寄托天下
查看: 413|回复: 3
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[a习作temp] Argument4 快上考场了,模考的,留链互批! [复制链接]

Rank: 3Rank: 3

声望
0
寄托币
313
注册时间
2007-5-25
精华
0
帖子
0
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2007-8-18 13:17:34 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

"Of the two leading real estate firms in our town-Adams Realty and Fitch Realty-Adams is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents. In contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams' revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch, and included home sales that averaged $168,000, compared to Fitch's $144,000. Homes listed with Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago, I listed my home with Fitch and it took more than four months to sell; last year, when I sold another home, I listed it with Adams, and it took only one month. Thus, if you want to sell your home quickly and at a good price, you should use Adams."

在本市的两家最大的房地产经纪公司--Adams RealtyFitch Realty--之中,Adams显然更优秀一些。Adams40名房地产经纪人,而Fitch只有25个,且很多是兼职工作。而且,Adams去年的收入是Fitch的两倍,其平均房价为$168000,而Fitch仅为$144000。在Adams销售的房屋卖得也更快:十年前,我把我的房产交给Fitch,它用了四个多月才卖出去;去年,我在Adams卖了另一处房产,仅用一个月就售出了。因此,要想让你的房产卖的更快更好,你应该选择Adams


In this article, the author recommends that people who want to sell their homes should use Adams. To support the conclusion, the author cites the evidence that the Adams has more real estate agents than Fitch has, and Adams earns more money compared to Fitch. Furthermore, the author's personal experience indicates that Adams is superior to Fitch. Yet the argument suffers from several critical flaws and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

Firstly, the author fails to prove that the Adam's agent is more qualified than Fitch's by the mere fact that Fitch has fewer agents and many of them are part-time workers. Common sense tells us that more agents do not necessarily means more experienced agents. It is entirely possible that the Fitch's agents are generally more qualified than Adam's. Perhaps Fitch rehires some retired agents who has many years work experience and is therefore better at their work affairs.

Secondly, the author ignores the possibility that the fact that Adam earns more money than Fitch last year is totally accidental. It is entirely possible that Fitch usually did a better job during a long period than Adam did and the last year’s failure is quite an aberration. Even if Adam often earns more money than Fitch, the author overlooks the possibility that the result can be totally caused by more selling, not the good bargain of each business. It is possible that individuals can sell more quickly and higher price with Fitch.

Finally, the experience the author cited is little credible since it happened last year. Perhaps the sales situation is better ten years ago than it was last year. Even if Fitch is not good at that time, it is entirely possible that the Fitch firm has improved significantly during this period. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author can not conclude any firm conclusion based on such experience.

In sum, the argument is not well supported. To bolster it, the author must provide sufficient evidence that Adam's agents are superior to Fitch’s, and price Adam usually sold with are higher. To better evaluate the strength of it, I need to be informed with recent personal experience with both firms, not ten years ago.

回应
0

使用道具 举报

Rank: 3Rank: 3

声望
0
寄托币
313
注册时间
2007-5-25
精华
0
帖子
0
沙发
发表于 2007-8-18 15:11:20 |只看该作者
自己顶

使用道具 举报

Rank: 3Rank: 3

声望
0
寄托币
313
注册时间
2007-5-25
精华
0
帖子
0
板凳
发表于 2007-8-18 17:43:19 |只看该作者
坚持不懈

使用道具 举报

Rank: 3Rank: 3

声望
0
寄托币
645
注册时间
2007-7-25
精华
0
帖子
10
地板
发表于 2007-8-18 18:50:25 |只看该作者
In this article, the author recommends that people who want to sell their homes should use Adams. To support the conclusion, the author cites the evidence that the Adams has more real estate agents than Fitch has, and Adams earns more money compared to Fitch. Furthermore, the author's personal experience indicates that Adams is superior to Fitch. Yet the argument suffers from several critical flaws and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.(第一段少些,加强中间段落)

Firstly, the author fails to prove that the Adam's agent is more qualified than Fitch's by the mere fact that Fitch has fewer agents and many of them are part-time workers. Common sense tells us that more agents do not necessarily means more experienced agents. It is entirely possible that the Fitch's agents are generally more qualified than Adam's. Perhaps Fitch rehires some retired agents who has many years work experience and is therefore better at their work affairs.(没有总结句)

Secondly, the author ignores the possibility that the fact that Adam earns more money than Fitch last year is totally accidental. It is entirely possible that Fitch usually did a better job during a long period than Adam did and the last year’s failure is quite an aberration. Even if Adam often earns more money than Fitch, the author overlooks the possibility that the result can be totally caused by more selling, not the good bargain of each business. It is possible that individuals can sell more quickly and higher price with Fitch.(感觉这个和第一段再加上房价三点合在一起更好)

Finally, the experience the author cited is little credible since it happened last year. Perhaps the sales situation is better ten years ago than it was last year.(没有深入的说) Even if Fitch is not good at that time, it is entirely possible that the Fitch firm has improved significantly during this period. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author can not conclude any firm conclusion based on such experience.(还有房子的差别)

In sum, the argument is not well supported. To bolster it, the author must provide sufficient evidence that Adam's agents are superior to Fitch’s, and price Adam usually sold with are higher. To better evaluate the strength of it, I need to be informed with recent personal experience with both firms, not ten years ago.


语言比较流畅,但是论证不太深入!

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-724270-1-1.html   这个是我的,拍一下,谢谢
已有 1 人评分寄托币 收起 理由
作文版全体版主 + 5 作文互评

总评分: 寄托币 + 5   查看全部投币

使用道具 举报

RE: Argument4 快上考场了,模考的,留链互批! [修改]
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

问答
Offer
投票
面经
最新
精华
转发
转发该帖子
Argument4 快上考场了,模考的,留链互批!
https://bbs.gter.net/thread-724592-1-1.html
复制链接
发送
报offer 祈福 爆照
回顶部