argument177 求ILOVEISSUE的拍！谢谢

freeatomUID: 2142222

TOPIC: ARGUMENT177 - The following is a letter that recently appeared in the Oak City Gazette, a local newspaper.

"Membership in Oak City's Civic Club-a club whose primary objective is to discuss local issues-should continue to be restricted to people who live in Oak City. People who work in Oak City but who live elsewhere cannot truly understand the business and politics of the city. It is important to restrict membership to city residents because only residents pay city taxes and therefore only residents understand how the money could best be used to improve the city. At any rate, restricting membership in this way is unlikely to disappoint many of the nonresidents employed in Oak City, since neighboring Elm City's Civic Club has always had an open membership policy, and only twenty-five nonresidents have joined Elm City's Club in the last ten years."
WORDS: 502          TIME: 0:30:00          DATE: 2007-4-4
Oak City的市俱乐部主要目的是讨论本地事务，其成员资格应该继续被限制在居住在Oak City的市。那些在Oak
City工作但在别的地方居住的人无法真正理解本城市的政治和经济。把成员资格限制在本市居非常重要，因为只有居付城市税因而也只有他们才知道这些钱如何使用才能促进城市发展。无论如何，以这种方式限制成员资格不太可能使很多在Oak
City工作的外地人失望，因为邻近城市Elm City的市俱乐部一直采取开放成员资格的政策，但在过去10年中只有25名外地人加入了Elm
City的市俱乐部。



Given some evidence, the author asserts that membership in Oak City's Club should continue to be restricted to people who live in Oak City. The argument sound reasonable at the first glance, however we can find several flaws which render it unconvincing as it stands.

First of all, the author unfairly assumes that people who are not the resident of the city can not truly understand the business and politics of the city. However the author does not provide to prove this. Common sense tell us that we cannot decide who truly understand the business and politics of the city only through if he or she is the resident of the city. It is possible that people who are resident of the city do not care about the city as they may think that it has nothing important to do with them, they only care about themselves. Whereas those who are not resident of the city but live in the city may care about the city as they have live in the city for some years thus they feel that they are part of the city and also the business and politics of the city also related to their job and family, and they understand and care the business and politics of the city. Thus without more information, the author's assertion is premature.

In addition, the evidence that only residents pay city taxes is scant evidence that they know how the money could best be used to improve the city. Though only residents pay city taxes, other people who work in Oak also pay other taxes other than city taxes. And their happiness are also related to the prosperity of the city. Moreover people who work in Oak but not the resident of Oak may better understand how to use the money as may have ever worked in other city, more or less, by comparing the Oak with other city, they may have more constructive ideas about how to use the money and how to improve the city than those who are residents of the city.

Last but not least, even if nonresidents are less understands how to improve the city, it is hasty to say that restricting membership is unlikely to disappoint the nonresidents, even though in Elm City's Club, nonresident seldom join the club. As they may be some difference between the number and character of the nonresident in the two cities which may lead to the different attitude to he Club. Perhaps In Elm City the number of the nonresident are smaller than that of the Oak City, if they are only 1000 nonresident work in the Elm City, than 25 may be a quite large number. If the nonresident in Oak City is larger such as a million, than certainly more people may want to join the club. Also It is possible that the nonresident in Oak is more active and eager to have some contribution to the city than the nonresident of the Elm City, then if we restrict them, they may all disappointed.

In sum the argument is unconvincing.

[ 本帖最后由 freeatom 于 2007-4-4 13:35 编辑 ]

pippo1983UID: 172110

issue看来要自己开个铁匠铺了:cool: :cool: :cool:

ILOVEISSUEUID: 2300195

Given some evidence, the author asserts that membership in Oak City's Club should continue to be restricted to people who live in Oak City. The argument sound reasonable at the first glance, however we can find several flaws which render it unconvincing as it stands.

First of all, the author unfairly assumes that people who are not the resident of the city can not truly understand the business and politics of the city. ts不错However the author does not provide to prove this. Common sense tell us that we cannot decide who truly understand the business and politics of the city only through if he or she is the resident of the city. It is possible that people who are resident of the city do not care about the city as they may think that it has nothing important to do with them, they only care about themselves.既然ts是说不是居民不能了解城市是错的，那就不必提及是居民到底怎么样 Whereas those who are not resident of the city but live in the city may care about the city看错题目了吧，文中明明说的是那些人在这里工作，但不住在这里。 as they have live in the city for some years thus they feel that they are part of the city没道理，为什么residents也住了很多年，就不这样觉得呢？反例要说的有道理，不能想让它不是就不是 and also the business and politics of the city also related to their job and family, and they understand and care the business and politics of the city. Thus without more information, the author's assertion is premature.
举出的反例要让人信服

In addition, the evidence that only residents pay city taxes is scant evidence that they know how the money could best be used to improve the city. Though only residents pay city taxes, other people who work in Oak also pay other taxes other than city taxes. 与ts无关，ts想证明的是residents不知道怎样improve，而这里怎么又说道other people了？And their happiness are also related to the prosperity of the city.晕。。。什么意思？和ts有什么关系？ Moreover people who work in Oak but not the resident of Oak may better understand how to use the money as may have ever worked in other city, more or less, by comparing the Oak with other city, they may have more constructive ideas about how to use the money and how to improve the city than those who are residents of the city.晕，这么长的句子70个词。。。虽然我知道你想表达的意思，批判点也不错，但这写得也太罗嗦了。
论证要围绕ts展开

Last but not least, even if nonresidents are less understands how to improve the city, it is hasty to say that restricting membership is unlikely to disappoint the nonresidents, even though in Elm City's Club, nonresident seldom join the club. ts还是太长了，删一半差不多。Even though后面的东西不应该在ts这样写。 这样写你看看怎么样:Finally, the mere fact that twenty-five people joined EC’s club does not indicate that nonresidents in OC will not disappoint.As they may be some difference between the number(number有什么好difference的？) and character of the nonresident in the two cities which may lead to the different attitude to he Club. Perhaps In Elm City the number of the nonresident are smaller than that of the Oak City, if they are only 1000 nonresident work in the Elm City, than 25 may be a quite large number. If the nonresident in Oak City is larger such as a million, than certainly more people may want to join the club.想说明什么？number difference? Also It is possible that the nonresident in Oak is more active and eager to have some contribution to the city than the nonresident of the Elm City, then if we restrict them, they may all disappointed.
(最后一个body更加混乱了，把number和character在同一层次里写显然不是明智的选择。这样写也许好点
1．25个人不能说明去EC club 的nonresidents少，club总共人多少？占比例多少？
2．即使去EC club的nonresidents人少，也不一定想去 OC club的人少，地方，人，差异)
In sum the argument is unconvincing.

内部论证问题严重，有点意识流写作分格，想到什么说什么，没有逻辑可言
多看看ETS范文吧，加油

[ 本帖最后由 ILOVEISSUE 于 2007-4-4 15:16 编辑 ]

freeatomUID: 2142222

这篇文章确实有很大的问题，问一句，每段后面要不要加总结性的句子，比如：1。In such cases, the author cannot say that the residents can really provide wise plan for the expenditure on the improvements of the Oak City.
2。Without considering such factors, simply ruling out the nonresidents from the club may be a great loss for Oak City.
3。In such circumstance, the recommendation of the author is unacceptabl
这样的。
ps:这几个总结句是在iq28 以前的文章的。

ILOVEISSUEUID: 2300195

要