argument36 第一篇，望点拨

unique_wruiUID: 2148589

36.The following appeared in an article written by Dr. Karp, an anthropologist.



"Twenty years ago Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia and concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. However, my recent interviews with children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia show that these children spend much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. This research proves that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture is false, and thus that the observation-centered approach to studying cultures is invalid. Because they are using the interview-centered method, my team of graduate students working in Tertia will establish a much more accurate understanding of child-rearing traditions there and in other island cultures."

20年前著名人类学家Field博士访问了Tertia岛，并从他的观察得出结论：Tertia的儿童是由整个村庄的人抚养长大的而不是由他们的双亲。然而，我最近对包含Tertia的一组岛屿上生活的儿童的采访显示，这些儿童的谈话中谈到他们双亲的时间要远多于谈到村庄中其他成年人的时间。这个研究证实了Field博士关于Tertia村庄文化的结论是错误的，因而这种以观察为中心的研究文化的方法是无效的。由于我在Tertia工作的研究生们所用的是以采访为中心的方式，他们将对那里以及其他岛屿文化的儿童抚养传统建立精确的多的了解。


By quoting the evidence that the children living in Tertia talked more about their parent than other adult in the village, the arguer claimed that the conclusion drawn by doctor Field is invalid, and furthermore the arguer made his conclusion that interview is a better method than observation when it comes to understanding island cultures. This assumption seems to be true in some case, but based on a incomprehensive analysis and insufficient evidence, it has several suspicious facets as follows.

The threshold problem of this argument is that the evidence supplied by the arguer lends no substantial support to the arguer' s recommendation. Fist the readers just can not find out how many children is involved in the survey. If the amount of the children is a relatively very small number compared to the total number of the whole village, the survey is of no use to convince the readers. Secondly, giving that the representation of the survey is out of question,   the fact that  children talked more about their parent than other people does not indicate that they were not adopted by an entire village. It is entirely possible that they were adopted by the whole village but lived with their parents and as a result talking more about their parents. In sum lacking supplementary  evidence to ruling out the two flaws above, the arguer's conclusion which stands on a unwarranted survey is lack strength,

In addition, the arguer acclaims that the observation-centered approach to studying culture is invalid.  In drawing this conclusion, it is  
tacitly assumed by the arguer that a  method which is invalid to establish the understanding of island culture is invalid when understanding all cultures. But in this argument no evidence was supplied to verify this recommendation.  For example, when studying the taboos  of a certain region, how will the interview help us? Perhaps the people involved in the interview will not say any world when the author ask the question related with the very information he wanted. In this situation, if it was, observation is a better choice anyway.

Even if the this survey is of no flaw and interview-centered approach is truly a better method, the conclusion made by the arguer that the interview-centered approach will establish a more accurate goal in other islands is weaken by several questions. Lacking evidence to show that all the islands are of the same geographical conditions, the same culture origin, the same kind of personality of people, it is possible that the people in other island do not like to talk more with the strangers or the graduate students just do not understand what they say because of a language barrier.

In conclusion,  this argument is not well reasoned considering all the weak facet above, before the conclusion is made, the arguer should pay more attention to the representation of the survey and persuade the readers that all the island is of the same or at least approximately condition, and moreover, the arguer should not over-generalize a certain "better" approach in understanding a certain culture to a all cultures.


第一篇，只会套模版，写完帖到world里面一看，虽然早有准备但仍然深受打击，红的一片啊，而且花费的时间也超出很多，真郁闷，忘好心人指点

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-12-12 at 23:36 ]

gtrandUID: 2156108

不错，问题都抓住了，分析得也入理。

gtrandUID: 2156108

　　　By quoting the evidence that the children living in Tertia talked more about their parent(s) than other adult(s) in the village, the arguer claimed(claims) that the conclusion drawn by doctor Field is invalid,(。应该断句)and furthermore the arguer made his conclusion The author also concludesthat interview is a better method than observation when it comes to understanding island cultures. This assumption seems to be true in some case, but based on a incomprehensive analysis and insufficient evidence, it has several suspicious facets as follows. The argument, appearing to be plausible at first glance, has several flaws such as questionable assumptions, incomprehensive analysis and insufficient evidence. 要攻击的是结论及其论证过程，不仅仅是assumption。


　　　The threshold problem of this argument is that the evidence supplied by the arguer lends no substantial support to the arguer' s recommendation. Fist (Firstly,) the readers just can not find out how many children is (are) involved in the survey. If the amount (number--amount是不可数名词) of the childreninterviewed is a relatively very small number compared to the total number of (children in) the whole village, the survey is of no use to convince the readers. (hardly representative. 不能绝对说一点用都没有）Secondly, giving that the representation of the survey is out of question,   the fact that  children talked more about their parent(s) than other people does not indicate that they were not adopted by an entire village. It is entirely possible that they were adopted by the whole village but lived with their parents and as a result talking more about their parents.(这个反驳有点牵强，adopt应该包括与adopters一起生活的意思。because they were adopted by other adults they missed their parents so much that they talked about them most of the time. In sum (,) lacking supplementary  evidence to ruling out the two flaws above, the arguer's conclusion which stands on a unwarranted survey is lack strength, (与第一句重复，可以不要）
　　In addition, the arguer acclaims　用词错误。claims that the observation-centered approach to studying culture is invalid.  In drawing this conclusion, it is  
tacitly assumed by the arguer that a  method which is invalid to establish the understanding of island culture is invalid when understanding all cultures. But in this argument no evidence was supplied to verify this recommendation (assumption).  For example, when studying we study the taboos  of a certain region, how will (would)the interview help us? Perhaps the people involved in the interview will (would)not say any world (words) when the author ask the question (多余）　related with the very information he　(the interviewer)　 wanted. In this situation, if it was, observation is (might be) a better choice anyway.

Even if the this survey is of no flaw and (the)interview-centered approach is truly a better method (in this case), the conclusion made by the arguer that the interview-centered (this)approach will establish a more accurate goal (understanding)in other islands is weaken by several questions. Lacking evidence to show that all the islands are of the same geographical conditions, the same culture origin, the same kind of personality of people, it is possible that the people in other island(s) do not like to talk more with the strangers or the graduate students just do not understand what they say because of a language barrier.

In conclusion,  this argument is not well reasoned considering (because of)all the weak facet (flaws mentioned)above, (.断句）before (Before)the conclusion is made, the arguer should pay more attention to the representation of the survey and persuade the readers that all the island (islands)is are of the same or at least approximately condition(s),(.断句) and moreover (Moreover), the arguer should not over-generalize by asserting that a certain "better" approach in understanding a certain culture to a (approach which is found to be more useful in understanding a certian culture would be always better than other methods in underistandng) all cultures.


     越读越觉得是一篇好文章。英文、逻辑、结构都很不错。If I were the ETS reader, I would give a score of ----- 5.5, haha.
     在论证访谈未必比观察好的那段里还可以加进一个论点：任何观察的结果如果有缺点，至少可以从两个方面找原因，要么观察方法不适用于这种情况，要么就是观察者的方法有问题。即使以前那位老先生的观察是错误的，也不能断定观察方法不适用。
　　原主张还有一个可以攻击的地方，即原来的结论是２０年前得出的，后来的情况可能发生了变化，小孩仍改归父母抚养了。

[ Last edited by gtrand on 2005-12-13 at 01:19 ]

unique_wruiUID: 2148589

多谢gtrand， 自己找自己的错误真是太难了，现在有一种豁然开朗的感觉，实在感谢

第一篇，感觉词汇问题相当严重，而且反驳的论据也不容易想出来，楼上真是细心，连单复数都改了，感动ing,

不过有个问题想探讨一下，就是那个关于adopt与live的例子，我觉得adopt应该指经济，教育等方面的抚养，可以不包括住在一起，不过，听了楼上的话，感觉也有道理，真不知类似的例子以后还能不能用

gtrandUID: 2156108

听说过以色列的基布兹（集体农庄）吗？长期以来，那里的儿童就由集体抚养，与父母分开居住和生活。当然３０多年前基布兹开始改革，其中包括孩子回归家庭。不过我想说的重点还不在这里，而是我认为在反驳时没有必要在字面上纠缠，提出一个本身会引起新争议的论点来。