[phoenix] argument 7【20100217】12号

zj-129UID: 2179763

7.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, because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."

According to the reasons quoted in the assertion, I do not think these explanations are reasonable enough to pursuate me to vote to Ann Green. My  reasons why author's reasons are too weak to cause the conlusion who bring to the assumption are as follows:

Firstly,  the number of factories, the air pollution levels and the patients in the local hospitals are all increased last year. As a member of the Cleaview town council, Frank Braun must shoulder the responsibility of breaking the climate banlance , and what's more, he must take the accuse of not controlling the situation of respiratory illnesses spreading and not administrate the air pollution controlling. Is that fair to conclude the result all to Frank Braun? Of course not. As a team, the town council result is a negocitaion compromise. No matter how much power Frank Braun has, he can not change the overall result if he insist to protect the climate whereas insist to keep the economical delelopment. Thus, the fault of those factors which were increased last year concluded only to Frank Braun is unfair and absurd as well.

Secondly, if Frank Braun should shoulder the most responsiblity of those breaks to climats and people's health, as a president or some other powerful commands and so on, is the town council must take the responsiblity for all those results? Take the respiratory illenesses for examples, as we all know that, the reasons cause to one illness are variable, we can not conclude the administrate reason as the only one. The same explanation we can get to other two phenomenons the assertion quoted.

Thirdly, Ann Green is a member of the Good Earth Coalition whereas Frank Braun is a member of the Cleanview town council. The different backgrounds are the most important reason to vary them. But, what about the Good Earth Coalition ? The overall information about the foundation is its name, and a member called Ann Green plus. We know nothing else about it. Thus, we can believe that once Ann Green elected to solve this problem, all the matters will disappear immediately? I doubtouded.

To sum up, the author is naive to believe that Ann Green is the more suitable person than Frank Braun who has ever controlling these problems last year as a member of the local town council.It might be has something to do with him to some extend, however, it can not be the full reason that Ann Green can solve these problems perfectly.

hhfboyUID: 2749089

1# zj-129
7.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, because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."

According to the reasons quoted in the assertion(确定了就不用讨论了:改为assumption), I do not think(consider) these explanations are reasonable enough to pursuate(persuade) me to vote to Ann Green. My reasons why author's reasons are too weak to cause(make) the conclusion who bring to the assumption are as follows (A 是驳论文不是立论文…最后一句表达也有问题,你慢慢体会下):

建议: 叙述作者观点, 简单列出作者支持他观点的论据, 简单说下这些论据存在的问题

Firstly, the number of factories, the air pollution levels and the patients in the local hospitals are all increased last year.(factories number增加, patients 是percentage 增加, pollution 是levels增加, 最好分开写) As a member of the Cleaview town council, Frank Braun must shoulder the responsibility of breaking the climate banlance(FB 需要担负破坏环境的责任?) , and what's more, he must take the accuse of not controlling the situation of respiratory illnesses spreading and not administrate the air pollution controlling. Is that fair to conclude the result all to Frank Braun? Of course not.(不要出现太肯定的词) As a team, the town council result is a negocitaion compromise. No matter how much power Frank Braun has, he can not change the overall result if he insists to protect the climate whereas insist to keep the economical development.( It is entirely possible that FB has made efforts on protecting environment but it is unavailable at last for his limited power in this council ) Thus, the fault of those factors which were increased last year concluded only to Frank Braun is unfair and absurd as well.(第二段在攻击什么,最好把攻击点写在第一句.)

Secondly, if Frank Braun should shoulder the most responsibility of those breaks to climates and people's health, as a president or some other powerful commands and so on(这句话有问题,你把你的意思和我说我帮你改,因为很多用此都不妥,不知道你要表达什么), is the town council must take the responsiblity for all those results? Take the respiratory illnesses for examples, as we all know that, the reasons cause to one illness are variable, we can not conclude the administrate reason as the only one. The same explanation we can get to other two phenomenon the assertion quoted.

Thirdly, Ann Green is a member of the Good Earth Coalition whereas Frank Braun is a member of the Cleanview town council. The different backgrounds are the most important reason to vary them. But, what about the Good Earth Coalition ? The overall information about the foundation is its name, and a member called Ann Green plus. We know nothing else about it. Thus, we can believe that once Ann Green elected to solve this problem, all the matters will disappear immediately? I doubtouded.

To sum up, the author is naive to believe that Ann Green is the more suitable person than Frank Braun who has ever controlling these problems last year as a member of the local town council.It might be has something to do with him to some extend, however, it can not be the full reason that Ann Green can solve these problems perfectly.
点评:
我简单的看了下  这篇A写得太失败了,语言问题是你本来就存在的问题, 建议每个攻击点一段, 不要在攻击的时候太多问句了,需要你去攻击而不是要你去质疑.
建议每段结构: 攻击点---> 攻击理由   我写的文章和你正好是一样的 你去看看吧 觉得你可以借鉴下 虽然写得也不是很好 ,或者你也可以去看下北美范文. 你Argument 还没找到思路啊  要指导A 是拿分重点  要重点加强  与女女共勉!!!!