[a习作temp] argument37 泡面队13号作业 [复制链接]

bishao422
UID：204362

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 281
注册时间: 2005-4-5
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2005-8-13 20:37:40 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

37 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 unique to 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 only have crossed it by boat, but there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. And boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared. Moreover, Paleans would have had no need to cross the river—the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game. It follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea.

一种具有独特花纹的编织篮子以前只在史前村庄P的临近地区发现过，因而被认为是P居民所独有的。然而最近，考古学家在一个与P存隔着一条叫做B的河流的村庄L发现了一个这样的P篮子。B的河水很深很宽，所以古代P人只能坐船穿过它，但没有证据表明P的人拥有船只。而且能够运载大量人和货物的船只直到P人消失几千年之后才出现。而且，P人应该没有必要穿过这条河流――P周围的林地有丰富的果实和小动物。这表明这种所谓的P篮子不是P村的人所独有的。

In this argument, the author concludes the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea when the archaeologists discovered such a “Palean” basket in Lithos, an ancient village arose the Brim River from Palea. To support this conclusion, the author cites many evidences, however, clarify scrutiny of the author’s argument reveals that this argument is unpersuasive to some extent.

To begin with, the author unfairly to infer that the Palean couldn’t cross the Brim River because that the Brim River is very deep and broad, and there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. The author overlooks other possibilities that perhaps the Brim River wasn’t so deep and broad at that time as now, maybe it was only a small river thousands years ago. As we know, the geography would have had a great change during thousands years, so, even though the Palean had no boats, they could also cross this small river by swimming and brought the Palean baskets to Lithos. Without ruling out such explanations, the author’s assumption is dubious.

Secondly, even if the Brim River was deep and broad thousands years ago, and the ancient Paleans could only have cross it by boat, the author assumes that if Palean wanted to cross the river, the should have had some boats, which can carry groups of people and cargo were developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared. But the author makes a mistake that if the Paleans had a little boat that could just carry one people or a basket, they could also bring the Palean basket to Lithos. So the author can’t convince me.

In addition, the author concludes too hastily that Paleans would have had no need to cross the river for that the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game. But this need not be the case, the author ignores that maybe some day there happened a disaster of disease in Palea, some of the Paleans had to leave Palean to Lithos. So, it is not the necessary condition for the author claims that Paleans wouldn’t leave Palea forever.

To sum up, the author’s argument is logically unsound. To strengthen it, the author must provide better evidence that the Palean couldn’t cross the Brim River and there had no one Palean basket could bring from Palea to Lithos. To better support the argument, I would need more information about the factor why Paleans never leave away from Plean.

回应
0

使用道具举报

skylov
UID：209137

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 0
寄托币: 380
注册时间: 2005-5-6
精华: 0
帖子: 0

沙发

发表于 2005-8-14 01:38:33 |只看该作者

回拍回拍~~~~~传统G德~~!!!

37 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 unique to 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 only have crossed it by boat, but there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. And boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared. Moreover, Paleans would have had no need to cross the river—the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game. It follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea.

一种具有独特花纹的编织篮子以前只在史前村庄P的临近地区发现过，因而被认为是P居民所独有的。然而最近，考古学家在一个与P存隔着一条叫做B的河流的村庄L发现了一个这样的P篮子。B的河水很深很宽，所以古代P人只能坐船穿过它，但没有证据表明P的人拥有船只。而且能够运载大量人和货物的船只直到P人消失几千年之后才出现。而且，P人应该没有必要穿过这条河流――P周围的林地有丰富的果实和小动物。这表明这种所谓的P篮子不是P村的人所独有的。

In this argument, the author concludes the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea when the archaeologists discovered such a “Palean” basket in Lithos, an ancient village arose the Brim River from Palea. To support this conclusion, the author cites many evidences(好象不可数的撒), however, clarify scrutiny of the author’s argument reveals that this argument is unpersuasive to some extent.

To begin with, the author unfairly to infer that the Palean couldn’t cross the Brim River because that the Brim River is very deep and broad, and there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. The author overlooks other possibilities that perhaps the Brim River wasn’t so deep and broad at that time as now(today), maybe it was only a small river thousands (of) years ago. As we know, the geography would have had a great change during thousands (of) years, so, even though the Palean had no boats, they could also cross this small river by swimming and brought the Palean baskets to Lithos. Without ruling out such explanations, the author’s assumption is dubious.(恩~~还可以补充没有排除绕道可能)

Secondly, even if the Brim River was deep and broad thousands (of) years ago, and the ancient Paleans could only have cross it by boat, the author assumes that if Palean wanted to cross the river, the(y) should have had some boats, which can carry groups of people and cargos were developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared. (这句有点怪`~)But the author makes a mistake (neglect) that if the Paleans had a little boat that could just carry one people or a basket, they could also bring the Palean basket to Lithos. So the author can’t convince me (of what?).

In addition, the author concludes too hastily that Paleans would have had no need to cross the river for that the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game. But this need not be the case, the author ignores that maybe some day there happened a disaster of disease in Palea, some of the Paleans had to leave Palean to Lithos(这个理由~~~汗~~也行拉~~补充一下,简单而言,玩耍猎奇都可能成为去P的理由^^). So, it is not the necessary condition for the author claims that Paleans wouldn’t leave Palea forever.

To sum up, the author’s argument is logically unsound. To strengthen it, the author must provide better evidence that the Palean couldn’t cross the Brim River and there had no one(删掉) Palean basket could(n’t be brought) bring from Palea to Lithos. To better support the argument (additionally), I would need more information about the factor why Paleans never leave away from Plean.
恩~~~~~~~个人觉得几点都算论述到了,除了有的论证中的例子还需斟酌~~卡卡
加油加油~~~!!!
把偶的提纲列一下把
1.Time shifting problems:那时不一定有河或很浅
2.Dubious assumption,即使有河，没有证据说有船不代表不能做简易木筏过去,就算不做木筏也可以绕道过去。
3.dubious assumption可能过去的因素不一定是事物,可能为了玩耍或是其他偶然因素
4.dubious assumption一个篮子有很大偶然性,也可能是后人无意带去得.

使用道具举报