【1010G精英组】ARGUMENT7 B组回收站

weaselUID: 2739489

提交时间为5月9日13点之前

ROse_MaryUID: 2790464

Nowadays, the environment is a hot issue. In this letter, the author obviously put the environment protection in the first place in the work of a mayor, and ignored the whole responsibility of a qualified mayor. His argument seems well-reasoned, but after the analogy below we can find some flaws.

To begin with, the author pointed out that Ann Green, as a member of the Good Earth Coalition, given the mayoralty, will certainly solve the environmental problems in Clearview. There is no evidence to demonstrate that Ann Green being in the coalition had dedicated herself to the protection of the environment. Judging a person whether he or she has an active attitude toward the natural surroundings doesn’t depend on if he or she has a identification of some institution connected to the environment, but what concrete contributions the person has made to protect our earth. Thus, it is entirely possible that in the Clearview Town Council Frank Braun always tend to keep green, but opposed by other members.

Moreover, the examples given by the author are not persuasive. Firstly, the air pollution problem might be caused by other factors such as the increase of the number of the motor vehicles or the climate phenomenon, just like sand storm. Secondly, the respiratory ailment could also be in connection with the turning of the seasons, and as we all know, in this kind of period, the respiratory illness like cold and flu is apt to outbreak among people. Therefore, the conclusion drawn from the two examples that the members of the local council are not protecting the environment is unreasonable.

Finally, the author didn’t realize the meaning of being a mayor. If a mayor put all the money and effort upon the environment protection at the cost of the destroy of the economic construction, the residents will certainly suffer from the regression of the standard of living. The double of the number of the factories which increased the economic development in the city was also out of the consideration of the progress of the whole city. We can conclude that even if Ann Green has an active attitude toward the environment, taking the factors that will certainly influence the developing level of Clearview, she may probably take measures to set other factories in the city.

In summary, without more investigation of the achievement in the field of environment protection from the two candidates cannot the author come to the conclusion, and he or she is supposed see the balance between the green surroundings and the social development.

youngstoneUID: 2670818

In this letter, the author recommends that citizens of Clearview vote for Ann Green, a member of the good Earth Coalition instead of Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council in the next mayoral election. To support the recommendation, the author provides the evidence that the number of factories in Clearview has doubled during the past years, and the air pollution levels have increased. In addition, the author reasons that the number of patients with respiratory illness in local hospital has increased by 25%. Clearly examining the evidence, we find they are too week to support the conclusion.

In the first place, the fact that the number of factories in Clearview has doubled and the air pollution level have increased does not necessarily indicate that FB is no qualified. Te change in the number of factories and the increase of the air pollution level may not result from FB’s attitude or decision. Maybe FB is against the increase in the number of factories, but for certain reasons the increase cannot be prevented. Even assuming it is FB’s decision that results in the increase in the number of factories, we cannot draw that conclusion that FB is not competent to the position. Since there is no information concerning the influence of these factories to the environment it is entirely possible that these factories do not harm the environment while the economic needs to be further developed. In that case, it is reasonable for FB to make decisions to increase the number of factories.

In the second place, the 25%increase in the number of patients with respiratory in local hospital does not necessarily result from the environmental conditions. The number of people who go to the hospital may not reflect the actual number of people who suffered from respiratory illnesses. People may increase their health awareness, thus they would like to go to the doctor. Therefore, there is hardly a definite relationship between the number of people with respiratory illnesses in hospital and the environment conditions in Clearview. Even though the people with respiratory illnesses actually increase last year, the phenomenon may result from other factors rather than the environmental problems.

Last but not least, the assumption that AG is more qualified than FB is open to doubt. There is no information about AG’s performance last year, thus we know nothing about her ability. It is entirely possible that AG is not the right person for his lack of experience or the sense of responsibility. Even though AG had a wonderful performance last year, it does not necessarily means that she will be qualified to be a mayor, since the work in Good Earth Coalition and Clearview town council may vary drastically. Maybe AG is a outstanding member of GEC, yet is not suitable to the position of a mayor.

To sum up, the conclusion that AG is more qualified than FB as mayor is unwarranted. To bolster the conclusion, the author should provide information about the seriousness of the environmental problems and the actual change in the number of people with respiratory illnesses. In addition, more information about AG’s performance and ability is needed to better evaluate the two candidates.

钱钱去米国UID: 2761990

In this artical ,the author recommand that because Ann Green is a member of the Good Earth Coalition,she will slove the environmental problems in Clearview as a result.Thus, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green rather than for Frank Braun.And in order to prove the anthor offer an example,which is incorrect at the same time.I will point out these existing logical faws which lead the author drawn an untenable conclusion in the following paragraphs.

To the begining ,the relationship between the growing number of the factories in Clearview and the increasing levels of air pollution cannot necessary prove that the former causes the latter . there is no evidence that can prove the reaults are reliable. the author fails to provide the kinds of these factories ,so we cannot have a clear concept whether these factories will do hurt to the air. If these factories are food factories,they will not affect the air.

Even assuming that these factorise can cause air pollution,a direct correlation between air pollution and the increasing number of patients with respiratory illnesses can not infer a causal relationshop.Firstly,there is no specific data show the degree about the air pollution.the author just mention that air pollution levels have increased,while do not give a precise number to show the pollution.if the suspended particulate matter in the air increased only 0.01%,it is unclear whether the increased air pollution is able to lead to a growing number of patients with respiratory illnesses.secondly, not all the air polution will cause respiratory illnesses,it may be the weather change that make the 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses.

Although,if it is the new factories that incraese the air pollution,and the air pollution leads to the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses.there is no evidences that can prove that electing Ann Green will certainly solve the problems abrove,not to mention this can slove all the environmental problems in Clearview .Because the authordo not reference the environmental policy of Ann.And may be Frank Braun’s policy on envuronment is more effective than Ann’s.Similary, as a member of the Good Earth Coalition can not attest Ann can do better than Frank in solving the environment problem in Clearview.Ann may lack of actual capacity on sloving the environment pollution ,while only owns a good will.

In addition, the author indicates that the growng of the factory amount increase the air pollution cause the.and the air pollution cause the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses.howerve, a high correlation is strong evidence of a causal relationship,in it self it is not sufficient. there are many different reason that cause air poulltion and respiratory illnesses,like the deterioration of ecological environment and weacher changes, which are ignored by the author.

youngstoneUID: 2670818

[/color]改钱钱的~~
In this [color=Red]artica[/color]l [color=Red](article[/color]),the author recommand that because Ann Green is a member of the Good Earth Coalition,she will [color=Red]slove(solve)[/color] the environmental problems in Clearview as a result.Thus, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green rather than for Frank Braun.And in order to prove the [color=Red]conclusion[/color], the [color=Red]anthor(author)[/color] offer[color=Red]s[/color] an example,which is incorrect at the same time.I will point out these existing logical [color=Red]faws(flaws)[/color] which lead the author [color=Red]to[/color] [color=Red]drawn(draw)[/color] an untenable conclusion in the following paragraphs.
(第一段拼写错误还是尽量少啊~~要不然让考官第一段就看得不爽就不好了）

To the begining [color=Red]（有这种表达吗，是不是to begin with更好一点）,[/color]the relationship between the growing number of the factories in Clearview and the increasing levels of air pollution cannot necessary prove that the former causes the latter . there is no evidence [color=Red]that can prove the reaults are reliable[/color]（[color=Red]语法错误）. [/color]the author fails to provide the kinds of these factories ,so we cannot have a clear concept whether these factories will do hurt[color=Red]（改成harm好一点）[/color] to the air. If these factories are food factories,they will not affect the air.[color=Red]（这地方再论证几句吧，为什么食品工厂就不污染环境呢？）[/color]
（感觉这段列举它因有点不充分）

Even assuming that these factorise can cause air pollution,a direct correlation between air pollution and the increasing number of patients with respiratory illnesses [color=Red]can not（cannot)[/color] infer a causal relationshop.Firstly,there is no specific data [color=Red]show(showing)[/color] the degree about the air pollution.the author just mention that air pollution levels have increased,while [color=Red]do(does)[/color] not give a precise number to [color=Red]show the pollution(感觉表达不太到位，还缺点什么，展示污染水平啊，程度啊，之类的）[/color].if the suspended particulate matter in the air increased only 0.01%,it is unclear whether the increased air pollution is able to lead to a growing number of patients with respiratory illnesses.secondly, not all the air polution will cause respiratory illnesses,it may be the weather change that [color=Red]make（makes) [/color]the 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses.
(这段论证得很好，很充分）

Although,if it is the new factories that incraese the air pollution,and the air pollution [color=Red]leads to the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses（语法错误[/color]）.there is no [color=Red]evidences(evidence) [/color]that can prove that electing Ann Green will certainly solve the problems [color=Red]abrove(above),[/color]not to mention this can slove all the environmental problems in Clearview .Because the author do not reference the environmental policy of Ann.And may be Frank Braun’s policy on envuronment is more effective than Ann’s.Similary, as a member of the Good Earth Coalition can not [color=Red]attest Ann can do(这处表达最好再确认一下正确性）[/color] better than Frank in solving the environment problem in Clearview.Ann [color=Red]may lack of （语法错误）[/color]actual capacity on sloving the environment pollution ,while only owns a good will.

In addition, the author indicates that the growng of the factory amount increase the air pollution cause the[color=Red]缺东西[/color]and the air pollution cause the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses.howerve, a high correlation is strong evidence of a causal relationship,in it self it is not sufficient. there are many different reason[color=Red]（reasons) [/color]that cause air poulltion and respiratory illnesses,like the deterioration of ecological environment and weacher changes, which are ignored by the author.

论证一个方面的时候挺充分的，缺点是没有结尾，另一个缺点就是拼写错误和语法错误很多~~具体评论都写在段后啦

sola-nanaUID: 2744594

Given the fact that the current environmentwas heavily polluted with current members of Clearview town council on thepost, the editorial concludes that residents of Clearview should vote for amember of the Good Earth Coalition who will certainly solve the environmental problemsrather than a member of the Clearview town council. Obviously, the conclusionwas made without any speculation and there are several ridiculous unconfirmedassumptions.

On the first point, the editorial unfairly assumesthat there is an environmental problem attribute to members of the town councilin Clearview. The increased numbers of factories unnecessarily result in environmentalproblems. As there is no introduction of the basic conditions of thesefactories, we could not take it for granted that where there is an increasednumber of factories, there must be environmental problems. It is possible thatthese are environment friendly factories which could dispose the waste wellenough to have no harmful effect to the environment. Or even these factoriesare the ones that treat environmental pollutions. As for the increased level ofair pollution, we could not assert that it is brought about by the increasedfactories. Environmental pollution is a global issue. It is the same atmospherethat we share. Maybe the polluted air is from other parts in the neighborhood ofClearview. The editorial does not give any further instruction of how it foundout the air pollution levels had increased. No comparison with cities in thesame condition or with itself in the prior history, whether the air pollutionlevel has increased or not could not be judged. Referring to the increasedpatients with respiratory illnesses, are the air pollution is the only causalfactor? There are other many should be taken into consideration. Such as the agingpopulation and increasing numbers of exterior population which may bringrespiratory illnesses to the local resentments. As aresult, whether there is an air pollution could not be judged by the evidenceprovided by the editorial.

On the second point, the editorial givesthe conclusion too hasty. Only because Ann Green is one of the Good EarthCoalition, the editorial gives the suggestion that local residents should votefor her in the next mayoral election. Firstly, there is no confirmation orevaluation of the conscientiousness or the ability in capturing environmentalproblems. Maybe this candidate who enjoys a high reputation in environmentalprotection area does not have a practical experience in solving these problems.Secondly, the qualities of a mayor not only simply include the awareness of theimportance of environmental protection or the capacity of disposing wastes, itneeds the abilities in coordination of each department of the government andthe coordination of economic progress and environmental protection. After all, themayor should not only be a environmentalist.

On the third point, this suggestion is unfairto Frank Braun just based on the fact that he is a member of local towncouncil. Albeit the current members of the local council are not doing well inenvironmental protection, it does not mean that Frank Braun will continue the environment-neglectingjob which others do in the council. There is no description about Mr. Braun. Whetherhe plays an advocated role of environmental protection in the council but is dissembledin the entire background of pursuing profits for a large scale.

On balance, the editorial’s assertion istoo ungrounded to be persuaded. To bolster its conclusion, the editorial couldtake the following suggestions: 1) give precise data in the comparison ofenvironmental pollution between Clearview and other towns or the present andpast of Clearview; 2) do not consider background as the only factor whendetermining which candidate should vote for; 3) give an comprehensiveinstruction of each candidate, by which can we fairly judge he or she is theright person has the qualities to be a mayor.

weaselUID: 2739489

In this argument, the author attempts touse some superficial evidence to prove that current authentic governmentincluding one member of it, Frank Braun, did not protect our environment well.As a result, the author remarked that residents should elect Ann Green, aparticipator of Good Earth Coalition, as a next mayoral instead of voting forAnn Green. When taken into consideration seriously, the argument goes withseveral flaws.

Only in view of two indexes over Clearview’senvironment can we not assert that the current members did not endeavor to maintain and improve the town’s circumstance.Firstly, the increased number of patients, with respiratory illnesses, treatedby local hospital could not totally contribute to present severe air condition.It is entirely possible that the disease is caused by some kind of virus. Isvirus’ intruding regarded as air pollution? To some extent, it may beattributed to a bad air environment. But there are also other alternatives suchas epidemic infection brought by increasing exotic population. Again, even ifthe air pollution grows in reality, one can not deny present party’s possiblyexisting efforts. There is a circumstance that they have a must to seek abalance between economical development and environment protection. As thenumber of factories doubled, they also take an active part in purifying air andwater polluted by these necessary industrial productions. Thus, can we say thecurrent members did not do their best?

Next, before advocating voting for AnnGreen, the author lacks detail data about Ann Green and his party to provide uswith enough evidence that can substantiate they will address the environmentalproblems and do better than Clearview town council. Did they show their moreadvancing policy with wisdom, have they taken their theory into practice andproved that it can works well, and have they found a perfect balance betweeneconomical development and environmental protection?
We have not known all of these questions’answers! It is possible that Ann Green and his party did not do anything exceptshouting slogans. Besides, through converting their name into a relevant style, Greenand Good Earth, do they have some unique purpose?

Furthermore, the author emphasized more theimportance of protecting environment and neglected an essence of mayoralelection. What kind of person is proper to be selected as a mayor? Only becauseof prominent abilities in preventing environment pollutions can we not say thathe is a perfect person and has enough functions to be a mayor. As a commonsense, a mayor must equip with many essential capabilities, which containsmanagement, diplomacy, charming personalities and so forth. Is Ann Green suitedto be a mayor and Frank Braun not? No one can make a certain conclusion basedon the argument with limited data.

Anyway, if the author wants to advocatemore people to vote for Ann Green, he must present more detail analysis toconvince us Ann can be a good mayor. Otherwise, who will believe it other thanconsidering it a deceptive speak?

weaselUID: 2739489

OK， 全勤

钱钱去米国UID: 2761990

Given the fact that the current environmentwas heavily polluted with current members of Clearview town council on the post, the editorial concludes that residents of Clearview should vote for amember of the Good Earth Coalition who will certainly solve the environmental problemsrather than a member of the Clearview town council. Obviously, the conclusionwas made without any speculation and there are several ridiculous unconfirmedassumptions.

On the first point, the editorial unfairly assumesthat there is an environmental problem attribute to members of the town councilin Clearview. The increased numbers of factories unnecessarily result in environmentalproblems. As there is no introduction of the basic conditions of thesefactories, we could not take it for granted that where there is an increasednumber of factories, there must be* environmental problems. It is possible thatthese are environment friendly factories which could dispose the waste wellenough to* have no harmful effect to the environment. Or even these factoriesare the ones that treat environmental pollutions. As for the increased level ofair pollution, we could not assert that it is brought about by the increasedfactories. Environmental pollution is a global issue. It is the same atmospherethat we share. Maybe the polluted air is from other parts in the neighborhood ofClearview. The editorial does not give any further instruction of how it foundout the air pollution levels had increased. No comparison with cities in thesame condition or with itself in the prior history, whether the air pollutionlevel has increased or not could not be judged. Referring to the increased patients with respiratory illnesses, are* the air pollution is* the only causalfactor? There are other many should be taken into consideration. Such as the agingpopulation and increasing numbers of exterior population which may bringrespiratory illnesses to the local resentments. As aresult, whether there is an air pollution could not be judged by the evidenceprovided by the editorial.
论证很充分
On the second point, the editorial givesthe conclusion too hasty. Only because Ann Green is one of the Good EarthCoalition, the editorial gives the suggestion that local residents should votefor her in the next mayoral election. Firstly, there is no confirmation orevaluation* of the conscientiousness or the ability in capturing environmentalproblems. Maybe this candidate who enjoys a high reputation in environmentalprotection area does not have a practical experience in solving these problems.Secondly, the qualities of a mayor not only simply* include the awareness of theimportance of environmental protection or the capacity of disposing wastes, itneeds the abilities in coordination of each department of the government andthe coordination of economic progress and environmental protection. After all, themayor should not only be a environmentalist.

On the third point, this suggestion is unfairto Frank Braun just based on the fact that he is a member of local towncouncil. Albeit the current members of the local council are not doing well inenvironmental protection, it does not mean that Frank Braun will continue the environment-neglectingjob which others do in the council. There is no description about Mr. Braun. Whetherhe plays an advocated role of environmental protection in the council but is dissembledin the entire background of pursuing profits for a large scale.

On balance, the editorial’s assertion istoo ungrounded to be persuaded. To bolster its conclusion, the editorial couldtake the following suggestions: 1) give precise data in the comparison ofenvironmental pollution between Clearview and other towns or the present andpast of Clearview; 2) do not consider background as the only factor whendetermining which candidate should vote for; 3) give an comprehensiveinstruction of each candidate, by which can we fairly judge he or she is theright person has the qualities to be a mayor.
喜欢这样的结尾，很明确，很简洁，学习之。

ROse_MaryUID: 2790464

改young！！

In this letter, the author recommends that citizens of Clearview vote for Ann Green, a member of the good Earth Coalition instead of Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council in the next mayoral election. To support the recommendation, the author provides the evidence that the number of factories in Clearview has doubled during the past years, and the air pollution levels have increased. In addition, the author reasons that the number of patients with respiratory illness in local hospital has increased by 25%. Clearly examining the evidence, we find they are too week to support the conclusion.（我觉得第一段有点长，restate好像没什么作用）

In the first place, the fact that the number of factories in Clearview has doubled and the air pollution level have increased does not necessarily indicate that FB（练习的时候还是不要用缩写吧，养成习惯比较好哦） is not qualified. The change in the number of factories and the increase of the air pollution level may not result from FB’s attitude or decision. Maybe FB is against the increase in the number of factories, but for certain reasons the increase cannot be prevented. Even assuming it is FB’s decision that results in the increase in the number of factories, we cannot draw that conclusion that FB is not competent to the position. 这里貌似要再加一句说明“为什么即使FB的决定没有导致工厂数的增加，我们也不能推断出FB不能胜任这个工作”。Since there is no information concerning the influence of these factories to the environment ，it is entirely possible that these factories do not harm the environment while the economic needs to be further developed. In that case, it is reasonable for FB to make decisions to increase the number of factories.

In the second place, the 25%increase in the number of patients with respiratory in local hospital does not necessarily result from the environmental conditions. The number of people who go to the hospital may not reflect the actual number of people who suffered from respiratory illnesses. People may increase their health awareness, thus they would like to go to the doctor. 我觉得原文里说的呼吸道感染的病人，应该就是指确切的受到呼吸道疾病困扰的人。为什么病人要提高健康意识就会去看医生呢？可不可以说季节变换或者气候原因导致了呼吸道病人增多，而并非该地区的环保工作不到位造成的？Therefore, there is hardly a definite relationship between the number of people with respiratory illnesses in hospital and the environment conditions in Clearview. Even though the people with respiratory illnesses actually increase last year, the phenomenon may result from other factors rather than the environmental problems.

Last but not least, the assumption that AG is more qualified than FB is open to doubt. There is no information about AG’s performance last year, thus we know nothing about her ability. It is entirely possible that AG is not the right person for his lack of experience or the sense of responsibility. Even though AG had a wonderful performance 这个performance是指哪方面的？是整体业绩？, it does not necessarily means that she will be qualified to be a mayor, since the work in Good Earth Coalition and Clearview town council may vary drastically. 我觉得since后面的原因，与前半句没有因果关系，这两个机构的工作可能大不相同，为什么就知道AG不是一个合格的市长呢？而且，你前面已经说了AG 可能不是the right person，然后这句话里面又说并不一定表明她是一个合格的市长，其实这两句话的意思是一样的~Maybe AG is a outstanding member of GEC, yet is not suitable to the position of a mayor.

To sum up, the conclusion that AG is more qualified than FB as mayor is unwarranted. To bolster the conclusion, the author should provide information about the seriousness of the environmental problems and the actual change in the number of people with respiratory illnesses. In addition, more information about AG’s performance and ability is needed to better evaluate the two candidates.

有什么问题的话，欢迎交流~~！！O(∩_∩)O哈！

weaselUID: 2739489

首先建议一下哈，贴在论坛上字调大一点，不然版主哪天查作业绝得你在偷懒：）
Nowadays,the environment is a hot issue. In this letter, the author obviously put the environment protectionin the first place in the work of a mayor（这句有点Chinglish了）,and ignored the whole responsibility of a qualified mayor. His argument seemswell-reasoned, but after the analogy below we can find some flaws.
To begin with,the author pointed out that Ann Green, as a member of the Good Earth Coalition,given the mayoralty, will certainly solve the environmental problems inClearview. There is no evidence to demonstrate that Ann Green being in the coalition（这么用我不确定行不行直接of the coalition不就行了） had dedicated herself to theprotection of the environment. Judging a person whether he or she has an activeattitude toward the natural surroundings doesn’t depend on if he or she has a identification ofsome institution connected to the environment
, but what concrete contributions the person has made to protectour earth.（这个长句用的好） Thus, it is entirelypossible that in the Clearview Town Council Frank Braun always tend to keep green（不好）,but opposed by other members.（这里怎么突然话锋一转，说到FB去了，如果是另一个方面，那就应该充分论证下去，不能光放一句话在这摆着）
另外，前面的这个connected to the environment是站不住脚的，题目没有说这个组织是保护环境的，你这是基于自己的一个未经证实的假设，怎么能作为条件驳斥别人呢
Moreover, theexamples given by the author are not persuasive. Firstly, the air pollutionproblem might be caused by other factors such as the increase of the
（increasing）numberof the motor vehicles or the climate phenomenon, just like sand storm.Secondly, the respiratory ailment could also be in connection with the turningof the seasons, and as we all know, in this kind of period, the respiratoryillness like cold and flu is apt to outbreak
（这里be apt to后面应该是跟动词，而outbreak只有名词的形式） among people. Therefore, the conclusion drawn from the twoexamples that the members of the local council are not protecting theenvironment is unreasonable.

这段逻辑错误找的没有问题，但是只是点到即止，论证不够充分

Finally, theauthor didn’t realize the meaning of being a mayor. If a mayor put all themoney and effort upon the environment protection at the cost of the destroy（一样不是名词形式） of the economic construction, the residents will certainly sufferfrom the regression of the standard of living.（提个建议，of用的过多，可以用’s或者其他介词替代） The double of（doubled）the number of the factories which increased the economic development in thecity was also out of the consideration of the progress of the whole city（题目提到是town）. （这句的意思我揣摩出来了，但是表达的不是太好，还是有点Chinglish，改进一下，另外的问题还是of，你这里of不管是重复的意思了the progress前的这个就有点不准确了）We can conclude that even if Ann Greenhas an active attitude toward the environment, taking the factors that will certainly influence the developinglevel of Clearview, she may probably take measures to set other factories inthe city.
这段你的语气有点绝对，读起来给我的感觉是在说AG不得不再去开更多的工厂区污染环境，，应该是这样，没有证据说明AG一定能保护好环境，有可能为了城市的经济发展，他不得不开更多的工厂去破坏环境，你挑逻辑错误应该是保留的语气，不能说的这么绝对，找别人错误的同时自己也留下了逻辑漏洞，你看我就可以这么驳斥你，为什么一定会要去开工厂才能提高紧急发展？商贸不行？农业不行？一定是工业？
In summary,without more investigation of the achievement in the field of environmentprotection from the two candidates cannot the author come to the conclusion,and he or she is supposed see the balance between the green surroundings andthe social development.

总体来说，不能把 argument不是单纯的模板+找错游戏，建议认真研读学习AW intro和官方范文http://www.taisha.org/bbs/thread-1093482-1-1.html这个帖子里，有人帮助你理解，应该好入手一点，如果怕影响自己的思考，可以去下个没有注解的，总之，先了解argument的评分标注，再看别人是怎么样深入论证的

weaselUID: 2739489

晕，掉色厉害，下word吧，rose

sola-nanaUID: 2744594

改weasel