第一篇作文Argument5求指教！

baidugoogleUID: 2864795

第一次写作文，随便捡了一篇连翻书带查字典的，写了一个多小时。。。
大家帮忙改改~~:loveliness:
Argument 5
The following appeared in the business section of a newspaper.
"Given that the number of people in our country with some form of arthritis is expected to rise from 40 million to 60 million over the next twenty years, pharmaceutical companies that produce drugs for the treatment of arthritis should be very profitable. Many analysts believe that in ten years Becton Pharmaceuticals, which makes Xenon, the best-selling drug treatment for arthritis, will be the most profitable pharmaceutical company. But the patent on Xenon expires in three years, and other companies will then be able be produce a cheaper version of the drug. Thus, it is more likely that in ten years the most profitable pharmaceutical company will be Perkins Pharmaceuticals, maker of a new drug called Xylan, which clinical studies show is preferred over Xenon by seven out of ten patients suffering from the most extreme cases of arthritis."


我的提纲：
1、没有直接证据说明Xylan赚钱
2、BP不一定会赚的少
3、未来几年完全可能出现新的公司新的技术

The author claims that in ten years the most profitable pharmaceutical company will be Perkins Pharmaceuticals (PP) which makes Xylan (XY) rather than Becton Pharmaceuticals (BP) which makes Xenon (X). However, the author's argument is problematic in several respects, rending the argument unconvincing as it stands.

First of all, there is no direct evidence indicating that XY can make profit. The clinical studies can only explain XY is effective but not illustrate people are willing to use it. Besides, given that XY is more useful in most extreme cases, it is entirely possible that X is more useful than XY in normal cases which most of the patients suffer from. If it comes to that, then X will still be wide used. Lacking the evidence that XY will be popular, it is difficult to assess XY can bring profit.

Secondly, even if XY will beat X, one cannot infer that the profit of BP will decrease. BP also can make new drugs, then it probably continue to dominate the market. And even if the patent gone, BP can lower price, other companies’ do not necessarily cheaper than its. There is also a possibility that consumers feel more at ease using BP's products though they are higher in price. Without eliminating these possibilities, the author cannot conclude that PP will be more profitable.

Finally, the author fails to take into account that there may be new companies and new technologies in the next few years. Technologies developed rapidly in today’s world, perhaps a more effective new drug will be made to treat arthritis. Besides, if pharmaceutical companies earn much money, other companies also will make investment. By that time, BP and PP may both fell behind resulting in the most profitable is neither BP nor PP.

In conclusion, the author assumes hastily that PP will be the most profitable among pharmaceutical companies in ten years. To strengthen it the author should conduct a survey to indicate XY will be popular. I would also need to know more information of BP and other companies.

baidugoogleUID: 2864795

自己先顶个~

nuaaskyUID: 2615912

帮你顶下，
我觉得有些语法错误。时态可能不对,even if XY will beat X，未发生的事情，是不是改用虚拟语气，even if XY would beat X?文章还有多处

baidugoogleUID: 2864795

帮你顶下，
我觉得有些语法错误。时态可能不对,even if XY will beat X，未发生的事情，是不是改用虚拟语气，even if XY would beat X?文章还有多处
nuaasky 发表于 2010-7-31 23:57

谢谢你提意见哈~~
查了下语法：even if/even though, 意为“即使”，用来引导一个让步状语从句，后面既可用陈述语气，也可用虚拟语气，但是even if/even though,引导的从句中不用将来时。

baidugoogleUID: 2864795

自己改了一些语法错误
The author claims that in ten years the most profitable pharmaceutical company will be Perkins Pharmaceuticals (PP) which makes Xylan (XY) rather than Becton Pharmaceuticals (BP) which makes Xenon (X). However, the author's argument is problematic in several respects, rending the argument unconvincing as it stands.

First of all, there is no direct evidence indicating that XY can make profit. The clinical studies can only explain XY is effective but not illustrate people are willing to use it. Besides, given that XY is more useful in most extreme cases, it is entirely possible that X is more useful than XY in normal cases which most of the patients suffer from. If it comes to that, then X will still be widely used. Lacking the evidence that XY will be popular, it is difficult to assess XY can bring profit.

Secondly, even if XY is popular, one cannot infer that the profit of BP will decrease. BP also can make new drugs, then it probably continue to dominate the market. And even if the patent is gone, BP can lower its price, other companies do not necessarily make their price cheaper than that. There is also a possibility that consumers feel more at ease using BP's products though they are higher in price. Without eliminating these possibilities, the author cannot conclude that PP will be more profitable.

Finally, the author fails to take into account that there may be new companies and new technologies in the next few years. Technologies develops rapidly in today’s world, perhaps a more effective new drug will be made to treat arthritis. Besides, if pharmaceutical companies earn much money, other companies also will make investment. By that time, BP and PP may both fall behind resulting in that the most profitable is neither BP nor PP.

In conclusion, the author assumes hastily that PP will be the most profitable among pharmaceutical companies in ten years. To strengthen it the author should conduct a survey to indicate XY will be popular. I would also need to know more information about BP and other companies.

七星之城UID: 2784227

“The clinical studies can only explain XY is effective but not illustrate people are willing to use it”此句与题目中“clinical studies show is preferred over Xenon" 不符，完全相反，读题需要看清。

内容上要点都照全了。内容、首尾段再扩充点更好，300+显得字数少了，不过如果是限时的话第一篇就这样也没问题。

baidugoogleUID: 2864795

“The clinical studies can only explain XY is effective but not illustrate people are willing to use it”此句与题目中“clinical studies show is preferred over Xenon" 不符，完全相反，读题需要看清。

...
七星之城 发表于 2010-8-1 20:22

恩，你说的第一个问题，昨天我也发现了，审题确实没有审好。
至于字数，我是写什么作文都容易字数少的那种:L 我没有限时写，考虑到自己打字慢所以开头段并没有复述论据，我也不喜欢加一些没有用的长连词，看着显得空洞，还是再努力想想怎么把论点扩展开吧~~
总之，谢谢你啊~~