[you are not alone ]小组习作 Argument 53

tingsnowyUID: 2739192

By citing two studies - one was conducted thirteen years ago, discovering a correlation between mothers' production of melatonin and infants' mild distress, and the other one conducted earlier this year showed that in the later life the same group of "infants" are still sharing a continuous shyness - the arguer concludes that growing levels of melatonin before birth give rise to an enduring shyness in one' infancy as well as in the later life. Nevertheless, both of the studies cited lack necessary backgrounds and information that help convince their validity and sufficiency. Also, without rolling out other explanations of one's shyness, the conclusion is drawn a little hastily.

The arguer fails to inform us sufficient background information concerning two studies. In the first one, there should be certain backgrounds about an average level of infant mild distress, which should necessarily compared with the practical statistics in the study. What if it is common for all infants at that period of age sharing a similar level of mild distress when confronting unfamiliar stimuli? Likewise, in the second one no description of other teenagers, or an average situation of all teenagers, is discussed. Therefore, to convince us these distress/shyness signs are really arresting, respective control groups, whose members respective an average level of all infants/teenagers, are needed in both studies. What’s more, even if the truth being that the distress and shyness are distinct, the quantity of the sample (given only 25 individuals are studied) is queasy enough.

In addition, as for the first study the arguer ignores other possible causes towards an infant's distress, which chiefly due to the unknown particular of those infants. Their age range, physical condition and emotional fitness to their surroundings could impact their behavior, tactically or explicitly. Common sense tells us infants at the same age enjoy a higher chance to be conceived in same season, say, in the early autumn. Also, physical condition affects an infant's emotional state, not to mention whether one feel safely comfortable in his/her surroundings. As a result, any of these vague backgrounds or sample details could mislead the researchers to draw an unsound correlation between mother's increasing melatonin and an infant's mild distress.

Besides, the second study is unsoundly proved primarily due to its devoid definition of shyness. What is the criterion of shyness? Claiming "more than half of the teenagers identified themselves as shy", the study itself fails to generalize the different identification of shyness of different teenagers. Also, thirteen years could be such a long time that any teenager in the study could be impacted or even changed by, for example, both external environment and personal experiences, which may be other sources of shyness except the gotten melatonin before birth.

Last but not least, it is unjustifiable to equal mild distress signs to the shyness ones in two studies. The former indicates a slight sadness emotionally while the latter merely reflects part of one’s nature. Obviously, these two notions differ logically, conceptually, and psychologically and no scientific proof shows they are alike.

In the final analysis, the arguer’s hasty generalization is made on the basis of two flawed studies designed with biased sampling and incomplete analysis. To make the deduction more convincing, backgrounds (or additional control groups) and other concerns aiming at ruling out other influential possibilities are required. Also, any conclusion has to be hold on until the true connections between mild distress, shyness and melatonin are clearly figured out.

刘文奇UID: 2850560

By citing two studies - one was conducted thirteen years ago, discovering（它的主语是？？） a correlation between mothers' production of melatonin and infants' mild distress, and the other one （was） conducted earlier this year showed that in the later life the same group of "infants" are still sharing a continuous shyness(你确定shyness是可数的吗？) - the arguer conclude that growing levels of melatonin before birth give rise to an enduring shyness in one' infancy as well as in the later life. Nevertheless, both of the studies cited lack necessary backgrounds and information that help convince their validity and sufficiency. Also, without rolling out other explanations of one's shyness, the conclusion is drawn a little hasty.（通过一句话概括了全文内容，足见作者英语功底了！）

The arguer fails to inform us sufficient background information concerning two studies. In the first one, there should be certain backgrounds about an average level of infant mild distress, which should necessarily (be)compared with the practical statistics(什么意思？) in the study. What if it is common for all infants at that period of age sharing a similar level of mild distress when confronting unfamiliar stimuli? Likewise, in the second one no description of other teenagers, or an average situation of all teenagers, is discussed（有点问题，什么description要讲清楚）. Therefore, to convince us these distress/shyness signs are really arresting, respective control groups, whose members respective an average level of all infants/teenagers（什么“average level”）, are needed in both studies(有点拗口，可以直接说对照组are needed). What’s more, even if the truth being that the distress and shyness are distinct, the quantity of the sample (given only 25 individuals are studied) is queasy(这个词是“恶心的”意思） enough.

In addition, as for the first study the arguer ignores other possible causes towards an infant's distress, which chiefly due to the unknown particular of those infants. Their age range, physical condition and emotional fitness to their surroundings could impact their behavior（s）, tactically or explicitly. Common sense tells us infants at the same age enjoy a higher chance to be conceived in same season, say, in the early autumn(这句话为了论证什么？). Also, physical condition affects an infant's emotional state（这个在前面讲过，重复了）, not to mention whether one feel safely comfortable in his/her surroundings（这句话什么意思？，说明了什么？）. As a result, any of these vague backgrounds or sample details（什么detail？） could mislead the researchers to draw an unsound correlation between mother's increasing melatonin and an infant's mild distress.

Besides, the second study is unsoundly proved（prove 不能用被动吧？！） primarily due to its devoid（of） definition of shyness(这句话还是有些拗口，强烈建议改一下). What is the criterion of shyness? Claiming "more than half of the teenagers identified themselves as shy", the study itself fails to generalize the different identification of shyness of different teenagers. Also, thirteen years could be such a long time that any teenager in the study could be impacted or even changed by, for example, both external environment and personal experiences, which may be other sources of shyness except the gotten melatonin before birth.

Last but not least, it is unjustifiable to equal mild distress signs to the shyness ones（指的是？signs=ones??） in two studies（前一段好像论证了这个问题）. The former indicates a slight sadness emotionally while the latter merely reflects part of one’s nature. Obviously, these two notions differ logically, conceptually, and psychologically and no scientific proof shows they are alike.

In the final analysis, the arguer’s hasty generalization is made on the basis of two flawed studies designed with biased sampling and incomplete analysis. To make the deduction more convincing, backgrounds (or additional control groups) and other concerns aiming at ruling out other influential possibilities are required. Also, any conclusion has to be hold on until（改为before比较好） the true connections between mild distress, shyness and melatonin are clearly figured out.
（评：总的来讲，开头和结尾写的不错，英语的概括能力很强，但是，还有些问题：一，论证的逻辑性不够，主要表现在每段的论证不够给力，同时，段与段之间的练习很混乱，所以导致有的是同时论证两个研究，有的是一个一个，有的论证一个研究，后来又插入对两个研究的分析。所以强烈要求作者在写文章之前，把要攻击的点写好，再按照一定的逻辑顺序排列好。每单个论点的论证也需要加强。二，感觉语言有些松散，不是很紧凑。反正就是那个感觉了~，要加强语言之间的逻辑性。三，通过两次对你作文的修改，发现你很喜欢用并列，特别是三个并列，比如，三个主语，三个副词。读起来很别扭，最好别超过两个。还有有些词的用法也要注意，在文中也标出来了。最后，我还有一个疑问：tactically or explicitly，是什么意思，他们能用OR连接吗？）
有什么不服的地方，尽可以找我辩论~~