[a习作temp] argument163 第一篇阿狗，限时没有成功，也没怎么用模版，大家看写的行不？ [复制链接]

conquer0824
UID??2102638

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 0
寄托币: 1779
注册时间: 2005-5-18
精华: 0
帖子: 2

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2005-7-16 14:45:10 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

终于写出了第一篇阿狗，以前写了两篇都是半途而废，今天是硬着头皮写完了，而且没有限时成功，觉得时间不太够用，就这样开头段还没有用模版，只是简单的写了两句，是偶打字太慢?还是思维太慢? 都慢，:L汗....

Argument163 第3篇让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户共用时间：36分41秒 (time out 402 words) (finished 495words) (after revision 566words)
从2005年6月16日9时2分到2005年6月16日9时36分
------题目------
The following is taken from the editorial section of the local newspaper in Rockingham.
'In order to save a considerable amount of money, Rockingham's century-old town hall should be torn down and replaced by the larger and more energy-efficient building that some citizens have proposed. The old town hall is too small to comfortably accommodate the number of people who are employed by the town. In addition, it is very costly to heat the old hall in winter and cool it in summer. The new, larger building would be more energy efficient, costing less per square foot to heat and cool than the old hall. Furthermore, it would be possible to rent out some of the space in the new building, thereby generating income for the town of Rockingham.'
------正文------
At first glance, the argument seems to be logical; however, after carefully scrutinizing, I find there are several flaws that render it an untenable one.

On the one hand, one of the purposes for the arguer recommending to tear down the old town hall and built a new one is to save a considerable amount of money. But he fails to provide any convincing evidence to prove that the new one will save more money than the old one. He says that the new hall will be more energy efficient, and cost less per square foot to heat and cool than the old one. But he overlooks that the new one is bigger than the old one, so maybe the gross energy used will outweigh that used by the old one.

On the other hand, the arguer points out that it would be possible to rent out some of the space in the new building, thereby generating income. We should notice that another reason he proposes to build a larger town hall is to accommodate the number of the people comfortably. If he rents out some of the space, even he is propelled by the profits and rents out most of the space, the living condition of the people will be not improved, but deteriorated. And he fails to provide any evidence that anyone will rent the space, if no one is interested in rending it, building a larger hall will be a waste of both money and space. So, before building it, he should first investigate whether there is any one want to rend some of the space, and calculate whether the rents can cover the cost.

Last but not least, by recommending to build a larger, new town hall, the arguer fails to consider any other alternative choices. Can the old hall be used any longer? And whether it has become dangerous for people to live in it? If it is still in good condition, and can serve to function for a long period, then it should not be torn down. Additionally, even if it is out of use, to rear it down is not a good choice, for we can know from the argument that the hall is a century-old one, so even it is of no utilitarian use, it should also be preserved for its aesthetic and historical value. The arguer says that it is costly to heat the old hall in winter and cool it in summer, but this lend no credibility that it should be torn down; this problem can be simply resolved by changing efficient heating and cooling equipment. And for the problem that the old hall cannot accommodate comfortably the number of the people who are employed by the town, it can also be settled by building another new, smaller hall, which can accommodate the rest of the people. Additionally, tearing down the old hall and building a new one will cost a lot of money, which may not be offset by the money saved from energy.

From what has been discussed, the conclusion drawn by the arguer that the old hall should be torn down and a new one should be built is an unpersuasive one. To come to the final and sound conclusion, he should calculate and compare carefully the costs of all the alternative means, and choose from them the most efficient and saving one.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-7-17 at 12:22 ]

We are sad today, and we will be sad for quite a while. We are not moving on. We are embracing our mourning. We are Virginia Tech ...

回应
0

使用道具举报

conquer0824
UID??2102638

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 0
寄托币: 1779
注册时间: 2005-5-18
精华: 0
帖子: 2

沙发

发表于 2005-7-17 00:06:35 |只看该作者

自己顶，居然没有人看，第一次写阿狗，不知道写得怎么样，大家多提宝贵意见，必回拍

We are sad today, and we will be sad for quite a while. We are not moving on. We are embracing our mourning. We are Virginia Tech ...

使用道具举报

SinkyYan
UID??2114484

新手上路

Rank: 1

声望: 0
寄托币: 11
注册时间: 2005-7-7
精华: 0
帖子: 0

板凳

发表于 2005-7-17 23:08:57 |只看该作者

第一次写的话不错了几个点都找的蛮全的但着句话有点别扭If he rents out some of the space, even he is propelled by the profits and rents out most of the space,（着句话好想多此一举了把） the living condition of the people will be not improved, but deteriorated. 还有不该用living condition把 city hall 说不定用working environment更好
还有就是那个第四段写的东西听多但是好象看起来有点乱建议在修改以下

使用道具举报