Argument144 第一篇，高频题！关于结尾有些疑问，希望能向、imong斑竹求解！

blur13_0UID: 150275

Argument144.
According to a poll of 200 charitable organizations, donations of money to nonprofit groups increased by nearly 25 percent last year, though not all charities gained equally. Religious groups gained the most (30 percent), followed by environmental groups (23 percent), whereas educational institutions experienced only a very small increase in donations (3 percent). This poll indicates that more people are willing and able to give money to charities but that funding for education is not a priority for most people. These differences in donation rates must result from the perception that educational institutions are less in need of donations than are other kinds of institutions.
根据一项针对200个慈善组织的调查，去年对于非营利团体的捐款上升了将近25％，而并不是所有组织都获得了同样的增幅。宗教团体增幅最大（30％），其次为环境组织（23％），而教育机构所获捐款仅有少量增长（3％）。这一调查说明有更多的人愿意而且有能力为慈善组织捐款，但资助教育并不是人们的首选。这种捐款数额上的差异一定是由于人们认为教育机构没有其他组织更需要资助的观念而导致的。

一部分仿照imong的文章写的 ;) ，有些疑问：是否结尾也像开头一样可以略带一笔，而把99%精力用在正文上呢？

正文
Well-presented and seemingly logical at first glance, the argument can hardly stand up to any scrutiny for its several flaws.

Firstly, the poll cannot support the assertion above that more people are willing and able to give money to charities because its validity is worth questioning. The speaker did not mention the concrete location of region and the exact scope of the poll. 200 organizations may be not enough to represent all of the organizations or the summation. Maybe there are more than 2000 charities in the whole nation, these 200 organizations in this poll are only account for 10% and most located in the places, where people preferred to donate to charities with the well development of regional economy, while more organizations in other regions under the worse economic circumstances obtain less donations. Then this poll cannot indicate the overall situation of the whole nation. In addition, the amount of donations at last year should have been given. If these nonprofit groups only received 10 dollars the last year and 12.5 dollars this year, this is also an increase at rate of 25 percent, yet hardly can anyone say that more people are pleased to give money to charities.

Secondly, even if we concede that most charity organizations obtained more donations is in fact, we cannot assume that funding for education is not a priority for most people. The proportion of different kinds of organizations in this poll has not been given at all. It is possible the number of educational institutions is much more than that of religious and environmental groups. For example, there may be 190 educational institutes, which all acquire some fund, and not each of the rest 10 groups gain donations. Perhaps certain renowned religious organization and one famous environmental group receiving a large amount of money lead to the rise of the total rate. Further, what is the respective income of different kinds of groups? Common sense tells us the increase of rate does not represent the amount. The speaker fails to calculate how much money does each group gain.It is posible that the total donation of all environmental groups is only 1000 dollars last year, while educational institutes received 1,000,000 dollars during the same period, if so it would be apparent 3 percent of the latter is much more than 23 percent of the former. In this case,  it is possible most people prefer to donate money to education rather than other charities.

Finally, Even if we accept that funding for education is not precedence for most people, we cannot assert that these differences in donation rates are due to the perception that educational institutes are less in need of money. There are also alternative factors accounting for this phenomenon. Perhaps lots of donations are directly sent to the schools without passing the charitable organization for the reason that many schools have their own committee or office for financial donation, while most money donated to religious and environmental groups is always passed through charities. Thus it may be the different access of donation, not the supposed perception that leads to the differences in donation rates.

To sum up, perhaps the speaker has some otherwise sound reasons for the argument, but the evidences and reasoning mentioned above are not sufficient and well grounded. Therefore, any final conclusion should not be drawn unless more detailed and convincing evidences are available.

feifeiguoUID: 181589

我还是个新手没有能力给你改作文呢~~~对不起。我想问问：什么是高频题？谢谢~~

flyingwindUID: 189320

最初由 blur13_0 发布
[B]Argument144.
有些疑问：是否结尾也像开头一样可以略带一笔，而把99%精力用在正文上呢？
以下省略...... [/B]

可以
你的结尾不少了

imongUID: 140258

Firstly, the poll cannot support the assertion above that（above that？） more people are willing and able to give money to charities because（这里because从句貌似废话） its validity is worth questioning. The speaker did not mention the concrete location of region and the exact scope of the poll. 200 organizations may be not enough to represent all of the organizations or the summation. Maybe there are more than 2000 charities in the whole nation, these 200 organizations in this poll are only account for 10% and（前半句还算正常 后半句为啥就这么and上了？明明是两个部分两个理由） most located in the places, where people preferred to donate to charities with the well development of regional economy, while more organizations in other regions under the worse economic circumstances obtain less donations. （其实economy还是有点虚 可以写的再concrete些）Then this poll cannot indicate（represent） the overall situation of the whole nation. In addition, the amount of donations at last year should have been given. If these nonprofit groups only received 10 dollars the last year and 12.5 dollars this year, this is also an increase at rate of 25 percent, yet hardly can anyone say that more people are pleased to give money to charities.（其实这一点应该是个主要反驳点的）

Secondly, even if we concede that most charity organizations obtained more donations is in fact（we concede that完全多余 is in fact改成 in reality）, we cannot assume that funding for education is not a priority for most people（语序古怪了点 说话说的像麻花 我们不能认为不是...绕。而且 前半句和后半句有关吗？）. The proportion of different kinds of organizations in this poll has not been given at all. It is possible the number of educational institutions is much more than that of religious and environmental groups. For example, there may be 190 educational institutes, which all acquire some fund, and not each of the rest 10 groups gain donations. Perhaps certain renowned religious organization and one famous environmental group receiving a large amount of money lead to the rise of the total rate. （这里可以说得更详细些 前面那个190那个部分尤其 简单的几句话把 rate depend on what说清楚就是 ）Further, what is the respective income of different kinds of groups? Common sense tells us the increase of rate does not represent the amount. The speaker fails to calculate how much money does each group gain.It is posible that the total donation of all environmental groups is only 1000 dollars last year, while educational institutes received 1,000,000 dollars during the same period, if so it would be apparent 3 percent of the latter is much more than 23 percent of the former. In this case, it is possible most people prefer to donate money to education rather than other charities.（一个理由说了两遍？和上一段的最后一部分比？提前想好 组织顺序。）

Finally, Even if we accept that （没必要we accept来回说 事实就是事实 不用出现人称代词的）funding for education is not precedence（？） for most people, we cannot assert that these differences in donation rates are due to the perception that educational institutes are less in need of money. （这句话也说得罗嗦。Thrid, the preference in making donation does not necessarily arise from such an non-existent perception, even when the difference in donation rate is indeed the result of the difference in preference. 哎 写得也啰嗦）There are also alternative factors accounting for this phenomenon. Perhaps lots of donations are directly sent to the schools without passing the charitable organization for the reason that many schools have their own committee or office for financial donation, while most money donated to religious and environmental groups is always passed through charities. Thus it may be the different access of donation, not the supposed perception that leads to the differences in donation rates.（感觉解释得不够coherent）

To sum up, perhaps the speaker has some otherwise sound reasons for the argument, but the evidences and reasoning mentioned above are not sufficient and well grounded. Therefore, any final conclusion should not be drawn unless more detailed and convincing evidences are available.

结尾收束全文 简明扼要就可以了 重点也还在正文 正文写不好 润色开头结尾也很难帮助
正文也还得好好练习呢！还不够精炼！

blur13_0UID: 150275

;) 谢谢imong的大砖，唉，又让你费心了，惭愧啊，本来issue感觉希望越来越小，想抓紧时间多练练argu，能把平均分提点，原来差距好像更大，呵呵。。。。。现在赶紧反思反思。。。。

再次感谢！！！争取下一篇给大伙点好的启发，而不是这种。。。