1010G零散版友作文互改帖（Argument）

396857815UID：2758634

TOPIC: ARGUMENT209 - The following recommendation was made by the Human Resources Manager to the board of directors of the Fancy Toy Company.

"In the last three quarters of this year, under the leadership of our president, Pat Salvo, our profits have fallen considerably. Thus, we should ask for her resignation in return for a generous severance package. In Pat's place, we should appoint Rosa Winnings. Rosa is currently president of Starlight Jewelry, a company whose profits have increased dramatically over the past several years. Although we will have to pay Rosa twice the salary that Pat has been receiving, it will be well worth it because we can soon expect our profits to increase considerably."
WORDS: 496          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 7/19/2010 10:19:33 AM

  In this argument the manager recommends us to replace our current president Pat Salvo with the current president of the Starlight Jewelry Company Rosa Winnings. The manager cites a fact that he or she thought would be the evidence of the reasonable recommendation. However, the mere fact that our company's profit has declined during the last three quarters under the Pat Salvo's leadership while Starlight's profit has increased during the past several years with the current president Rosa Winnings obviously cannot verify the conclusion. With some logical flaws existing the recommendation is not that rational and unambiguous.
  First of all, there is no evidence can prove that it is our president, Pat Salvo, who is responsible for the falling profits. The manager has masked the other alternative possibilities that may also contribute to the profits decline. For example, the rising costs of materials and labor can make our expend increase; the probably whole toy business's depression can make our marketing not as well as before; and so forth. Before these possibilities stated above have been ruled out, the conclusion that it is Pat Salvo, our president, who is responsible for the profits decline is too slapdash and unreliable.
  Secondly, same with the flaws state above, there is also no evidence can prove that it is Rosa Winnings, the current president of Starlight, is responsible for the past several years' increasing profit. There may have other possibilities that can also lead to the profits increasing. For instance, if the whole jewelry business is prospective, may be Rosa's management ability is not good enough； The profit of Starlight can still increase. Or, maybe during the past several year, it is not Rosa who is in charge of Starlight, the increasing profits is totally owing to the predecessor of Starlight but not the current president Rosa.
  Finally, the management has masked another important factor which makes the conclusion totally not rational. The factor is the discrepancy between the toy business and jewelry business. No evidence or information is given to prove that the work experience and management skill in jewelry business can also work in toy business. Moreover, we cannot verify that Rosa's skill and experience in Starlight can also work in Fancy. Maybe the two companies in two different businesses are totally different in every aspects of management. Therefore, even if Rosa is very successful in Starlight, it cannot demonstrate he or she can also be successful in Fancy.
  In conclusion, the manager's recommendation is totally unconvincing with the logical flaws stated above. To strengthen the conclusion, the manager has to prove that the cause of our company's decreasing profits is exactly Pat Salvo. And more information and facts is needed to demonstrate that Rosa is the one who is responsible for the Starlight's increasing profits, not other factors. In addition, to convince to replace Pat with Rosa, there also must be verify that Rosa's experience and skill can also success in our company； Thus, our company can be assured to have an increasing profit considerably.

tyarelUID：2756223

占楼，限时argument还写到500去了，吓到我了...

TOPIC: ARGUMENT209 - The followingrecommendation was made by the Human Resources Manager to the board ofdirectors of the Fancy Toy Company.

"In the last three quarters of this year, under the leadership of ourpresident, Pat Salvo, our profits have fallen considerably. Thus, we should askfor her resignation in return for a generous severance package. In Pat's place,we should appoint Rosa Winnings. Rosa is currently president of StarlightJewelry, a company whose profits have increased dramatically over the pastseveral years. Although we will have to pay Rosa twice the salary that Pat hasbeen receiving, it will be well worth it because we can soon expect our profitsto increase considerably."
WORDS: 496          TIME: 00:30:00         DATE: 7/19/2010 10:19:33 AM

  In this argument the manager recommends us to replace our current president Pat Salvo with the current president of the Starlight Jewelry Company Rosa Winnings. The manager cites a fact that he or she thought would be the evidence of the reasonable recommendation. (个人觉得这句话没什么实际意义，纯粹凑字数的话还不如不要) However, the mere fact that our company' s profit has declined during the last three quarters under the Pat Salvo's leadership while Starlight's profit has increased during the past several years with the current president Rosa Winnings obviously cannot verify the conclusion. With some logical flaws existing the recommendation is not that rational and unambiguous.
对首段提点我自己的看法。这篇Argument是建立在这样一个逻辑上的，FTC业绩下降+SJ业绩上升→R的到来可以大幅提升FTC业绩→我们应该雇佣R。不管怎么写，关键是把逻辑线抓清楚。所以我觉得以你这样复述的写法的话还有些遗漏，至少从第一段看整个逻辑没有完全出来。

  First of all, there is no evidence can prove that it is our president, Pat Salvo, who is responsible for the falling profits. The manager has masked the other alternative possibilities (alternatives就可以了…) that may also contribute to the profits decline. For example, the rising costs of materials and labor can make our expend increase; the probably whole toy business's depression can make our marketing not as well as (it was是market和market比，不是market和before比较) before; and so forth. Before these possibilities statedabove have been ruled out, the conclusion that it is Pat Salvo, our president, who is responsible for the profits decline is too slapdash(这个单词会不会用得太刻意？个人感觉…) and unreliable.(建议还是换个句式，开头结尾都用同一个感觉有点单调)

  Secondly, same with the flaws state above, there is also no evidence can prove that it is Rosa Winnings, the current president of Starlight, (who)is responsible for the past several years' increasing profit. (…这个句式又来了…) There may have(be) other possibilities that can also lead to the profits increasing. For instance, if the whole jewelry business is prospective, may be (maybe) Rosa's management ability is not good enough； The profit of Starlight can still increase. Or, maybe during the past several year, it is not Rosa who is in charge of Starlight, (去掉逗号用and连接，逗号不能连接2个完整的句子)the increasing profits is totally owing to the predecessor of Starlight but not the current president (也可以省掉) Rosa.

  Finally, the management has masked another important factor which makes the conclusion totally not rational. The factor is the discrepancy between the toy business and jewelry business. No evidence or information is given to prove that the work experiences and management skills in jewelry business can also work in toy business. Moreover,we cannot verify that Rosa's skill and experience in Starlight can also work in Fancy.(和前一句意思其实是一样的吧？二取一就可以了) Maybe the two companies in two different businesses are totally different in every aspects of management. Therefore,even if Rosa is very successful in Starlight, it cannot demonstrate he or she can also be successful in Fancy.

这里错误是抓到了，但是讲得太简单了，可以具体讲讲2个公司哪些方面不一样。比如说客户群体他们的消费习惯啦，市场份额的问题啦。可以稍微提及一下，你的反驳会更有力。

  In conclusion, the manager's recommendation is totally unconvincing with the logical flaws stated above. To strengthen the conclusion, the manager has to prove that the cause of our company's decreasing profits is exactly Pat Salvo. And more information and facts is needed to demonstrate that Rosa is the one who is responsible for the Starlight's increasing profits, not other factors. In addition, to convince to replace Pat with Rosa, there also must be verify that Rosa's experiences and skills can also success in our company(experiences和skills怎么success？何况success是名词)； Thus, our company can be assured to have an increasing profit considerably.

主要逻辑问题抓出来了，结构比较清楚
缺点是文章模版化感觉比较严重。另外在语言的多样性上有待加强。特别是句式反面，用蓝色画出来4个句子，一模一样的句式，其实可以考虑多一些的表达方法，看范文或者改文的时候可以留意下别人的写法丰富自己。还有语句可以精炼下，有的地方表述比较重复

tyarelUID：2756223

TOPIC: ARGUMENT60 - The following appeared in the health section of Glenntown's local newspaper.

"Several national medical studies suggest that older people who have pets tend to enjoy better health than those who do not have pets: those who have pets have lower rates of high blood pressure and arthritis. It seems clear that having to care for an animal promotes good health for the older person. Therefore, Glenntown should establish a program to give a small pet such as a dog or cat to all of its citizens who are over the age of 65. This will help to insure that our senior citizens enjoy good health and have fewer medical bills."
WORDS: 430  

Based on the assumption that having pets benefits the older peoples' health due to the study about the relationship between it and rate of high blood pressure and arthritis, the author recommended a program of giving pets in order to insure  senior citizens' health and decrease medical bills. Yet, it isn't the case and because of the illogical inference the suggestion is also unwarranted.

Foremost, the advice depends on the studies about the older people having pets. However, the study just figured out the relationship between but failed to point out it is having pets that caused low rates of high blood pressure and arthritis. It's totally likely that this relationship is just a coincidence. If that is true other factors, like life style or exercises can conduce to the low rate. Thus, if the author cannot rule out the possibilities mentioned, the conclusion is weak obviously.

What's more, even though having pets do help decrease the incidence of blood pressure, no evidence have been offered to illustrate that it really do good to older people's health. All we can obtain from the studies is about the rate of having high blood pressure and arthritis. But what about other common senile diseases, such as heart trouble? Meanwhile it also cannot be denied that pets may lead to skin allergy, which is also not stated. Unfortunately, the author didn't provide any information about that. If having pets will indeed result in heavy skin allergy, how can we promote the program and bring this trouble to the old? So, only after eliminating any likelihood that having pets may do harm to older people can we consider the feasibility of the recommendation.

Last but not least, the author also committed a mistake when supply his advice. The studies are about older people while the program is about those over 65. How can he take it for granted that the objects in the studies are over 65? Maybe the result is correct only when people over 75? Or perhaps the research did not fit people over 85? And what if it is directly opposed to those from 65 to 75? Then it is not impossible that the program will not only be worthless to older people, but may be harmful to their health.

All in all, although the author cited several national medical studies, they accomplished very little towards supporting his suggestion, In my opinion, if more data and analysis about the benefits of having pets to older people's health can be provided, the argument will be strengthened and the advice can be accepted.


谢谢LX了～

追梦小木耳UID：2781857

Based on the assumption that having pets benefits the older peoples' health due to the study about the relationship between it and rate of high blood pressure and arthritis, the author recommended a program of giving pets in order to insure  senior citizens' health and decrease medical bills. Yet, it isn't the case and because of the illogical inference the suggestion is also unwarranted.
不知道你看过草木斑竹的一个贴没有~反正我对这种复述题目的开头持保留态度~与其复述一遍，不如指出主要错误

Foremost, the advice depends on the studies about the older people having pets. However, the study just figured out the relationship between
（who?） but failed to point out it is having pets that caused low rates of high blood pressure and arthritis. It's totally likely that this relationship is just a coincidence.
可改为：the study unreasonably amounted the correlation between having pets and low rates of high blood pressure and arthritis to casual relationship If that is true other factors, like life style or exercises can conduce to the low rate. Thus, if the author cannot rule out the possibilities mentioned, the conclusion is weak obviously.


对other possibilities的解释太少，做的假设也太少


What's more, even though having pets do help decrease the incidence of blood pressure, no evidence have been offered to illustrate that it really do good to older people's other aspects of health. All we can obtain from the studies is about the rate of having high blood pressure and arthritis. But what about other common senile diseases, such as heart trouble? Meanwhile it also cannot be denied that pets may lead to skin allergy, which is also not stated. Unfortunately, the author didn't provide any information about that.语义重复，可删去其中之一 If having pets will indeed result in heavy skin allergy, how can we promote the program and bring this trouble to the old? So, only after eliminating any likelihood that having pets may do harm to older people can we consider the feasibility of the recommendation.
这一段论述的很好很充分


Last but not least, the author also committed a mistake when supply his advice. The studies are about older people while the program is about those over 65. How can he take it for granted that the objects in the studies are over 65? Maybe the result is correct only when people over 75? Or perhaps the research did not fit people over 85? And what if it is directly opposed to those from 65 to 75? Then it is not impossible that the program will not only be worthless to older people, but may be harmful to their health.
这个攻击点很勉强~毕竟65也算老年人

All in all, although the author cited several national medical studies, they accomplished very little towards supporting his suggestion. In my opinion, if more data and analysis about the benefits of having pets to older people's health can be provided, the argument will be strengthened and the advice can be accepted.

总的来说，攻击点都找到了，逻辑也比较清晰。
第一个论点阐述的不够详细，再对你所做的假设解释的详细一点会更好更充实
语言不够流畅，还需要加强。
我说一下我的思路：
尽管根据题目养宠物可能有利于老年人的健康，但是由于调查没有说服力，根据此制定的让所有65岁以上的老年人养宠物是不合理的。
（1）
调查没有说服力。可能接受调查的人群仅限于某一个地方，可能不是养宠物使他们身体好。可能是其他原因，比如饮食健康、经常锻炼、遗传因素
（2）
养宠物可以避免高血压和关节炎，但可能有其他副作用。比如产生别的疾病。如皮肤病、过度劳累等
（3）
就算养宠物有助于健康，让所有老年人都养宠物是不合理的，忽略了老年人的个人情况。也许有的老年人不喜欢宠物，对宠物过敏，或者养不起宠物。

追梦小木耳UID：2781857

TOPIC: ARGUMENT7 - 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."
WORDS: 358          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2010-7-19 20:05:43

Final words 461 已修改黑体为后来补充

The argument is well presented, but the evidence provided is not sufficient to conclude the essential reason for air pollution, and simply electing a member of the Good Earht Coalition as the mayor may not effectively solve the problem.

In the first place, the main reason of the air pollution in the region is not clearly pointed out according to the argument. The arguer assumes it is the increasing number of factories in Clearview that has caused the air pollution. However, other possible alternatives are totally neglected. Perhaps, the factories built there do not produce polluting gas at all and it is the growing number of cars in the area that has led to increased air pollution. Also, the worse air condition may be caused by other nearby places where air pollution is exceptionally serious, which has affected the air condition of Clearview.

In addition, the arguer fails to demonstrate the air pollution level in Clearview. The rising number of patients with respiratory illnesses in hospital may not the result of local air pollution. Probably, a flu recently spread the area and most people have been infected, leading the 25 percent more patients. Also, it could be caused by a sudden weather change that a storm has attacked the whole area and a proportion of citizens caught a cold, getting worse and developing to serious respiratory illnesses.

Finally, whether Ann Green will be dedicated to solving air problem if she was elected mayor remains a doubt. Even if it was the factory that has caused the air pollution, would Ann Green, a member of Good Earth Coalition, close them? As a mayor, she must consider other matters of the city. Perhaps, closure of the factories would lead to economic problems of the region, making a number of employees be laid off. Considering such possible result, Ann Green may not close the factories simply for better air conditions. On the other hand, no evidence shows that Frank Braun would not be competent for the position. Although, he is not a member of green organizations, he may be better at balancing economy and environment problems as a member town council, who has more experience in politics. In addition, other capabilities should be taken into consideration when electing the mayor. Probably, there exists other problem that is more urgent than air pollution in the region, which calls for a capable mayor rather than a member of some environmental organizations.

To conclude, merely depending on the mayor to solve the environmental problem can hardly take effects. The local government should make more researches to find the air pollution level and its causes. Meanwhile other capabilities of the candidates must be considered in the election of mayor in order to the long-term development of the region.

beanie加油UID：2843548

The argument is well presented, but the evidence provided is not sufficient to conclude the essential reason for air pollution, and simply electing a member of the Good Earht Coalition as the mayor may not effectively solve the problem.

In the first place, the main reason of the air pollution in the region is not clearly pointed out according to the argument. The arguer assumes it is the increasing number of factories in Clearview that has caused the air pollution. However, other possible alternatives are totally neglected. Perhaps, the factories built there do not produce polluting gas at all and it is the growing number of cars in the area that has led to increased air pollution. Also, the worse air condition may be caused by other nearby places where air pollution is exceptionally serious, which has affected the air condition of Clearview这个观点很独特！.

In addition, the arguer fails to demonstrate the air pollution level in Clearview. The rising number of patients with respiratory illnesses in hospital may not the result of local air pollution. Probably, a flu recently spread the area and most people have been infected, leading the 25 percent more patients. Also, it could be caused by a sudden weather change that a storm has attacked the whole area and a proportion of citizens caught a cold, getting worse and developing to serious respiratory illnesses.

Finally, whether Ann Green will be dedicated to solving air problem if she was elected mayor remains a doubt. Even if it was the factory that has caused the air pollution, would Ann Green, a member of Good Earth Coalition, close them? As a mayor, she must consider other matters of the city. Perhaps, closure of the factories would lead to economic problems of the region, (causing)making a number of employees be laid off. Considering such possible result, Ann Green may not close the factories simply for better air conditions. On the other hand, no evidence shows that Frank Braun would not be competent for the position. Although, he is not a member of green organizations, he may be better at balancing economy and environment problems as a member town council, who has more experience in politics. In addition, other capabilities should be taken into consideration when electing the mayor. Probably, there exists other problem that is more urgent than air pollution in the region, which calls for a capable mayor rather than a member of some environmental organizations(organization,some当某个讲更好）.

To conclude, merely depending on the mayor to solve the environmental problem can hardly take effects. The local government should make more researches to find the air pollution level and its causes. Meanwhile other capabilities of the candidates must be considered in the election of mayor in order to the long-term development of the region.
感觉你的逻辑很清晰，思维很连贯。陈述很到位，这点从整篇文章看下来深有体会。
语言方面也很多样化。你的思维和逻辑是我学习的榜样。继续加油！

beanie加油UID：2843548

TOPIC: ARGUMENT20 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Balmer Island Gazette.

"The population of Balmer Island increases to 100,000 duing the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by each of the island's six moped and bicycle rental companies from 50 per day to 30 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council is sure to attain the 50 percent reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year in the neighboring island of Torseau, when Torseau's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals."
WORDS: 217 REVISED: 470        TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2010/7/19 4:41:20

    The article is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. By adapting to the similar policy in the island of Torseau of limiting the number of moped rentals, the speaker assures that the town council can attain the 50 percent reduction in moped accidents. However, the argument seems to be compelling at first glance which actually masks many alternative counter examples.
     The speaker demonstrates that through limiting the number of mopeds rental by 20 per day, the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians can be reduced to a half. But if the accident rate is 400 per day concerned with the huge population in Balmer Island, is it accessible to reach the 50 percent reduction by only limiting 20 moped rented? If so, it seems to the speaker that all incidences of accidents are heavily laid on driving mopeds, which is obviously not the case. In reference to the quality of the rented mopeds, maybe it suffers from many vital problems which are responsible for the accidents it causes. Thus, there is no assurance of the reduction in moped accidents. Other reasons contributing to the large number of accidents involve that people in the island may lack of a safety consciousness which directly leads to the high accidents rate, or a general traffic law has not been published yet to constrict pedestrian’s random behavior. All the factors can best explain the number of accidents there. Hence, not excluding the possible alternatives, the speaker can not presume the problems to be resolved.
    The situation in neighboring island of Torseau is probably quite different with that in Balmer Island. Perhaps the population in Torseau is small and hence the accidents rate is relatively low compared with that in Balmer. In addition, the residents there are well-educated to obey the traffic rules. Therefore, when the town council demands to reduce the number of moped rentals, people are more sensible to their duty and subsequently to avoid causing accidents.  Again, the geographical and terrain factors are also the causes of the number of accidents. Chances are that the roads in Torseau Island are very flat to be conducive for people's driving, whereas the Balmer Island is located in a hilly area, where its highways have to built on the hills. Many dangerous curves and sharp turns inevitably obstacle the reduction of accidents rate. Or probably the weather in Balmer is too bad to guarantee the safety of driving mopeds on the road, which is completely contrasted to the mild weather in Torseau. Thus, without ruling out these possible situations that may more or less influence the number of accidents, the speaker can not assume the Balmer Island to be able to achieve the same result of Torseau Island.
     Overall, the speaker tries to carry out the similar policy Torseau Island used to adapt to tackle with the accident rates. However, he neglects to consider the consequence of the seem-to-be reasonable policy due to many different factors. Before any final decisions are made about the reduction of the number of moped rentals, the town council should take a comprehensive view to evaluate possible alternatives and causes for the accidents.

figuechenUID：2850619

TOPIC: ARGUMENT20 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Balmer Island Gazette.

"The population of Balmer Island increases to 100,000 duing the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by each of the island's six moped and bicycle rental companies from 50 per day to 30 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council is sure to attain the 50 percent reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year in the neighboring island of Torseau, when Torseau's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals."
WORDS: 217 REVISED: 470        TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2010/7/19 4:41:20

    The article is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. By adapting to the similar policy in the island of Torseau of limiting the number of moped rentals, the speaker assures that the town council can attain the 50 percent reduction in moped accidents. However, the argument seems to be compelling at first glance which actually masks many alternative counter examples.
[开头很不错，开门见山。语句也很不错，学习了]

     The speaker demonstrates that through limiting the number of mopeds rental by 20 per day, the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians can be reduced to a half. But if the accident rate is 400 per day concerned with the huge population in Balmer Island, is it accessible to reach the 50 percent reduction by only limiting 20 moped rented? [恩？不是每家公司减少20么？]If so, it seems to the speaker that all incidences of accidents are heavily laid on driving mopeds, which is obviously not the case. [感觉这里有点啰嗦，为了讲清这个道理费了不少劲]In reference to the quality of the rented mopeds, maybe it suffers from many vital problems which are responsible for the accidents it causes. Thus, there is no assurance of the reduction in moped accidents. Other reasons contributing to the large number of accidents involve that people in the island may lack of [不用of了，lack就行]a safety consciousness which directly leads to the high accidents rate, or a general traffic law has not been published yet to constrict pedestrian’s random behavior. All the factors can best explain the number of accidents there. Hence, not excluding the possible alternatives, the speaker can not presume the problems to be resolved.
[这里作者说的是该措施不一定能降低事故率。个人感觉这个错误可以放到最后讲，因为原题中是用了一个类比来说明事故率能降低，那么就应该先反驳这个类比，再说明这点。另外第一点的反例有些勉强，我觉得可以这样说：六家公司只是占了moped出租市场的少数，禁了他们也不能完全禁了moped出租，更不能导致事故率下降。可能我举的这个说法反驳点稍有不同，仅供参考啦]

    The situation in neighboring island of Torseau is probably quite different with that in Balmer Island. [光这句感觉不够，没点到点上。可以再补一句，因为不同，所以相同的措施在B岛未必有用。]Perhaps the population in Torseau is small and hence the accidents rate is relatively low compared with that in Balmer. In addition, the residents there are well-educated to obey the traffic rules. Therefore, when the town council demands to reduce the number of moped rentals, people are more sensible to their duty and subsequently to avoid causing accidents.  Again, the geographical and terrain factors are also the causes of the number of accidents. Chances are that the roads in Torseau Island are very flat to be conducive for people's driving, whereas the Balmer Island is located in a hilly area, where its highways have to built on the hills. Many dangerous curves and sharp turns inevitably obstacle the reduction of accidents rate. Or probably the weather in Balmer is too bad to guarantee the safety of driving mopeds on the road, which is completely contrasted to the mild weather in Torseau. Thus, without ruling out these possible situations that may more or less influence the number of accidents, the speaker can not assume the Balmer Island to be able to achieve the same result of Torseau Island.
[反驳这个faulty analogy。非常非常到位，例子很详实了。]

     Overall, the speaker tries to carry out the similar policy Torseau Island used to adapt to tackle with the accident rates. However, he neglects to consider the consequence of the seem-to-be reasonable policy due to many different factors. Before any final decisions are made about the reduction of the number of moped rentals, the town council should take a comprehensive view to evaluate possible alternatives and causes for the accidents.

[综述]
总的来说，作者分段清晰，开头和结尾很简洁，没有废话。中间陈述的内容逻辑很清晰，例子也很恰当。

但我总觉得两个反驳点少了一点。特别是作者的两个反驳着眼点有些雷同。其实这篇Argument还有许多从其它角度考虑的反驳点，比如BI在其它月份中的人口很少，没有必要；或者是该措施可能导致负面影响，比如游客出行不便。如果啰嗦一点的话还可以攻击说：限制出租数量未必是邻岛事故率下降的因素。虽然我最近也试图把类似的攻击点归纳到一起，但我还是感觉每一段就攻击一个小点，这样思路和逻辑上都会比较清晰。

一点小意见，仅供参考~

figuechenUID：2850619

TOPIC: ARGUMENT40 - The following appeared in a memorandum from the president of Excello Food Markets.

"In 90 towns where Excello has food markets, natural-food stores specializing in organic food products-products containing no chemical preservatives and made with foods grown without pesticides-have opened nearby as competitors. Surveys of our own customers reveal a growing concern about foods grown using pesticides or preserved with chemicals. Recently our market in Sun City participated in a local food tasting fair, and 75 percent of the fair goers who visited the Excello booth requested free samples of organic fruit. Such evidence indicates that to increase our profits, we should begin to stock a full line of organic food products in all our markets."

WORDS: 596          TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2010-7-19 20:20:18

    The president suggests that the company should start to stock organic food products in the markets in order to increase the profits. Several reasons are listed to support his claim. However, there are many flaws in the assumption and therefore the argument is unconvincing.
    First of all, the author unfairly concludes that there is a growing trend to buy organic foods for consumers. The author quotes the phenomenon on the food tasting fair, which cannot bolster his claim. Firstly, people who asked for organic fruit might not be interested in buying those foods Perhaps participants requested the fruit simply because the fruits are free, and they want something to eat at that time, while they may not incline to buy the fruit in the result of price, taste, etc. Besides, admitted that there is the need in Sun City, we cannot infer from the argument that there exists the same need all over the country. Perhaps residents in other towns show little interest in organic fruits, and a stock of organic foods in all the markets will be a waste of time and funds. The author too hastily infers that there is a growing need for organic fruit.
    Even assuming that there lies the interest on organic food for customers, the author fails to provide evidence to show that consumers will buy these fruits. There are many factors that determine whether a product will be welcome, which include taste, price, quality, and safety. Perhaps the quality and taste of organic fruit is excellent while the price of it is too high for most families to accept, and therefore the market of organic fruit is rather small; or perhaps the taste and price of the organic fruit is satisfactory while the safety of the fruit remains doubting, and therefore many people will not dare to buy organic foods, leading to little potential for organic fruits. Unless the author provides evidence to eliminate these possibilities, he cannot convince me that there will be a large number of consumers who will have a try on these fruits.
    Finally, even if we assume that many consumers tend to buy organic foods instead of inorganic ones, the author cannot ensure that his measures will bring about the increase of profits. He does not provide information about the profits of organic and inorganic foods, and therefore we do not know whether organic foods are more profitable or not. Perhaps inorganic foods are ten times more profitable than organic ones, and thus they should not turn to organic ones unless there is a much stronger need for organic foods. In addition, he fails to consider other factors that have an influence on the profits. Perhaps it will take much more money to raise these foods, and the company will pay more to the farmers, which might cause a decline in the profits; or perhaps it is easier for organic foods to go bad and therefore it will cost the company more to keep them fresh, resulting in economic losses. Without ruling out these cases, the author cannot confidently conclude that stocking a full line of organic foods will raise their profits.
    In sum, due to the flaws listed above, the claim that Excello Food Markets should initiate to stock organic food products in all their markets so as to increase their profits. To better support his claim, the author had better provide further evidence, such as a more persuasive survey results indicating a strong need for organic fruits and a marketing survey to illustrate that a stock of organic food products will make money.

谢谢楼下了

追梦小木耳UID：2781857

不好意思，改晚了

The president suggests that the company should start to stock organic food products in the markets in order to increase the profits. Several reasons are listed to support his claim. However, there are many flaws in the assumption and therefore the argument is unconvincing.
开头不错，简洁，点明要害
    First of all, the author unfairly concludes that there is a growing trend to buy organic foods for consumers. The author quotes the phenomenon on the food tasting fair, which cannot bolster his claim. Firstly, people who asked for organic fruit might not be interested in buying those foods Perhaps participants requested the fruit simply because the fruits are free, and they want something to eat at that time, while they may not incline to buy the fruit in the result of这个短语啥意思，没查到 price, taste, etc. Besides, admitted that there is the need in Sun City, we cannot infer from the argument that there exists the same need all over the country. Perhaps residents in other towns show little interest in organic fruits, and a stock of organic foods in all the markets will be a waste of time and funds. The author too hastily infers that there is a growing need for organic fruit.
    Even assuming that there lies the interest on organic food for customers, the author fails to provide evidence to show that consumers will buy these fruits. There are many factors that determine whether a product will be welcome popular, which includeincluding taste, price, quality, and safety. Perhaps the quality and taste of organic fruit is excellent while the price of it is too high for most families to accept, and therefore the market of organic fruit is rather small; or perhaps the taste and price of the organic fruit is are
satisfactory while the safety of the fruit remains doubting doubtable, and therefore many people will not dare to buy organic foods, leading to little potential for organic fruits. Unless the author provides evidence to eliminate these possibilities, he cannot convince me that there will be a large number of consumers who will intend to have a try on these fruits.
    Finally, even if we assume that many consumers tend to buy organic foods instead of inorganic ones, the author cannot ensure that his measures will bring about the increase of profits. Since He does not provide information about the profits of organic and inorganic foods, and therefore we do not know whether organic foods are more profitable or not. Perhaps inorganic foods are ten times more profitable than organic ones, and thus they should not turn to organic ones unless there is a much stronger need for organic foods. In addition, he fails to consider other factors that have an influence on the profits. Perhaps it will take much more money to raise these foods, and the company will pay more to the farmers, which might cause a decline in the profits; or perhaps it is easier for organic foods to go bad organic foods are easier to go bad and therefore it will cost take the company more to keep them fresh, resulting in economic losses. As a result, Without ruling out these cases, the author cannot confidently conclude that stocking a full line of organic foods will raise their profits.
    In sum, due to the flaws listed above, the claim claim后缺少谓语和宾语 that Excello Food Markets should initiate to stock organic food products in all their markets so as to increase their profits is unreasonable. To better support his claim, the author had better provide further evidence, such as a more persuasive survey results indicating a strong need for organic fruits and a marketing survey to illustrate that a stock of organic food products will make money.

主要攻击点都说出来了，逻辑无可挑剔。
有些链接词我觉得不太合适，就改了下，可以参考

我写的提纲，和你的角度不太一样，但是内容差不多，供参考
所提供的证据不足以说明有机食物受到居民的欢迎，因此在市场中建立有机食物销售可能不能带来利润
（1）调查没有可信度，不能证明有机产品会受欢迎。调查人群不可靠，也许在回答问题的时候受到了引导。担心不表示就会购买有机产品，可能会考虑到有机产品也有坏处
（2）去参观要样品不能说明他们也愿意买。也许尝了以后觉得不好吃。只要了有机水果的样品，可能只对水果感兴趣，对其他有机产品不感兴趣。同时价钱也不知道，可能会认为太贵不买
（3）即使人们对有机食品感兴趣，储备有机食物也不一定能赚钱。储备会很快坏掉。不知道哪种有机产品最受欢迎

追梦小木耳UID：2781857

大家限时都写到500+了，我才刚300多~
补充完还不到500，还需多练！先感谢楼下指导
TOPIC: ARGUMENT233 - The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a company that builds shopping malls throughout the country.

"The surface of a section of Route 101, paved two years ago by McAdam Road Builders, is now badly cracked and marred by dangerous potholes. In another part of the state, a section of Route 66, paved by Appian Roadways more than four years ago, is still in good condition. Appian Roadways has recently purchased state-of-the-art paving machinery, and it has hired a new quality-control manager. Because of its superior work and commitment to quality, we should contract with Appian Roadways rather than McAdam Road Builders to construct the access roads for all our new shopping malls."
WORDS: 325  final 498        TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2010-7-20 11:27:26

The argument is well presented, but only by comparing the present conditions of the two roads that were constructed separately by the two companies can not convince me that the Appian Roadways is superior to McAdam Road Builders, and therefore should construct the access roads project.

In the first place, the comparison of the present conditions of the two roads is unreasonable, which has failed to consider other possibilities such as the amount of cars travelling on the roads and the climates of the two regions. As the amounts of cars on two roads are not provided, it is entirely possible that there has been larger number of cars running on Route 101during the last two years, causing the cracks and dangerous potholes. While there could have been much fewer cars on Route 66, which may be built in a distant area, and therefore could have kept better condition. Besides, different climates could also affect the road conditions. Perhaps, the place in which Route 101 was built rains a lot every year and the road suffers flood frequently, triggering severe damages. While climate in another part of the state, in which Route 66 was constructed, is exceptionally mild and has little effects on the road conditions. Thus, it seems imprudent to argue that it is the companies' responsibility for the conditions of the roads without accounting for other possible alternatives.

Furthermore, Appian Roadways' new purchase of machinery and the new manager could not demonstrate its superiority as well. Perhaps, the company has received lots of complains about their constructions before, and have to purchase new paving machinery in order to upgrade the quality of their works. Or probably the employees of the company did not work efficiently before and the company has to hire new manager to improve the working efficiency. On the other hand, the facilities of MRB are not mentioned in the argument. Does it have more advanced machinery? Do the workers in the company work more efficiently? If so, the option of AR is unreasonable.

Even if Appian Roadways does have superior work and commitment to quality, no information indicates that it could be competent for the construction of shopping mall’s access roads. The argument only shows its superior construction of state routes but fails to prove that it has any experience in building other types of roads. As it is known, the usage of access roads differs totally from that of state routes. Cars travelling on access roads would be in much lower speed and the roads would own more pedestrians who may require comfortable sidewalks and fabulous scenes. It remains a doubt whether the AR could satisfy these needs.

To conclude, it is not sound to claim that AR is superior to MRB based on the unreliable comparison. To make the argument forceful, more achievements of the two companies should be provided in order to help figure out which one is competent to the construction of the access roads of the shopping malls.

pocketlionUID：2622834

占71楼～～


改71楼：

TOPIC: ARGUMENT233 - The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a company that builds shopping malls throughout the country.


"The surface of a section of Route 101, paved two years ago by McAdam Road Builders, is now badly cracked and marred by dangerous potholes. In another part of the state, a section of Route 66, paved by Appian Roadways more than four years ago, is still in good condition. Appian Roadways has recently purchased state-of-the-art paving machinery, and it has hired a new quality-control manager. Because of its superior work and commitment to quality, we should contract with Appian Roadways rather than McAdam Road Builders to construct the access roads for all our new shopping malls."
WORDS: 325  final 498        TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2010-7-20 11:27:26

The argument is well presented, but only by comparing the present conditions of the two roads that were constructed separately by the two companies can not convince me that the Appian Roadways is superior to McAdam Road Builders, and therefore should construct the access roads project.（去掉project，感觉construct
the .....project搭配不当）

In the first place, the comparison of the present conditions of the two roads is unreasonable, which has failed to consider other possibilities（改为aspects） such as the amount of cars travelling on the roads and the climates of the two regions. As the amounts of cars on two roads are not provided, it is entirely possible that（1） there has been larger number of cars running on Route 101during the last two years, causing(用and causes貌似好些) the cracks and dangerous potholes. While there could have been much fewer cars on Route 66,（与前面（1）重复） which may be built in a distant area, and therefore could have kept better condition. Besides, different climates could also affect the road conditions（+and leads to the difference between the conditions of the two roads强调导致的不同结果）. Perhaps, the place in which Route 101 was built rains a lot every year and the road suffers flood frequently, triggering severe damages. While climate in another part of the state, in which Route 66 was constructed, is exceptionally mild and has little effects on the road conditions. Thus, it seems imprudent to argue that it is the companies' responsibility for the conditions of the roads without accounting for other possible alternatives.

Furthermore, Appian Roadways' new purchase of machinery and the new manager could not demonstrate its superiority as well. Perhaps, the company has received lots of complains（complaints） about their constructions before, and have to purchase new paving machinery in order to upgrade the quality of their works. Or probably the employees of the company did not work efficiently before and the company has to hire new manager to improve the working efficiency. On the other hand, the facilities of MRB are not mentioned in the argument. Does it have more advanced machinery? Do the workers in the company work more efficiently? If so, the option of AR is unreasonable.

Even if Appian Roadways does have superior work and commitment to quality, no information indicates that it could be competent for the construction of shopping mall’s access roads. The argument only shows its superior construction of state routes but fails to prove that it has any experience in building other types of roads. As it is known, the usage of access roads differs totally from that of state routes. Cars travelling on access roads would be in much lower speed and the roads would own more pedestrians who may require comfortable sidewalks and fabulous scenes. It remains a doubt whether the AR could satisfy these needs.
（还可以稍加提下以下谬误：1.No information about the performance of the new quality-control manager at Appian is provided.2. Other competent companies might be available for the president to choose from.）

To conclude, it is not sound to claim that AR is superior to MRB based on the unreliable comparison. To make the argument forceful, more achievements of the two companies should be provided in order to help figure out which one is competent to the construction of the access roads of the shopping malls.

文章谬误找的较全，论证有力，行文流畅，表达清晰，已经很不错了，至于练习时字数较少，只要稍加练习，形成自己的写作套路和习惯，速度很快会提上来的，作者加油。

pocketlionUID：2622834

TOPIC: ARGUMENT82 - The following appeared in a letter to an editor.

"In many countries, wood is the primary fuel used for heating and cooking, but wood smoke can cause respiratory and eye problems, and extensive use of wood causes deforestation, a major environmental problem. In contrast, charcoal, made by partially burning wood in a controlled process, is a fuel that creates less smoke than wood does. Moreover, although charcoal costs slightly more than wood, less charcoal is needed to produce the same amount of heat. Therefore, people who use wood as their primary fuel can, without experiencing economic hardship, switch to charcoal and can thereby improve their health and preserve the environment."

In the letter, the author concludes that people who use wood as their primary fuel can improve their health and preserve the environment without experiencing economic hardship by switching to charcoal. To support it, the author points out that the charcoal creates less smoke than the wood. Meanwhile, the author reasons that the charcoal is more efficient in producing heat than wood. However, the argument suffers from various flaws and therefore it is unwarranted.

To begin with, as no detailed information about the process in which the wood is made into charcoal is provided, we cannot ensure that using charcoal will be more friendly to the environment. Although the charcoal creates less smoke than the wood, the production of charcoal may be harmful to the environment and causes worse environmental problems than using the wood does. If this is the case, the author cannot make any general conclusion that using charcoal can help preserve the environment.

Besides, the author fails to inform us about the cost of producing the charcoal and we do not know how much does charcoal cost more than wood. It is highly possible that it will cost much money to make the wood into charcoal. If so, not all the countries can afford to take the measurement and people who use charcoal as their primary fuel may experience economic hardship if the cost of using the charcoal is high. Therefore, without ruling out the possibility above, the author cannot come to the conclusion that switching to charcoal can improve their health and preserve the environment without experiencing economic hardship.

In addition, the author fails to inform us how much wood will be used to make the charcoal which can produce the same amount of heat. The deforestation will be accelerated if the production of charcoal need more wood to get the charcoal which can produce the same amount of heat. Therefore, we cannot ensure that using charcoal can help preserve the environment.

Finally, only switching to charcoal may not be sufficient to improve the people's health and preserve the environment. The efficiency of the using of wood should be improved and the other measurements such as planting more trees should be taken to protect the environment and improve people's health. Besides, other fuels which may be better than charcoal are ignored by the author. Moreover, not all people may be willing to make the change of using fuel.

In sum, the argument is logically flawed and unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the conclusion, the author should provide more persuasive evidence about the advantages of using charcoal. Besides, the author should rule out the possibility that people cannot afford to make the wood into charcoal .To better assess the conclusion, we should know more information about the cost of producing charcoal and the influence on the environment when using charcoal instead of wood.


请使劲拍之～～～

tyarelUID：2756223

占楼73

TOPIC: ARGUMENT82 - The following appeared in a letter to an editor.

"In many countries, wood is the primary fuel used for heating and cooking, but wood smoke can cause respiratory and eye problems, and extensive use of wood causes deforestation, a major environmental problem. In contrast, charcoal, made by partially burning wood in a controlled process, is a fuel that creates less smoke than wood does. Moreover, although charcoal costs slightly more than wood, less charcoal is needed to produce the same amount of heat. Therefore, people who use wood as their primary fuel can, without experiencing economic hardship, switch to charcoal and can thereby improve their health and preserve the environment."

In the letter, the author concludes that people who use wood as their primary fuel can improve their health and preserve the environment without experiencing economic hardship by switching to charcoal. To support it, the author points out that the charcoal creates less smoke than the wood. Meanwhile, the author reasons that the charcoal is more efficient in producing heat than wood. However, the argument suffers from various flaws and therefore it is unwarranted.
对首段的一点小建议。模版化的痕迹太重了。现在我个人觉得首段可以有2种处理方法：淡化原文内容，着重指出逻辑错误以引导下文；或者不提及错误，但是清楚复述出原文推理的逻辑链。关键就是要从首段就能读出以下信息”文章的逻辑链我读懂了，接下来我要从哪几个逻辑上反驳”。否则感觉这个首段就完全没起到作用了。当然这个我自己也在练习。。。

To begin with, as no detailed information about the process in which the wood is made into charcoal is provided, we cannot ensure that using charcoal will be more friendly(friendlier) to the environment. Although the charcoal creates less smoke than the wood, the production of charcoal may be harmful to the environment and causes worse environmental problems than using the wood does. If this is the case, the author cannot make any general conclusion that using charcoal can help preserve the environment.
这点反驳的太简单了。不够深入，为什么木炭可能对环境不好？木炭可能引起什么问题？这一段几乎没有什么实质性的反驳内容。比如说，制作木炭同样要花费木材，那是不是提供同等热量花费的木炭，转化为原材料花费的木材更多？制作木炭的时候要通过不充分燃烧，会产生CO等气体是不是对环境更不利？这些都可以提及

Besides, the author fails to inform us about the cost of producing the charcoal and we do not know how much does charcoal cost more than wood. It is highly possible that it will cost much money to make the wood into charcoal. If so, not all the countries can afford to take the measurement and people who use charcoal as their primary fuel may experience economic hardship if the cost of using the charcoal is high. (表达上有点重复了,可省) Therefore, without ruling out the possibility above, the author cannot come to the conclusion that switching to charcoal can improve their health and preserve the environment without experiencing economic hardship.(提高健康和保护环境不是重点，因此结论句这么写不合适，应该突出的是经济方面，所以就不要提及health和environment了)

In addition, the author fails to inform us how much wood will be used to make the charcoal which can produce the same amount of heat. The deforestation will be accelerated if the production of charcoal need more wood to get the charcoal which can produce the same amount of heat. Therefore, we cannot ensure that using charcoal can help preserve the environment.
完全可以并入第一段，作为质疑保护环境的一个方面。

Finally, only switching to charcoal may not be sufficient to improve the people's health and preserve the environment. The efficiency of the using of wood should be improved and the other measurements such as planting more trees should be taken to protect the environment and improve people's health. Besides, other fuels which may be better than charcoal are ignored by the author. Moreover, not all people may be willing to make the change of using fuel.
反驳得有点牵强也散乱，感觉没有核心的说理来串出这段的观点，只是堆了些可能性再这里。其实我觉得这个反驳点就在于换木炭的可行性。1.作者没有证明除了这个办法就没有更好的办法了，比如就像换别的fuel,像gas。2.作者没有考虑别的可能的困难。比如说谁来制作木炭？还有意愿的问题？木炭的供应是否跟得上或者说是否充足？

In sum, the argument is logically flawed and unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the conclusion, the author should provide more persuasive evidence about the advantages of using charcoal. Besides, the author should rule out the possibility that people cannot afford to make the wood into charcoal.　To better assess the conclusion, we should know more information about the cost of producing charcoal and the influence on the environment when using charcoal instead of wood.
最后一段的3句话可以在句式上再推敲一下，做点变化，the author should; the author should; we should显得比较单调，也可以索性句子合并合并


主要逻辑问题抓出来了，文章语句词汇上没有什么大错
主要问题是，模板化感觉过重；反驳不够深入，对于他因分析例举不够导致文章感觉没有什么说服力，同时也使得文章显得没有内容；结构上稍有问题，2,4两段针对的是同一个逻辑错误，应该并在一起论述；最后就是语言上变化性不足，句式显得有点平淡

以上就是个人想法，希望对你有用

tyarelUID：2756223

TOPIC: ARGUMENT185 - The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment building to its manager.

"One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately 1/3 of its original force. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. Clearly, restricting water flow throughout all the 20 floors of Sunnyside Towers will increase our profits further."
WORDS: 325 -- 532         TIME: 00:30:00          DATE: 2010/7/22 11:46:03

Associating the modification implemented and the fact that Sunnyside Corporation (SC), the author assumed that the restraint would result in a considerable savings and then on the assumption that no other big problems would be brought besides some complains, he recommended that restricting water flow would be spread to all the 20 floors. However, that is not the case and since he made a wrong inference on the result restricting flow may cause, didn't consider the complains would damage the firm and the unexpected reactions of other residents to the plan, the suggestion is not so tempting as it appeared at the first glance.

Foremost, the author made an experiment on the first floors of Sunnyside Towers (ST) to make sure the influence the adjustment may bring to residents and SC. But it is too hasty to conclude that the plan will certainly help SC decrease costs. On one hand, since no readings of water usage is obtained no evidence illustrating that the usage may be remained. It is highly possible that the restriction will force dwellers find some methods to meet their need of water, like increase the time of using water. On the other hand, the price of water is also not mentioned. Maybe the fluctuation of price of water per unit is the true reason to the decreasing costs. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author cannot persuade me that the modification result in a considerable savings to SC.

What's more, the author admitted that some bad impressions will be left on the consumers of SC because of the adjustment. People will complain about the low water pressure and the author failed to figure out the measures to handle this problem. It is likely that residents may consider changing the company providing their water or maybe this incident will also worse others’ impression on our company, which may decrease our potential consumers and our profits at the same time. And then the bad image will be spread further and cause more lost of consumers. Without finding a method to rebuild our image and tackle the chain reaction, it is not wise to adopt this plan at the risk of losing consumers.

Last but not least, the owner also didn't take the difference between first 5 floors and all the 20 floors into consideration. Even if the restraint and the impact did not incur the dislike of residents on first 5 floors, it can be necessarily that other inhabitants will not deprecate that since decreasing amount of water may be more obvious to them and conduce to more inconvenience to their livesA, which can lead to the same possible results mentioned above and may bring more damage to SC. Unless we can make sure that all people in ST will not reject the adjustment, the modification cannot be casually carried out.

In conclusion, to strengthen the argument and make the recommendation more adoptable, the owner must provide that the plan can truly help SC save money and offer enough methods to deal with the problems caused as well. Besides, he also need to do the survey to ensure that it can be accepted by residents on all 20 floors. Thus, the project may be more reasonable and feasible.

有个小小疑问，我写完后想想，会不会最后一段反驳论证比较单薄？另外关于except complains, no problems have been shown也可以进行反驳？如果反驳的话单独一段好还是和complain那段放在一起好？

希望lx改的时候能给我点意见，谢谢