[i习作temp] Argument2[Jet]小组第一次作业 [复制链接]

O--honey
UID: 2452493

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 153
注册时间: 2008-1-28
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2008-1-29 16:18:16 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

字数：441    时间：08.1.29
  In this argument, the arguer recommends that because of homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community’s yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted, the average property values have tripled in Brookville. In addition, he cites the result of this policy can also do good to the increasing of property values in Deerhaven, therefore, he concludes that Deerhaven Acres should also adopt their own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting. A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.
In the first place, the arguer commits a fallacy of using” since then” in assuming that adopting a set of restrictions regarding the landscaping of yards and the painting of the exteriors of homes has resulted in the tripling of the property values in Brookville, he fails to take into account the other factors in the analysis. What if it is because of a new policy that raise the house price as a result the average property values has been triple altogether, or if only the materials that used to make furniture are more expensive than before, or perhaps the scenery beside the Brookville is very beautiful which attract a lot of residents there. In this case, the average property values in the communities near the lake or park or anything that attract residents must be highly increased due to the comfortable and convenience. Only if the arguer ruled out these possibilities, we can not adopt the recommendation.
In the second place, based on a false analogy, the arguer unfairly assumes that Deerhaven Acres could necessarily raise its property values by simply coping the policy of Brookville totally ignore the differences between the two acres. In this case, even Deerhaven Acres accept this policy, it doesn’t possibly lead to a increase in the property values as the same result as in Brookville, the environmental factors which play a key part to attract more residents, or the locations and public infrastructure, without concerning about these factors, just hastily coping the landscaping or the finishing restrictions in Brookville may cause a lot of loss , even lead to a waste of material and resources in Deerhaven, which is a unwise recommendation.
  In sum, the conclusions lack serious comparison and the cause and effect relationship between the policy and the increase of property values. In order to make this argument strength. The arguer must provide some evidence to rule out those possibilities, and at the same time convince the feasibility of adoption the restriction on landscaping and housepainting as the same as in Brookville.

回应
0

使用道具举报

leftkiss
UID: 2347956

高级会员

Rank: 5 Rank: 5

声望: 0
寄托币: 533
注册时间: 2007-6-9
精华: 0
帖子: 23

沙发

发表于 2008-1-29 19:31:23 |只看该作者

段与段之间要隔一行滴～～稍改一下吧:) 回头大家好互改
－－from组员之一

【2025FALL】全站祈福已开放~~来领祈福章，求offer得offer

使用道具举报

月亮熬的汤
UID: 2382325

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 259
注册时间: 2007-8-14
精华: 0
帖子: 3

板凳

发表于 2008-1-30 20:21:24 |只看该作者

Argument2[Jet]小组第一次作业

字数：441 时间：08.1.29
In this argument, the arguer recommends(recommend主要是推荐的意思吧好像不太适合) that because of homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted（把because of改成because或者变成because of Brookville's adoption） a set of restrictions on how the community’s yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted, the average property values have tripled in Brookville. In addition, he cites the result of this policy can also do good to the increasing of property values in Deerhaven,（这句话有些奇怪，首先语法不对，应该是he cites that the result...，我觉得这句话和以上arguer assert的东西不是in addition的关系而是therefore的关系，建议把后一句和这句合并） therefore, he concludes that Deerhaven Acres should also adopt their own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting. A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.
In the first place, the arguer commits a fallacy of using ”since then” in assuming that adopting a set of restrictions regarding the landscaping of yards and the painting of the exteriors of homes has resulted in the tripling of the property values in Brookville, he fails to take into account the other factors in the analysis. What if it is because of a new policy that raise the house price as a result（as a result是应该作为插入语使用的，前面应该有逗号，或者可以使用result in） the average property values has been triple altogether, or if only the materials that used to make furniture are more expensive than before, or perhaps the scenery beside the（此处不该使用冠词） Brookville is very beautiful which attract（attracts） a lot of residents there. In this case, the average property values in the communities near the（并没有特指应使用a） lake or a park or anything that attract residents must be highly increased（不知道有什么不对就是读起来很奇怪，如果是我我可能会说will raise greatly） due to the comfortable（形容词，应为comfort） and convenience. Only if the arguer ruled out these possibilities, we can not adopt the recommendation.
In the second place, based on a false analogy, the arguer unfairly assumes that Deerhaven Acres could necessarily raise its property values by simply coping（copying） the policy of Brookville totally ignore the differences between the two acres. In this case, even Deerhaven Acres accept this policy, it doesn’t possibly lead to a（an） increase in the property values as the same result as in Brookville, the environmental factors which play a key part to attract more residents, or the locations and public infrastructure, （这两句没有主语啊和前后都没有连上）without concerning about these factors, just hastily coping the landscaping or the finishing restrictions in Brookville may cause a lot of loss , even lead to a waste of material and resources in Deerhaven, which is a（an） unwise recommendation.
In sum, the conclusions lack serious comparison and the cause and effect relationship between the policy and the increase of property values. In order to make this argument strength.（strengh是名词，可以使用reasonable） The arguer must provide some evidence to rule out those possibilities, and at the same time convince the feasibility（这句话的意思是说服可能性？感觉不太对） of adoption the restriction on landscaping and housepainting as the same as in Brookville.

1.建议采用每段前不空两格而每段之间空一行的方式，我上新东方的时候老师建议的～
2.注意冠词的使用，尤其是元音前要使用an
3.一般是提出三个问题比较好，这篇只提出了两个
我觉得写的挺好～很吹毛求疵的挑了很多错误，如果不对请见谅哦～一起加油！

使用道具举报