【clover】Argument2 习作 by tofee

tofeeUID: 2485486

1.
2
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.
A．7年前的情况和今天的不一样（时间，人们的审美，）
B. B的地价上涨的原因不一定是这两个措施（非地域的原因，甚至在大环境下，这种上涨并不很高，甚至正是这两点阻碍了地价涨的更高）
C. 即使这两个措施使得B的地价上涨，也不一定带来本地的上涨（地域的原因，本身地价已经非常高了）



This letter recommends that in order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres(D), the homeowners should adopt their own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting. To support this recommendation, the author claims that, seven years ago, using a similar strategy, Brookville community (B), their neighboring community, seen its property values tripled. However, this assumption is unfounded. The recommendation suffers from two flaws and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

To begin with, the author’s conclusion relies on the unfounded assumption that it is the landscaping and housepainting strategy boosts the property values. However, The landscaping and hourspainting may not the key reason to raise the property values in D. Instead, many other possibilities may serve as the key reasons to lift the price of B. Perhaps the water supply in B proved good to health. That could be a real boon to those who pay much attention to their health. Or perhaps many artists settled in B, and attract more people like arts. These make B so unique than other place and make the property value rising, but nothing to do with the landscaping and housepainting strategy. The author fails to consider those possibilities and relegate his argument to unpersuasive.

Secondly, the author granting the premise that, the property values tripling within seven years is a big success. But before providing more reference and information about the real estate market in this area in the last seven years, I keep discreet about such claim. It is entirely possible, for instance, that the average property price has been rise more than 3 times during the seven years. If so, than the conclusion relies on it is unconvincing. The author must rule out all these possibilities in order to conclude confidently that, the B’s strategy is worth to considerate and mimic.

Moreover, seven years is such a long time that such method which could bring up the esteem price successfully many years ago may not sufficient and efficient today. During the seven years, real estate purchaser’ taste may change a lot, and the uniform landscape and housepainting may not trigger the soaring of the property. D’s design may Even seen as a defeat from today’s aspect. Moreover, the purchasing capability and desire may change a lot, and the investment into the estate may not flourish as seven years ago. Having failed to address this distinct possibility, the letter is wholly unconvincing.

Even if the hoursingpainting and landscaping strategy matters in B, it might be a false analogy between B and D. perhaps the yards in D are not big enough to landscaped, and the construction of the houses in D in not suitable to dorm as B’s. Or perhaps the D’s yards arrangement is for better than B, and simply mimic may cause bad result, let alone to rise the property price.  Or perhaps the property price in D is significant high, and no more rising space left.

tofeeUID: 2485486

先别改呢，我没有检查语法，给我点时间再:lol

cyctUID: 2728144

2# tofee
刚准备改，呵呵

cyctUID: 2728144

修改的

tofeeUID: 2485486

第一次修改
This letter recommends that in order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres(D), the homeowners should adopt their own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting. To support this recommendation, the author claims that, seven years ago, using a similar strategy the neighboring Brookville community (B) has tripled its property values. However, this assumption is unfounded. The recommendation suffers from two flaws and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

To begin with, the author’s conclusion relies on the unfounded assumption that it is the landscaping and housepainting strategy boosts the property values. However, the landscaping and hourspainting may not be the key reason to raise the property values in D. Instead, many other possibilities may serve as the key reasons to increase the price of B. Perhaps seven years ago, a spring was found in B and the water supplied was proved good for health. That could be a real attraction to those who pay attention to their own health. Or perhaps many artists settled in B, and the arts scene may attract many literary amateurs. These make B so unique than other place and make the property value rise , and merely the landscaping and housepainting strategy may not to be a complete answer. The author fails to consider those possibilities and relegate his argument to unpersuasive.

Secondly, the author grants the premise that the property values tripling within seven years is a big success. It is entirely possible, for instance, that the average property price in the state has been rise more than 3 times during the seven years. If so, the conclusion relied on is unconvincing. Before providing more reference and information about the real estate market in this area in the last seven years, I keep discerning about such claim.

Moreover, seven years is such a long time that such tactic , bring up the esteem price successfully many years ago, may not sufficient and efficient today. After seven years, real estate purchaser’ taste may change a lot, and the uniform landscape and housepainting may not trigger the soaring of the property. D’s design may even be seen as a defeat from today’s aspect. Moreover, the purchasing capability and desire may also change a lot, and the investment into the estate may not flourish as seven years ago. Having failed to address this distinct possibility, the letter is nconvincing.

Even if the hoursingpainting and landscaping strategy matters in B, it might be a false analogy between B and D. Perhaps the yards in D are not big enough to landscaped, and the construction of the houses in D in not suitable to dorm as B’s, or perhaps the D’s yards arrangement is much better than B. If so, than simply mimic may cause bad results, let alone rising the property price.  Or perhaps the property price in D is significant high, and no more rising space left.

桔子susanUID: 2754084

改好了
argument2--tofee 桔子susan修改.doc (29 KB, 下载次数: 3)

2010-2-5 15:21:51 上传

下载次数: 3