Argument109 同主题，找拍

cane004UID: 2110633

A-109
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Maple City newspaper.
"Twenty years ago Pine City established strict laws designed to limit the number of new buildings that could be constructed in the city. Since that time the average housing prices in Pine City have increased considerably. Chestnut City, which is about the same size as Pine City, has over the past twenty years experienced an increase in average housing prices similar to Pine City, but Chestnut City never established any laws that limit new building construction. So it is clear that laws limiting new construction have no effect on average housing prices. So if Maple City were to establish strict laws that limit new building construction, these laws will have no effect on average housing prices."

翻译：
20年前Pine City建立了严格的法令来限制该市未来建造的高层建筑的数量。从那以后Pine City的平均房价显著上涨。和Pine City差不多同等规模的Chestnut City在过去20年中经历了和Pine City类似的房价上涨，但Chestnut City从未建立任何限制高层建筑的法令。因此限制建造高层建筑的法令对于平均房价没有影响。所以如果Maple City建立限制新的高层建筑的法令的话，这种法令不会影响平均房价。

提纲：
a. 20年前的数据不能说明以后的情况，毕竟时代不同了，everything is changing。
b. 并未阐述地价提高的根本原因，inflation&devaluation of currency, 地产市场, 规定与地价之间的关系不令人信服
c. P有限制地价提高，C无限制地价同样提升，类比并不能说明法规是否有效，两城市存在种种差别，同理M也应该具体情况具体分析
In this advice letter, The author asserts that Pine City and Chesnut City experienced a similar increasing in average housing prices in past 20 years. Pine City printed a number restrict law of new buildings, while Chesnut City did not. Thus the author concludes that laws to limit new constructions have no effect on average housing prices, and they are absolutely meaningless for Maple City to establish. The conclusion sounds logical and reasonable at first glance, but if we examine it more carefully, we will find out several critical flaws as follows:

Firstly, it is ill-convinced and dubious to infer the effectiveness in the future by historical statistics in past 20 years. As an old saying goes: "Time passes and the situation has changed”, the market circumstance may be totally different to which in 20 years before, so an effective law before is probably weakened by the time going.
Secondly, the relation between restrict law and price increase is not well supported and cogently proved. The author should point out all the causal reasons of the rising of average housing prices, in order to roll out the influence of restrict law. To be frank, assuming some detailed information about how and in what quantity the law increase the average housing value is presented by anyone, the author's conclusion would be undermined.
Finally, although Pine City and Chesnut City are similar in size as the author referred,  the situation of Pine City and Chesnut City may be various in other aspects, such as the geographic condition and the consumers' purchasing desire.  In another words, if Pine City might lay on a plain, and there is no limit for new building, land agents are likely to construct excessive buildings and reversely to sold in lower prices; meanwhile, if Chesnut City lay on a mountainous region, there is not enough valid space to build so many buildings. Therefore, the analogy between the two cities can not lend credible to evaluation of the restrict law.
In sum up, it is presumptuous to judge the limit law in Maple City, just by a superficial analogy of two other cities, ignoring their dissimilarities.

[ 本帖最后由 staralways 于 2006-2-25 23:53 编辑 ]

小室黄瓜UID: 2155213

翻译：
20年前Pine City建立了严格的法令来限制该市未来建造的高层建筑的数量。从那以后Pine City的平均房价显著上涨。和Pine City差不多同等规模的Chestnut City在过去20年中经历了和Pine City类似的房价上涨，但Chestnut City从未建立任何限制高层建筑的法令。因此限制建造高层建筑的法令对于平均房价没有影响。所以如果Maple City建立限制新的高层建筑的法令的话，这种法令不会影响平均房价。

提纲：
a. 20年前的数据不能说明以后的情况，毕竟时代不同了，everything is changing。
b. 并未阐述地价提高的根本原因，inflation&devaluation of currency, 地产市场, 规定与地价之间的关系不令人信服
c. P有限制地价提高，C无限制地价同样提升，类比并不能说明法规是否有效，两城市存在种种差别，同理M也应该具体情况具体分析
In this advice letter, The author asserts that Pine City and Chesnut City experienced a similar increasing in average housing prices in past 20 years. Pine City printed a number restrict law of new buildings, while Chesnut City did not. Thus the author concludes that laws to limit new constructions have no effect on average housing prices, and they are absolutely meaningless for Maple City to establish. The conclusion sounds logical and reasonable at first glance, but if we examine it more carefully, we will find out several critical flaws as follows:（开头的这种冗繁的restate已经被很多人尽量避免来用了。至于为什么，精华贴中有关于这个的文章，我觉得你有必要看看。）

Firstly, it is ill-convinced and dubious to infer the effectiveness in the future by historical statistics in past 20 years. As an old saying goes: "Time passes and the situation has changed”,这个引用俗语的方法我第一次见，很好！很新颖。也能说明问题，但最好再说一句，或把这句加长来说，就是填上与论点的联系。 the market circumstance may be totally different to which in 20 years before, so an effective law before is probably weakened by the time going.开头的句子既然表明观点就应该用你的分析和充足的论据论证。你明显没有展开论述。这点问题非常大。很多人都会写你说的这一个观点，多看看别人写得，你就知道你自己应该怎么展开了。（另外！！段与段要空格，要不格式不对，很多人不会给你改得。要注意哦！！）

Secondly, the relation between restrict law and price increase is not well supported and cogently proved. The author should point out all the causal reasons of the rising of average housing prices，in order to roll out the influence of restrict law. To be frank, assuming some detailed information about how and in what quantity the law increase the average housing value is presented by anyone, the author's conclusion would be undermined. 这段也是展开的问题，即使你的观点很整确也没有说服力。而且注意一下你所找的错误的顺序，哪个先说哪个后说也是很重要的要深思熟虑的问题。既然你说的理由这么少还不如把这段放到后面，因为你的结构没有清晰的递进关系在里面。这个非常重要！

Finally, although Pine City and Chesnut City are similar in size as the author referred,  the situation of Pine City and Chesnut City may be various in other aspects, such as the geographic condition and the consumers' purchasing desire.  In another words,（没有必要再重复分论点） if Pine City might lay on a plain, and there is no limit for new building, land agents are likely to construct excessive buildings and reversely to sold in lower prices; meanwhile, if Chesnut City lay on a mountainous region, there is not enough valid space to build so many buildings. Therefore, the analogy between the two cities can not lend credible to evaluation of the restrict law.

In sum up, it is presumptuous to judge the limit law in Maple City, just by a superficial analogy of two other cities, ignoring their dissimilarities.其实结尾说的多一点比开头好，开头尽量简洁，结尾可以说一些正确的方法，就是你跳的作者的错误有没有改进的地方？

总的来说，问题很大，但刚开头都是这样，别灰心，多看看别人写的，在积极地修改自己和别人的，一定有很大进步！！

小室黄瓜UID: 2155213

早就改完了，一直进不来，没改成红色，不好意思。希望对你有用