Definitely, a victory 小组第1次作业 argument169 By 森森霖

fayememoUID: 2687181

The following appeared in a letter from a department chairpersonto the president of Pierce University.
“Some studies conducted by Bronston College,which is also located in a small town, reveal that. Therefore, in the interestof attracting the most gifted teachers and researchers to our faculty andimproving the morale of our entire stuff, we at should offer employment to thespouse of each new faculty member we hire. Although we cannot expect all offersto be accepted or to be viewed as an ideal job offer, the money invested inthis effort will clearly be well spent because, if their spouses have a chanceof employment, new professors will be more likely to accept our offers.”



Thisargument strongly advise that Pierce University should offer employment to thespouses of each new faculty member they hire so that the professors will bemore likely to accept their offers basing on an investigation conducted byBronston College. The inference seems logical by comparing the conditions undera same town’s background, but I think lots of imprecise speculations exist.

Firstly,in condition of admitting the dependability of the research by and the resultsalso fitting the professors who are firmed by, happier living in small townsdoesn’t equal to being more likely to accept the offers. The professors mayinvestigate the level of the University’s laboratory equipment, wages they mayget, position in the academic circles and so on. The conclusion that they willbe more likely to accept the offers cannot be straightly inferred upon theabove basis.

Secondly,whether it is worthy to offer employment to the aimed people is not sure forthe yardstick is still unknown. Even if the professors accept the offers, theyprobably will not create the same amount of wealth that cost on the offeringemployment to their spouses. The so called “most gifted teachers andresearchers” haven’t been examine by anything, can it be believed? What’s more,offering employment to the spouses of each new faculty member they hire isunnecessary for the Pierce University will hire not only professors, maybe someother cleaners, for example. But the cleaners and other possible staff don’tmatch the condition of the study which is regarded as basis of the speaker.

Thirdly,the accuracy of the study conducted by Bronston Collegeis not believable. The research points out that the professors are happierliving in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the samegeographic area. We can conclude that their spouses working in the same geographicarea makes the professors happier, but perhaps they feel happier also for someother reasons like the scenery of the town is pleasing, the locals areneighborly, their families are happier to live in the town and so forth.

Andsome other reasons can also strongly overthrow the conclusion made by thespeaker. Like hiring professors can improve the morale of their entire stuff isillogical. Considering the above opponents I think the conclusion need morediscussion.

week 1-no.169.doc (26 KB, 下载次数: 3)

2010-6-12 17:28:44 上传

下载次数: 3

huohuo0101UID: 2760840

This argument(author, 上文的这一段叫做stimulus, 你写的才叫argument) strongly advise that Pierce University should offer employment (job) to the spouses(spouse) of each new faculty member they hire so that the professors will be more likely to accept their offers basing on an investigation conducted by Bronston College. The inference seems logical by comparing the conditions under a same town’s background,(都是在小镇但不是同一个小镇) but I think lots of imprecise speculations exist.(是否改成there exist lots of 。。。比较好，另外imprecise在此处的用法我觉得过于有些 Chinglish，imprecise是 not exact的意思， 所以 我认为换成 unsubstantiated speculations更好  )

Firstly, in condition of admitting the dependability of the research by and the results also fitting the professors who are firmed by, happier living in small towns doesn’t equal to being more likely to accept the offers.（理解起来有困难） The professors may investigate（consider） the level of the University’s laboratory equipment, wages they may get, position in the academic circles（field） and so on. The conclusion that they will be more likely to accept the offers cannot be straightly（directly） inferred upon the above basis.

Secondly, whether it is worthy to offer employment to the aimed people is not sure for the yardstick is still unknown. Even if the professors accept the offers, they probably will not create the same amount of wealth that （is） cost on the（去掉 the） offering employment to their spouses. The so called “most gifted teachers and researchers” haven’t been examine by anything, can it be believed?(此句话太粗糙) What’s more, offering employment to the spouses of each new faculty member they hire is unnecessary for the Pierce University will hire not only professors, maybe some other cleaners, for example. But the cleaners and other possible staff don’t match the condition of the study which is regarded as basis of the speaker.

Thirdly, the accuracy of the study conducted by Bronston College is not believable（reliable）. The research points out that the professors are happier living in small towns when their spouses are also employed in the same geographic area. We can conclude that their spouses working in the same geographic area makes the professors happier, but perhaps they feel happier also for some other reasons like the scenery of the town is pleasing, the locals are neighborly, their families are happier to live in the town and so forth.

And some other reasons can also strongly overthrow the conclusion made by the speaker. Like hiring professors can improve the morale of their entire stuff is illogical. Considering the above opponents I think the conclusion need more discussion.（最后一段写的太仓促了，没有作者如果要完善建议应该做哪些工作）

hedengboUID: 2797857

2# huohuo0101
个人拙见,论证的顺序是否可以调换一下,最后的关于调查的怀疑如果提到最前面似乎更加合适.