[a习作temp] argument2[一花一世界]第一次作业 [复制链接]

       (In this letter,习惯了这样的开头啦) The arguer concludes that houseowners in Deerhaven Acres (DA) should adopt a set of restrictions on landscaping and house painting (as BC dose)to raise average property values.To support this assumption(assertion), the arguer provides the facts that houseowners in Brookville community (BC) adopt the restrictions seven years ago and since then, average property ( there) values have tripled. However, careful examination of these unwarranted evidences reveals none of them lends credible support to the recommendation (conclusion 与前文对照).        

Firstly, it is entirely possible that property value rising in nearby BC is not because of their adopting a set of restrictions on（有没有问题，不太确定） how the community’s yards should landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Perhaps the transportation, living condition, basic facilities in BC are much better than those in DA. Perhapsthere are some advanced hospitals and famous schools in BC; therefore, many people want to live there and average property values have tripled there. In all, without ruling out other (these) possibilities, the arguer can not convince me that adopting a set of restrictions is the only reason or even the reason for BC’s property value rising. Let alone the restrictions can be in favor of raising property values in DA。（有结构和框架，但具体没论证没展开，两个perhaps显得单薄，都是一句话了事，e.g 谈到living condition, basic facilities 可以举例扩展）

Secondly, even assuming adopting the restrictions is the reason for (变换下咯) property rising in BC, the arguer still can not come to the conclusion based on a false analogy BC and DA that houseowners in DA should adopt the same restrictions to raising property values. The arguer fails to provide the statistics that houseowners in DA are fond of ( are inclined to comply with) the restrictions. Moreover, perhaps besides adopting (全篇都是adopting, how about adoption of) the restrictions, BC also carry out some other measures to raising (increase, enhance) property values, such as convenient community service, colorful community activities and so on. Without being informed of whether other possibilities exist, I can not accept any conclusion that adopting a set of restrictions in DA can make property value there rise. (为了避免重复，we can say: Unless the arguer can exclude all the above possibilities, we are not convinced that … is the only factor attributes to…)       

Thirdly, the arguer leaves other possibilities out of account when coming to the conclusion, becausethe measures of restrictions are carried out 7 years ago in BC. During 7 years, housing demand may change a lot and perhaps houseowners now prefer a different style of yards landscaping and home painting. If the committee of DA decides to adopt the restrictions without consulting houseowners, the houseowners may feel dissatisfied or even move out.（主题句似乎要写7年前的不适用于现在，但写到最后好象脱离了主题句）

In sum, the arguer can not justify his or her recommendation on the basis of scant evidences provided in the letter. To bolster the recommendation, other possibilities of raising property values in BC should be ruling out. To better support the conclusion, the arguer should show DA has the same factors (status) as BC to make it accessible to adopt the restrictions. To better assess the argument, some necessary statistics on whether houseowners tend to adopt the restriction should be in great demand. （这里应该和最后一个论点对应，但我不清楚你最后一个论点到底想表达什么）

我认为写a主要是逻辑，尽量使你的各论点间有联系，运用连接词even if ,even assuming that