arguement17【076G－背水一战小组】第四小组skysijie第二次作业

SkysijieUID: 2233317

个人觉得字数太少了，但想了半天也不知道该怎么改，请大家帮忙

ARGUMENT17- The following appeared in a letter to the editor of theWalnut Grove townnewspaper. "Walnut Grove'stown council has advocatedswitching from EZ Disposal (which has had thecontract for trashcollection services in Walnut Grove for the past ten years)to ABCWaste, because EZ recently raised its monthly fee from $2,000 to $2,500a month, whereas ABC's fee is still$2,000. But the town council ismistaken; we should continue using EZ. EZcollects trash twice a week,while ABC collects only once. Moreover, EZ-which,like ABC, currentlyhas a fleet of 20 trucks-has ordered additional trucks.Finally, EZprovides exceptional service: 80 percent of respondents to lastyear'stown survey agreed that they were 'satisfied' with EZ's performance."

1．  TC真的仅仅因为EZ收费变高，而ABC没有涨价而不用EZ的吗？不是的
1）  EZ一直使用十年前的垃圾处理技术，给环境带来污染，而ABC采用先进的循环处理技术，不仅不污染环境，还可以使废物循环再利用

2． EZ的涨价真的合理吗？不是的
1）  十年前也是同样的价格同样的服务，但是为什么现在要多收500？
2） 就算EZ改进了服务，但是真的需要多收500吗？很可能200已足够
  
3． 作者给出的3个论据真的就毫无瑕疵吗？不是的
1）  有必要一周两次的频率吗？很可能TC并没有那么多的垃圾
2） 定购的这些车的车况都好吗？
3） 调查是很客观的吗？

Word: 404

This argument presents above is reasonably sound, however, the author fails to recognize all elements necessary to evaluate his situation. The position that EZ Disposal (EZ) should be used continually to collect the trash of Walnut Grove’s (WG) town hardly can convince me to have the same determination.

To begin with, the author fails to analyzethe question that town council (TC) make the decision that switching from EZ to ABC Waste merely depends on the EZ’s price has risen from $2000 to $2500 a month.It is probably has another reason. Perhaps, EZ still using traditional technology, which takes method of burying the trash into earth, to dispose the crash of WG. By doing this, it would be do harm to environment of WG. Meanwhile, ABC is using the latest technology,which disposes trash circularly, to reduce the pollution and advance the rate of use of castoff. In brief, I cannot make any decision without information about the technology EZ used.

In an addition, I want to query that it is reasonable to raise charge from the point of EZ. It is obvious that EZ providethe same service to WG with the same pride -2000 a month-in the last 10 years. At the same time, it is ambiguous that the reason why EZ has to raise to 2500 amonth to provide the same service as well as the last 10 years. Besides,I concede that EZ raises the pride due to provide a better service toWG; it must be increase 500 amonth? May be raise to 2200 a month is totally enough.

Furthermore, the arguments that the author affords to support his decision have blemishes. First, it is not necessary to collect trash twice a week perhaps. May there has little crash in WG.  Second,whether the additional trucks that EZordered recently are all of well quality to transport trash. It is possible that these trucks have no capable of carrying so many crashes twice a week.Third, the satisfying rate from the survey cannot supply a powerful evidence of the advantage of EZ.

Consequently, the letter give to the TC has so many flaws which cannot convince me. Much more work, such as the real reason that why TC decided to contrast with ABC but not EZ any more, and why EZ raises  the pricefrom 2000 to2500 a month and so on, is needed to make the determination.

[ 本帖最后由 Skysijie 于 2007-2-6 20:32 编辑 ]

kylinUID: 2242436

1．  TC真的仅仅因为EZ收费变高，而ABC没有涨价而不用EZ的吗？不是的
1）  EZ一直使用十年前的垃圾处理技术，给环境带来污染，而ABC采用先进的循环处理技术，不仅不污染环境，还可以使废物循环再利用

2． EZ的涨价真的合理吗？不是的
1）  十年前也是同样的价格同样的服务，但是为什么现在要多收500？
2） 就算EZ改进了服务，但是真的需要多收500吗？很可能200已足够
  
3． 作者给出的3个论据真的就毫无瑕疵吗？不是的
1）  有必要一周两次的频率吗？很可能TC并没有那么多的垃圾
2） 定购的这些车的车况都好吗？
3） 调查是很客观的吗？

Word: 404

This argument presents above is reasonably这里可以用reasonably么？觉得这样就肯定了作者的逻辑是不错的 没啥flaw了～ sound, however, the author fails to recognize all elements necessary to evaluate his situation. The position that EZ Disposal (EZ) should be used continually should continue to be used会不会好点～ to collect the trash of Walnut Grove’s (WG) town hardly can convince me to have the same determination.

To begin with, the author fails to analyzethe question that town council (TC) make the decision that switching from EZ to ABC Waste merely depends on the EZ’s price has risen from $2000 to $2500 a month.It is probably has another reason. Perhaps, EZ still using traditional technology, which takes method of burying the trash into earth, to dispose the crashtrash of WG. By doing this, it would be do harm to environment of WG. Meanwhile, ABC is using the latest technology,which disposes trash circularly, to reduce the pollution and advance the rate of use of castoff. In brief, I cannot make any decision without information about the technology EZ used.

In an addition, I want to删 query that whether it is reasonable to raise charge from the point of EZ. It is obvious that EZ provides the same service to WG with the same prideprice -2000 a month-in the last 10 years. At the same time, it is ambiguous that the reason why EZ has to raise to 2500 amonth to provide the same service as well as the last 10 years. Besides,I concede that EZ raises the pride拼写 due to provide a better service toWG; it must bemust it be increase 500 amonth? May beMaybe raise to 2200 a month is totally enough.文中有提到EZ会提高服务质量吗？这应该是lz的假设八～那么就不用concede了，直接even if会好些八～对于是升500还是200，lz可以再进一步说一下因为服务质量提高程度也未知，所以拿不准真正的提价幅度

Furthermore, the arguments that the author affords affords?offers八～？ to support his decision have blemishes. First, it is not necessary to collect trash twice a week perhaps. May there has little crash拼写 in WG.  Second,whether the additional trucks that EZordered recently are all of well quality to transport trash.改问号八～ It is possible that these trucks have no capablecapacity of carrying so many crashes twice a week.Third, the satisfying rate from the survey cannot supply a powerful evidence of to the advantage of EZ.

Consequently, the letter give gives to the TC has so many flaws which cannot convince me. Much more work, such as the real reason that why TC decided to contrast contract八～？ with ABC but not EZ any more, and why EZ raises  the pricefrom 2000 to2500 a month and so on, is needed to make the determination.

argu这个字数也差不多 不能算少拉 呵呵 有范文都只370个字呢～～所以感觉字数不是那么关键 最重要还是逻辑这个东东
lz的文章没啥大问题 小小建议最好不要用me之类的词 这种其实一定程度上暗示了你的argu带主观色彩 而且用us也比me好 让读者有认同感 更容易接受你的观点～～
另外 lz可以注意下拼写问题哈 有几处都拼错了 呵呵

[ 本帖最后由 kylin 于 2007-2-7 10:53 编辑 ]

SkysijieUID: 2233317

多谢kylin，不然又得犯错：）