1006G【redemptoion】备考帖 by 娃娃衫公主

娃娃衫公主UID: 2677493

170T "The surest indicator of a great nation is not the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists, but the general welfare of all its people."
170． 一个富强的国家最有力的证明不是它的统治者、艺术家或者科学家，而是全体人民的福利
1．  I concede that general welfare 是正确的指标。
public health and safety, security against military invasion, individual autonomy and freedom, cultural richness, and a high standard of living.
B另一方面，这些成就与统治者、艺术家和科学家密不可分。
2． 是衡量指标：
（1）统治者：决策者，决定性作用
EG：彼得大帝（Czar Peter），被认为是俄国最杰出（preeminent）的沙皇（czar）。进行了西方化改革：发展科学，改革社会风俗，使得俄国成为列强之一。
(2)艺术：艺术的繁荣需要以富强的国力作为保障EG：
(3)科学家：科技创新能力是

I concede that a country’s greatness can be indicated by the welfare of its people, as the speaker claims. However, the achievement of its ruler, scientists and artists, is another sure indication of them nation’s strength which is hard to neglect.

On one hand, the general welfare of a country’s people is an important index to judge a country’s greatness. The general welfare contains the public health and safety, security against military invasion, individual freedom and autonomy, cultural richness and high standard of living. Only a country with high welfare of its people can be defined as powerful. After the launch of Social Security Act, for example, people in the United States live a better life under the insurance of the nation’s welfare system. Nevertheless, in some districts where people are under the threat of war, diseases, where people can’t even get health care due to the lack of supporting laws, the nation is always treated as weak and disordered, not to mention of greatness. Thus, in order to determine whether a country is great or not, the general welfare must be taken into consideration.

However, on the other hand, the welfare of the public is an achievement made by a large group of people, in which, the contribution of its ruler is of great importance. History tells us a great country is always under the control of a great ruler. Russia in its seventeenth century is regarded as a great country in the world and people all describes Czar Peter, the ruler of that time, the most prominent czar in Russian’s history. He promoted the Westernized reform inside Russian, stimulated the progress in the scientific field, and changed the social customs of Russians. All these resulted in the prosperity of Russia. Together with the great achievement of a great ruler, the greatness of a nation is always there. A ruler, who makes no contribution, or even stuck against the masses, is always an indication of the ruin of a nation. Thus, the achievement of the ruler is also an important indication of a nation’s greatness.

Moreover, the achievement of a country’s scientists and artists can also serve to enhance a country’s general welfare, and thus is another indication. In scientific field, advances in the health care have enhanced the well-being of the citizens, ensure us with longer longevity; advances in the technology enhances the communication between people, raises the efficiency of people’s work, and under most cases, makes us more comfortable. In the field of art, Raphael’s oil painting, the world-famous frescos in the Sistine Chapel, Leonardo da Vinci's most famous painting, the Mona Lisa all appeared in Renaissance, when the economy grew with the coming of the bud of capitalism. The freedom of people’s thoughts and the sporting blood finally gave rise to the all-time event. The achievements of the artists, as well as that of the scientists, enjoy the background of a great nation, and are to enhance the general welfare of that nation. Without taking into their achievement into account, we are neglecting one of the powerful factor of a great nation.

In sum, the general welfare of a nation serves as an express indication of a great nation, while the achievement of the nation’s ruler, the scientists and the artists are of the same importance on measuring that, as their contribution will all make the general welfare better.

娃娃衫公主UID: 2677493

第六次作业
修改飞雪无痕：
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=1054090&pid=1773557863&page=2&extra=#pid1773557863

娃娃衫公主UID: 2677493

改小痴的第二次作业
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=1054056&pid=1773557905&page=2&extra=

lcv8006UID: 2452096

170T "The surest indicator of a great nation is not the achievements of its rulers, artists, or scientists, but the general welfare of all its people."
170． 一个富强的国家最有力的证明不是它的统治者、艺术家或者科学家，而是全体人民的福利
1．  I concede that general welfare 是正确的指标。
public health and safety, security against military invasion, individual autonomy and freedom, cultural richness, and a high standard of living.
B另一方面，这些成就与统治者、艺术家和科学家密不可分。
2． 是衡量指标：
（1）统治者：决策者，决定性作用
EG：彼得大帝（Czar Peter），被认为是俄国最杰出（preeminent）的沙皇（czar）。进行了西方化改革：发展科学，改革社会风俗，使得俄国成为列强之一。
(2)艺术：艺术的繁荣需要以富强的国力作为保障EG：
(3)科学家：科技创新能力是

I concede that a country’s greatness can be indicated by the welfare of its people, as the speaker claims. However, the achievement of its ruler, scientists and artists, is another sure indication of them(their) nation’s strength which is hard to neglect.(开篇表明观点，welfare 和 统治者都是国家强有力的标志）

On one hand, the general welfare of a country’s people is an important index to judge a country’s greatness. The general welfare contains the public health and safety, security against military invasion, individual freedom and autonomy, cultural richness and high standard of living. Only a country with high welfare of its people can be defined as powerful. After the launch of Social Security Act, for example, people in the United States live a better life under the insurance of the nation’s welfare system. Nevertheless, in some districts where people are under the threat of war, diseases, where people can’t even get health care due to the lack of supporting laws,（这两个从句最好合成一句） the nation is always treated as weak and disordered, not to mention of greatness. Thus, in order to determine whether a country is great or not, the general welfare must be taken into consideration. （这一段结构很好，论证也很清晰）

However, on the other hand, the welfare of the public is an achievement made by a large group of people, in which, the contribution of its ruler is of（是否应该删掉）great importance. History tells us a great country is always under the control of a great ruler. Russia in its seventeenth century is regarded as a great country in the world and people all describes Czar Peter, the ruler of that time,(as) the most prominent czar in Russian’s history. He promoted the Westernized reform inside Russian, stimulated the progress in the scientific field, and changed the social customs of Russians. All these resulted in the prosperity of Russia. Together with the great achievement of a great ruler, the greatness of a nation is always there. A ruler, who makes no contribution, or even stuck against the masses,(前后语态不太一致） is always an indication of the ruin of a nation. Thus, the achievement of the ruler is also an important indication of a nation’s greatness.

Moreover, the achievement of a country’s scientists and artists can also serve to enhance a country’s general welfare, and thus is another indication. （后面改造成一个从句比较好）In scientific field, advances in the health care have enhanced the well-being of the citizens, ensure us with longer longevity; advances in the technology enhances  the communication between people, raises the efficiency of people’s work, and under most cases, makes us more comfortable.(这一句话两个分局的单复不一致） In the field of art, Raphael’s oil painting, the world-famous frescos in the Sistine Chapel, Leonardo da Vinci's most famous painting, the Mona Lisa all appeared in Renaissance, when the economy grew with the coming of the bud of capitalism.（病句） The freedom of people’s thoughts and the sporting blood finally gave rise to the all-time event. （看不懂:L 这句）The achievements of the artists, as well as that of the scientists, enjoy the background of a great nation, and are to enhance the general welfare of that nation. Without taking into（删掉） their achievement into account, we are neglecting one of the powerful factor of a great nation.

In sum, the general welfare of a nation serves as an express indication of a great nation, while the achievement of the nation’s ruler, the scientists and the artists are of the same importance on measuring that, as their contribution will all make the general welfare better.

整篇文章，逻辑严密，结构清晰。语言上感觉有一些时态和语法的问题，另外有一些中式英语的痕迹。当然，语言问题本身是我的弱项，说错了请别介意。
例子举了很多，但感觉最好能再深入阐述一下。

娃娃衫公主UID: 2677493

第七次作业
Issue
221 "The chief benefit of the study of history is to break down the illusion that people in one period of time are significantly different from people who lived at any other time in history."
221． 研究历史最明显的好处就是完全消除了这样的错觉，某个时代的人们与历史上另一个时代的人有很大的差别。

What is the chief benefit of history? Is it to show that people in one period is not of significant differences with people live in any other time in history? As for me, I agree with the author that human beings living in different times must have something in common, which can be clearly shown in history. However, I can’t agree with that the chief benefit of history is that. On the contrary, history also benefits us by showing the differences of people’s differences in different times.
I turn first to my opinion of agreement with the statement. There are common characters people living in different times, as basic human nature seldom change all through history. No matter what the time it is, loyalty to one’s motherland is the basic value of a citizen; loyalty to the family is the cherished character of a family member; loyalty to friendship is still the highest standard between friends. On the other hand, the dark sides of human also maintain the same. Selfishness, conceit, greed and other evil human natures still exist in spite of the efforts of the past dynasties and governments. Each government, whether it is in the past or under the current time, has to legislate to maintain security. Conflicts between countries still continue with the advance of technology and the growth in the living standard of their people. After the study of history, we can easily draw the conclusion that men have rarely change in view of human nature.
Nevertheless, the invariability of human nature does not mean the indifference of human living in different times. With the change of time, some basic value still changed. For example, women used to be taken as the stooge of men, and were required to be submissive in the past. However, after the Feminist Movement, their social status gradually rises. The majority of women today are independent in the present. In some countries, there are laws to entitle the rights of women and to protect them from discrimination. Though there progress made by people in the coming times, there are also some new problems appear with the time. With the advance in science and technology, men are facing with new problem the prehuman could never think about. Clone, for example, raises heated debate in the field of ethics and morality. It is new concept human beings have to adjust to it. the same is the appearance of euthanasia, whether to legalize it or not is the problems people before have never think about.
In fact, modern time is a combination of both the unchanged human nature and new problems, while genuine history is an elder who keep telling vivid stories about humanity to hone the moral sense of the public and promote the thoughts about loyalty, morality, responsibility and so forth. Thus, In the process of the study of history, we need to figure out the changes and similarities of the people of different times, using principles indicated by history to help people make wise decisions and avoid the same failure by recognizing mistakes made in the past. At the same time, use our innovation to solve new problems.
In sum, the benefit of history is to show both the indifferences and differences of human in different times. Through the study of history, we make the wise choices in dealing with the new problems and avoiding the same mistakes we once made.

娃娃衫公主UID: 2677493

Argument 150
The author of this letter concludes that the global pollution of water and air is respecting to the decline of the number of amphibians. To bolster that, the author first notes a decline of the amphibian in Yosemite Park between 1915and 1992. And he then eliminates the possibility that the decline was caused by the introduction of trout in 1920 by declaring that the trout can’t result in the worldwide decline of amphibian. I find this argument unconvincing in three critical respects.
Firstly, the author fails to provide any evidence to refute the strong inference that the amphibian decline in Yosemite was indeed caused by the introduction of trout. As it is indicated in the letter that trout are known to eat amphibian eggs, it is entirely possible that the introduction of trout is the cause. The author also provides no affirmative evidence that any other phenomenon was instead the cause. Thus, the author’s broad assertion that a worldwide decline in amphibian indicated the global pollution is entirely unconvincing.
Secondly, even if assume that the decline was not attributed to the introduction of trout, the author provides no sufficient evidence that the pollution of air and water is the cause of the decline. There could be many other factors, such as the change of the climate in Yosemite, or the worsened management in Yosemite Park. Without ruling out all these possible explanations, the author cannot reasonably conclude that the pollution is responsible for the decline of amphibians. To reach the cited conclusion, the arguer must explain either why none of these alternatives is available or why none of them is able to sustain.
Last but not the least, even I were to concede that pollution of air and water are responsible for the decline of number of amphibians, the single sample fails to support the author’s assumption that the global decline was also due to the pollution. It is entirely possible that the cause and effect relationship in Yosemite Park is typical in the worldwide. Without any additional sample from diverse geographic locations, the author can’t prove the rightness of his generalization that the global decline was caused by the pollution.
In sum, the arguer’s conclusion that the global decline of amphibians are caused by pollution of air and water is indefensible. To strengthen it, he must provide more evidence, such as the samples of population change in diverse locations, which must shown a strong inverse relationship between the levels of air and water pollution and the amphibian population worldwide.

娃娃衫公主UID: 2677493

Argument 137
In this argument, the author concludes that recreation use on the Mason River will increase, and Mason City council should increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned land along the Mason River. To strengthen his conclusion, the author cites supporting evidence : (1)a survey revealing that residents in Mason City rank water sports as their favorite form of recreation;(2) there have been complaints about the quality of water in the river; (3) the agency responsible for rivers in their region has a plan to clean up Mason River. At first glance, the argument might seem reasonable, but close recruit reveals that it contains several unconvincing assumption and is therefore unpersuasive.

First of all, the arguer claims that there have been complaints about the water in the river, and automatically assumes that it was the only reason for which residents seldom use Mason River. Yet the correlation alone amounts to scant evidence of the claimed cause-and-effect relationship. The arguer obviously overlooks other possible explanations for this phenomenon. For example, perhaps the condition of Mason River is not suitable for the water sports residents’ favor most; or perhaps there are enough stadiums and gymnasia in the city that residents don’t need to exercise in the open air. Without ruling such possibilities, I can’t accept the arguer’s point that the residents avoid use the river only because they think it is not clean enough.

Secondly, even assuming that the residents near the Mason River seldom use Mason River due to its uncleanness, the author’s further advise depends on additional assumption that the related agency’s plan to clean up Mason River will result in the cleanness of the river. Absent of evidence that this is the case, it is equally possible that the adoption of the plan would not suffice by itself. To prove his assumption, the author needs more evidence to show that the agencies will carry out the plan regardless of the difficulties and the possible changes. He also needs statistic evidence to show that the nearby residents’ favor in water sports will not change before the river is cleaned. Otherwise, the author cannot convince me that the plan proposed by the related agency will result in the increase in the recreation activities in Mason River.

Thirdly, even I concede that the plan will resulted in the cleanness of the river, the author fails to provide any evidence to show that with the cleanness of the river, and the increase of the recreation in the river requires more budgets for improvement to the public owned lands along the Mason River. Perhaps since residents are in favor of water sports, they need less public lands to exercise. For that matter, the author cannot confidentially conclude to increase the budgets for improvement to the public lands along the Mason River.

In sum, the arguer’s conclusion that about the increase in the budgets for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River is indefensible as it stands. To bolster it, the author must provide clear evidence including that the residents nearby seldom use the river for recreation only because the river is not clean enough. To better assess the advise, evidence to prove that the agency’s plan to clean the river will be carried out sufficiently and effectively is also in need.The author should also try to provide evidence to show that the residents’ interest in water sports will stay the same.

lcv8006UID: 2452096

第七次作业 Issue 221 "The chief benefit of the study of history is to break down the illusion that people in one period of time are significantly different from people who lived at any other time in history." 221． 研究历史最明显的好处就是完全消除了这样的错觉，某个时代的人们与历史上另一个时代的人有很大的差别。 What is the chief benefit of history? Is it to show that people in one period is not of significant differences with people live in any other time in history? (这句有点不太通顺）As for me, I agree with the author that human beings living in different times must have something in common, which can be clearly shown in history. However, I can’t agree with that the chief benefit of history is that. On the contrary, history also（删掉） benefits us by showing the differences of people’s differences in different times.（好多的difference，第一个和第二个重复了） I turn first to my opinion of agreement with the statement. There are common characters （中间应该有个连词）people living in different times, as basic human nature seldom change all through history. No matter what the time it is, loyalty to one’s motherland is the basic value of a citizen; loyalty to the family is the cherished character of a family member; loyalty to friendship is still the highest standard between friends. （感觉有点中式英语痕迹）On the other hand, the dark sides of human （nature） also maintain the same. Selfishness, conceit, greed and other evil human natures still exist in spite of the efforts of the past dynasties and governments. Each government, whether it is in the past or under the current time, has to legislate to maintain security. Conflicts between countries still continue with the advance of technology and the growth in the living standard of their people. After the study of history, we can easily draw the conclusion that men have rarely change in view of human nature. （后面举得国家和政府的例子有些牵强） Nevertheless, the invariability of human nature does not mean the indifference of human living in different times. With the change of time, some basic value still changed. For example, women used to be taken as the stooge of men, and were required to be submissive in the past. However, after the Feminist Movement, their social status gradually rises. The majority of women today are independent in the present（与today重复）. In some countries, there are laws to entitle the rights of women and to protect them from discrimination. Though there progress made by people in the coming times,（感觉句子有点问题） there are also some new problems appear with the time. With the advance in science and technology, men are facing with new problem the prehuman could never think about. Clone, for example, raises heated debate in the field of ethics and morality. It is（冠词） new concept human beings have to adjust to it. the same is the appearance of euthanasia, whether to legalize it or not is the problems people before have never think about. （注意词汇的多样性） In fact, modern time（现代时代？） is a combination of both the unchanged human nature and new problems, while genuine history is an elder who keep（时态或者单复数） telling vivid stories about humanity to hone the moral sense of the public and promote the thoughts about loyalty, morality, responsibility and so forth. Thus, In the process of the study of history, we need to figure out the changes and similarities of the people of different times, using principles indicated by history to help people make wise decisions and avoid the same failure by recognizing mistakes made in the past.（动词与前面不一致） At the same time, use our innovation（病句） to solve new problems. In sum, the benefit of history is to show both the indifferences and differences of human in different times. Through the study of history, we make the wise choices in dealing with the new problems and avoiding the same mistakes we once made. 整篇文章，逻辑清晰，结构明确，但对论点的论述有一些牵强。 另外注意语法错误较多，语言用词较干瘪。不知道是不是限时的原因。

娃娃衫公主UID: 2677493

第八次作业
Argument7
In this in this argument, the editorial recommends that residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green instead of Frank Braun. To strengthen this conclusion, he cites a significant increase in the number of factories in the past year, and there were 25percent more patients with respiratory illness in the hospital.
On the basis of this evidence, the editorial infers that the the current members of the council are not protecting our environment. This argument might seem reasonable at first glance, but with close scrutiny, I find it to be logically flawed in several critical respects.
To begin with, the argument claims the increase in the number of factories and unfairly assumes it to be one of the sign of the worsened environment. However, this might not be the case. Maybe the increase of factories numbers doesn’t necessarily indicate the increase in pollution. Maybe the newly opened factories are environmental-friendly, or perhaps it has just provide more job available to the residents. If these were the matter, the increased number of factories is more like a good sign rather than blame to the current council. Even assuming the opening of more factories are causing pollution in the town, the editorial shows no evidence that it is the council’s responsibility. In fact, this can be caused by many other reasons. For example, maybe the development in the town is fast enough to have more factories open in the town, or perhaps the council were opposed to the idea of double the increase but lack the authority to prevent it. Without accounting for other explanations like this, the author can‘t unfairly draw the further assumption that the council are harming the town’s environment.
Moreover, the arguer also assumes unfairly that the increase in the number of patients with respiratory to local hospital an indication of the environmental problem. Even assuming the record of the hospital is reliable, the author has overlooked many other possibilities. For instance, perhaps the incidence of respiratory has actually not increased, but due to the growing awareness of respiratory disease, more people came to hospital for cure; or perhaps with the growing
Or perhaps there is an influx of people with pre-existing diseases, or the spread of respiratory is a result of the cigarette. Since the author fails to rule out such kind of possibilities, he cannot convince me that the increase of patients with respiratory to hospital is an indication of increased pollution, let alone to whom the residents should elect.

Thirdly, even assuming that the two cited increase do indicate a worsening of Clearview’s environment, the argument rests on the further assumption that Clearview town council is merely responsible for that. But since the author provides no further evidence to substantiate it, it is equally possible that decisions are made by other authorities. Even if the worsened environment problem is attributed to the council, no further evidence proves that Frank Braun is tone of the decision maker. Perhaps he was one of the minorities who were strongly opposed to the plan. For that matter, the assertion that Fraud Braun is the key member adversely effecting Clearview’s environment is unconvincing.
Fourthly, , even I concede that Fraud Braud was responsible for the worsened environment, the arguer unfairly assumes that electing Ann Green is the most effective way to prevent us from pollution. The only reason he bases the assumption on is that Ann is a member of Good Earth Coalition. However, the arguer fails to provide sufficient evidence such as Ann’s performance or contribution in the coalition, the recommendation might not seem reasonable.
Finally, even Green would in fact be effective in protecting our environment; the arguer assumes it to be the only helpful recommendation. However, the arguer entirely ignores some other choices, such as other candidate or other course of action would be more effective. Or perhaps the changing of other council member or even the member of the state’s council, would do more good to the town’s environment. Besides, were I concede Ann Green to be the most effective member in protecting our environment, the author fail to take other of her ability into account. Perhaps Ann Green would sacrifice the future development in closing down most factories, by doing which the residents may suffer from a lack of job vacancies.

In sum, the editorial recommendation to elect Ann Green in replace of Frank Braun is indefensible as it stands. To bolster it, the arguer must provide more evidence that (1)the Clearview does suffer from the worsening of environment, (2)the pollution was caused by Fraud Braun instead of other members of Clearview’s council, or even any other groups, (3)the electing of Ann Green is suffice to solve the current problems in the town without causing any other new problem.

娃娃衫公主UID: 2677493

Arguent37
In this argument, the author concludes that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea. To strengthen the conclusion, the arguer provides evidence that (1)in Lithos where the baskets were found, and a very deep Brim River is in between of Lithos and Palea (2)due to the depth of Brim, boats large enough is the only way to reach the opposite bank, but no evidence shows people of that time owned it, (3)people in Palea don’t need to cross the river due to the sufficiency in food. I find this conclusion to be logically flawed in several aspects.

To begin with, the argument claims the Brim River between Palea and Lithos is so deep that only boat can transport people to the other side. However, the author fails to provide sufficient evidence to show that the Brim River was deep in the past. Perhaps the river didn’t occur until the disappearance of Paleans. Moreover, the author bases his conclusion on the additional assumption that boat is the only form of transportation. However, the author ignores other ways like swimming or using other animals as a way to exchange things. Without ruling out all these possibilities, the arguer’s point is unconvincing to me.

Moreover, even assuming that the river is to deep to apply any other vehicles rather than the boat, the author provides no evidence to show that boat was not in own to Paleans. Lakin gin evidence does not necessarily indicate that there were none. Besides, the author also bases his conclusion on the assumption that only large boats are useful. However, there is no evidence to show that small boat weren’t used by Lithos to reach to the other side. Without evidence to show there were no boat at that time, or small boat was not useful to transport people to the otherd side, the arguer’s can’t convince me that Lithos had never been to Palea.

Thirdly, the author unfairly assumes that Palean had no need to cross the river since the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries and small games. There could be many other reasons, however, for Paleans to try to cross the river. For instance, the intermarries between Palea and Lithos were common, or perhaps there was food Paleans were most favored in Lithos. Without accounting these factor, the author can not hastily conclude that Paleans had no need to cross the river, let alone whether the baskets were unique to paleans.

In sum, the author’s conclusion that the basket is not unique in Palea is indefensible as it stands. To bolster it, the author must provide more evidence to show that the river was deep to prevent people from crossing it without boat, and the boat large enough for use didn’t appear until the disappearance of both groups of people. To better assess the problem, I would also need to know that there was really no need to either side of people to visit the other.

娃娃衫公主UID: 2677493

70"In any profession -- business, politics, education, government -- those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership."
70．在任何领域，商业、政治、教育、政府，掌权者都应该在5年任期后下台。对任何事业而言，取得成功最保险的途径就是聘用新生力量担当领导。
Position: Limiting the term of leadership is an effective way to prevent corruption and lack of initiatives. But the limitation of term should be determined with consideration of different conditions and in different fields.
①及时更新是有益的。对在位者来说，
  A 防止腐败
  B有激励作用
②对于新生力量也是有益的。
  A让他们看到机会，从而促使他们更努力的工作。
  B通常来说，年轻力量更能创新
③五年的限期太绝对。
  有的职位是靠经累积起来的，如：学术权威
  有的职位要求的是稳定性.可能影响长期政策的实行。

    Should we ask those in power to step down after five years in regardless to their profession? Is revitalizing through new leadership the surest way to success? The author thinks so. As for me, I strongly agree with the author that revitalization is essential to the success to any profession, as it can reduce power abuse and bring new ideas. Nevertheless, I don’t think the advice work the same in different fields, and five years is too absolute to follow.

   

  To begin with, revitalization through new leadership is effective and beneficial in most cases. On one hand, it can reduce chances for current leaders to abuse their power and eliminate corruption. Take the in America, a President’s term of office is four years, and an amendment to the United States Constitution limits the President to two full terms in office. This is to prevent the American presidents’ from withhold the power for too long a time, and thus to restrict them from the abuse of power. Otherwise, those in power may not take their responsibility with awe, cause they never need to worry about the loss of their power. As Sir Acton once said:”The absolute power leads to absolute corruption.” Moreover, the limitation of term in power also serves to stimulate the leaders to make every effort to make achievement, because they are often exposed to the possibility to be taken place by the revitalization.

   On the other hand, the change of leaders can serve as stimulation to the youth, ensuring them chances to test their ability and show their talents. Besides, in many professions, a new leadership usually has greater initiative and would bring in new ideas. Such as in the field of IT industry, where with the rapid change of science and technology, it is of great importance to keep the leader innovative and quick responded to the reform. The same are fields such as the advertising industry, the mass media industry, the art, the fashion design. If the leaders stay too long in their position, the enterprise may be left behind by its competitors and become outdated. From this we can see the swift change of power is also prior to the young generation and the enterprise.

   However, regardless of the benefits to ask leaders to step down, the author’s claim about five years as the limitation is too absolute. Firstly, in many fields, the accumulation of knowledge and experience takes much longer time than five years. Especially to some academic authorities, they may have spent half their life doing research and study, and finally come into power. If we ask them to step down after only five years, it is not only unfair, but is possible to cause chaos as the young are both less experienced and less learned. Secondly, under certain conditions, the continuing of a leadership over the limitation of time can be a merit rather than a defect. Franklin D. Roosevelt, the 32nd president of the United States was elected four times to the presidency. He led the United States through most of World War II, and relieved Americans from the Great Depression with his New Deal. Roosevelt‘s long-time time in power is a blessing to the United States. If the Americans stopped Roosevelt’s presidency as the Constitution limits, whether the successor can lead America out of the challenge remains unknown. Thus, I disagree with the author’s five-year theory to be put into practice in certain fields like academic, or in consideration to the certain conditions. In fact, the limitation of time in power should vary in different fields to make it more suitable.

   In sum, I agree with the author’s view that leaders should step down after certain time in power, to prevent corruption and to give way for revitalization for new leadership. However, I cannot agree with the author’s five-year limit as there are some fields where the accumulation of experience and knowledge can never be neglect. The term of office as a leader should vary in various fields.

liuxinglly2UID: 2754800

Argument7
In this in this argument, the editorial recommends that residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green instead of Frank Braun. To strengthen this conclusion, he cites a significant increase in the number of factories in the past year, and there were 25percent more patients with respiratory illness in the hospital.
On the basis of this evidence, the editorial infers that the current members of the council are not protecting our environment. This argument might seem reasonable at first glance, but with close scrutiny, I find it to be logically flawed in several critical respects.
To begin with, the argument claims the increase in the number of factories and unfairly assumes it to be one of the sign of the worsened environment. However, this might not be the case. Maybe the increase of factories numbers doesn’t necessarily indicate the increase in pollution. Maybe the newly opened factories are environmental-friendly, or perhaps it has just provide more job available to the residents. If these were the matter, the increased number of factories is more like a good sign rather than blame to the current council. Even assuming the opening of more factories are (is) causing pollution in the town, the editorial shows no evidence that it is the council’s responsibility. In fact, this can be caused by many other reasons. For example, maybe the development in the town is fast enough to have more factories open in the town, or perhaps the council were(was)
opposed to the idea of double the increase but lack the authority to prevent it. Without accounting for other explanations like this, the author can‘t unfairly draw the further assumption that the council are harming the town’s environment.
Moreover, the arguer also assumes unfairly that the increase in the number of patients with respiratory to local hospital an indication of the environmental problem. Even assuming the record of the hospital is reliable, the author has overlooked many other possibilities. For instance, perhaps the incidence of respiratory has actually not increased, but due to the growing awareness of respiratory disease, more people came to hospital for cure; or perhaps with the growing
Or perhaps there is an influx of people with pre-existing diseases, or the spread of respiratory is a result of(resulting from更好，这句of太多了)the cigarette（这里用动词“吸烟smoking”表达意思更好）. Since the author fails to rule out such kind of possibilities, he cannot convince me that the increase of patients with respiratory to hospital is an indication of increased pollution, let alone to whom the residents should elect.

Thirdly, even assuming that the two cited increase do indicate a worsening of Clearview’s environment, the argument rests on the further assumption that Clearview town council is merely responsible for that.（这个攻击是完全没有问题） But since the author provides no further evidence to substantiate it, it is equally possible that decisions are made by other authorities. Even if the worsened environment problem is attributed to the council, no further evidence proves that Frank Braun is tone of the decision maker.（但是这个EVEN我就觉得不太有道理了）
Perhaps he was one of the minorities who were strongly opposed to the plan. For that matter, the assertion that Fraud Braun is the key member adversely effecting Clearview’s environment is unconvincing. (个人感觉这段的关于Frank Braun是否为环境恶化问题的决策者的论述有点牵强了，文中没有任何关于此方面的假设)
Fourthly, , even I concede that Fraud Braud was responsible for the worsened environment, the arguer unfairly assumes that electing Ann Green is the most effective way to prevent us from pollution. The only reason he bases the assumption on is that Ann is a member of Good Earth Coalition. However, the arguer fails to provide sufficient evidence such as Ann’s performance or contribution in the coalition, the recommendation might not seem reasonable.
Finally, even Green would in fact be effective in protecting our environment; the arguer assumes it to be the only helpful recommendation. However, the arguer entirely ignores some other choices, such as other candidate or other course of action would be more effective. Or perhaps the changing of other council member or even the member of the state’s council, would do more good to the town’s environment. Besides, were I concede Ann Green to be the most effective member in protecting our environment, the author fail to take other of her ability into account. Perhaps Ann Green would sacrifice the future development in closing down most factories, by doing which the residents may suffer from a lack of job vacancies. （前一句说作者没有考虑Ann是否有其他就任市长的能力，但是后面一个Perhaps的内容却是她可能会做什么样的决策，最好这个Perhaps应该论述她能力方面的问题，而不是扯别的吧。）

In sum, the editorial recommendation to elect Ann Green in replace of Frank Braun is indefensible as it stands. To bolster it, the arguer must provide more evidence that (1)the Clearview does suffer from the worsening of environment, (2)the pollution was caused by Fraud Braun instead of other members of Clearview’s council, or even any other groups（这个攻击点我不太赞同）, (3)the electing of Ann Green is suffice to solve the current problems in the town without causing any other new problem

1.
全文流畅，语句用词准确多样，短语使用也很好。
2.
怎么全文那么长啊，都快800字了。其中关于证据的攻击详尽细致，是不是有点细致过头了占了很大篇幅。
3.
公主你可能从Frand Braun is a member of Clearview town council这句话里得到环境问题于这个FB本人是有关系的，以为影响环境的决策是跟他有关。你这么说可能有一定道理，但是我觉得作者并没有给出这方面的暗示，作者根本没有说FB的职位。这个点我个人不太同意。

娃娃衫公主UID: 2677493

第九次作业，拍飞雪无痕
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=1054090&pid=1773582361&page=3&extra=

liuxinglly2UID: 2754800

Arguent37
In this argument, the author concludes that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea. To strengthen the conclusion, the arguer provides evidence that (1)in Lithos where the baskets were found, and a very deep Brim River is in between of Lithos and Palea (2)due to the depth of Brim, boats large enough is the only way to reach the opposite bank, but no evidence shows people of that time owned it, (3)people in Palea don’t need to cross the river due to the sufficiency in food. I find this conclusion to be logically flawed in several aspects.

To begin with, the argument claims the Brim River between Palea and Lithos is so deep that only boat can transport people to the other side. However, the author fails to provide sufficient evidence to show that the Brim River was deep in the past. Perhaps the river didn’t occur until the disappearance of Paleans. Moreover, the author bases his conclusion on the additional assumption that boat is the only form of transportation. However, the author ignores other ways like swimming or using other animals as a way to exchange things. Without ruling out all these possibilities, the arguer’s point is unconvincing to me.

Moreover, even assuming that the river is to deep to apply any other vehicles rather than the boat, the author provides no evidence to show that boat was not in own to Paleans. Lakin gin evidence does not necessarily indicate that there were none. Besides, the author also bases his conclusion on the assumption that only large boats are useful. However, there is no evidence to show that small boat weren’t used by Lithos to reach to the other side. Without evidence to show there were no boat at that time, or small boat was not useful to transport people to the other side, the arguer can’t(人家改我的时候说书面宜用cannot) convince me that Lithos had never been to Palea.

Thirdly, the author unfairly assumes that Palean had no need to cross the river since the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries and small games. There could be many other reasons, however, for Paleans to try to cross the river. For instance, the intermarries between Palea and Lithos were common, or perhaps there was food Paleans were most favored in Lithos. Without accounting
(account如果当vt用应该是“认为”的意思) these factor, the author can not hastily conclude that Paleans had no need to cross the river, let alone whether the baskets were unique to paleans.

In sum, the author’s conclusion that the basket is not unique in Palea is indefensible as it stands. To bolster it, the author must provide more evidence to show that the river was deep to prevent people from crossing it without boat, and the boat large enough for use didn’t appear until the disappearance of both groups of people. To better assess the problem, I would also need to know that there was really no need to either side of people to visit the other.
本文我觉得没有什么问题，攻击线明确合理，中间段之间的联系和承转也很好，对于分论点的论述和例子也一针见血，而且个人没有找到什么疏漏。

liuxinglly2UID: 2754800

70"In any profession -- business, politics, education, government -- those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership."
70．在任何领域，商业、政治、教育、政府，掌权者都应该在5年任期后下台。对任何事业而言，取得成功最保险的途径就是聘用新生力量担当领导。
Position: Limiting the term of leadership is an effective way to prevent corruption and lack of initiatives. But the limitation of term should be determined with consideration of different conditions and in different fields.
①及时更新是有益的。对在位者来说，
  A 防止腐败
  B有激励作用
②对于新生力量也是有益的。
  A让他们看到机会，从而促使他们更努力的工作。
  B通常来说，年轻力量更能创新
③五年的限期太绝对。
  有的职位是靠经累积起来的，如：学术权威
  有的职位要求的是稳定性.可能影响长期政策的实行。

    Should we ask those in power to step down after five years in regardless to their profession? Is revitalizing through new leadership the surest way to success? The author thinks so. As for me, I strongly agree with the author that revitalization is essential to the success to any profession, as it can reduce power abuse and bring new ideas. Nevertheless, I don’t think the advice work the same in different fields, and five years is too absolute to follow.

  To begin with, revitalization through new leadership is effective and beneficial in most cases. On one hand, it can reduce chances for current leaders to abuse their power and eliminate corruption. Take the in America（没看懂…太深奥了）, a President’s term of office is four years, and an amendment to the United States Constitution limits the President to two full terms in office. This is to prevent the American presidents’ from withhold the power for too long a time, and thus to restrict them from the abuse of power. Otherwise, those in power may not take their responsibility with awe, cause（这个不是连词吧） they never need to worry about the loss of their power. As Sir Acton once said:”The absolute power leads to absolute corruption.” Moreover, the limitation of term in power also serves to stimulate the leaders to make every effort to make achievement, because they are often exposed to the possibility to be taken place by the revitalization. (本段只有一个小小的问题，对于减少abuse power 的论述很充分，但是对于减少corruption的问题只引用了一句名言，有点不充分。)

   On the other hand, the change of leaders can serve as stimulation to the youth, ensuring them chances to test their ability and show their talents. Besides, in many professions, a new leadership usually has greater initiative and would bring in new ideas. Such as in the field of IT industry, where with the rapid change of science and technology, it is of great importance to keep the leader innovative and quick responded to the reform. The same are fields such as the advertising industry, the mass media industry, the art, the fashion design. If the leaders stay too long in their position, the enterprise may be left behind by its competitors and become outdated. From this we can see the swift change of power is also prior to the young generation and the enterprise.

   However, regardless of the benefits to ask leaders to step down, the author’s claim about five years as the limitation is too absolute. Firstly, in many fields, the accumulation of knowledge and experience takes much longer time than five years. Especially to some academic authorities, they may have spent half their life doing research and study, and finally come into power. If we ask them to step down after only five years, it is not only unfair, but is possible to cause chaos as the young are both less experienced and less learned. Secondly, under certain conditions, the continuing of a leadership over the limitation of time can be a merit rather than a defect. Franklin D. Roosevelt, the 32nd president of the United States was elected four times to the presidency. He led the United States through most of World War II, and relieved Americans from the Great Depression with his New Deal. Roosevelt‘s long-time time in power is a blessing to the United States. If the Americans stopped Roosevelt’s presidency as the Constitution limits, whether the successor can lead America out of the challenge remains unknown. Thus, I disagree with the author’s five-year theory to be put into practice in certain fields like academic, or in consideration to the certain conditions. In fact, the limitation of time in power should vary in different fields to make it more suitable.

   In sum, I agree with the author’s view that leaders should step down after certain time in power, to prevent corruption and to give way for revitalization for new leadership. However, I cannot agree with the author’s five-year limit as there are some fields where the accumulation of experience and knowledge can never be neglect. The term of office as a leader should vary in various fields.

这3个中间段写的，观点明确，提出例子，例子后面有分析，语句很精致，没什么说的了。
唯一的意见：公主对“The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership.”的分析从提纲和文章里，我都没有读出来啊。