Arg 227 求指导 help help！！！

xulinxiUID: 2996978

第一次写 拼凑出来的 还写了好长时间啊 考试要什么办啊 另外 语言表达是个问题 求指导


227.The following appeared as an editorial in a local newspaper.

"In order to attract visitors to Central Plaza downtown and to return the
plaza to its former glory, the city should prohibit skateboarding there
and instead allow skateboarders to use an area in Monroe Park. At Central
Plaza, skateboard users are about the only people one sees now, and litter
and defaced property have made the plaza unattractive. In a recent survey
of downtown merchants, the majority supported a prohibition on
skateboarding in the plaza. Clearly, banning skateboarding in Central
Plaza will make the area a place where people can congregate for fun or
for relaxation."

为使闹市区中央广场吸引更多的观光者并回复该广场以前的繁荣，我们市应该禁止在那里玩滑板，让滑板爱好者使用Monroe公园地区活动。在中央广场，人们唯一可以看到的就是玩滑板的人，废弃物和损毁的公物使广场失去了往日的吸引力。在最近一次对闹市区商户的调查中，大多数人都支持禁止在广场玩滑板。显然，在中央广场禁止滑板将会使该地区成为人们可以聚集起来娱乐和休闲的场所。




In first glance，the arguer s reasoning seems to be quite sound. According to his conclusion, banning skateboarding in Central Plaza will make the area a place where people can congregate for fun or for relaxation. To substantiate it, the author points out the evidence that too many skateboard users and litter there left have made the plaza unattractive. In addition, he cites the result of a recent survey in support this recommendation. But unfortunately, I’m afraid this argument can hardly bear further consideration since there are several flaws in it.

To begin with, the author falsely bases on a gratuitous assumption that skateboard users are responsible for the litter and defaced property that make the plaza unattractive. However, no evidence is stated in the argument to support this assumption. For example, it is most likely bad weather conditions make the property defaced more easy. Or perhaps, anyone in plaza might have relationship with it except the skateboarding users. Therefore , the argument is unwarranted without ruling out these and other possibility.

Even assuming skateboarding users are related to the conditions marking the plaza’s decline, we are also told little details about the survey. The author fails to convince us that the merchants surveyed are representative of downtown merchants overall and most of them favor the prohibition. Or if it is not the case, or if the skateboarding users are a considerable profit of the merchants, merchants there may not really want the skateboarding users to leave for Monroe Park. In short, the author cites the result of the survey dose not lend strong support to his recommendation without more evidence provided.

Even if the skateboarding users are responsible for the litter and defaced property and the survey is valid enough to support his conclusion. We still suspect that banning skateboarding in Central Plaza is the only measure to return the Plaza to its former glory. For instance, we can make the area used for both skateboarding and relaxation with bring up a series of rules. Every problem can be solved in different means. Without further investigation and analysis, the arguer cannot conclude that banning skateboarding is the only way to fix it.

Anyway, I agree that it is highly possible that banning skateboarding can return the Plaza to its former glory. But the arguer fails to substantiate it. Making the recommendation more thorough and logically acceptable, we would need more information and details to evaluate the situation.

xulinxiUID: 2996978

来个人吧  只求 只言片语即可

xishui7000UID: 2816791

那我就说啦。。。冲上来那个in就亮了，然后每段你去头去尾你看看自己究竟写了多少。。。

liusashmilyUID: 2997896

结构蛮好的。