- 最后登录
- 2011-1-12
- 在线时间
- 28 小时
- 寄托币
- 90
- 声望
- 1
- 注册时间
- 2005-6-10
- 阅读权限
- 15
- 帖子
- 7
- 精华
- 1
- 积分
- 263
- UID
- 2107809

- 声望
- 1
- 寄托币
- 90
- 注册时间
- 2005-6-10
- 精华
- 1
- 帖子
- 7
|
发表于 2006-8-17 20:59:32
|显示全部楼层
嗯,先在开头做个说明,这是昨天晚上完成的第一篇Arg习作(现在才开始第一篇,实在是;)),基本上是规规矩矩的按着模板写的。
【题目】
The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.
"Seven years ago, 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. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."
虽然问题比较简单,还是给个大概的提纲,希望尽量不浪费各位宝贵的时间。
【开头】
作者证据:几年前B社区对landscaping和housepainting做了一些限制,从那以后,房价已经涨了3倍
作者结论:为了提高D的房价,我们应该采纳B的做法。
【正文】
1,B的措施与房价涨3倍之间不一定存在因果关系。
1)可能是因为社区内新建了许多便民设施,交通的改善
2)也可能是因为Inflation & devaluation
2,即使B的措施真的有效,在D实行这些措施,房价也不一定涨
1)D地形可能跟B不同,不适于进行统一的规划
2)D的居民可能不喜欢统一的外观,纷纷搬走
【结尾】
还需要证据:
B和D的异同;证明确实是B的限制措施导致了房价上涨
【问题】
1,嗯,首先当然就是大家的建议喽,需要特别注意和需要改进的地方~~
2,正文只写了两段,不知道会不会太少?字数好像应该够了(452 words)
3,大家有没比较好的上下文衔接的句式,特别是提出各类错误的
Firstly...Secondly...
The major problem with this argument is …
Another problem that undermines the argument is …
好像只有这些,太单调了(当然,我还没有开始看很多范文)
4,问个语法问题(考过T忘了),就是a and b的时候谓语单复数如何确定的?
哈哈,说了那么多,开始。。。
In this argument, the arguer advocates that the Deerhave Acres community should initiate restrictions on the landscaping and housepainting. To justify the recommendation, the arguer cited the example that the property values have been tripled in the nearby Brookvillle community since they adopted a set of restrictions on the landscape of the yards and colors of the exteriors of homes. In addition, the arguer assumes that as long as Deerhaven Acres imitate in the same way, the price of property will raise too. However, several important concerns, which the arguer fails to address in the analysis, may seriously undermine the conclusion.
First of all, the arguer commits the "after this, therefore because of this" fallacy. That is, without justification, just because the event that property values triple follows the restriction on the landscaping and housepainting, the arguer concludes the latter event has been cause by the former . However, many other factors could bring about the same result. For instance, the community constructed lots of new establishments providing more convenience and entertainment to citizen's everyday life, and the traffic condition of the community was improved much. All these changes might be conducive to the growth of the property values. It is also possible that the raise of price of property is due to the inflation and devaluation. Therefore, it remains greatly suspect that it is such restrictions that led to the tripled property values, unless other possible causal explanations have been considered and ruled out.
Another problem that undermines the argument is the "false analogy". The arguer simply assumes that the experience draw from the nearby Brookville community is also applicable to Deerhaven Acres, without providing any evidence whether the two communities are similar enough to justify the analogical deduction. In fact, there may exist much dissimilarity. For example, perhaps the geographical and physical terrain is much different between these two communities: Brookville is suitable to unify the landscape, while Deerhaven Acres is not. Furthermore, the constitution of residents and their favor is also worth to consider. If most of them do not like the uniform style, they might leave away from Deerhaven Acres, and this is definitely what the committee does not expect to see. Thus the author cannot rely on this false analogy to bolster his claim
On balance, the argument, while it seems logical at first, has several flaws as discussed above. To make it more convincing, the arguer would have to provide concrete evidence about the similarity and dissimilarity between the two communities. And I will suspend my judgment about the credibility of the claim until the arguer can demonstrate that it is the very restrictions on landscaping and housepainting that resulted in the raise of property values.
最后,感谢! |
|