fewer accidents, the argument for reducing Forestville's speed limits in order to decrease accidents seems logical.
Well-presented…well reasoned 结构对仗工整
By making a comparison of A with B 两事物进行比较的可以借鉴此结构
subsequently, therefore,连接词的使用首段概括了argument的大意以及作者写这个topic的目的
用词及语言特色：句子精炼，用了大量的介词引导，另外范文里连接词的使用是一大特色，使得上下文显得逻辑关系紧密，承接自然
However, the citizens of Forestville are failing to consider other possible alternatives to the increasing car accidents after the raise in speed limit. Such alternatives may include the fact that there are less reliable cars traveling the roads in Forestville, or that the age bracket of those in Elmsford may be more conducive to driving safely. It is possible that there are more younger, inexperienced, or more elderly, unsafe drivers in Forestville than there are in Elmsford. In addition, the citizens have failed to consider the geographical and physical terrain of the two different areas. Perhaps Forestville's highway is in an area of more dangerous curves, sharp turns, or has many intersections or merging points where accidents are more likely to occur. It appears reasonable, therefore, for the citizens to focus on these trouble spots than to reduce the speed in the entire area. Elmsford may be an area of easier driving conditions where accidents are less likely to occur regardless of the speed limit.
TS: 用however转折引出的topic senctence，简要概括了本段要说明的内容，即影响行车安全的其它可能原因，其后列举：1). 车子本身的原因；2). 道路本身的原因；3). 人即司机本身的原因；4). 不同的地理、地形及自然因素，重点写，列举了一些可能性。毕竟这个是所有点点里最重要的。受Bernina的启发，发现整段确实是在针对neighboring做文章。两个neighboring的地方，什么才是影响行车安全的根本呢？行车行车，首先就是车子本身，其次是车子行驶的地方－路，最后是驾驶车子的人－司机。整个思路从车－路－人，从客观到主观。更何况，两个地方的地形及自然因素还有可能不尽相同呢。进行阐述。结尾句对这个做一个总结。
Be conducive to doing sth. 有益于做某事
A six-month period is not a particularly long time frame for the citizens to determine that speed limit has influenced the number of automobile accidents in the area. It is mentioned in the argument that Elmsford accidents decreased during the time period. This may have been a time, such as during harsh weather conditions, when less people were driving on the road and therefore the number of accidents decreased. However, Forestville citizens, perhaps coerced by employment or other requirements, were unable to avoid driving on the roads. Again, the demographics of the population are important. It is possible that Elmsford citizens do not have to travel far from work or work from their home, or do not work at all. Are there more people in Forestville than there were sic months ago? If so, there may be an increased number of accidents due to more automobiles on the road, and not due to the increased speed limits. Also in reference to the activities of the population, it is possible that Forestville inhabitants were traveling during less safe times of the day, such as early in the morning, or during twilight. Work or family habits may have encouraged citizens to drive during this time when Elmsford residents may not have been forced to do so.
Core word: the same six-month period，关键点same, six TS：这6个月的时间里发生的事情，可能并不具有广泛适用性和代表性。作者并没有直接攻击6个月这个具体的时间太短或者怎么样，而是举例说明这6个月里可能出现的影响车祸发生量的事件。世界上没有完全相同的两段时间，那么很多很多事情发生了。变化，嗯对，变化，seiranzcc1说的变化提醒了我。本文比较的是the number of automobile accidents的提高率，即现在的number of automible accidents－6个月前的number of automible accidents 现在的number of automible accidents 那么车祸的发生跟上路的车子数量有关，万一根本就没车子上路，那车祸的发生率肯定要降噢。如此，举例说明。此外6个月毕竟是一个时间段，在写每一种可能发生的情况时，F应该先跟自己这6个月有没有发生跟之前不一样的事情，比如天气、上路的车子数量甚至居民人数有无改变。乃至人们的生活习惯。再跟E地比。作者再阐述每一个点点的时候都是此思路。总之，变化！
Overall, the reasoning behind decreasing Forestville's speed limit back to its original seems logical as presented above since the citizens are acting in their own best interests and want to protect their safety. However, before any final decisions are made about the reduction in speed limit, the citizens and officials of Forestville should evaluate all possible alternatives and causes for the increased number of accidents over the six-month period as compared to Elmsford.
结尾对应题干的结论，给出建议。

    简言之，这篇文就是在说，限速导致车祸发生率增高。具体说来，F地，限速使得车祸数目增高；而其邻居E地，没限速车祸没增多。所以F地应该取消限速。数据来自两地相同的一段时间－６个月。那么首先应该分析，哪些因素会导致车祸发生，其实文章2,3段都在说这件事，只不过关键词一个是neighboring，一个是the same six-month period。其次我觉得，还应该让步分析限速在这里面到底起多大作用。比如限速确实造成了诸如人们的安全意识下降之类导致车祸增多，这种可能性是存在的。所以尚需要对车祸发生的alternatives进行分析，这个可以放在末段。

感想：
１、Topic sentence的重要性，最好能在每个分论点的最后有个小的总结或者过渡至下一个观点的句子。
２、每一个攻击点时对原文的意思作一简要归纳。帮助自己明确到底这一段自己想表达啥。
３、攻击数据时，很重要的一点要关注，作者给出的到底是具体的数值还是percent，是平均值还是点值，是否是相同性质的两个数间的比较。若两个具体的数值或者percent相比较，要注意样本的总大小和抽样方法是否科学，若是点值和平均值比较，这种比较方式本身就有问题（例如我们写过的argument 242）。（总觉得关于数字还有些可以挖掘的，待我再想想）
４、范文中，作者通常都是先重点分析主体F地可能出现的问题，再写一点E地可能的问题作为辅助。这个就是告诉我们，始终要搞清楚，谁才是题干里的主要对象，比如这篇，就是写给F地的人看的，所以要以分析F地的实际情况为主，不然你分析来分析去都在说E地云云大放厥词，那F地的人又不了解E地的情况，可能并不能感同身受呢，说理效果也就要差很多。
５、作者用了大量may be, should, seem, likely, appear一类的词，我想是因为太过绝对的表达在GRE要求严谨的文章里不适用吧。
６、让步无处不在。。。让我们自己的文写得再平心静气一点吧，让阅卷人再看得平心静气一点吧。
7、写argument确实不是在找茬挑错！