Argument2 【米国有米】小组第二次作业

cherryshawnUID: 2242691

Argument2 【米国有米】小组第二次作业

2. The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners
from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.

"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set
of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what
colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average
property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property
values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on
landscaping and house painting."

Average property values have tripled due to other alternatives not because of restrictions on how the community’s yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted.
1.      a lot of people in other city come to Brookville for jobs because the economic of this place have developed much , it supply many a opportunity for work..this condition indirectly improve the heighten of the property values.
2.      in addition, the community in Brookville have improved their community service tremendously. For example, new advanced security measure which can ensure the safety  of the lessee to be added to the community service increase cost of the homeowners .therefore they have to elevate the price.
3.      perhaps we ought to consider the inflation of this place.
The thing happened seven years ago may not imply that the increase of average property values will get again in different places.
1.      it is possible that the real estate in Brookville(B) was in the developing state seven years ago. There are enough market space for the homeowners. however in Deerhaven(D) the homeowners may be not so luky as the homeowners in B seven years ago.
2.      Also in reference to the citizen in D, it is possible that they don’t care much about the living condition and focus more energy on cultureal learning after sever years. Therefore eventhough the homeowners in D take the same measure as the homeowners in B, it will not add any help to the increase of the average property values.

The letter to all the homeowners begins by stating that homeowers nearby Brookville(B) unified the color of the homes and restricted the yard’s landscape seven years ago. Then the average property values increased. Therefore the homeowner in Deerhaven(D) resist that they should take the same measure on their homes to boost their property values. The argument seems correct based on increase of average property values due to the restrictions on the painting and the exteriors of homes, but not thoroughly well-reasoned.
Average property values could triple due to other alternatives which the committee of homeowners in D ignored not yet because of restrictions on how the community’s yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Such alternatives may include the truth that a lot of people in other cities came to Bfor jobs because the economy of this place developed much , it would supply many a opportunity of work. It is very natural that the new immigrants would rent or buy houses. This condition indirectly improved the heighten of the property values. In addition, it is possible that the community in B improved their community service tremendously. For example, new advanced security system which can ensure the safety of the lessee to be added to the service increased  the cost of the homeowners. Therefore they have to elevate the rent or the price of the houses. Again we should not omit the developing condition of ecomomy. Perhaps the inflation broke out in Bto make the price arise at the same time.

The thing happened seven years ago may not imply that the same good result, increase of average property values, will abtain again in different places. It is possible that the real estate in B was in the starting state seven years ago. There was immense market space for the real estate industy. However in Dthe homeowners may be not so luky as the homeowners in B seven years ago. Most of the citizen own nice living condition probably. It is unnecessary for them to buy new houses. Also the citizen don’t care much about the living condition and focus more energy on cultural learning after sever years. Or pahaps most of citizen in D are out of work. They can’t afford extra money to buy houses. Eventhough the homeowners in D take the same measure as the homeowners in B, it will not add any help to the increase of average property values.

In conclusion, while the arguments seems very logical at first, it has several defects as discussed above. The committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres should consider the alternative reasons of the increase of average property values in B. Besides that, conditions such as society, economy would change a lot after seven years. Therefore the committee of homeowners in Deerhaven had better evaluate all possible alternatives and design a feasible plan to increase average property values.

chronicleUID: 2254484

Argument2 【米国有米】小组第二次作业

2. The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners
from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.

"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set
of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what
colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average
property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property
values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on
landscaping and house painting."

Average property values have tripled due to other alternatives not because of restrictions on how the community’s yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted.
1.      a lot of people in other city come to Brookville for jobs because the economic of this place have developed much , it supply many a opportunity for work..this condition indirectly improve the heighten of the property values.
2.      in addition, the community in Brookville have improved their community service tremendously. For example, new advanced security measure which can ensure the safety  of the lessee to be added to the community service increase cost of the homeowners .therefore they have to elevate the price.
3.      perhaps we ought to consider the inflation of this place.
The thing happened seven years ago may not imply that the increase of average property values will get again in different places.
1.      it is possible that the real estate in Brookville(B) was in the developing state seven years ago. There are enough market space for the homeowners. however in Deerhaven(D) the homeowners may be not so luky as the homeowners in B seven years ago.
2.      Also in reference to the citizen in D, it is possible that they don’t care much about the living condition and focus more energy on cultureal learning after sever years. Therefore eventhough the homeowners in D take the same measure as the homeowners in B, it will not add any help to the increase of the average property values.

The letter to all the homeowners begins by stating that homeowers nearby Brookville(B) unified the color of the homes and restricted the yard’s landscape seven years ago. Then the average property values increased. Therefore the homeowner in Deerhaven(D) resist (不明白)that they should take the same measure on their homes to boost their property values. The argument seems correct based on increase of average property values due to the restrictions on the painting and the exteriors of homes, but not thoroughly well-reasoned.

Average property values could triple due to other alternatives which the committee of homeowners in D ignored not yet because of (改成rather than)restrictions on how the community’s yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. (有点罗嗦) Such alternatives may include the truth that a lot of people in (from)other cities came to B for jobs because the economy of this place developed much (is much more prosperous than other regions), it would supply many a opportunity of work (work opportunities). It is very natural that the new immigrants would rent or buy houses. This condition indirectly improved the heighten (这是动词，可以改成rising) of the property values. In addition, it is possible that the community in B improved their community service tremendously (不恰当，不如就用significant).For example, new advanced security system which can ensure the safety of the lessee to be added to the service (没看懂) increased  the cost of the homeowners. Therefore they have to elevate the rent or the price of the houses. Again we should not omit the developing condition of ecomomy. Perhaps the inflation broke out in B to make the price arise at the same time.

The thing happened seven years ago may not imply that the same good result, increase of average property values, will abtain (obtain) again in different places. It is possible that the real estate in B was in the starting (beginning) state seven years ago. There was immense market space for the real estate industy (business). However in Dthe homeowners may be not so luky as the homeowners in B seven years ago. Most of the citizen own nice living condition probably. It is unnecessary for them to buy new houses. Also the citizen don’t care much about the living condition and focus more energy on cultural learning after sever years. Or pahaps (重复) most of citizen in D are out of work. They can’t afford extra money to buy houses. Eventhough the homeowners in D take the same measure as the homeowners in B, it will not add any help to the increase of average property values.

In conclusion, while the arguments seems very logical at first (glance), it has several defects as discussed above. The committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres should consider the alternative reasons of the increase of average property values in B. Besides that, conditions such as society, economy would change a lot after seven years. Therefore the committee of homeowners in Deerhaven had better evaluate all possible alternatives and design a feasible plan to increase average property values.

很抱歉，托了这么久才来改。

整篇文章读下来有点费劲，从提纲中可以看出你是想从两个角度来反驳，但在正文中没有体现的很清晰。我的感觉是，你举的反例很多，但没有条理，逻辑性不强，没有体现这些事例之间的关系。比如第三段你想说时间的推移会改变很多，会有其他因素在起作用。而文章中只是提到B在房地产方面潜力很大，之后就说两地居民的注意力和经济情况不同，更多的还是强调两地的差异，显得很散，另外和你的TS不符啊。
此外在结尾段中可以写一些关于如何增强文章说服力的内容，如论者应该给出那些有力的证据来支持他的论点。
以上尽供参考。

zhghuiUID: 2231447

你的 1, 2, 3点 攻击的面比较窄, 只相对与我的第一点.
my views:
1. The price risinng happening after the restriction was adopted doesn't makes it
the direct cause. There might be other variables and causes, such as inflation,
the location of the community and the development of the city.

2. Even if we concede the restriction is one of the cause of price surge in Brookville, It doesn't
show that the restriction will raise property values to Deerhaven. Because there are
variables different from two communities, which may make one community property value
increase but not the other. such as the original condition and style of the houses and the placement
houses in the area.

3. Strictly speaking, the experience in the past is a unwarrent anticipation without
sufficient justification. Nothing in the article makes this justification.

merryjeanUID: 2243650

The letter to all the homeowners begins by stating that homeowners nearby Brookville(B) unified the color of the homes and restricted the yard’s landscape seven years ago. Then (and then) the average property values increased. (我觉得这里复述的时候最好用一句话) Therefore the homeowner in Deerhaven(D) resist that they should take the same measure on their homes to boost their property values. The argument seems correct based on increase of average property values due to the restrictions on the painting and the exteriors of homes, but not thoroughly well-reasoned.

Average property values could triple due to other alternatives, which the committee of homeowners in D ignored not yet because of restrictions on how the community’s yards should be landscaped, and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. ( 这句看了半天才看懂,最后错误还是WORD改正的,建议以后先在WORD里改一遍,不过那样我就更难发现错误了呀) Such alternatives may include the truth that a lot of people in other cities came to B for jobs because the economy of this place developed much, and then it would supply many an opportunity (这是不是个词组啊,许多机会?我不太懂啊,可以肯定的a/an) of work. It is very natural that the new immigrants would rent or buy houses. This condition indirectly improved the heighten of (/) the property values. In addition, it is possible that the community in B improved their community service tremendously. For example, new advanced security system, which can ensure the safety of the lessee to be added to the service, increased the cost of the homeowners. Therefore (多种表达方式,试着变换吧) they have to elevate the rent or the price of the houses. Again we should not omit the developing condition of ecomomy (economy). Perhaps the inflation broke out in B to make the price arise at the same time.

The thing happened seven years ago may (might) not imply that the same good result(s), increase of average property values, will abtain (be obtained) again in different places. It is possible that the real estate in B was in the starting state seven years ago. There was immense market space for the real estate industry. However in D the homeowners may be not so lucky as the homeowners in B seven years ago. Most of the citizen own nice living condition probably. It is unnecessary for them to buy new houses. Also the citizens don’t care much about the living condition and focus more energy on cultural learning after sever years. Or perhaps most of citizen in D are out of work. They can’t afford extra money to buy houses. Even though the homeowners in D take the same measure as the homeowners in B, it will not add (bring) any help to the increase of average property values.

In conclusion, while the arguments seems very logical at first, it has several defects as discussed above. The committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres should consider the alternative reasons of the increase of average property values in B. Besides that, conditions such as society, economy would change a lot after seven years. (第二个观点陈述的是b 和d的可比性,适用与d的不一定适用与b,而非这里所讲的七年可以有很多方面发生了变化,前后对照不上) Therefore the committee of homeowners in Deerhaven had better evaluate all possible alternatives and design a feasible plan to increase average property values.
没有信号词总感觉逻辑性不那么强,呵呵…为了是文章看起来更有条理,还是添上信号词吧!

merryjeanUID: 2243650

呵呵，有很多人帮你改了文章嘛，
别忘了帮我改哦:D

sking_21UID: 2166834

好心人  顺便帮我看看 第一次写作文     510字吧    请大家指教    我心里承受能力好    尽管来吧

谢谢
2The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.

"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of ."


In this argument, the arguer suggests that homeowners should adopt their own set of restriction on landscaping and housepainting in order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres. To justify this claim, the arguer provides the evidence that Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.

In the first place, the argument is based on a hasty generalizition. According to the argument, the author deems that average property values have tripled in Brookville is due to restrictions on landscaping and housepainting. In fact, the property values depends on manifold other factors, such as: convenient traffic, quiet and clean eviroment, medical treatment system in the area, economical development in or near the area, moderate consumption expenditure and so on. Therefore it is possible that uniform landscaping and housepainting just plays a little part in property values increasing or even does not take part in it even though values increasing did happened after the restrications.

Furthermore, even though supposing that D and B are same in the factors mentioned in last paragragh and B average property values increasing was resulted from restrictions, the arguer’s inference that restrictions which were effective in the past will also be effective in the future rest on the poor assumption that during the last 7 years all conditions upon which their effectiveness depend have remained unchanged. In the future, may be the factors will vary to the direction which is disadvantage for appreciation. By any possibility, economic depression will occur; consumption expenditure will increase in this area; medical treatment system development will lag relatively behind other areas which make D be fewer attractive to people and eventually work on property values. Consequently, it is unwarranted to assume that property values will also rise if homeowners adopt their set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting.

Last but not the least, the author fails to consider the feasibility of the conclusion. Because the landscaping belongs to every individual living in the community and housepainting is a part of houseowner’s home, it is possible that not everyone would accept the same landscaping and uniform housepainting on their house walls which he or she doesn’t apprieciate at all. If the community insist on restrications, may be it will incur owner’s antipathy. If owners can’t help moving out D, let alone value rising.

To sum up,the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains.to strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to provide more evidence concerning the restrication is important reason in increasing property and the factors which works on property values will keep in good status in future. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information regarding every individual and houseowners in the community are agreeably to approve the uniform plan.