Argument17 [Victors小组]第1次作业，准备迎接暴风雨！～

tianjinxtlUID: 2173942

TOPIC: ARGUMENT17 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Walnut Grove town newspaper.

"Walnut Grove's town council has advocated switching from EZ Disposal (which has had the contract for trash collection services in Walnut Grove for the past ten years) to ABC Waste, because EZ recently raised its monthly fee from $2,000 to $2,500 a month, whereas ABC's fee is still $2,000. But the town council is mistaken; we should continue using EZ. EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. Moreover, EZ-which, like ABC, currently has a fleet of 20 trucks-has ordered additional trucks. Finally, EZ provides exceptional service: 80 percent of respondents to last year's town survey agreed that they were 'satisfied' with EZ's performance."
WORDS: 276          TIME: 0:43:57          DATE: 2007-4-14

In this letter, the author recommands that the Walnut Grove town should continue the contract of EZ Disposal other than switching to ABC Waste.  To support this recommandation, the arguer cites the following facts: EZ collects trash more frecrenctly; EZ has ordered 20 additional trucks, liking ABC; a survey shows that EZ satisfied 80 percent of respondents last year.  At the first glance, these evidences seem convincing.  However, the arguer's statement has three main questionable facets.

In the first place, the fact that EZ collects trash one more time every week than ABC does cannot undoubtly deduce the conclusion that EZ can do the cleaning work better.  More frequencies do not mean more efficiency, maybe EZ has not enough trucks to clear the whole town, or their trucks cannot meet the weight of trash.

Secondly, the arguer did not mention when the trucks ordered by EZ will arrive.  The citizens will be uncomfortable if waiting too long for the new trucks.  Moreover, EZ dose not tell us whether the trucks they ordered are the same with ABC's.  Maybe EZ would order the cheeper ones considering the cost and the income.

In addition, the survey mentioned is unconvincing.  It does not tell us how many respongdents, and if too few people echo the survey, it cannot be repersentitive to the whole town.  What's more, the arguer does not compare EZ and ABC from the survey, which is the most questionable because no comparing means no choosing.  Maybe citizens are more satisfied with ABC's performance.

To sum up, the arguer's statement is not convincing enough to deduce the conclusion, and more eviendence is needed.

ryansandyUID: 2315982

lz 您的字数好像少了点。。。

[ 本帖最后由 ryansandy 于 2007-4-14 02:35 编辑 ]

iq28UID: 2152875

汗哦
你怎么一出现就打击人家捏~

ryansandyUID: 2315982

...这都算打击人啊。。。:mad:

乳虎UID: 2251211

Happy birthday!Dream is the privilege of youth aged 20!
In this letter, the author recommands that the Walnut Grove town should continue the contract of EZ Disposal other than(rather than) switching to ABC Waste.  To support this recommandation, the arguer cites the following facts: EZ collects trash more frecrenctly; EZ has ordered 20 additional trucks, liking ABC; a survey shows that EZ satisfied 80 percent of respondents last year.  At the first glance, these evidences seem convincing.  However, the arguer's statement has three main questionable facets.

In the first place, the fact that EZ collects trash (one more time every week than )ABC (does cannot) undoubtly deduce the conclusion that EZ can do the cleaning work better.  More frequencies do not mean more efficiency, maybe EZ has not enough trucks to clear the whole town, or their trucks cannot meet the weight of trash(A good point,why not analysis enough).

Secondly, the arguer did not mention when the trucks ordered by EZ will arrive.(An original point!)  The citizens will be uncomfortable if waiting too long for the new trucks.  Moreover, EZ dose not tell us whether the trucks they ordered are the same with ABC's.  Maybe EZ would order the cheeper ones considering the cost and the income.

In addition, the survey mentioned is unconvincing.  It does not tell us how many respongdents, and if too few people echo the survey, it cannot be repersentitive to the whole town.  What's more, the arguer does not compare EZ and ABC from the survey, which is( the )most questionable because no comparing means no choosing.  Maybe citizens are more satisfied with ABC's performance.

To sum up, the arguer's statement is not convincing enough to deduce the conclusion, and more eviendence is needed.
处男作想必很痛苦吧,不过此文的确略显仓促,语言不规范是我们的通病,Maybe we have to recite New Concept English.

tianjinxtlUID: 2173942

Actually，NCE刚刚背了头几篇。

tianjinxtlUID: 2173942

贴出来就不怕丢脸。。。

tianjinxtlUID: 2173942

[ 本帖最后由 tianjinxtl 于 2007-4-17 02:52 编辑 ]