【寄托No.1】杀G小组 第3次作业 写第一篇A

良药重口UID: 3214270

6# greenbeanmeimei


结论：C俱乐部会赚钱
假设：jazz在M城很流行
解释：1.最近的club距M城60公里
2.去年夏天10万人参加爵士音乐节
3.一些知名jazz音乐人住在M城
4.评价最高的电台节目是jazz
5.一个全国调查表明典型爵士迷每年花1000美元在爵士上

不好意思，今天上午到下午一天的课，刚刚放学就赶紧过来改了。
greenbean，你的argument很清晰很透彻:) ，比我的好多了，要向你学习啊

文章结构很清楚，而且长短句包括一些很地道的短语的使用，都让这篇argument脱颖而出，
虽然有一些小问题（比如举例可以更透彻一些），但是通过多加练习一定能很好的解决




下划线的部分可以看看，仅供参考呵呵

In this proposal the loan developers recommends opening jazz music club in Monroe. To support this recommendation, the developers cite the following facts about Monroe: (1) the nearest jazz club is 65 miles away; (2) jazz is extremely popular in Monroe; and (3) a nationwide study indicates that jazz fans spend a lot on jazz entertainment. Close scrutiny of each of these facts, however, reveals that none of them lend credible support to the recommendation. We cannot hastily arrive at the conclusion since each and every premise requires careful and substantial proof.

First, the absence of jazz music clubs in the city does not necessarily indicate that a new club in the city of Monroe will be profitable. Perhaps the nearest 65-mile-away club has a long history and a reputation for weekly jazz musician shows. For that matter, the establishment of a new jazz music club doesn't ensure popularity and profitability since music fans would rathertake the pains of driving 65 miles(感觉直接用take great pains就已经很好了，因为为了准确性，不能说所有的人都住在离该jazz club 65 miles 的地方) to meet their favorite musicians and enjoy their day than sit in a newly established club with no music elements catering to their tastes.

Secondly, even if the 65-mile-away club has no such specialty as mentioned above, the developers assumes further(个人感觉further放在assumes前面更好一些) that jazz gains extreme popularity in Monroe. Yet the facts in this part of application do not necessarily lead to this assumption. Perhaps there were only 10 among the100000 people attended Monroe's jazz festival that were local residents, with the vast majority of remaining out-of-town visitors. Or perhaps jazz musicians live in Monroe but perform elsewhere, perhaps at the club located 65 miles away. What's more, the author provides no evidence that radio listeners would be interested in going out to hear live jazz. For that matter, the radio program might actually pose competition for the C-Note club, especially considering that the program airs during the evening. All of the possibility underlying in the facts would weaken the applicant's（applicants’根据题目好像申请人不止一个） assertion that the C-Note would be profitable.

Finally, the nationwide study showing that the average jazz fan spends $1,000 each year on jazz entertainment would lend support to the applicant’s claim only if Monroe residents typify jazz fans nationwide. However, the applicant provides no credible evidence that this is the case. (这个可以稍微展开一点呵呵)

In sum, the recommendation relies on certain doubtful assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the loan applicants' recommendation, they must provide further and clearer evidence-----perhaps by way of a local survey of study（如果我没理解错的话，你是想说“通过调查研究当地情况”吗？这句话可以稍微改一下，否则容易引起歧义，特别是阅卷人没理解你想法的时候） ---- that in reality jazz is popular in Monroe, and that local residents are likely to entertain themselves in C-Note. To better assess the proposal. （最好是用“，”，小错误估计是不小心打错了吧，呵呵，没关系）I would also need to know what competition C-Note might face in Monroe.


总的来说，很不错啊，到时候交流一下哈~

zlatan9UID: 2458066

感谢846136085的意见，我会注意的，呵呵
来看你的文章，我自己语法就不好，尽力吧我
In this argument, those loan applicants try to make us believe that a jazz music club in Monroe would be tremendously[/color]（觉得tremendouse就好，毕竟不是修饰动词） profitable. However, lacking in convincing evidence makes this argument much weaker than it appears to be at first glance.

Firstly, it is the fact that the nearest jazz club is 65 miles away, but it doesn't necessarily mean the proposed （少定冠词，加个a）new jazz club would have the local market all to itself. We will, of course, chose the near（nearer，更近的一个） jazz club, if there is（are，复数） no other factors affecting us, like old friends, good shopping mall, than（nor) just the jazz music. So there is no evidence that the new jazz club, C-Note, will get its own market share, unless the true profiting factor is understood properly, not just because of its location.

Secondly, the authors try to illustrate that jazz is extremely popular in Monroe, but more substantial concerns should be addressed than what they have provided. It is pointed out that over 100,000 people attended the annual jazz festival last summer, but we don't how many local people there. Even given local people consist of considerable percentage, it is still possible that their attendance has nothing with their preference for jazz. It is also pointed out that several well-known jazz musicians live in Monroe now, however, there may be some other things attract them, like(可否换成such as) lower living expense, quiet environment, rather than the enthusiasm of local people for jazz. When it comes to the "Jazz Nightly", many other factors can make it highest-rated. Maybe it is the only music program in Monroe, or others are much disappointing. Even given the assumption（the given assumption) is true, that jazz is extremely popular in Monroe, no one can guarantee that a jazz club is profitable, since there is no necessary relation between popularity and profit. Much more (建议加个名词，比如aspects)should be taken into consider, like other entertainment enterprise already in Monroe.

Last but not least, the validity and scope of the survey, cited to represents the average expense spent on jazz entertainment by a typical jazz fan, is not clear. What is included in the expense and how is the survey conducted? We just do not know. Furthermore, it cannot represent the local people in Monroe, since the survey is nationwide and the living standard varies much across the nation. Unless it is carried out validly and focused on local people, the survey is useless to support the author's argument.

To sum up, a new jazz club in Monroe may be profitable, however, the evidence provided is not likely convincing enough to support the application for the loan.

觉得的语法错误文中标出，第一次写感觉不错了已经。
其实觉得没必要硬是三点，可以分开写，衔接词用的也多点，besides...之类都可以用上
举例问题上，不要只是like,还有很多，希望以后会注意到这点。
建议每段可以再多一到两句的论述，不用太长，觉得这样可以增加文章的议论性，虽然我自己做的也不好，加油吧！

leijerry888UID: 3143968

4# babyenoch In the application, the developers conclude that a jazz club in Monroe would be a tremendously profitable enterprise.
To justify the conclusion, the developers point out the proposed new jazz club in Monroe would have the local market all to itself since the nearest jazz club is 65miles away and cite a nationwide study which indicates that the typical jazz fan spends close to $1000 per year on jazz entertainment. Meanwhile, the supporters assert that jazz is extremely popular in Monroe based on three evidence that there were 100,000 people attending Monroe's jazz festival last summer, and that several well-known jazz musicians live in Monroe, and that 'Jazz Nightly' is the highest-rated radio program in Monroe, in order to back their conclusion. It might seem logical, at first glance, to agree with the conclusion. However, these evidences provide little credible support for the conclusion.
(开头意群过于庞大，没有必要将题目复述，此点在北美范文中有提及，5.5一书中也指出，开头最多3行）
To begin with, the application states a fact that the nearest jazz club is 65 miles away, so the developers assert that the local market would be had by the proposed new jazz club in Monroe. But no evidence indicates that the jazz fans within 65miles will all go to the C-Note for many factors will affect the market share, such as the price, quality of service, and fashion. Maybe people prefer a club farther but cheaper and more friendly than C-Note. To strengthen the assertion, the developers would benefit from implementing a normed survey asking a wide range of jazz fans within 65 miles if they would like go to C-Note by listing the club's feature.
（我认为此段的反驳不是很明确，price，service，fashion，friendly等指代不是很具体，应适当展开。但是改进提的不错，另外个别句子稍显累赘，应避免过长的不简洁的复杂句，如段中蓝色标出的一句）
Next, the developers presume that jazz is extremely popular in Monroe due to these evidences: there were 100,000 people attending Monroe's jazz festival last summer; several well-known jazz musicians live in Monroe; 'Jazz Nightly' is the highest-rated radio program in Monroe. However, this evidence cannot support this assertion effectively. First, the developers provided evidence that 100,000 people attended Monroe's jazz festival last summer, but how many of them are local residents? We do not know. Perhaps native people are a very small proportion of the total people. Even if most of them are local citizens, maybe they attended the festival just for fun, but not interested in jazz music. Second, several musicians living here doesn't mean they also work here. And the developers provide no evidence for their working place. Perhaps they just live here because of the perfect environment. Finally, even if jazz is extremely popular in Monroe, it does not mean that people will go to C-Note. Perhaps they just like listening jazz music at home or participating in some festival about jazz. Such evidence would serve to undermine the developers’ conclusion that a jazz club in Monroe would be a tremendously profitable enterprise.
（一段内列出三个逻辑错误，为何不将其分开写呢，而且关于radio这个逻辑层次，在此段后半部分并未进行陈述。但此段逻辑较为到位，如能分段，并稍微详述，将会更好。此段应稍注意语法错误。）

Additionally, the developers cite a nationwide survey to back their conclusion. Yet, the developers provide no assurances that the survey on which the conclusion depends is statistical reliable. Unless the survey's respondents are representative of the overall population of jazz fans, the developers cannot rely on it to predict the conclusion. Nevertheless, though the typical jazz fan spends close to $1,000 per year on jazz entertainment, we do not know the proportion of the expense on jazz entertainment in the gross for the year. Maybe it is only a little part. And even if the nationwide survey itself is strong enough, we may question that if the result of a nationwide survey can represent of Monroe.
（此段逻辑我读起来不是很顺畅，尤其是nevertheless转折后的句子我不是很理解。Argue的一大典型错误为国家性的调查应用于局部，而本段只将其列在了最后一句。我个人还是认为，只要是提出逻辑错误，就另起一段，在最后小小的提一下容易被忽略）
At last, even if all these evidences above are prefect, we also cannot get the conclusion that a jazz club in Monroe would be a tremendously profitable enterprise. In order to fully evaluate the applicants, we would also to learn more about the club. How much cost would they spend on building the club? As we know, high income does not mean a tremendously profit. It is significantly undermine the conclusion if it turns out that the high income cannot meet their enormous cost. Without knowing the cost, we cannot accept the developers' conclusion.
（首先，此段语法错误众多。且略显累赘，此段的后半段就是在重复前半段。我个人不太了解类似于此段的提出自己观点的改进意见，这种类似于ISSUE的写法段落在此出现是否合适。希望得到指导。）
In sum, the argument is indefensible as it stands. To strengthen it, the developers must assure me that the jazz fans within 65miles will go to the C-Note and nationwide survey reflects the local people. To better assess the application, I would need to know (1) What the percentage of the native residents in the people attending the jazz music festival last summer is; (2) where do well-known jazz musicians living in Monroe work; (3) if would people in Monroe go to jazz club and how much they would spend on it.
（结尾的总结过于啰嗦了，后面列出的几条重复重复了上文中体，没必要。如果想要在文章结尾处提出改进性意见，倒数第二段既是。因此我认为，可以将最后两段合并并且减少字数）
综上，我认为，此文优点：逻辑主线清晰，主要逻辑错误均找出，且问题的解释详略较为得当。此文缺点：语言啰嗦，不简洁，尤其开头结尾，我们增加文章的字数不能够依靠绕着圈圈说重复的话，否则得不偿失；语法错误众多，应减少自己难以驾驭的句型句式的使用；段落划分的清晰不能只体现在头句上，更要体现在论证内容上。
缺点是大家共有的，我们一同努力，共同快速提高，我的拙见，希望多多指正。

babyenochUID: 3153670

3# leijerry888
我的第一次A，1个小时，530words，个人感觉比较冗长，写的很不精练。希望同仁们多拍多多帮助我提高，我们共同努力加油！谢谢大家

At first glance of the evidences provided by the author, it may be true that a jazz music club located in Monroe would be profitable. However, when taking a more serious evaluation of the validity and reasonable of the provided evidences, the prediction becomes extremely vulnerable. And additional evidences must be considered to make the judge【judgment】.

Firstly, the evidence of how the jazz club gets its revenue must be considered. The author doesn’t research on whether jazz club makes money via albums and musical accessories sales, tickets sales of club performances, periodic fees of club members or some other ways. For example, if the jazz club’s principal revenue comes from club members’ fees, based on the assumption that people in Monroe are willing to be members of jazz club, it may be true that the C Note club will be profitable because 60 miles’ distance will keep the local people from attending to other jazz clubs. Yet, if the club makes money mainly on musical accessories sales, we may suggest that 60 miles is probably not far enough to encumber other clubs sales in Monroe. Unless we know the specific way of the methods of getting incomes of jazz clubs, we cannot have the conclusion that C Note club will own the whole local market.
【个人感觉这段有点怪，思维貌似和我有点不一样呃~首先为神马club还会卖乐器配件呢？我觉得club就是bar啊。而且就算你的理解没问题，标红的那段还是有很大漏洞的，很显然你提到的assumption是题目隐含的一个假设，但这个假设本身就是不对的，60miles的距离不足以支持这个假设，如果这个club很差的话或者风格不合人们的胃口，不管怎样人们肯定不会去。所以个人意见，这段可以改掉，就攻击支持assumption的证据不足】
Another piece of evidence we need to evaluate the author’s conclusion is a more convincible information of whether people in Monroe would like to take part in a jazz club if there is one. The author does provide several evidences for this assumption, but none of them is adequately convincible. For instance, crowded people in Monroe’s jazz festival last summer may just because there’s a very famous music star’s performance last year, or, even people in Monroe who enjoy carouses of crowed circumstances just like to attend crowed activities, while this would do no help to prove that people in Monroe love jazz. Moreover, several well-known jazz musicians live in Monroe may because the city’s convenient life, beautiful environment, or something else which is irrelevant to jazz music itself. Additionally, the popularity of the radio program ‘Jazz Nightly’ may also result from other reasons except people’s love of jazz. The program is widely listened may merely because it occupies the radio’s golden time. Thusly, more accurate evidence must be provided to evaluate how much does the people live in Monroe love jazz music.
【第二段感觉有些乱，首先要明确你这段攻击的三个证据在题目中是为了说明当地人喜欢jazz，然后再推出人们会参加俱乐部。这个逻辑链是分两步的，每步都有缺陷，首先三个证据不足以说明人们喜欢jazz；就算能证明人们喜欢jazz，那也不能推出人们会去club。但从你的论述来看的话，第一句是说没有足够的证据表明人们会去club，但后面攻击完三个论据之后却说需要提供更多的证据证明人们喜欢jazz，这就没有和首句对应起来，也就是说，把从喜欢jazz到会去club这个过程忽略了。所以这段的话，可以把首句改一下，就只攻击证明人们喜欢jazz的证据不足；当然更完整的话，就需要在这段后面在补充一下了】
The third evidence needed to evaluate the author’s prediction is a more accurate study which is able to indicate how much money does a jazz fun【fan】 of Monroe like to pay for【spend on更好吧】 jazz entertainment, and which particular aspect of entertainment does he like to pay for, as a nationwide study possesses little persuasion for people in Monroe【既然前面说需要两个证据：1 当地人的娱乐消费情况2 娱乐消费的主要方面，那as后面最好对应两个吧，1 国家不能代表当地，2 $1000具体消费方向不明】. Thusly, without a local research with more indifferent and more specific details, there is no way to get a convincing assumption of Monroe jazz funs would like to spend money on local jazz clubs.
【这段我写的也不太好，总觉得漏洞太多，不知道怎么取舍。考虑了一下，这个调查最主要的问题还是两点：国家代表局部和1000在总收入中占得比例（也就是所谓的绝对值陷阱）。其他的我倒觉得可以不必都攻击了】
In conclusion, it may be right that a Monroe’s local jazz club would be very profitable; however, the evidences provided by the author are far from convincible. More evidences are needed to enhance the validity of the evaluation of author’s conclusion.

【其实大家水平现在都差不多，有几个地方还是需要注意：1 句式和用词多样一些，可以适当用下强调句啊之类的，个人觉得不必因为instruction中说evidence我们就在全文一直强调evidence；2 有些句子说不上错，但读起来就是感觉怪怪的，还是需要加强一下语言的表达。加油吧~】

chasedream2012UID: 3238888

In this memo, the president suggests choosing Zeta instead of Alpha for their new building project base his past experience. However, under scrutiny we can find that this decision is really ill-founded.

To begin with, the president substantiates his assertion by cites the fact that the maintenance expenditure of Zeta in last year is only half of the Alpha’s. While it is true that Zeta is more economical in last year, the president cannot draw the conclusion that Alpha spent more money than Zeta in repairing the building every year. It is entirely possible that in first 9 years, the edifice built by Alpha did not need any repair and the maintenance fee is low while the Zeta’s building need completely repair in these years and waste a great deal of money; therefore the totally expenditure of Alfa is far less than Zeta, which render the recommendation of president unpersuasive.

In addition, the president asserts that the Alpha building has consumed more energy than Zeta’s every year since the construction of building. Nevertheless, the president fails to provide any specific information about the circumstance about the Alpha building and Zeta building. We may raise the doubt that what’s the weather like in the location of Zeta building and Alfa building respectively? Perhaps Alfa building is located in a place where temperature has great variance in every season, and it is very cold in winter and very hot in summer, so the local residents should utilize air condition to keep summer cooler and winter warmer. In the contrary, the Zeta building may be situated in a place where temperature is steady and appropriate for the humankind to live in; hence the local inhabitants never use air condition and conserve a vast amount of electricity and energy. Additionally, we also need to take into account the acre and the total number of staff in Alfa building and Zeta building, since the area of building and amount of staffs can sway the energy consumption. Without answer these questions above, the president cannot draw his conclusion hasty.

Finally, the president also cites the fact that Zeta has a stable workforce. Nonetheless, the president only provides information about Zeta, and we have no approach to know what the condition of Alpha about labor force. Moreover, a company with little employee turnover may evince that the company is lack of dynamic and vitality; hence this message lends no support to the president’s recommendation.

In sum, in order to make this argument more persuasive, the president need to answer the following questions: what is total maintenance fee of Alpha building and Zeta building respectively for past 10 years? And what is the detail circumstance (e.g. weather, amount of staffs, and area of building) of Alpha building and Zeta building? Finally, the president can investigate the maintenance fee of Zeta and Alpha for the new building, and if the Alpha’s expense for maintenance is lower than Zeta, then perhaps Alpha is a better choice since Alpha’s bid for construction is lower than Zeta.