[a习作temp] argument159 欢迎互拍:) [复制链接]

popcat
UID: 2105433

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 5
寄托币: 102
注册时间: 2005-5-30
精华: 0
帖子: 0

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2005-7-23 21:36:30 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

题目：159The nation of Claria covers a vast physical area. But despite wide geographic differences, many citizens are experiencing rising costs of electricity. A recent study of household electric costs in Claria found that families who cooled their houses with fans alone spent more on electricity than did families using air conditioners alone for cooling. However, those households that reported using both fans and air conditioners spent less on electricity than those households that used either fans or air conditioners alone. Thus, the citizens of Claria should follow the study's recommendation and use both air conditioners and fans in order to save money on electricity.

我的提纲：
1.调查的有效性：代表性，持续的时间
2.用电量还与其它电器有关；不同地区可能存在电价的差异
3.同时使用空调和风扇会在设备上开销增大；而且不一定是最好的方法，各地区可能有最适合自己的方法

Argument T159 (14)
2005.7.23 by popcat

Elapsed time: 50 min
Total Words: 393

(无效调查――第一段)
代表性，时间长度

In this argument, the arguer suggests that she citizens of Claria use both air conditioners and fans to save money on electricity. To support his suggestion, the arguer cites a recent study of household electric costs in Claria. The study shows that those households using both fans and air conditioners spent less on electicity than those households that used either fans or air conditioners alone. However, the study itself suffers from several flaws and can lead litter support to the arguer's recommendation.

First, the arguer provides no information about the number of households surveyed and the geographic distrition of them, so we have good reason to doubt whether the sample is representative enough to reflect the general household electric costs throughout Claria. In addition, we don't know the time span of the study. Maybe the study lasted only three months. But common sense tells us that three months is too short to study the household electric cost. In this case, the study is apprently unbelievable. Thus the study is statistically unreliable and leads no credible support to the arguer's suggestion.

Besides from the study's statistical unreliability, there are still many suspitious points in the study. A lot of other electrical appliances may contribute to the household electric costs except air conditoners and fans. Without the data about the electric costs of those appliances, it is imprecise to evaluate the electric costs only considering air conditioners and fans. Futhermore, duing to its wide geographic differences, the eletric price may very from areas in Claria. Without rule out the price factor, the conclusion about the electric cost is unwarranted.

Even if the result of the study above is true, it is hasty to suggest using both air conditioners and fans for cooling without take the costs of devices into account. The citizens will have to spend more money on cooling devices if they use air conditioners and fans both. Are they willing to afford this addional expenditure? And there may be other better choises to save costs than this one. It is reasonable to adopt methods which are most appreciate to the local climate.

To sum up, this argument is groudless as it stands. To substantiate his suggestion, the arguer should consider all possible factors concerning the eletric cost. In order to better evaluate the argument, we would need more statistical information about the study.

欢迎拍砖:)

[ Last edited by popcat on 2005-7-24 at 01:29 ]

我的世界我做主

回应
0

使用道具举报

lleputa
UID: 192475

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 126
注册时间: 2005-1-16
精华: 0
帖子: 0

沙发

发表于 2005-7-24 22:34:04 |只看该作者

In this argument, the arguer suggests that she(the) citizens of Claria (should)use both air conditioners and fans to save money on electricity. To support his(or her) suggestion, the arguer cites a recent study of household electric costs in Claria. The study shows that those households using both fans and air conditioners spent less on electicity(electricity) than those households that (who)used either fans or air conditioners alone. However, the study itself suffers from several flaws and can could lead litter(couldn’t lead strong) support to the arguer's recommendation.

First, the arguer provides no information about the number of households(participators) surveyed (删除)and the geographic distrition （distriction）of them, (etc.)so we have good reason to doubt whether the sample is representative enough to reflect the general household electric costs throughout Claria. In addition, we don't know the time span of the study. Maybe the study lasted only three months. But common sense tells us that three months is too short to study the household electric cost. In this case, the study is apparently unbelievable. Thus the study is statistically unreliable and leads no credible support to the arguer's suggestion. ( 这段建议你参考了牛人的文章以后重写，实在很难改，说得不清楚．)

Besides from the study's statistical unreliability, there are still many suspitious points in the study. A lot of other electrical appliances （equipments）may contribute to the household electric costs except air conditoners and fans.（这段改成用consist of 要好一些吧．） Without the data about the electric costs of those appliances, it is imprecise to evaluate the electric costs only considering air conditioners and fans. Futhermore, duing to its wide geographic differences, the eletric price may very from areas in Claria. Without rule out the price factor, the conclusion about the electric cost is unwarranted.

Even if the result of the study above is true, it is hasty to suggest using both air conditioners and fans for cooling without take the costs of devices into account. The citizens will have to spend more money on cooling devices if they use air conditioners and fans both. Are they willing to afford this addional expenditure? And there may be other better choises (option or alternative)to save costs than this one. It is reasonable to adopt methods which are most appreciate to the local climate.(最后一个观点很好，关于保护环境的，但是没有展开，而且说得不清楚会让人觉得跟主题无关．．感觉最后就在做成本利润分析，考虑购买设备支出＼环境损失＼电费的均衡．但是要说清楚．建议重写．)

To sum up, this argument is groudless as it stands. To substantiate his suggestion, the arguer should consider all possible factors concerning the eletric cost. In order to better evaluate the argument, we would need more statistical information about the study.

1\拼写错误,还有很多,我没改,建议你自己放在WORD上看.
2\感觉每一个论点都没有展开.建议你每个论点再多想点话来说.
3\听我朋友介绍,最好写500字以上,起码要450,虽然我看孙远的书上说400足已,不过最好保险一点.
4\感觉你这次为了抓时间写的很仓促,完全没有你以往镇定的风格了.别着急哦,先讲质量,再说速度.
5\总而言之,就是重写这篇吧.^_^

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=305494

【2025FALL】全站祈福已开放~~来领祈福章，求offer得offer

使用道具举报