Argument226 拍我者请留下自己文章链接，48小时内回拍

flyfish9UID: 156664

本贴是近期看见讨论较多的贴子，希望大家继续发扬团队合作的精神－david编辑


The following appeared as part of a memo from the manager of an automobile manufacturing company.
'Because the demand for our automobiles is expected to increase dramatically, we need to open a new manufacturing plant as soon as possible in order to continue to thrive. Our marketing projections indicate that 80 million people will want to buy our automobiles, yet our existing plant can only produce 40 million automobiles. The new plant can be opened on a part-time basis, with workers from our existing site rotating responsibilities, until an operational staff can be trained. A major airplane manufacturer was extremely successful using this part-time rotating strategy when it opened its new plant five years ago.'

**************************************************************************************

Before opening new plant on a part-time basis, the evidence given in this argument should be examined from other angles. Although the manage of the automobile manufacturing company seems to believe that the company should open new plant using part-time rotating strategy, he/she should at first examine the marketing projections and the experience of the major airplane.

First, there is no specific information about how the marketing projections get the result that 80 million people will want to buy their automobiles. Maybe the survey has received several answers from members of the same family. If so, these several people will only buy an automobile and actually the total amount of automobiles people want to buy is less than 80 million, or even less than 40 million. It is unnecessary for the company to open new plant if the demand is less than 40 million automobiles that it can already satisfy.

Furthermore, even if these people are from different families, it is to say, there are 80 million families want to buy their automobiles, it is still suspect if the company really have a demand of 80 million automobiles. After all, these 80 million people only "want to" buy their automobiles. It is not mean that they will really buy in the end. Maybe some of them cannot get enough money to buy an automobile, or maybe some of them ultimately buy a product of other company.

Thus, it is too hasty to say that 80 million automobiles will be sold only because 80 million people will want to buy them.

Second, even if there is really a demand of 80 million automobiles and therefore the company should open new plant, there are no evidence that it is a correct way to use part-time rotating strategy.Anyway, part-time workers are of less experience. It is possible that they make products of poorer quality, thus making people who want to buy the automobiles at the beginning change their mind.

It is wrong to get this result only because that a major airplane manufacturer was extremely successful using this method 5 years ago. After all, many things may have changed as 5 years have past. Whether this experience is still suitable of today's situation should be considered.

In addition, this experience is from an airplane company, which has a lot of differences with an automobile company. Maybe the part-time workers in the area of airplane are well-chosen at first and can easily suitable for the job in a short time.

To sum up, the manage of this automobile company fails to examine the specific sitution of the marketing objections and the experience of the airplane company. Therefore his/her conclusion is not cogent and convictive.

ponponUID: 181304

Before opening new plant on a part-time basis, the evidence given in this argument should be examinedconsidered from other angles. Although the manager of the automobile manufacturing company seems to believe that the company should open new plant using part-time rotating strategy, he/she should at first examine the marketing projections and the experience of the major airplane.

First, there is no specific information about how the marketing projections get the result that 80 million people will want to buy their automobiles. Maybe the survey has received several answers from members of the same family. If sothus, these several people will only buy an automobile and actually the total amount of automobiles people want to buy is less than 80 million, or even less than 40 million. It is unnecessary for the company to open new plant if the demand is less than 40 million automobiles that it can already satisfy.

Furthermore, even if these people are from different families, itthat is to say, there are 80 million families want to buy their automobiles, it is still suspect if the company really have a demand of 80 million automobiles. After all, these 80 million people only "want to" buy their automobiles. It is not mean that they will really buy in the end. Maybe some of them cannot get enough money to buy an automobile, or maybe some of them ultimately buy a product of other company.

Thus, it is too hasty to say that 80 million automobiles will be sold only because 80 million people will want to buy them.这个80的论证过程感觉有点复杂，可否简化一下

Second, even if there is really a demand of 80 million automobiles and therefore the company should open new plant, there are no evidence that it is a correct way to use part-time rotating strategy.Anyway, part-time workers are of less experience. It is possible that they make products of poorer quality, thus making people who want to buy the automobiles at the beginning change their mind.

It is wronginproper to get this result only because that a major airplane manufacturer was extremely successful using this method 5 years ago. After all, many things may have changed as 5 years have pastpassed. Whether this experience is still suitable of today's situation should be considered.

In addition, this experience is from an airplane company, which has a lot of differences with an automobile company. Maybe the part-time workers in the area of airplane are well-chosen at first and can easily suitable for the job in a short time.

To sum up, the manage of this automobile company fails to examine the specific sitution of the marketing objections and the experience of the airplane company. Therefore his/her conclusion is not cogent and convictive.
读完感觉你的错误找的不错了，需要的就是语法和句式的改进了

希望可以互相提高

ponponUID: 181304

https://bbs.gter.net/showthre ... readid=250751请批评

mythztUID: 162409

Before opening new plant on a part-time basis, the evidence given in this argument should be examined from other angles. Although the manage(manager) of the automobile manufacturing company seems to believe that the company should open new plant using part-time rotating strategy, he/she should at first examine the marketing projections and the experience of the major airplane.(开头段形式蛮新颖的)

First, there is no specific information about how the marketing projections get the result that 80 million people will want to buy their automobiles. Maybe the survey has received several answers from members of the same family. If so, these several people will only buy an automobile and actually the total amount of automobiles people want to buy is less than 80 million, or even less than 40 million. It is unnecessary for the company to open new plant if the demand is less than 40 million automobiles that it can already satisfy.(这个反例很牛啊，反正我是想不到)

Furthermore, even if these people are from different families, it is to say, there are 80 million families want to buy their automobiles, it is still suspect if the company really have a demand of 80 million automobiles. After all, these 80 million people only "want to" buy their automobiles. It is(does) not mean that they will really buy in the end. Maybe some of them cannot get enough money to buy an automobile, or maybe some of them ultimately buy a product of other company(companies).

Thus, it is too hasty to say that 80 million automobiles will be sold only because 80 million people will want to buy them.

Second, even if there is really a demand of 80 million automobiles and therefore the company should open (the)new plant, there are no evidence (showing)that it is a correct way to use part-time rotating strategy. Anyway, part-time workers are of less experience. It is possible that they make products of poorer quality, thus making people who want to buy the automobiles at the beginning change their mind.

It is wrong to get this result only because that a major airplane manufacturer was extremely successful using this method 5 years ago. After all, many things may have changed as 5 years have past.(这里感觉说服力不强呵) Whether this experience is still suitable of today's situation should be considered.

In addition, this experience is from an airplane company, which has a lot of differences with an automobile company. Maybe the part-time workers in the area(?) of airplane are well-chosen at first and can easily suitable(感觉没有谓语动词) for the job in a short time.

To sum up, the manage(manager) of this automobile company fails to examine the specific situation of the marketing objections and the experience of the airplane company. Therefore his/her conclusion is not cogent and convictive.
整体感觉很不错，我只能鸡蛋里挑骨头了.建议把“secondly”和“in addition”两段合并一下，着重攻击两个厂差异之处，至于“5年前”我觉得可以不用攻击。个人认为还有一个攻击点就是新建的工厂未必能有与原来那个相同的效率，既然工人都轮班。
一点愚见，见笑了！

flyfish9UID: 156664

谢谢二位，mythzt请留下你文章的链接。
晚上自习回来拜读二位的大作，现在去自习写Issue去了:)

zqimagineUID: 193623

Argument226  第4篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：寄托家园作文版普通用户     共用时间：30分51秒     390 words
从2005年1月26日19时25分到2005年1月26日19时30分
------题目------
The following appeared as part of a memo from the manager of an automobile manufacturing company.
'Because the demand for our automobiles is expected to increase dramatically, we need to open a new manufacturing plant as soon as possible in order to continue to thrive. Our marketing projections indicate that 80 million people will want to buy our automobiles, yet our existing plant can only produce 40 million automobiles. The new plant can be opened on a part-time basis, with workers from our existing site rotating responsibilities, until an operational staff can be trained. A major airplane manufacturer was extremely successful using this part-time rotating strategy when it opened its new plant five years ago.'

------正文------
In this memo, the manager of an automobile manufacturing company recommends a new manufacturing plant be build and the plant adopt the part-time rotating stradegy. To substantiate his recommendation, the manager cites the results of their maketing projection and their current producing capacity. He also illustrate the success of a major airplane manufaciturer using the part-time rotating stradegy. A strict scrutiny reveals that the argument bases on some problematic assumptions, which renders it unconvincing.

To begin with, the manager fails to convince us of the representivity of their projection. The sample in the projection must be suffcient in size and typify the overall purchasing desire of the potencial customers. However, lacking of such evidence, the results of the projection is inaccurate, at best.

Secondly, even if the projection can represent the great demanding of the public, manager's claim that catering the demanding can render the company to thrive. However, whethe this step of the company can function effectively as the manager expected is doubtable. The manager neglects certain underlying factors that can place negative impact. Perhaps the cost of building a new producing plant will turn out to outweight the revenue it brings. Or perhaps when the new plant starts to produce, the demand of the consumers declines to a larger extent. In other words, building up a new plant may not do any contribution to the strive of the company.

Thirdly, the manager unreasonably assumes that the part-time totating strategy, while applied in the major airplane company to be a success, can also benefit the automobile company. This assumption is untenable. The producing process of automobiles diverses from the process of manufacturing airplanes. Moreover, the success of such strategy appeared five years ago, it is entirely possible that the situation has been changed up till now. Thus, the strategy might be obsolete and invalid now.

In conclusion, the argument suffers from a series of logic flaws. To support his recommendation, the manager should provide much evidence that the projection is statisticly accurate and the build up of the new plat will help the company to strive. The manager should also provide evidence to show that the success will be duplicated in this company. To better access the argument, I will need more information about the availability of the strategy and more datas of the projection and measuring datas of the revenue and cost expected of the new plant.
超了一分钟，没来得及检查:(

zqimagineUID: 193623

Before opening new plant on a part-time basis, the evidence given in this argument should be examined from other angles. Although the manager of the automobile manufacturing company seems to believe that the company should open new plant using part-time rotating strategy, he/she should at first examine the marketing projections and the experience of the major airplane.（开头确实很新颖）

First, there is no specific information about how the marketing projections get the result that 80 million people will want to buy their automobiles. Maybe the survey has received several answers from members of the same family. If so, these several people will only buy an automobile and actually the total amount of automobiles people want to buy is less than 80 million, or even less than 40 million. It is unnecessary for the company to open new plant if the demand is less than 40 million automobiles that it can already satisfy.（这段也不错，我也想到了但是觉得表达起来很费时间）

Furthermore, even if these people are from different families, it is to say, there are 80 million families want to buy their automobiles, it is still suspect if the company really have a demand of 80 million automobiles. After all, these 80 million people only "want to" buy their automobiles. It is not mean that they will really buy in the end. Maybe some of them cannot get enough money to buy an automobile, or maybe some of them ultimately buy a product of other company. （我喜欢这段）Thus, it is too hasty to say that 80 million automobiles will be sold only because 80 million people will want to buy them.

Second, even if there is really a demand of 80 million automobiles and therefore the company should open new plant, there are no evidence that it is a correct way to use part-time rotating strategy.Anyway, part-time workers are of less experience. It is possible that they make products of poorer quality, thus making people who want to buy the automobiles at the beginning change their mind.

It is wrong to get this result only because that a major airplane manufacturer was extremely successful using this method 5 years ago. After all, many things may have changed as 5 years have past. Whether this experience is still suitable of today's situation should be considered.

In addition, this experience is from an airplane company, which has a lot of differences with an automobile company. Maybe the part-time workers in the area of airplane are well-chosen at first and can easily suitable for the job in a short time.

To sum up, the manage of this automobile company fails to examine the specific sitution of the marketing objections and the experience of the airplane company. Therefore his/her conclusion is not cogent and convictive.（结尾不是应该多写点啊？）

我的驳斥点写了那个新开的生产部门不一定会有利于公司的发展，所以不一定可行。。。
大家互相借鉴学习啰！

flyingwindUID: 189320

Before opening new plant on a part-time basis, the evidence given in this argument should be examined from other angles. Although the manage of the automobile manufacturing company seems to believe that the company should open new plant using part-time rotating strategy, he/she should at first examine the marketing projections[如果说这里没问题，那么后面的就有问题了？why要检查the experience of the major airplane？能说明社么？人家的成功是确实的！类比错了，时间变了，所以情况变了的意思没有表达出来。所以这个最后一段是有问题的！] and the experience of the major airplane.

First, there is no specific information about how the marketing projections get the result that 80 million people will want to buy their automobiles. Maybe the survey has received several answers from members of the same family. If so, these several people will only buy an automobile and actually the total amount of automobiles people want to buy is less than 80 million, or even less than 40 million. It is unnecessary for the company to open new plant if the demand is less than 40 million automobiles that it can already satisfy.[这个反例子并不成功！谁说一个家庭就买一辆车？每个家庭成员都可能买车。这个反驳无力。其实这个错误很好反驳，说它调查种种问题就好]

Furthermore, even if these people are from different families, it is to say, there are 80 million families want to buy their automobiles, it is still suspect if the company really have a demand of 80 million automobiles. After all, these 80 million people only "want to" [这个反驳点很好]buy their automobiles. It is not mean that they will really buy in the end. Maybe some of them cannot get enough money to buy an automobile, or maybe some of them ultimately buy a product of other company.

Thus, it is too hasty to say that 80 million automobiles will be sold only because 80 million people will want to buy them.[why分开一段？]

Second, even if there is really a demand of 80 million automobiles and therefore the company should open new plant[这里你可能漏了个重要的批驳点，不一定要开新的啊，开支非常庞大等等], there are no evidence that it is a correct way to use part-time rotating strategy.Anyway, part-time workers are of less experience[这里是不是理解错了？这里的part-time，rote。。是指的轮班制度吧，人还是本厂的人，怎么能说part-time没经验？说工作强度大，带来质量。。问题还查不多！]. It is possible that they make products of poorer quality, thus making people who want to buy the automobiles at the beginning change their mind.

It is wrong to get this result only because that a major airplane manufacturer was extremely successful using this method 5 years ago. After all, many things may have changed as 5 years have past.[说了一个时间的影响，点对了，展开简单了] Whether this experience is still suitable of today's situation should be considered.

In addition, this experience is from an airplane company, which has a lot of differences with an automobile company.[这个句子很难看] Maybe the part-time workers in the area of airplane are well-chosen at first and can easily suitable for the job in a short time.[这里的展开同样简陋]

To sum up, the manage of this automobile company fails to examine the specific sitution of the marketing objections and the experience of the airplane company. Therefore his/her conclusion is not cogent and convictive.

总体感觉[不太好]！
文中有一些错误（也许我看错了）；逻辑的[展开不够]，分段奇怪！

对于一些[常见的逻辑错误批驳的句式]，建议作者利用一些，这样不至于类比错误等见的错误表达不好。

[加油！]

flyfish9UID: 156664

呵呵，被flyingwind批得好惨:)
首先感谢一下，毕竟从不同意见中可以学到更多的东西嘛。
当然很多地方我是有不同意见的：
1. 一个家庭买一辆还是几辆车的问题。一个家庭可能买几辆车么？当然可能。Bill Gates一个人买几百辆车也行。但是一般的情况是怎样的呢？如果确实是每个家庭成员都有车的情况很普遍，那确实这一段比较无力了，反之应该很有力吧。对于Argument写作, 只要指出其它可能就行了（当然这个其他可能可能性越大越好），不应该要求指出的这个可能都是没有例外的绝对情况。
2.分段问题。body中前三段和后三段分别攻击两个逻辑错误，有first和second作为明显标志。由于攻击过程中考虑到不同的可能性，所以分为不同的段落。ETS从来也没有要求过段落必须怎么划分，都是新东方在要求。所以我觉得只要结构清楚就可以了。而且我这篇文章的段落划分是参考了一片6分ETS范文的，应该问题不大。
3.遗漏批驳点。我承认有遗漏，但是遗漏的应该说是“一种可能”更合适。批驳点是“如果供不应求，是否该建新厂”，一种可能是“建新厂花费可能很大，得不偿失”。这种可能性我是没提到。但是Argument都是漏洞百出的啊，每种可能都提到，2000字也收不住吧:(
4.part-time理解错误。确实理解错了！心悦诚服！这个是很严重的，谢谢flyingwind.
5.第二个批驳点展开简陋。确实简陋，因为写到后来实在写不下去了，呵呵。而且在批驳对比错误方面我确实很weak，需要提高。
毕竟还是第二篇Argument，还是需要努力的

flyfish9UID: 156664

zqimagine，你的文章我看了。
感觉呢，点找的不少，但是展开几乎没有，只有cost of building a new plant还算有些展开。
这样子不太好。argument一定要写具体了，这是ETS高分范文中明显体现出来的，imong老大也多次强调过。

mythztUID: 162409

这是我的文章：
https://bbs.gter.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=250768

劳驾了！谢谢！

flyingwindUID: 189320

我只说了缺点和不同意的地方，优点没有说哈，希望flyfish不要介意啊

1。点还是感觉不严密。你是这样写的“Maybe the survey has received several answers from members of the same family. If so, these several people will only buy an automobile and actually the total amount of automobiles people want to buy is less than 80 million, or even less than 40 million”
如果我没理解错的话。你的反驳的一种可能是：也许调查中有好几份sample是一个家庭的成员做的，这样他们所指的买车就是买同一个车。我想在美国汽车那么普及的情况下，不是象中国一家人贡一辆车吧。
也许是我挑剔了，夫妻说的买车也许就是同一个车呢，谁知道！

2，3 见仁见智了！perhaps我看习惯了八股文，看不来新思潮拉！

davidjackyUID: 135962

本贴是近期看见讨论较多的贴子，希望大家继续发扬团队合作的精神－david编辑