- 最后登录
- 2012-8-22
- 在线时间
- 195 小时
- 寄托币
- 823
- 声望
- 44
- 注册时间
- 2005-2-23
- 阅读权限
- 25
- 帖子
- 3
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 848
- UID
- 197049

- 声望
- 44
- 寄托币
- 823
- 注册时间
- 2005-2-23
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 3
|
本帖最后由 prettywraith 于 2009-12-15 22:03 编辑
第二次作业
ARGUMENT143 [REBORN FROM THE ASHES] TASK ONE by prettywraith
第一遍限时写了200多字,比较郁闷啊,逻辑点还可以,就是有话说不出来来;
上次放上来的是第二遍写的,没有限时,写了330字。后来发现有几个漏洞;
现在放上来的是第三遍写的,有两个地方觉得还是有点问题,过几天再改吧。
Supporting his standpoint with a recent report, the arguer insists the article shows a mistaken impression that many capable workers who are out of job because of company downsizing have suffered serious economic hardship for years, until they find other proper employment. But I cannot concede his conclusion only by providing three causes in the report: (1) new jobs have increased absolutely since 1992; (2)many jobless workers have found new job;(3) most newly created jobs with above-average wages are full-time positions in industries.
Report states more jobs have been offered since 1992. But the arguer do not tell us how many population who are at the working age increase in these years. Assume there are 1 million people seeking jobs, 1 million job position in 1992, and until now, there are 2 million people finding jobs, 1.5 million jobs. Under this hypothesis, even if jobs increase 50 percent,
the unemployment rate still rise from zero to 25%. Thus, it is hard to say the net increase in the number of new jobs created also means
people could find job easily. Perhaps, comparing with jobless population in 1992, today, more people lost their job, and these workers effected by corporate downsizing also face the same suffering situation. In other words, lacking the exact number of employment rate, the arguer cannot undermine the article’s claim.
Assuming the first finding of report used by arguer have proved jobless population decline, but it still do not show whether positions provided by corporations increase or not. Because perhaps the majority of the newly created jobs are provided by farm, hospital, government, university or other institutions. Were they farmers, polices, professors, doctors or librarians, people would find job easily. But, for those workers working in corporation may face fierce competition. someone may say the arguer also claimed that many jobless people have found job again. Obviously, this is another same problem in letter. On the one hand, it does not tell us what is the kind of new job. On the other hand, the evidence, cited by the arguer, does not show the percentage of jobless people who have found a new job. Possibly, thousands of people find new job, and author thinks that is “many”. However, if there were still millions of jobless people, the evidence would not help author challenging the article’s assertion.
At the bottom of the arguer’s evidence, most of newly created jobs in those high-paying industries do not mean high-paying in downsized corporate. Moreover, the report only say the newly created jobs with high-paying, and it does not mention what is the pay of original positions. After all, not all people will catch the position by newly created. Even if all the corporation pay high salary for all positions, maybe, they still have plan to reduce employment scale. Actually, corporation always simplify their personnel structure and pay more salary for the rest workers, for increasing profit. Thus, these jobless workers are hinder by many difficulties, as retrieving their as before.
In sum, the arguer do not support his viewpoint with sufficient evidence and reasoning. To more effectively refute the claim the author should provide clear evidence that what is the employment rate in 1992 and today, what is the percent of jobless people finding new jobs and what is the ratio of new jobs with high-paying.
ISSUE13 [REBORN FROM THE ASHES] TASK ONE by prettywraith
TOPIC: ISSUE13 - "Many of the world's lesser-known languages are being lost as fewer and fewer people speak them. The governments of countries in which these languages are spoken should act to prevent such languages from becoming extinct."
WORDS: 230
TIME: 0:45:00
DATE: 2009-12-13
When society is developing, some languages are forgetting in the world. Whatever how often the language is used, we have to say that our spiritual wealth are suffering from extinct languages. Whether the government has duty to protect these languages?
In my viewpoint, government has other more important social problems need to solve, and it should not intervene to prevent theses languages from becoming extinct.
Today, government need to do a lot of things, which are more important and emergency than lesser-known languages extinct. Let us take a look about our real society: high jobless rate, high crime, hunger crisis, and climate change. All these are
threatening our life, and government might be deploying its resources to fight against. Taking the United Nations Climate Conference in Copenhagen for instance,
we can see developing country are suffering hungers, developed country are worrying climate change. Which government do you think could afford for protect the language becoming extinct? Under this circumstance, how can government could spend money and workers to solve languages extinct problem. You may say that government could employ more people to do these. Facing to this question, I ask you two questions : Do you want to pay more tax? Do you want to government have more authority to interrupt you life? If you say no, the government would better do not prevent such languages from becoming extinct.
Certainly, if some countries’ government have more funds and employees, they could preserve such languages. But they should know different languages will lead to misunderstanding among people, hinder international commerce and trade, and even result in war among nations. Mover, in some countries, there are too many languages to keep them. For example, 56 races lying in China, they have at least thousands of languages; even two villages, hundreds miles between them, have different language. How could government to protect all them? As I know, under the help of high technology, from now, only a few government do effort for a part of languages.
Despite no practical need for some languages, no government resources pay for them, these languages still have charming function for us. They can preserve the distinct ideas which only that particular language can convey, such as some abstract concepts. Languages always are signs of distinct cultural people, could help people keep their own traditions, rituals and beliefs, could satisfy people psychological need for individual identity.
Therefore, people themselves need to do some efforts to protect their own languages, while society should give them more help by setting up a languages protecting institution or donating a minority languages fund. For government, it has to deal with many serious economic, social and political problems, and hardly devotes its time and resources to prevent some lesser-known languages from becoming extinct.
|
|