- 最后登录
- 2014-3-11
- 在线时间
- 16 小时
- 寄托币
- 53
- 声望
- 0
- 注册时间
- 2010-2-19
- 阅读权限
- 10
- 帖子
- 1
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 36
- UID
- 2766377
- 声望
- 0
- 寄托币
- 53
- 注册时间
- 2010-2-19
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 1
|
Argume184
In the Bayhead Public Library, books that are rarely borrowed continue to take up shelf space year after year, while people who want to read a recent novel frequently find that the library's only copy is checked out. Clearly, the library's plan to replace books that are borrowed no more than once a year with sufficient copies of more recent books will solve this problem. The protest we have heard since this plan was made public has come from a small, and thus unrepresentative, group of some thirty people and so should therefore be ignored.
字数统计:432
Cause of some books rarely borrowed in the library have taken up the shelf space permanently, some newly published books has no space to be placed with more copies. The arguer put out an solution is to replace the rarely borrowed books with the newly published novels, and in his mind the opposition is ignorable. However, the arguer has misunderstood the basic function of the library and has made his conclusion on incredible statistics. (开头的事实阐述有些生硬)
First and foremost, for the function of the library, one way or another, is to provide the books for the readers, not only the recent novels, but also some old books and some precious copies for the particular readers. If the library has made this replacement, it will be harmful for its basic function and will make the readers who need those books be very disappointed. And if all the libraries have put out similar policy, then where should those readers who need the books, may be the scientists and social analysts, refer to, and it will eventually do great harm to the development of the whole society.
Moreover, the conclusion is not made on precise statistics and the arguer has not provide us with the exact ratio that how many people need to borrow the latest published books and can not find them, if the ratio is too small, which is of great possibility, will make the proposed solution seemed to be ridiculous. To make his suggestion more credible the arguer should try to figure out the exact demands of the readers and try to get some useful suggestions from them, to a certain degree, the readers may be already to put out a feasible solution.
Last but not the least, cause of only one organization of about thirty people has showed their oppoisite (opposite) attitudes with the proposition, the arguer thought the opposition is not the main stream and can be ignorable. However, to a certain degree, the arguer has not made a survey in the readers, and the fact may be that the majority of the readers are against with the proposition, and only a small number of them have carried it out so far. If the fact is that, this solution will not make most of the readers contented.
To sum up, with the description above, we can see that the arguer is too haste to make the conclusion and has misunderstood the basic function of the library and go to the extreme. Besides without available and credible statistics, we can not figured out the precise attitude of the readers. To make a feasible and sustainable solution, more statics should be gathered and a wide survey is needed.
总结:文章思路清晰,有少量错误,倒装用的好像有点问题?谬误点基本找全了,例子说明也很好。 |
|