[a习作temp] 习作求拍 [复制链接]

jupiterding
UID：2909030

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 145
注册时间: 2010-9-18
精华: 0
帖子: 4

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2011-6-9 19:10:06 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a "Palean" basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could have crossed it only by boat, and no Palean boats have been found. Thus it follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean.

In the argument ,the arguer arrived at the argument that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean. To strengthen his point, the arguer provide the evidence that the woven baskets have been only founded in the village of palea,. Furthermore, another factor that the palean basket were discovered in another acient village across the brim river from palea. Without sound assumption in favor of the conclusion or compelling and convincing evidence , the argument , as far as i am concerned, is groundless and unacceptable .

First of all, the arguer attempt to establish the causal relationship between the fact the woven baskets were found only in the village of palea and the claim that they can only be made by palean people.however, there are some other highly possible explanations to that fact. For example, perhaps , this kind of baskets were belong to another civilization which has disappeared in history we haven't acknowledged ; in addition , it is possible ,the baskets were brought in this village because of war or trade,not made by pa;ean people . In a word, unless the other possible reasons have ben considered or ruled out, this argument is unacceptable.
Secondly, the author claim that it is no way for the ancient paleans to cross the rive on an gratuitous assumption that, thousands years ago , the river is as the same as today's. Actually , the same river at that time might just be a brook people even can walk through , or there was even no river at all because of geology movement . What's more , the arguer commit an hasty conclusion that the palean people were not able to cross river just because no boats have been found yet. The author neglect the fact that boats of palean might , which were made of wood or other natural materials, have been eroded out or just destroyed by war fire.
In summary , at first glance, the argument seems to be appealing and plausible, but further analysis tell us it is neither credible nor persuasive. If the argument includes the given factors discussed above, it wound have been more thorough or adequate .

回应
0

使用道具举报

yiyiniu
UID：3038018

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 370
注册时间: 2011-3-22
精华: 0
帖子: 3

沙发

发表于 2011-6-11 19:45:08 |只看该作者

In the argument ,the arguer arrived at the argument -->...the speaker....at the point (连着三个arg..，有点绕嘴)

the arguer provide the evidence -->...provided...

arguer attempt to establish --> ...attempted...

this kind of baskets were belong --->was belong

civilization which has disappeared in history we haven't acknowledged -->civilization that has disappeared in history and that we didn't acknowledge.

the author claim that it is no way-->the author claimed that there was no way

thousands years ago -->thousands of years ago

the river is as the same as today's-->the river was the same as it is at present.

the arguer commit an hasty -->...committed...

一点建议望有帮助
:handshake

使用道具举报