[phoenix] Argument241 第9作业 by 3号 求P

ningbo1990UID: 2641538

TOPIC: ARGUMENT241 - The following appeared in a memo at the XYZ Company.

"When XYZ lays off employees, it pays Delany Personnel Firm to offer those employees assistance in creating resumés and developing interviewing skills, if they so desire. Laid-off employees have benefited greatly from Delany's services: last year those who used Delany found jobs much more quickly than did those who did not. Recently, it has been proposed that we use the less-expensive Walsh Personnel Firm in place of Delany. This would be a mistake because eight years ago, when XYZ was using Walsh, only half of the workers we laid off at that time found jobs within a year. Moreover, Delany is clearly superior, as evidenced by its bigger staff and larger number of branch offices. After all, last year Delany's clients took an average of six months to find jobs, whereas Walsh's clients took nine."
WORDS: 331
TIME: 00:30:35.33
DATE: 2010/2/24 16:31:33

The argument DP`s services benefits laid-off employees greatly because these employees found job quickly last year, and the WP Firm cannot benefits them so greatly because only half of workers found jobs eight years ago and it do not have much branch offices than DP`s and the average time to find jobs is less than DP`s, so we should choose DP firm not WP firm. I think there are some flaws in this logical reasoning, I will discuss them in turn.

First, the author should give more evidence to demonstrate the fact that it is DP`s services helped laid-off employees can find a job quickly. Although the author says these who attend DP`s services can find a job more quickly than who did not, the author should also imply some other conditions. For example, these employees really lack of creating resumes and interviewing skills, and these employees were really learn these skills well, and it is these skills helps them find a job, and whether these who do not attend DP`s services employees cannot find jobs because lacking of creating resumes and interviewing skills and so on. By supplying these conditions, the author can assume it is DP`s services helped their employees greatly.

Moreover, the reasons the author gives cannot to explain DP is superior to WP firm. Here are some examples, the author says DP has bigger staff and larger number of branch offices than WP may not logically, maybe WP`s officers is well experienced while DP`s may green hands. And the experience XYZ using Walsh happened eight years ago, maybe some condition changed and WP developed much and now it becomes one of great firms.

Finally, the author do not consider other firms, maybe both DP and WP firm are not good enough, there is maybe other firm makes these laid-off employees find jobs more quickly than DP and WP Firm.

In conclusion, the argument have some flaws to get these result, it need to give further improve. First the author should give more details about it is DP helps these laid-off employees can find a job quickly; moreover, make more correct evidence to confirm the DP is much stronger than WP firm. Finally, to consider other firms, maybe others are superior than both DP and WP firm.

nandingjinUID: 2594537

The argument DP`s services benefits laid-off employees greatly because these employees found job quickly last year, and the WP Firm cannot benefits them so greatly because only half of workers found jobs eight years ago and it do not have much branch offices than (这个比较句好像有问题，没有比较词，可以改成it do not have as many branch offices as )DP`s and the average time to find jobs is less than DP`s, so we should choose DP firm not (可用instead of)WP firm. I think there are some flaws in this logical reasoning, I will discuss them in turn.

First, the author should give more evidence to demonstrate the fact that it is DP`s services (一般强调句型不能省that) helped laid-off employees can (can去掉)find a job quickly. Although the author says these who attend DP`s services can find a job more quickly than who did not, the author should also imply some other conditions. For example, these employees really lack of creating resumes and interviewing skills, and these employees were really learn these skills well, and it is these skills helps them find a job, and whether these who do not attend DP`s services employees cannot find jobs because lacking of creating resumes and interviewing skills and so on. By supplying (建议改为after supplementing/ adding) these conditions, the author can assume it is DP`s services helped their employees greatly.

Moreover, the reasons the (that) author gives cannot to explain DP is superior to WP firm. Here are some examples, the author says DP has bigger staff and larger number of branch offices than WP may not logically(貌似有语法错误，改成what the author says about DP has bigger……may not logically是不是好些？), maybe WP`s officers is well experienced while DP`s may (may be) green hands. And the experience XYZ using Walsh happened eight years ago, maybe some condition changed and WP developed much and now it becomes one of great firms.(这里用完成时好一些，如some conditions have changed and WP has already developed to a outstanding firm.)

Finally, the author do not consider other firms, maybe both DP and WP firm are not good enough, there is maybe other firm makes these laid-off employees find jobs more quickly than DP and WP Firm.(可以换个句式，如there probably exists another firm which can settle the problem of laid-off employees brilliantly)

In conclusion, the argument have some flaws to get these result, it need to give further improve(improvement). First the author should give more details about it is DP (少了who)helps these laid-off employees can(去掉) find a job (jobs) quickly; moreover, （这里少了主语）make more correct evidence to confirm the DP is much stronger than WP firm. Finally, to consider other firms, maybe others are superior than
（to）both DP and WP firm

点评：
1.
文章第四段的观点很好，学习了一下。这一段比较突出，可以适当增加笔墨。
2.
文章的句式缺少变换，可以多用一下别的句式，如反问、倒装，中间出现的强调句式基本上都是有问题的，建议作者好好看看强调句的用法。
3.
文章结尾可能是时间上的问题，有点简单，建议重写结尾段。

By 12号