- 最后登录
- 2011-1-12
- 在线时间
- 71 小时
- 寄托币
- 106
- 声望
- 0
- 注册时间
- 2010-2-18
- 阅读权限
- 15
- 帖子
- 3
- 精华
- 0
- 积分
- 171
- UID
- 2766140
![Rank: 2](template/archy_plt8/image/star_level2.gif)
- 声望
- 0
- 寄托币
- 106
- 注册时间
- 2010-2-18
- 精华
- 0
- 帖子
- 3
|
TOPIC: ARGUMENT97 - The following appeared in a memo from the manager of television station KICK.
"A nationwide survey reveals that a sizeable majority of men would like to see additional sports programs on television. After television station WACK increased its sports broadcasts, its share of the television audience in its viewing area almost doubled. To gain a larger audience share in our area, and thus increase company profits, KICK should also revise its broadcast schedule to include more sports coverage."
The argument is far from cogent. Basing on a survey of the audience, the increasing share of the television in WACK, supposing the successful experience could also be implemented in KICK, the advice to add more sports coverage to the broadcast schedule sounds reasonable on its surface. (这句话挺奇怪的,我建议这样写吧,The arguer cites a survey of the audience and the fact of the increasing television share in WACK, based on which he supposes the successful experience could also be implemented in KICK and advices to add more sports coverage to the broadcast schedule sounds reasonable on its surface. )However, failing to see the differences between KICK and WACK, as well as some other logical flaws, weaken the argument.(如果这句要按你原来这样意思表达,我建议这样写:However, falling to see the differences between KICK and WACK, this arguer is unable to convince me for some other logical flaws as well.)
(这段我感觉语法错误有点严重,想把句子写长写漂亮也不该用这种方式吧,如果写成这样我觉得还不如全是普通短句效果还好。而且我建议还是按照:结论+列举evidence+反驳,这种结构来写会显得清晰,通过这样的信息整理也有助于下面的反驳分析。)
To begin with, the nationwide survey can not predict the trends of television share in local of KICK. First, the nationwide results may different from the trends in KICK. (The nationwide survey showing does not necessarily apply to KICK.)It is entirely possible that the residents’ attention to the additional sports programs in KICK declines, while people in other cities show great appetites, thus the nationwide results turn out to be sizeable majority. Second, the survey only concerns about the men’s attitude to the additional programs. In fact, the amount of other groups such as women, children who also watch television could be as large, if not more, as of men. Without taking the women’s attitude into consideration, the survey results may be unwarranted and meaningless.
(论证合理,结构也清晰。)
Furthermore, the arguer falsely assumes that the additional sports lead the television share to uplift in WACK. There is no evidence to show the definite cause and effect relationship (改成这样子吧,the definitely causal relationship)between the increasing share and the additional sports programs. Generally speaking, television shares vary with the content that the(the 去掉吧) provided by the TV stations, but not the amount of the content. Since the arguer has not mentioned the time span of statistical results of the television share in WACK, it is entirely possible that there is a famous sports meeting broadcasted by the television at certain period. People may only see the sports meeting and seldom take a glance at the additional sports. It is also possible that the station broadcast some interesting comics, which lead to the increase of the television share. Without ruling out these possibilities, the influence of the additional sports to (改成on吧。)the increasing share can not be sound.
Even if the survey result is reliable and the additional sports do increase the television share in WACK, extending this regulation hastily to KICK is still open to question. (我觉得改成这样顺点吧,the hasty extension of this regulation to KICK is still open to question.)
The arguer assumes that the television share will also grow in KICK basing on the experience of WACK. However the existed differences in television share, the audience structure and their appetites also influence the trend of television share. First, what is the television share of WACK now? If it is high enough, or even higher than that of KICK, rescheduling may not be a wise measurement, because the high television share may decline due to changes. Second, the structure and the appetites of the viewers are worth mentioning. If the majority audience of KICK is women, or children, they may tend to enjoy the programs like music, talk shows, and teleplays, other than sports programs. Adding sports programs, the television may become less attractive to them and lead to share declination. The argument (虽然用argument也不能算错,但是arguer的话就绝对不错。)neglects all these factors in making its conclusion.(in这里我不肯定对错,但是我会这样写,to make a hasty conclusion.)
Given the television share enlarges because of the rescheduling strategy, that the profits of the station will boost is still open to doubt. ()The arguer, at least, fails to take the following two factors that influence the profits. On one hand, adding more sports coverage needs extra resource including time, energy and money which also increases the investment of the station. In the argument, there is no evidence shows that the station can get profit from this additional investment. (没有说清楚,他怎么就不能从投资中获得利润。)On the other hand, usually, a station earns most, if not all, of its profits through the advertisements. After programs rescheduling, the additional sports programs may take up the time for advertisements, or the customers may tend to choose the station with less sports programs to broadcast their advertisements. In this situation, the profits of the station may probably decrease. (这一点还行。)Without ruling out these possibilities, the conclusion of earning more profits is also groundless.
After carefully analyzing the evidence as well as the reasoning, it is clearly that the conclusion can not be safely reached. To strengthen the argument, the arguer should make sure whether the increasing of the television share is due to the additional sports programs of WACK, propose a specific survey to show the real needs of the audience of KICK, and take both the similarities and differences between two stations into account. Also, evidences to justify that profits of the station will increase due to larger television share should be given.
(结尾思路也行吧。)
我觉得分析的还行,错误都找到了,反驳的挺到位的。我觉得这篇ARGUMENT最大的问题不是分析的思路,还应该在语言表达上下功夫。其实语言不一定非要多复杂,最重要是清晰明了,有复杂长句当然可以锦上添花,但是如果写出的长句是错误了或者根本没办法理解,那对你的ARGUMENT真是大大削弱。
我自己语法本来也不是特别好,后面我都不敢给你看语法错误了,怕自己改错了也不好。像我自己吧,语法不是特扎实的那种,但我尽量不用我觉得似对非对的句子。像伴随状语这种,我也挺喜欢用的,可我一般不会用错或乱用吧。 |
|