argument2 [米国有米] 第二次作业 求拍!

blackswitchUID: 2110679

Argument 2
提纲： 1 没有充分的理由说明是restriction 导致房价的上升
       2 两个地区的情况是不相同的
The committee of homeowners recommends that they should adopt a set of restriction in landscaping and housepainting such as the nearly Brookville community assume, because the Brookville’s average property values have tripled after adopting the set of restriction. In my view, there is no enough convince to show that the set of restriction necessarily result in the same increase of property values in Deerhaven

First of all, the arguer commits a fallacy of “after this, there because of this ”in assuming that adopting a set of restrictions regarding the landscaping of yards and the painting of the exteriors of homes has resulted in the increase of property values in Brookville. There is no doubt the increase of property values in Brookville. occurred after they adopt a set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting But this does not mean that the increase of the property values contribute to the set of restrictions. The values of the property were determined by a various of factors including social, economical, political influence. Maybe a new factory was built in Brookville thereby the needs of the house modified rapidly. Maybe the government imposes more taxes on using land for building house, because of this, the rate of new house increasing is lower than before and the property value grow.

Even if it is the set of restriction on landscaping and houspainting leads to the increase of property values in Brookville., the arguer provides no evidence to substantiate this policy can put into effect in Deerhaven such as in Brookville.. Do the potential the buyers of the two communities have similar favor? Perhaps the inhabitant in Brookville like painted house but the residents in Deerhaven do not like painted house. Therefore, the price of the having been painted house will decrease in Deerhaven. In addition, the increase of property value in Brookville happened in several years ago, so ,the case can not necessarily happened at present time given that some conditions influencing the property values have changed.

In sum, to persuade me that the implement of these restrictions would necessarily make the property values in Deerhaven rise, the arguer must supply sufficient evidence that the increase of the property values in Brookville owes to the application of these restrictions ,not other factor. Also provide evidence that the two areas have the same social, economical and political environment which would affect the property values.

foroneUID: 2273159

  The committee of homeowners recommends that they should adopt a set of restriction[可数restrictions] in landscaping and housepainting such as the nearly Brookville community assume[应该为such as the nearby Brookville community does], because the Brookville’s average property values have tripled after adopting the set of restriction[同上]. In my view, there is no enough convince[convince是动词] to show that the set of restriction[同上] necessarily result in the same increase of property values in Deerhaven

  First of all, the arguer commits a fallacy of “after this, there because of this ”in assuming that adopting a set of restrictions regarding the landscaping of yards and the painting of the exteriors of homes has resulted in the increase of property values in Brookville.[这句当中出现了和上段末句相同的result in换其他的词是不是更好.such as account for] There is no doubt the increase of property values in Brookville. occurred after they adopt a set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting But this does not mean that the increase of the property values contribute to the set of restrictions. The values of the property were determined by a various[variety] of factors including social, economical[economic], political influence[influences多种]. Maybe a new factory was built in Brookville thereby the needs of the house modified rapidly[modify搭配rapidly用的有问题]. Maybe the government imposes more taxes on using land for building house, because of this[which], the[increasing放这] rate of new house increasing is lower than before and the property value[values] grow.

分析得挺好,动词时态用得有点乱,单复数要注意

  Even if it is the set of restriction on landscaping and houspainting leads to the increase of property values in Brookville., the arguer provides no evidence to substantiate this policy can put into effect in Deerhaven such as in[like] Brookville.. Do the potential the buyers of the two communities have similar favor? Perhaps the inhabitant in Brookville like painted house but[用while好] the residents in Deerhaven do not like painted house. Therefore, the price of the having been[多余,去掉] painted house will decrease in Deerhaven. In addition, the increase of property value in Brookville happened in several years ago, so ,the case[直接which代替,简洁] can not necessarily happened at present time given that some conditions influencing the property values have changed.小问题:单复数问题,动词时态问题,--习作者亲手找找

  In sum, to persuade me that the implement of these restrictions would necessarily make the property values in Deerhaven rise, the arguer must supply sufficient evidence that the increase of the property values in Brookville owes[owe] to the application of these restrictions ,not other factor[factors]. Also provide evidence that the two areas have the same social, economical and political environment which would affect the property values.[这句话没主语了]

总的来说,逻辑错误分析呈述都很到位,但语言上有待加强

[ 本帖最后由 forone 于 2006-11-26 16:20 编辑 ]