argument220 [复制链接]

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: 381          TIME: 0:30:00          DATE: 2007-3-20

The arguer makes a conclusion that writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television rather than for print media. This conclusion is based on a recent study that people's conversation references 23 times television and 1 time fiction. As discussing below, the argument suffers from several flaws and therefore is unpersuasive.

From the first place, the arguer fails to consider about the characters of television and fiction. As the television programs is newest and broadest, such as the new-reports, which includes the controversy or issue that easy for people to discuss in their daily life. Moreover the television's vivid pictures and sound is more attractive than the fiction for people. But this just means that people used to pay more attention on the programs of television, rather than they would like to ignore the pleasure of reading fiction. The arguer claims that people prefer television to fiction is based on empirical evidence.

From the second place, there is no evidence suggesting that the publishing and bookselling industries will decline in profitability, compared with the television industry. Unless the argument can provide the evidences that, such as , the quantity of the sell-out books has decreased in sharp, or the complains of the readers are much more than before, it seems unwarranted to conclude that the former will decline in profitability. Further, even if the former will decline in the economical depression or some other situations, it is entire possible that the latter will decline as the same or even worse than the former. So without considering about these alternative factors, the conclusion is not persuasive as it stands

Last but not the least, the arguer treats fiction as print media. Granted that people prefer watching TV to reading fiction, it is not equal to people like the biography, another kind book of print media, more than television programs. The arguer fails to rule out the other kinds of print media besides the fiction, thus it is not strong enough to support the conclusion.

In sum, any decision aimed at addressing the problem of writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television rather than for print media must be based on more thorough investigation to gather sufficient dada to narrow down the actual causes of the problem.

The arguer makes a conclusion that writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television rather than for print media. This conclusion is based on a recent study that people's conversation references 23 times television and 1 time fiction. As discussing below, the argument suffers from several flaws and therefore is unpersuasive. (yes.这么长的开头正好.给出结论,给出最基本的论证依据就已经非常足够了)

From the first place, the arguer fails to consider about the characters of television and fiction. (没有考虑到电视和小说的特性?这段你想攻击什么呢?明确写出讨论多少不代表是否真正看得多少.这个才是ts.你写的只能算是错误的原因,而且写的还很晦涩,跟下面的关联也不大) As the television programs is newest and broadest, such as the new-reports, which includes the controversy or issue that easy for people to discuss in their daily life. (这一段怎么都在说电视好?看到这觉得很危险,你似乎要支持作者原文观念了) Moreover the television's vivid pictures and sound is more attractive than the fiction for people. But this just means that people used to pay more attention on the programs of television, rather than they would like to ignore the pleasure of reading fiction. (这段攻击失败.紫色字的部分看上去直接就是在支持作者观念了.明白你的意思,你是要说虽然人们谈论电视多但不代表人们就不关注书籍了.不过你前面说了那么多电视怎么怎么吸引人,最后忽然来一句rather than.....让人看了觉得非常没有说服力.不用那么仁慈,直接反驳说人们讨论了电视,不代表人们就看了电视) The arguer claims that people prefer television to fiction is based on empirical evidence.

From the second place, there is no evidence suggesting that the publishing and bookselling industries will decline in profitability, compared with the television industry. Unless the argument can provide the evidences that, such as , the quantity of the sell-out books has decreased in sharp, or the complains of the readers are much more than before, it seems unwarranted to conclude that the former will decline in profitability. (yes,这一段写得很bingo.但是最好在这些实例前面加上批驳文章的论据的话,承认即使现在电视看得人比较多,也不能说明问题.) Further, even if the former will decline in the economical depression or some other situations, it is entire possible that the latter will decline as the same or even worse than the former. (这一个让步毫无意义.文章只是提到书利润下降,我们反驳之即可.没有任何的蛛丝马迹说到电视行业会利润下降.你这里每根据地来一个就算书的利润因为整个经济的萎缩而下降,那么电视也不会有好果子吃,看了非常唐突.怎么忽然说到两个要下降一起下降呢??) So without considering about these alternative factors, the conclusion is not persuasive as it stands

In sum, any decision aimed at addressing the problem of writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television rather than for print media must be based on more thorough investigation to gather sufficient dada to narrow down the actual causes of the problem.

加油吧

可能是你刚刚开始限时写的比较慌乱

继续努力