Argument 7 第一次写 求拍~谢谢！！！

justbegunUID: 2746795

发现自己以前都没怎么看A 快要考试了 觉得再不看来不及了
况且I又写得不好 集中复习A吧
第一次写完整的A
问题可能很多
O(∩_∩)O谢谢


7, （政治经济，社会/提议/并列）The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper.
"In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council(3), because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled(1), air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses(2). If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved(4,5)."




原文逻辑顺序
有两个人要竞选市长（一个环境部门一个另外一个事市委成员）——C城工厂多人生病多因此环境不好——因为市委成员没有能力——所以只有选环境部门的人才可以解决

This letter to the editor points out several environment problems of Clearview, criticizes the town council’s inability to deal with these problems and states the necessity to elect someone not from council as the next mayoral. However, this writer of the letter fails to provide other important features of the candidates, the real reason of people’s illness and enough evidence not to choose member from council.


To begin with, this letter doesn’t conclude sufficient information of the two candidates. It just points out that Ann Green is from the Good Earth Coalition and Frank Braun is from the clearview town council. It’s ridiculous to judge one’s ability just from the offices they work for. Citizens need to know the differences between two candidates’ policies, as well as their personality, experience and background. The ability to handle environmental problems is just one facet of the qualification. Politic is not only about environmental problems. What are the candidates’ opinions on education, health plan, and financial problems? The letter is too limited in only discussing problems related with the environment.


Secondly, the claim that the air pollution levels have increased is ungrounded. The fact that the number of factories in Clarview has doubled doesn’t necessary indicate that there would be more pollution in the city. No evidences provided that these factories pollute the air and water. Thus the author’s assumption that the increase in respiratory illnesses owes to the increase of the factories is invalid. The growing number goes to the hospital could result from many reasons. The writer simply equals the concept that more people get ill because more people go to the hospital. Many other factors other than environment problem could also trigger the illness. Without finding out the real reason why more people go to local hospital, the letter is not convincing to state the environment is getting worse. At least the writer should give some persuasive scientific report about the quality of the air during these years to stand his view.


Thirdly, even if the environment is being damaged recently, the town council should not be blamed. No direct evidence provided to show it was council’s fault that results those environmental problems. Frank Brawn is just one member of the council. He could have different view on the environmental issue with his office members. The fact that Ann Green is from Good Earth Coalition does not indicate she will certainly solve the environmental problems.


All in all, choosing a mayoral of a city is not a small case. The writer of this letter only sees the environmental program though even that small part is not persuasive. To convince more people to vote for Ann Green, the letter should at least provide more evidence on her advantages over her competence not simply in one area.

minor_majorUID: 2502168

很有意思的文章，看不出是第一次写A，没有很严重的模版痕迹，很不错
感觉B2有些问题，
the claim that the air pollution levels have increased is ungrounded这个是一个事实，我们质疑的永远不是事实，是结论，或者说从事实推向结论的逻辑链中的错误链接，
我建议，把现在的B3并入B2，B2的前面换成对于，三个事实是否能推断出与FB有关，然后接B3，
然后深化，出新的观点，即使FB要对这个负责，AG来了能改变么？AG能与政府其他议员如何协调的问题？

justbegunUID: 2746795

O(∩_∩)O谢谢
我再仔细 想下 这些 再改下
确是 不能质疑 事实 可能写的时候觉得空气没有被污染

恩  G的A 是第一次 写 （不过以前 写过托福的文 感觉大体 差不多）也许是没有怎么准备的关系没有看很多文章的关系所以才米有模板的痕迹……估计 开始复习 一段时间后反而有模板痕迹了……

rodgoodUID: 2619326

原文逻辑顺序
有两个人要竞选市长（一个环境部门一个另外一个事市委成员）——C城工厂多人生病多因此环境不好——因为市委成员没有能力（题目没有提到因为市委成员没能力而不选他，而是他可能不是支持环保的人。当然，论述时可以把能力与否作为依据之一）——所以只有选环境部门的人才可以解决

This letter to the editor points out several environment problems of Clearview(文中只有一句话直接提到环境变差，即air pollution levels have increased), criticizes the town council’s inability to deal with these problems（指环境问题？还是还有工厂加倍和病人增多？） and states the necessity to elect someone not from council as the next mayoral. However, this writer of the letter fails to provide other important features of the candidates, the real reason of people’s illness and enough evidence not to choose member from council.


To begin with, this letter doesn’t conclude sufficient information of the two candidates. It just points out that Ann Green is from the Good Earth Coalition and Frank Braun is from the clearview town council. It’s ridiculous to judge one’s ability just from the offices they work for. Citizens need to know the differences between two candidates’ policies, as well as their personality, experience and background. The ability to handle environmental problems is just one facet of the qualification. Politic is not only about environmental problems. What are the candidates’ opinions on education, health plan, and financial problems? The letter is too limited in only discussing problems related with the environment.
这段的思想值得学习，呵呵。的确，题目开头就表示了should的意向，而这个意向是需要全方位考虑的。

Secondly, the claim that the air pollution levels have increased is ungrounded. The fact that the number of factories in Clarview has doubled doesn’t necessary indicate that there would be more pollution in the city. No evidences provided that these factories pollute the air and water. Thus the author’s assumption that the increase in respiratory illnesses owes to the increase of the factories is invalid. The growing number goes to the hospital could result from many reasons. The writer simply equals the concept that more people get ill because more people go to the hospital.（个人认为此句和下句是两个不同的方面，所以此句可以稍微展开下，如可能是人们对健康更关注，所以一有不舒服就去看医生，而这可能正是政府官员政策或意识引导的好结果） （然后这里可以来个moreover）Many other factors other than environment problem could also trigger the illness（最好限定在呼吸疾病范围内）. (需要再展开下下，比如哪些因素也可能导致呼吸疾病啊之类的) Without finding out the real reason why more people go to local hospital, (因为前面说了两个小方面，所以应加上and the cause of their respiratory problem) the letter is not convincing to state the environment is getting worse. At least the writer should give some persuasive scientific report about the quality of the air during these years to stand his view.这句不错~~


Thirdly, even if the environment is being damaged recently, the town council should not be blamed. No direct evidence provided to show it was council’s fault that results those environmental problems. Frank Brawn is just one member of the council. He could have different view on the environmental issue with his office members. The fact that Ann Green is from Good Earth Coalition does not indicate she will certainly solve the environmental problems. 这段论述少了点点，可能是时间不够了？个人觉得还可以方向说说，比如环境变差，Good Earth Coalition可能也有责任等等。


All in all, choosing a mayoral of a city is not a small case. The writer of this letter only sees the environmental program though even that small part is not persuasive. To convince more people to vote for Ann Green, the letter should at least provide more evidence on her advantages over her competence not simply in one area.题目中还深入论述了这个方面（环境），且论述得不够令人信服。


也请你帮我看看我的A哈，谢谢
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=1053639&extra=

合作愉快~~

hychlavenderUID: 2697566

弱弱的问下下，怎么添加附件哪？

minor_majorUID: 2502168

3# justbegun
不要模版更好，文章看上去比较有新的感觉
怕有了模版后，会限制思维

justbegunUID: 2746795

恩 不过没有框架也是不行的

谢谢RODGOOD的详细更改
特别欣赏这一点 ： 比如环境变差，Good Earth Coalition可能也有责任等等 这确实能削弱原命题很多啊！