[a习作temp] ARGUMENT220 求互拍！ [复制链接]

superstar008
UID：2318905

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 0
寄托币: 1223
注册时间: 2007-3-24
精华: 1
帖子: 1

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2007-4-1 07:53:28 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

还有一周就考，希望各位多多指正了！
TOPIC: ARGUMENT220 - The following appeared in an article in a magazine for writers.
"A recent study showed that in describing a typical day's conversation, people make an average of 23 references to watching television and only 1 reference to reading fiction. This result suggests that, compared with the television industry, the publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability. Therefore, people who wish to have careers as writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television rather than for print media."
WORDS: 491       TIME: 0:30:00       DATE: 2007-4-1
Should people who wish to have careers as writers try to write for television rather for print media as the article's writer asserted? Maybe, but close scrutiny of the argument reveals serveral crucial logical flaws which made the conclusion unconvincing.
First of all, the mere fact that people make an average of 23 references to watching television and only 1 reference to reading fiction does not follow that people watch television more often than reading fiction. More reference to a certain media does not necessarily prove that people use that media more frequently. It is entirely possible that many people watch a same television program, while they usually read different fictions, and the share of television program rather than more popularity caused the more reference. In this case, people may read fictions as much as, or even more than, watching television.  Without ruling out this and other possibilities, the author simply can not persuade me that  television is more popular than books.
Secondly, even I am well informed that people watch television more, the author made a further dubious assumption that publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability. Profitability are determined by revenue, expense, competetion, and market share, it is not necessary determined by popularity only. Perhaps in spite of less popularity, publishing a read fiction need less money and workforce, thus can make profit more easily than the costly produced television programs. Or competetion among publishing and bookselling industries are not so fierce as it is among television stations, as a result, they can enjoy a higher price, which ensures profit. Since the author provided no firm evidence that publishing and bookselling industries will decline in profitability, his conclusion remain gratitous.
Last but not least, even I am further well informed that the profitability of publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability, the author's conclusion that people who wish to become writers should prepare  writing for television rather than print media remain too hasty, he should take into account all these and other factors which may affect the future writers' success. First, the author failed to provide any detail about the profitability of television industries,  perhaps their profitability are even worse due to the high expense to produce programs. Moreover, consider the popularity of television, it is very possible that the competiton in writing for television are more fierce, and new writers are much less likely to success. In these cases, writing for television are even worse than writing for print media. Since the author did not consider all these possibile difficulties, his conclusion is unsound.
In sum, serveral logical flaws make the argument unconvincing as it stands. To bolster it, I need firm evidence that the popularity of television win over that of reading fiction and  that publishing and bookselling industries will decline in profitability. Before any final decision are made, the author should also take into account other factors that may affect the future writers' success.

回应
0

使用道具举报

xlj
UID：2316543

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 204
注册时间: 2007-3-19
精华: 0
帖子: 0

沙发

发表于 2007-4-2 23:21:28 |只看该作者

Should people who wish to have careers as writers try to write for television rather for print media as the article's writer asserted? Maybe, but close scrutiny of the argument reveals serveral (several) crucial logical flaws which made the conclusion unconvincing. (简洁而非模板化的开头，学习中……)
First of all, the mere fact that people make an average of 23 references to watching television and only 1 reference to reading fiction does not follow that people watch television more often than reading fiction. More reference to a certain media does not necessarily prove that people use that media more frequently. It is entirely possible that many people watch a same television program, while they usually read different fictions, and the share of television program rather than more popularity caused the more reference. In this case, people may read fictions as much as, or even more than, watching television. Without ruling out this and other possibilities, the author simply can not persuade me that television is more popular than books. (或者，人们喜欢看电视不代表他们就不喜欢读书)
Secondly, even I am well informed that people watch television more, the author made a further dubious assumption that publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability. Profitability are （is）determined by revenue, expense, competetion (competition), and market share, it is not necessary determined by popularity only. Perhaps in spite of less popularity, publishing a read fiction need less money and workforce, thus can make profit more easily than the costly (个人觉得这个修饰词就不要了吧，未必电视行业的成本就都比出版行业高吧) produced television programs. Or competetion among publishing and bookselling industries are （is）not so fierce as it is among television stations, as a result, they can enjoy a higher price, which ensures profit.Since the author provided no firm evidence that publishing and bookselling industries will decline in profitability, his conclusion remain gratitous.(gratuitous)
Last but not least, even I am further well informed that the profitability of publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability, the author's conclusion that people who wish to become writers should prepare writing for television rather than print media remain too hasty, he should take into account all these and other factors which may affect the future writers' success. First, the author failed to provide any detail about the profitability of television industries, perhaps their profitability are even worse due to the high expense to produce programs. Moreover, consider the popularity of television, it is very possible that the competiton in writing for television are (is) more fierce (fiercer), and new writers are much less likely to success. In these cases, writing for television are (is) even worse than writing for print media. Since the author did not consider all these possibile (possible) difficulties, his conclusion is unsound. (我觉得还可以把个人兴趣作为一个它因，或者作家不为印刷媒体写作就只能为电视写作了么，没有其他选择了么？)
In sum, serveral （several） logical flaws make the argument unconvincing as it stands. To bolster it, I need firm evidence that the popularity of television win over that of reading fiction and that publishing and bookselling industries will decline in profitability. Before any final decision are (is) made, the author should also take into account other factors that may affect the future writers' success.

写得很好啊，很值得我学习。本人水平有限，只能修改到这种程度，望见谅。
祝你下周考试成功^-^

使用道具举报

lovejc26
UID：2239039

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 215
注册时间: 2006-8-7
精华: 0
帖子: 4

板凳

发表于 2007-4-3 11:06:13 |只看该作者

TOPIC: ARGUMENT220 - The following appeared in an article in a magazine for writers.
"A recent study showed that in describing a typical day's conversation, people make an average of 23 references to watching television and only 1 reference to reading fiction. This result suggests that, compared with the television industry, the publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability. Therefore, people who wish to have careers as writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television rather than for print media."
WORDS: 491       TIME: 0:30:00       DATE: 2007-4-1
Should people who wish to have careers as writers try to write for television rather for print media as the article's writer asserted? Maybe,(maybe放在这有点突兀、牵强，不如就说"表面上看上去很正确...”) but close scrutiny of the argument reveals serveral crucial logical flaws which made the conclusion unconvincing.
First of all, the mere fact that people make an average of 23 references to watching television and only 1 reference to reading fiction does not follow that people watch television more often than reading fiction. More reference to a certain media does not necessarily prove that people use that media more frequently. It is entirely possible that many people watch a same television program, while they usually read different fictions, and the share of television program rather than more popularity caused the more reference. In this case, people may read fictions as much as, or even more than, watching television.  Without ruling out this and other possibilities, the author simply can not persuade me that  television is more popular than books.论证很完整哈哈！练得有火候了。补充一点，你完全可以就这个多找些错误，一顿狠批，进一步充实论证。比方说23人的样本太小，可能这23人都是家庭妇女（热衷于看电视嘛），那么小孩、男人、老人的观点就无从知…
Secondly, even I am well informed that people watch television more, the author made a further dubious assumption that publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability. (句子前加个As we know之类的承接一下，显得过渡自然) Profitability are determined by revenue, expense, competetion, and market share, it is not necessary determined by popularity only. Perhaps in spite of less popularity, publishing a read fiction need less money and workforce, thus can make profit more easily than the costly produced television programs. Or competetion among publishing and bookselling industries are not so fierce as it is among television stations, as a result, they can enjoy a higher price, which ensures profit. Since the author provided no firm evidence that publishing and bookselling industries will decline in profitability, his conclusion remain gratitous. 论述比第一段更犀利了赫赫，很咄咄逼人！ps还可以说他以偏概全，fiction只是publishing and bookselling industries的一小部分。
Last but not least, even I am further well informed that the profitability of publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability, the author's conclusion that people who wish to become writers should prepare  writing for television rather than print media remain too hasty, he should take into account all these and other factors which may affect the future writers' success. First, the author failed to provide any detail about the profitability of television industries,  perhaps their profitability are even worse due to the high expense to produce programs. Moreover, consider the popularity of television, it is very possible that the competiton in writing for television are more fierce, and new writers are much less likely to success. In these cases, writing for television are even worse than writing for print media. Since the author did not consider all these possibile difficulties, his conclusion is unsound. 很佩服你的论证过程~~ **  ps论证时没必要一条道儿跑到黑（只说利益的问题），还可以说作家的成长那么多因素，没必要揪着利益，兴趣啦之类的也很重要。（issue不是经常讨论这个问题么），还有很多出版物后来不都改变成电视了么。In sum, 尽可能让论证多元化~
In sum, serveral logical flaws make the argument unconvincing as it stands. To bolster it, I need firm evidence that the popularity of television win over that of reading fiction and  that publishing and bookselling industries will decline in profitability. Before any final decision are made, the author should also take into account other factors that may affect the future writers' success.

与ETS做最后斗争

使用道具举报