argument2 [Aspire互改小组]第二次作业

jjjinyUID: 2297865

The problem in Deerhaven Acres
    In this letter, you can see people in Deerhaven Acres want to take the action that adopt their set of restrictions on  landscaping and housepainting in order to raise property values following the place of Brookville. The main reason is as follows: Average property values have tripled in Brookville, and 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.
    A letter was sent by a committee of homeowners from the Beerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres, and a threshold assumptions are set which are not considered comprehensively support this letter's inference.The fundemental one is the same restrictions can cause both the positive effects about property values in Brookville and Deerhaven Acres, which maybe totlely two different siuations. Meanwhile, the committee failed to consider other factors that might cause the change of property values. They just confused the obvious concept that things happened as time goes by is not surely to have relationship with each other.
    Deducing from the letter sent by the committee in Deerhaven Acres, we can get the following view: if some restrictions work well in the place of Brookville, it will surely take effects in Deerhaven Acres. But it's no relationship with each other, for rulls will only take action under a certain environment. A change of enviroment will cause a lot of differences and finally the same restrictions may take totally different effections on different places. So we can't just use other place's policy simply without considering the features of our own place. We should combine others' experience with our own practical conditions.
    Even assuming that the conditions are same in two conturies, the committment rely on additional assuming that average property values have tripled in Brookville are mostly caused by the restrictions which explains how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. In fact, we can't infer it is the restrictions that caused the tripled of average property values in Brookville. Maybe they just happened in different times, and we confuing concurrence with causal relationship. The relationship between the set of restristions and property values may be not the cause and effects, maybe they are just happen at a certain time, and the real reason for the triple of property values is others such as the need of property is significantly promoted in recently years. So we can't just attribute the increasing of average property values to be restrictions set by Brookville community.
    In conclusion, in order to support the idea that we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting, much more details should be reported to prove its feasibility, especially on the environmental differences between Brookville and Deerhaven Acres and the proven that the real causations of the increasing in average property vaules in Brookville are those sets of restrictions.


非常感谢!改得真仔细,谢谢

[ 本帖最后由 jjjiny 于 2007-2-4 20:53 编辑 ]

kito9695UID: 209685

发帖格式错误，请修改~

kooyiiUID: 2177986

应该是:argument2 <aspire互改小组>第N次作业
不用写你的名字~呵呵

kooyiiUID: 2177986

The problem in Deerhaven Acres
    In this letter, you can see people in Deerhaven Acres want to take the action that adopt their set of restrictions on  landscaping and housepainting in order to raise property values following the place of Brookville. The main reason is as follows: Average property values have tripled in Brookville, (前面写的是结果,后面再AND上一个原因,可以么?)and 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(建议开头段应该一针见血的狠狠的指出这篇文章的逻辑错误,不要跟这种傻文章太客气了~).
    A letter was sent by a committee of homeowners from the Beerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres(这句话怎么这么貌似原题目?应该自己改改再写出来~), and a threshold assumptions are set which are not considered comprehensively support this letter's inference.The fundemental(fundamental) one is the same restrictions can cause both the positive effects about property values in Brookville and Deerhaven Acres(不错的句子), which maybe totlely(totally) two different siuations(situation). Meanwhile, the committee failed to consider other factors that might cause the change of property values. They just confused the obvious concept that things happened as time goes by is not surely to have relationship with each other(最后一句话有点难懂,翻成中文后跟我解释下~)(你这一段一下子指了两个逻辑错误).
    Deducing from(没见过的词,不错~) the letter sent by the committee in Deerhaven Acres, we can get the following view: if some restrictions work well in the place of Brookville, it will surely take effects in Deerhaven Acres(这个观点你不是上一段就写了吗?The fundemental one is the same restrictions can cause both the positive effects about property values in Brookville and Deerhaven Acres两句话表达的是同一个意思). But it's no relationship with each other(这里的转折很不连贯), for rulls(rules?) will only take action under a certain environment. A change of enviroment(environment) will cause a lot of differences and finally the same restrictions may take totally different effections on different places. So we can't just use other place's policy simply without considering the features of our own place. We should combine others' experience with our own practical conditions(你后面两句话就象在自言自语,你要批的是这篇文章的逻辑错误,你后面这一大捆就象是事先已经背好了味精加工就抄下去的,原文的一句话都没涉及,这样不好~你想说有其他的原因导致了XX,那你可以把这些原因都列举出来,这样不就有话写了?).
    Even assuming that the conditions are same in two conturies(countries), the committment(commitment) rely on additional assuming that average property values have tripled in Brookville are mostly caused by the restrictions which explains how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted(竟然蹦出了一个GRE阅读的句子,牛~). In fact, we can't infer it is the restrictions that caused the tripled of average property values in Brookville(好象有点语法错误,你自己再看看,我语法弱,不会改). Maybe they just happened in different times, and we confuing concurrence with causal relationship. The relationship between the set of restristions and property values may be not the cause and effects, maybe they are just happen at a certain time, and the real reason for the triple of property values is others such as the need of property is significantly promoted in recently years. So we can't just attribute the increasing of average property values to be restrictions set by Brookville community.
    In conclusion, in order to support the idea that we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting, much more details should be reported to prove its feasibility, especially on the environmental differences between Brookville and Deerhaven Acres and the proven that the real causations of the increasing in average property vaules in Brookville are those sets of restrictions.

1.从我已经读的部分看,有一个明显的缺陷,就是第二三段的观点的重复.你第二段一下子把两个基本点错误挑出来了,有点急,并且又不加以分析,然后第三段又重复了第二段的观点,这样就不得体了~比较理想的写法是:
第一段:开头指出存在错误(记住,要见血)
第二段:A的情况在B那里不一定有相同的效果
第三段:作者排除了他因
......
一个错误列出一段
2.从我已经读的部分看,你的很多论述都没有充分的展开,当然,第一次写,有什么问题都是正常的~这些都是有待加强的~
3.似乎存在风格的不一致~如果参照了某些文章,你应该尽量的把那些句子翻成中文,然后用自己的话写出来~再对比之间的差距~而不是单纯的CCOPY~
4.错别字:这个...建议以后写完后放到WORD里检查一下再放上来~你的错误情况大概都是多打了一个T或者把M打成N这种,注意下就好~不过你没有检查过拼写,竟然只错了那么几个,让我很佩服啊~
5.用词:显得比较单调~比如restrictions,比如totally,restrictions这个词本来我是不认识的,翻来覆去的看,最后没办法,崩溃了,就把这个词记住了~
对某些关键的词可以尝试多换换~

你现在最主要的还是把逻辑文章的套路搞清楚,每个错误用一段搞定~一定程度上来说,ARG比ISSUE更容易拿分,因为他的套路比较死~so....+u咯~
你后面的我还没看,我赶车,呵呵~晚上回来继续看看~

[ 本帖最后由 kooyii 于 2007-2-15 13:49 编辑 ]

jjjinyUID: 2297865

谢谢!我写的第一篇argument 以前觉得思路还清晰,真正到自己一写就乱了...
谢谢批改! 共同进步