ARGUMENT99-考前冲刺，求拍

1070810820UID: 2639450

题目：ARGUMENT99 - The following appeared in a memo from the economic minister of the small country Paucia.
"Using a newly developed variety of seed, farmers in our neighboring country Abundia produced 80 percent more rice last year than in any previous year. To increase the income of farmers in our own country, we should encourage them to cultivate this new variety of rice rather than some of their traditional crops. Such high yields of rice will also improve our country's balance of trade by enabling us to begin exporting it."
字数：449          用时：00:30:00          日期：2009/8/30 17:04:54

Grounded on the example of Abundia, the author suggests in this argument that Paucia should encourage its farmers to cultivate the same new variety of rice rather than some of their traditional crops. However, further examination into the reasonning of this argument reveals some flaws in the assumptions.

Firstly, author unreasonably contributes the success in increasing the rice production by 80 percent to the use to the newly developed variety of seed. the author fails to take many other possibilities into consideration. For instance, perhaps Abundia has put a new policy on promoting the income of the farmers last year which significiently increased their passion in production. Perhaps the climate for cultivating is extremly good for the growth of rice latst year. Or perhaps the rice price is always higher than any other sorts of cultural products so that the farmers took action to change their lands which originally used to produce fruits or vagetobals into the production of rice. Abcent of discussion on the topics above, this success of Abundia is highly possible not a result ot the use of the new seed.

Additionally, the author falsely assumes that once Paucia use the new seed, the farmers will surely have an increase of income. But even for the example of Abundia, the author have not provide evidence showing their income of farmer has increased. Moreover, as we know the income is a function of both the incomes and expenses. For the income, although the production of rice have may increase, but we should know that the price of rice will be affacted by the increased amounts of rice on the market. It is highly possible that the price will drop a lot after the increase in production. So even thought he prodicution increase, the total income may still be reduced for the low price. for the expenses, does the new seed cost much more than the traditional one? Will the income brought by the new seed overshadowed by this? In short, without weighing the incomes against the expenses, the conclusion is unpersuasive to me.

Last but not least, granted that the new seed of rice will bring profit to Paucia, the beautiful suggetion that they can export their rice to improve the balance of trade is based on nothing more than pure speculation and perhaps withful thinking. This suggests that the author has already seen some plans or made some plans indicating that there may be a conflict of intersts here.

In summary, the ultimate conclusion is unpersuasive to me for the points presented above. The assumptions are short of support to his view and this suggetion may be a result of conflicts of interests behind the surface.

jjs1986UID: 2478040

最后一个分论点是不是分析的有点太浅了。

lghscuUID: 2552043

1# 1070810820
Grounded on the example of Abundia, the author suggests in this argument that Paucia should encourage its farmers to cultivate the same new variety of rice rather than some of their traditional crops. However, further examination into the reasonning of this argument reveals some flaws in the assumptions.

Firstly, author unreasonably contributes the success in increasing the rice production by 80 percent to the use to the newly developed variety of seed. (大写)the author fails to take many(manyàa multitude of / a tremendous amount of / a o considerable amount of不用many，用短语，增加字数的同时使sentence variety比较多) other possibilities into consideration. For instance, perhaps Abundia has put a new policy on promoting the income of the farmers last year which significiently increased their passion in production. Perhaps the climate for cultivating is extremly good for the growth of rice latst year. Or perhaps the rice price is always higher than any other sorts of cultural products so that the farmers took action to change their lands which originally used to produce fruits or vagetobals (vegetable)into the production of rice. Abcent(Absent) of discussion on the topics above, this success of Abundia is highly possible not a result ot(of) the use of the new seed.(找他因时，显得论证不充分，可以试着从一个角度比如whether，比较深入地分析可能高产的原因)

Additionally, the author falsely assumes that once Paucia use the new seed, the farmers will surely have an increase of income. But even for the example of Abundia, the author have not provide (provided) evidence showing their(the) income of farmer has increased. Moreover, (前后没有递进关系吧)as we know the income is a function of both the incomes and expenses(price). For the income, although the production of rice have may(have manyàmight) increase, but (不要but)we should know that the price of rice will be affacted(affected) by the increased amounts of rice on the market. It is highly possible that the price will drop a lot after (dut to)the increase in production. So even thought(though) he prodicution increase(even though the production increases), the total income may still be reduced for the low price. for the expenses, does the new seed cost much more than the traditional one? Will the income brought by the new seed overshadowed by this? In short, without weighing the incomes against the expenses, the conclusion is unpersuasive to me.

Last but not least, granted that the new seed of rice will bring profit to Paucia, the beautiful suggetion that they can export their rice to improve the balance of trade is based on nothing more than pure speculation and perhaps withful (wishful)thinking. This suggests that the author has already seen some plans or made some plans indicating that there may be a conflict of intersts here.(可从是否具有海外市场分析)

In summary, the ultimate conclusion is unpersuasive to me for the points presented above. The assumptions are short of support to his view and this suggetion may be a result of conflicts of interests behind the surface.

总体感觉，思路清晰，但语言有待进一步提高

欢迎回拍
=七月流火=小组第5次小组作业 argument9 by lghscu

sophytaoUID: 2529680

我是菜鸟
不敢班门弄斧
在思路上没有太多发言权~不过你的几个攻击点，是我前前后后反复看了好几遍题目后才想全的（我是先自己想的然后才看的你的文章）。所以还是要膜拜一下的呵呵~~感觉逻辑框架很清楚的~！
看了前面3楼同学的建议 关于第二段的论证 有个想法：
我想 也许可以按照高产的原因分类：
1. 原因出在生产过程本身，即改变了单位劳动力在单位时间的产量的因素
归纳为生产原料/技术/条件 共3种因素
原料除了种子，还有肥料，杀虫药，农用器材比如拖拉机；
技术则比如： 劳动力效率增高（热情增高）新的栽种方法（栽种时令的不同 浇水浇肥杀虫的时间等等）
条件则即为 气候、蝗虫灾害 等等
2. 原因出自外界 主要为市场原因 作物的单价升高 使得更多的农民有激励来种小麦 即单位劳动力在单位时间的产量不变，但有更多劳动力投入生产：
可能1：市场需求增多使单价上升，比如新的研究显示 吃米饭的人长寿 因此大家都去买大米了
可能2：政府鼓励大米种植，出台政策 种植一公斤水稻 可以得到XX元补助 即政府补助种大米的行为（用动词subsidize，很地道的）
我觉得如果这么展开，就论证的比较有条理也比较深入啦~
当然 不一定非要说明哪几种属于什么什么原因，哪几种属于另一种什么什么原因。只是可以考虑论证是按这个框架来分层，大层次内有小层次，逐层分析（即同一大层内的小层次并列分析，分析完一个大层次再进行第二个大层次。）虽然都是分层，但想办法表现出来两个大层内 各自包裹几个小层 的逻辑框架
不知是否可行呢？欢迎讨论哈~

下面再从 语言 以及 语法两方面小提几个建议
1. 句型、词汇略显简单
如：
第二段“Firstly, author unreasonably contributes the success in increasing the rice production by 80 percent to the use to the newly developed variety of seed. the author fails to take many other possibilities into consideration. ”这两句中，我个人认为第二句读起来略显句型重复，改成伴随状语从句也许会不错哦：）“Firstly, .......variety of seed, failing to take many other possibilities into consideration.”
再如
example一词 使用略显频繁
我的替换词汇是：archetype/ paradigm/ prototype/ typical case （使用时未必可完全互换，最好可以再查一下字典感觉一下各自的使用语境~但很多场合可以用于替代example，希望有帮助哦^^）
如果是 总体中的样本（抽样查\研究时常用到）则可用speciman代替sample

2. 词汇拼写，语法错误应更留意一点
明显笔误的地方不必多说 只盼望LZ能在实战中更谨慎小心一点点~~
有几处担心是否是存在小漏洞 故在此提出
如 第二段（“Firstly”开头）段末最后一句“Abcent” 应为“Absent”（觉得可能是记错了，所以提出的，如果是笔误 请见谅^^）
   仍是第二段， "Or perhaps the rice price...so that..."一句，我认为连词应改为 so/ therefore/ hence 或用副词 consequently/ accordingly etc.均可~ 但so that 经查找确认后可初步认定 只能连接前半句涉及行为的 目的 是后半句涉及的行为，即 之所以按照前半句那样，是为了能像后半句那样。
而此处LZ想表达的逻辑显然是 由于前半句，因此后半句... 因此不能用so that。（我认为这可能是平时的习惯 没有注意到的问题 所以提出来 如有误解 切莫责怪哦^^）
    第三段（Additionally 开头）由于我是学金融这方面的 对这个话题比较敏感，正好我们学校学的路线是按照美国的标准走的 用的是那边的教材 可以比较肯定的提醒LZ一下，income一般来说 指的是profit，即纯收入。我的建议是 如果怕不保险，可以第一次提到纯收入时 用net income，之后用Income就应该不会引发歧义咯~ 而相对于纯收入 我们平时说的收入 即未扣除支出的得到的钱 是用revenue(s). 支出的话 楼主用的很对 就是expense(s).

基本就这些了，水平不高，说的不对的地方一定指出来哦 一起进步吧！
真心祝你考场成功！
加油 没问题的！！:victory: