Argument11 第4篇 24小时回拍，谢谢！

xin320UID: 165608

Argument11  第4篇 大家帮忙看看吧，谢谢！
------摘要------
作者：xin320     共用时间：33分1秒     380 words
从2005年2月24日7时55分到2005年2月24日8时33分
------题目------
The following appeared in a memo from the mayor of the town of West Egg.
'Two years ago, our consultants predicted that West Egg's landfill, which is used for garbage disposal, would be completely filled within five years. During the past two years, however, town residents have been recycling twice as much aluminum and paper as they did in previous years. Next month the amount of material recycled should further increase, since charges for garbage pickup will double. Furthermore, over ninety percent of the respondents to a recent survey said that they would do more recycling in the future. Because of our residents' strong commitment to recycling, the available space in our landfill should last for considerably longer than predicted.'
------正文------
In this memo, the arguer predicts that the available space in West Egg's landfill should last for consdierably longer than predicted. To support this conclusion, the arguer cites the fact that the total amount of town residents' recycling twice as much aluminum and paper as they did in previous years. Moveover, the arguer quotes the result of a recent survey about the attitude of residents towards recycling to solidify this prediction. After a careful examination of this argument, I reveal this argument is mainly problematic from three reasons.
In the first place, the conclusion based on an assumption that consultants of West Egg do not take the growth of recycling into account. However, the arguer fails to supply any information about it. In addtion, while it is ture that the consultants fails to consider the increasing of recycling, the arguer also overlook that living garbage is only a part of the total amount of garbage. Without any information of industry garbage, we will hardly can accept the prediction that the total amount of garbage will deline and therefore the space for landfill will last more time than five years.
In the second place, the arguer unfaily assumes that the total amount of garbage is based on the amount of aluminum and paper. We will never accept this claim, unless the arguer could prove that the aluminum and paper garbage is the main garbage and occupies a very large percentage. Although the charges for garbage will double, the arguer does not provide any evidence show that the amount of material recycled will really increase.
Last  but not last, from mentioned about the survey, there are no sign of the proceduce for random sampling. Further, the arguer tells us nothing about the sample size of the survey. If the sample size is small and the preceduce of the sampling is not random, the conclusion that residents in West Egg have strong comitment to recycling will be seriously weakened.
In summary, the arguer's prediction bases on assumption that lacks strick evidence to support. The arguer should gives more information to rule over the industry garbage's influence to total amount of garbage. To better evaluate the result of survey, the arguer should demonstrate the sample size is large enough and the view is representative.

mariaUID: 197971

楼住写完了没有放到word 检查么？

____UID: 186122

本人第一次拍
拍得不好  见谅
还有几天偶也考了
In this memo, the arguer predicts that the available space in West Egg's landfill should last for consdierably longer than predicted. To support this conclusion, the arguer cites the fact that the total amount of town residents' recycling twice as much aluminum and paper as they did in previous years. Moveover, the arguer quotes the result of a recent survey about the attitude of residents towards recycling to solidify this prediction. After a careful examination of this argument, I reveal this argument is mainly problematic from three reasons.
In the first place, the conclusion based[bases] on an assumption that consultants of West Egg do not take the growth of recycling into account. However, the arguer fails to supply any information about it[about which the arguer fails to supply any information]. In addtion, while it is ture that[it is true that 多用来让步] the consultants fails to consider the increasing of recycling, the arguer also overlook [the fact ]that living garbage is only a part of the total amount of garbage. Without any information of industry garbage, we[one or readers ] will[would ] hardly can accept the prediction that the total amount of garbage will deline and therefore the space for landfill will last more time than five years.[ and the result from which the space for landfill wil last more than five years, however, is unbelievable]
In the second place, the arguer unfaily assumes that the total amount of garbage is[ not passive ] based on the amount of aluminum and paper. We will never accept this claim[ this sentanse is so simple and absolute ], unless the arguer could  prove that the aluminum and paper garbage is[ were ??] the main garbage [source]and occupies a very large percentage[ 意思重复了]. Although the charges for garbage will double, the arguer does not provide any evidence show that the amount of material recycled will really increase.[换个句型吧, the possibility that _____is not simply ignored.]
Last but not last[least 本人建议最好不要再用这句 lastly ,finally, Another factor thearguer should have considered is that:] from[according to 正式一点]  [what is ]mentioned about the survey, there are [is]no sign of [in]the proceduce for[ 去掉for illustrating] random sampling. Further, the arguer tells us nothing about the sample size of the survey. If the sample size is small and the preceduce [proceduce]of the sampling is not random, the conclusion that residents in West Egg have strong comitment to recycling will be seriously weakened.[具体说一下 supposing that _____]
In summary, the arguer's prediction bases on [已经是第三次了 用the arguer 作主语试　]assumption that lacks strick[strict???] evidence to support. The arguer should gives more information to rule over[take account of]  the industry garbage's influence to total amount of garbage. To better evaluate the result of survey, the arguer should[不要用should 啦] demonstrate the sample size is large enough and the view is representative.
总的来这篇文章基本指出了argument 的错误
但是 文章词汇略显单调,
  句式不够丰富
很多错误没有展开
句子之间缺少过渡
  一些拼写错误
  要向 站友们多学习
加油吧, 我相信你会作的更好

mariaUID: 197971

In this memo, the arguer predicts that the available space in West Egg's landfill should last for considerably longer than predicted. To support this conclusion, the arguer cites the fact that the total amount of town residents' recycling twice as much aluminum and paper as they did in previous years. Moveover,Moreover the arguer quotes the result of a recent survey about the attitude of residents towards recycling to solidify this prediction. After a careful examination of this argument, I reveal this argument is mainly problematic from three reasons.其实这种开头已经很不提倡了，因为比较浪费时间，还对分数不会有太大作用，当然如果楼主大字很快的话就无所谓了
In the first place, the conclusion based on an assumption that consultants of West Egg do not take the growth of recycling into account. However, the arguer fails to supply any information about it. In addtion, addition while it is ture truethat the consultants fails to consider the increasing of recycling, the arguer also overlooks the factthat living garbage is 去掉is 改为only occupyonly a small part of the total amount of garbage. Without any information of industry garbage, we will hardly cancan去 accept the prediction that the total amount of garbage will deline declineand therefore the space for landfill will last more time than five years.
In the second place, the arguer unfaily unfairly assumes that the total amount of garbage is based on the amount of aluminum and paper. We will never accept this claim, unless the arguer could prove that the aluminum and paper garbage is the main garbage and occupies a very large percentage. Although the charges for garbage will double, the arguer does not provide any evidence show that the amount of material recycled will really increase.
Last but not last, from mentioned about the survey, there are no sign of the proceduce procedure for random sampling. Further, the arguer tells us nothing about the sample size of the survey. If the sample size is small and the preceduce of the sampling is not random, the conclusion that residents in West Egg have strong commitmentcommitment to recycling will be seriously weakened.
In summary, the arguer's prediction bases on assumption that lacks strick strictevidence to support. The arguer should gives givemore information to rule over the industry garbage's influence to total amount of garbage. To better evaluate the result of survey, the arguer should demonstrate the sample size is large enough and the view is representative.
错误找对了，但给人感觉是论述不太充分，可以多考虑写可能性有空的话帮我看看谢谢
https://bbs.gter.net/showthre ... 1325648#post1325648

xin320UID: 165608

非常感谢你们的建议，我已经仔细的看过了。以后的作文中尽量避免类似的错误。
因为是限时写的，没有拿到word里边去改，想充分暴露自己的打字错误。可能给大家的修改添麻烦了，多包涵。maria的文章改过了，____请留下链接。