argument220 吧啦吧啦吧啦拍！

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

Argument220  第1篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：吱吱     共用时间：30分2秒     474 words/ 489words after revised
从2005年3月5日22时57分到2005年3月5日23时30分
------题目------
The following appeared in an article in a magazine for writers.
'A recent study showed that in describing a typical day's conversation, people make an average of 23 references to watching television and only 1 reference to reading fiction. This result suggests that, compared with the television industry, the publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability. Therefore, people who wish to have careers as writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television rather than for print media.'
------正文------
In this article, the author recommends that people who want to be writers should acquire training and experience for television rather than for print media, according to a recent study describing that people during the conversation people refer to television more times than to reading fiction. However, based on unsubstantial evidence, this argument is not cogent.

The threshold problems is whether the study is acceptable. No detailed information is provided about how many responders joined in the study, whether the sample is big and reprehensive enough for the investigation and so forth. It could be entirely possible that most of the responders are working in the television station, or it might be the case that only one person takes the study. Without providing more evidence about the study, the study is not convincing.

Next, even if the study makes sense, it does not necessarily suggest that compared with the television industry, the profit of publishing and bookselling will decline. As we all knows, publishing and bookselling industry is not merely constitute with producing fiction, but contains more forms of books, such as reference books, textbooks, magazines and so on. No data has been provided to show the decline of the whole industry of publishing and bookselling. Without evidence to strengthen the assertion, the author could not reasonably conclude that the television industry is making more profit than publishing and bookselling industry.

At the same time, even though the profit of publishing and bookselling industry has declined, the author could neither draw a conclusion that profit of the television industry is higher than that of publishing and booksellings. It might be the case that although people talk about television conspicuously or suspiciously, they do not really pay money into the television industry. In addition, mentioning to the profit, the author should take consideration of comprehensive factors, such as the cost, the expenses, and the income and so on. Unless the author finds these facts, he/she could not assert that the profit of television industry is higher than that of publishing and booksellings.

Finally, suppose that the market of television industry has more brilliant prospect than that of publishing and booksellings, the author could not hastily recommends people who want to be writers should receive trainings and experience of television rather than that of print media. It could be possible that most writers have a goal of writing fictions and finally publish them, how could the author arbitrarily neglect their ideals and recommend their career just for money? It also could be possible that even if the writers receive the training and experience for television industry, they could not earn much money because of the fierce competition in the television realm.

In conclusion, this argument is not convincing because it is first based on an unsubstantial study and then supported by poor evidence. Unless the author provides us more detailed information about the discussed issues, this argument is not persuasive.

龙非UID: 193190

占个座先

鬼谷子UID: 159645

唉，占一个

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

高兴的进来了
原来都是沙发 而且某鬼占座的时候还挺惆怅的样子 :mad:

我等着，，，，，，，，，，谢一个的先

龙非UID: 193190

------题目------
The following appeared in an article in a magazine for writers.
'A recent study showed that in describing a typical day's conversation, people make an average of 23 references to watching television and only 1 reference to reading fiction. This result suggests that, compared with the television industry, the publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability. Therefore, people who wish to have careers as writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television rather than for print media.'
------正文------
In this article, the author recommends that people who want to be writers should acquire training and experience for television rather than for print media, according to a recent study describing that people during the conversation people refer to television more times than to reading fiction. However, based on unsubstantial evidence, this argument is not cogent.

The threshold problems is whether the study is acceptable. No detailed information is provided about how many responders joined in the study, whether the sample is big and reprehensive enough for the investigation and so forth. It could be entirely possible that most of the responders are working in the television station, or it might be the case that only one person“只有一个人参加study”，不要举例这么极端，反而显得说服力不够，何况题目中用的是people make ...，本身是复数来的。 takes the study. Without providing more evidence about the study, the study is not convincing.

Next, even if the study makes sense, it does not necessarily suggest that compared with the television industry, the profit of publishing and bookselling will decline. As we all knows, publishing and bookselling industry is not merely constitute with producing fiction, but contains more forms of books, such as reference books, textbooks, magazines and so on. No data has been provided to show the decline of the whole industry of publishing and bookselling. Without evidence to strengthen the assertion, the author could not reasonably conclude that the television industry is making more profit than publishing and bookselling industry. 这一段驳得还比较表面，只是举了一个反例，而其实还有很多例子可以举出来驳斥，这样就会显得有力多了，比如谈论的多并不能说明就是看电视看得多，可能只是因为电视节目相对来说较少，大家看的都是同样的节目，所以共同话题就多了，而书则比较多，每个人看得都不一样，所以共同话题较少，提到的也就少了。如果是这样的话，并不能说明出版业利润下降了。

At the same time, even though the profit of publishing and bookselling industry has declined, the author could neither draw a conclusion that profit of the television industry is higher than that of publishing and booksellings. It might be the case that although people talk about television conspicuously or suspiciously, they do not really pay money into the television industry. In addition, mentioning to the profit, the author should take consideration of comprehensive factors, such as the cost, the expenses, and the income and so on. Unless the author finds these facts, he/she could not assert that the profit of television industry is higher than that of publishing and booksellings.这一段不好，一来题目并没有明确说profit of the television industry is higher than that of publishing and booksellings，二来这一段就没说清楚，比如“although people talk about television conspicuously or suspiciously, they do not really pay money into the television industry”就不知所云，怎样才叫pay money into the television industry？而一个行业的利润简单地说什么要考虑成本、收入之类的东西显得很泛，如果一个商店的利润扯这些东西还可以。因此，总的来说，这一段不如不要。

Finally, suppose that the market of television industry has more brilliant prospect than that of publishing and booksellings, the author could not hastily recommends people who want to be writers should receive trainings and experience of television rather than that of print media. It could be possible that most writers have a goal of writing fictions and finally publish them, how could the author arbitrarily neglect their ideals and recommend their career just for money? It also could be possible that even if the writers receive the training and experience for television industry, they could not earn much money because of the fierce competition in the television realm.还有一点可以增加的就是，即使是电视行业的利润高，不代表电视作家的利润高，可能大部分收入都让导演啊，主角啊等其他人给拿去了。

In conclusion, this argument is not convincing because it is first based on an unsubstantial study and then supported by poor evidence. Unless the author provides us more detailed information about the discussed issues, this argument is not persuasive.

boyjimUID: 125249

zhizhi~~~~~~~~~:D

boyjimUID: 125249

龙哥看得挺详细的了~俺的意见比他的还少~嘻嘻

枫丹UID: 166492

Argument220 第1篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：吱吱 共用时间：30分2秒 474 words/ 489words after revised
从2005年3月5日22时57分到2005年3月5日23时30分
------题目------
The following appeared in an article in a magazine for writers.
'A recent study showed that in describing a typical day's conversation, people make an average of 23 references to watching television and only 1 reference to reading fiction. This result suggests that, compared with the television industry, the publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability. Therefore, people who wish to have careers as writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television rather than for print media.'
------正文------
In this article, the author recommends that people who want to be writers should acquire training and experience for television rather than for print media, according to a recent study describing that people during the conversation people refer to television more times than to reading fiction. However, based on unsubstantial evidence, this argument is not cogent.

The threshold problems is whether the study is acceptable. No detailed information is provided about how many responders joined in the study, whether the sample is big and reprehensive enough for the investigation and so forth. It could be entirely possible that most of the responders are working in the television station,我觉的你的这个假设过分夸张了，说清楚它没有代表性，取样不够全面就可以了吧 or it might be the case that only one person takes the study. Without providing more evidence about the study, the study is not convincing.

Next, even if the study makes sense, it does not necessarily suggest that compared with the television industry, the profit of publishing and bookselling will decline. As we all knows,know publishing and bookselling industry is not merely constituteconstituted with producing fiction, but contains more forms of books, such as reference books, textbooks, magazines and so on. No data has been provided to show the decline of the whole industry of publishing and bookselling. Without evidence to strengthen the assertion, the author could not reasonably conclude that the television industry is making more profit than publishing and bookselling industry. 其实提到的次数少不一定看的少， 看的少不一定会使出版业利益下降，中间存在两层关系

At the same time, even though the profit of publishing and bookselling industry has declined, the author could neither draw a conclusion that profit of the television industry is higher than that of publishing and booksellings. It might be the case that although people talk about television conspicuously or suspiciously, they do not really pay money into the television industry. In addition, mentioning to the profit, the author should take consideration of comprehensive factors, such as the cost, the expenses, and the income and so on. Unless the author finds these facts, he/she could not assert that the profit of television industry is higher than that of publishing and booksellings.似乎这一段被题目误导了，还是在驳斥上个驳斥点， 但是两层关系绞在一起了，是不是呢？

Finally, suppose that the market of television industry has more brilliant prospect than that of publishing and booksellings, the author could not hastily recommends people who want to be writers should receive trainings and experience of television rather than that of print media. It could be possible that most writers have a goal of writing fictions and finally publish them, how could the author arbitrarily neglect their ideals and recommend their career just for money? It also could be possible that even if the writers receive the training and experience for television industry, they could not earn much money because of the fierce competition in the television realm.题目暗示为电视写作->带来收入， 是不是应该点明呢？

In conclusion, this argument is not convincing because it is first based on an unsubstantial study and then supported by poor evidence. Unless the author provides us more detailed information about the discussed issues, this argument is not persuasive.
结尾似乎过于笼统了，不过这是小问题

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

谢谢龙非和枫丹

时间紧迫 不仔细回复了 意见很好 都看了 慢慢研究中
jim你干啥乐成那样？我最近只准备发阿狗上来 然后由鬼鬼和龙非，jim三个人改就足够了。谢谢先。

是在没时间回拍了

枫丹你啥时候考？要是在我后面的话，这个砖头我先压着，以后还。谢谢批改：）

boyjimUID: 125249

zhizhi的啊狗其实写得挺好的了！别紧张就好了！一休的题破完了没？

apolloxpUID: 156355

Argument220 第1篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
------摘要------
作者：吱吱 共用时间：30分2秒 474 words/ 489words after revised
从2005年3月5日22时57分到2005年3月5日23时30分
------题目------
The following appeared in an article in a magazine for writers.
'A recent study showed that in describing a typical day's conversation, people make an average of 23 references to watching television and only 1 reference to reading fiction. This result suggests that, compared with the television industry, the publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability. Therefore, people who wish to have careers as writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television rather than for print media.'
------正文------
In this article, the author recommends that people who want to be writers should acquire training and experience for television rather than for print media, according to based on应该会更确切些 a recent study describing that people during the conversation people refer to television more times than to reading fiction. 这个。。。自己看看从句的语法，两个people得删掉一个 However, based on unsubstantial evidence, this argument is not cogent.

The threshold problems 多s is whether the study is acceptable. No detailed information is provided about how many responders joined in the study, whether the sample is big and reprehensive ？？？ enough for the investigation and so forth. It could be entirely possible that most of the responders are working in the television station, or it might be the case that only one person takes the study. 不太会这样吧 Without providing more evidence 不是证据是细节details/information不然将不通 about the study, the study is not convincing.

Next, even if the study makes sense, it does not necessarily suggest that compared with the television industry, the profit of publishing and bookselling will decline. As we all knows 多s, publishing and bookselling industry is not merely constitute with 没见过这个用法，另外constitute是及物动词！ producing fiction, but contains more forms of books, such as reference books, textbooks, magazines and so on. No data has been provided to show the decline of the whole industry of publishing and bookselling. Without evidence to strengthen the assertion, the author could not reasonably conclude that the television industry is making more profit than publishing and bookselling industry.

At the same time 这个词组应该不表示逻辑上的并列或转折，只表示时间的吧，有点中式英语了, even though the profit of publishing and bookselling industry has declined, the author could neither draw a conclusion that profit of the television industry is higher than that of publishing and booksellings. It might be the case that although people talk about television conspicuously or suspiciously, they do not really pay money into the television industry. 比如不看收费频道？这里可以再深入一点 In addition, mentioning to the profit, the author should take consideration of comprehensive factors, such as the cost, the expenses, and the income and so on. Unless the author finds these facts, he/she could not assert that the profit of television industry is higher than that of publishing and booksellings.

Finally, suppose that the market of television industry has more brilliant prospect than that of publishing and booksellings, the author could not hastily recommends people who want to be writers should receive trainings and experience of television rather than that of print media. It could be possible that most writers have a goal of writing fictions and finally publish them, how could the author arbitrarily neglect their ideals and recommend their career just for money? It also could be possible that even if the writers receive the training and experience for television industry, they could not earn much money because of the fierce competition in the television realm.这段稍好，但引文好像有点长

In conclusion, this argument is not convincing because it is first based on an unsubstantial study and then supported by poor evidence. Unless the author provides us more detailed information about the discussed issues, this argument is not persuasive.

中规中举吧，不过
1、有些小错误自己要注意
2、句式稍显单一
3、b2 b3是不是合并了好？都是讲利润问题的
4、论证不算太深入
加油哦！

victoriazhizhiUID: 163135

噢！！！！！
谢谢菠萝