[a习作temp] argument205 时间... [复制链接]

monkeydry
UID：183691

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 286
注册时间: 2004-10-26
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2005-8-2 22:06:48 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

The following appeared in a recommendation from the president of Amburg's Chamber of Commerce.
'Last October the city of Belleville installed high intensity lighting in its central business district, and vandalism there declined almost immediately. The city of Amburg has recently begun police patrols on bicycles in its business district but the rate of vandalism there remains constant. Since high intensity lighting is apparently the most effective way to combat crime, we should install such lighting throughout Amburg. By reducing crime in this way, we can revitalize the declining neighborhoods in our city.'
---------------------------
The recommendation suggests that in order to revitalize the city, Amburg city should install high intensity lighting to reduce crime. This suggestion seems to be logical at the first glance, however, after the careful examination in the following argument on the evidences provided by the arguer, it will reveal how groundless and unreliable it is.
First of all, there is no proved evidence shows that the decreasing of vandalism in Belleville is the direct result of intensity lighting in the central business district. It is quite possible that the education on this thing to the residents in that area has caused effect, which prevents that bad phenomenon obviously. It is also likely that the vandalism happened before was made by some fixed criminals who are recently arrested by polices. In short, there are many other possible reasons influencing the declined vandalism.
At the second place, even if high intensity lighting is a reason to combat crime, it is hasty to claim that that is the most effective method. Though police patrols do not reduce crime immediately, it does not mean that installing lighting is the best way. Granted that the lighting decline the crime in Belleville immediately, no reasons show the same thing is not proved to exist reliably. The conditions of the two cities are possibly different. Perhaps the rate of crime in Amburg is always higher than in Belleville, so the lighting policy does not cause effect in Amburg in a short time. Anyway, high intensity lighting is not proved to be the best way to reduce vandalism and the installing lighting decision upon this unwarranted reason is also unconsidered.
Last but not least, there is no connection between declined vandalism and revitalization in the city. A healthy condition in a city is just one factors concerning revitalization. There are many other elements consists the renewal of city, including the condition of business improving, the education rising and so on. Only declining the vandalism does not mean the total revival.
Consequently, it seems reasonable for the citizens in Amburg to install lighting since it is natural for their willing to construct their city better. However, before any final decisions are made, the inhabitants and policy makers in the area should evaluate all the possible alternative and reasons influencing their ultimate aim.

回应
0

使用道具举报

yuemingjushi
UID：2108406

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 727
注册时间: 2005-6-12
精华: 0
帖子: 0

沙发

发表于 2005-8-3 13:30:21 |只看该作者

The recommendation suggests that in order to revitalize the city, Amburg city should install high intensity lighting to reduce crime. This suggestion seems to be logical at the first glance, however, after the careful examination in the following argument on the evidences provided by the arguer, it will reveal how groundless and unreliable it is.(一个句子中出现两个it感觉有点重复)First of all, there is no proved evidence（证据还需要被证明么？） shows that the decreasing of vandalism in Belleville is the direct result of intensity lighting in the central business district. It is quite possible that the education on this thing to the residents in that area has caused effect, which prevents that bad phenomenon obviously. It is also likely that the vandalism happened before was made by some fixed criminals who are recently arrested by polices（police个人意见，可能不合理）. In short, there are many other possible reasons influencing the declined vandalism.
At the second place, even if high intensity lighting is a reason to combat crime, it is hasty to claim that that（我觉得后一个可以改成it） is the most effective method. Though police patrols do not reduce crime immediately, it does not mean that installing（加intensity） lighting is the best way. Granted that the lighting decline the crime in Belleville immediately, no reasons show the same thing is not proved to exist reliably（有点不通）. The conditions of the two （each） cities are possibly different. Perhaps the rate of crime in Amburg is always higher than in Belleville, so the lighting policy does not cause effect in Amburg in a short time. Anyway, high intensity lighting is not proved to be the best way to reduce vandalism and the installing lighting decision upon this unwarranted reason is also unconsidered.
Last but not least, there is no connection between declined vandalism and revitalization in the city. A healthy condition in a city is just one factors（单复数有问题） concerning revitalization. There are many other elements consists the renewal of city, including the condition of business improving, the education rising and so on. Only declining the vandalism does not mean the total revival.
Consequently, it seems reasonable for the citizens in Amburg to install lighting since it is natural for their willing to construct their city better. However, before any final decisions are made, the inhabitants and policy makers in the area should evaluate all the possible alternative and reasons influencing their ultimate aim.

总的来讲还是写得不错的，错误点找的很好，语言还有待改进。本人水平比较低，将就着参考一下吧。有空拍一下我的
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... ge=1&highlight=
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... ge=1&highlight=

使用道具举报