argument2 五一互助小组第三次作业 by 无边无际

gluttonUID: 2330210

TOPIC: ARGUMENT2 - 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 housepainting."
WORDS:          TIME: 01:00:00          DATE: 2007-6-1 20:49:57
   By scrutinying the case of Brookville , which take a certain set of restrictions and
housepainting, then the property values triple there. The arguer claim that  Deerthhaven
Acres should adopt a set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting in order to raise
property values there. However, the claim suffers several fallacies.
   
   To begin with, the arguer do not find out  the real cause that make the property values
tripled in Brookville. The price of a commodity is determined by supply and demand. Athough
the Brookville community did take certain set of actions seven years ago, but it does not
mean those kind of actions trigger the demands go beyond the supplies, then cause the price
to soar. There maybe other reasons that make the property values tripled. For instance, the
Brookville is likely a suburb area seven years ago, but nowsdays it become a prosperous area
and important business center of a city. Therefore, a great deal of people are willing to
live there, then make the property values tripled. And the property values of this area will
appriciate still without adopting these restrictions and housepainting, since those certain
kind of action are not the real cause of property values tripled in Brookville.
  
  Secondly, The arguer make a inapproriate comparison with Brookville and Deerhaven. Even
assuming that these restrictions and housepainting actions can make the community a more
convinient and cozy place for the people in Brookville to live in, then attract more people
living there. We can not rush into the conclusion that these restrictions on landscaping and
housepainting will also be suitable for Deerhaven, for the terrain of Brookville and
Deerhaven are not the same. Perhaps it is easy for Brookville to apply these restrictions
and it is more convenient for people living in Brookville after these restrictions adopted
due to the specific terrain there. But it is not the case for Deerhaven, it is entire
possible that it will cost lots of money to adopt such kind of restrictions on landscaping
and the restrictions can not make Deerhaven Acres a convenient place to live, since there
may be lots of hills there and the already exist buildings make the rules of the restriction
can not make them end meet. Also peoples reaction toward housepainting is different,
possiblely it attracts lots of people near Brookville, where people have such a sense of art
feeling. But people living around Deerhaven Acres may not have such a sense of art feeling,
the housepainting make them feel disgust and unwilling buy the house anymore. So the method
such as restrictions on landscaping and housepainting may generate a negative rather than
positive effect in Deerhaven Acres. And these method can not appriciate the property values
there.

  In sum, the arguer make the conlusion too hastely without a carefull obervations. The
argument do not make clear the real causes of the tripled property values and fausefully
exert the same adoptions can be applied in two different aeras.

[ 本帖最后由 glutton 于 2007-6-3 11:50 编辑 ]

tengda89757UID: 2327455

By scrutinying（scrutinizing） the case of Brookville , which take a certain set of restrictions and
housepainting, then the property values triple there. The arguer claim that  Deerthhaven
Acres should adopt a set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting in order to raise
property values there. However, the claim suffers（from） several fallacies.
   
   To begin with, the arguer do not find out  the real cause that make the property values
tripled in Brookville.（这句有点武断了，他因是通过probably等词举出来的） The price of a commodity is determined by supply and demand.（argument是找出逻辑错误尽力反驳，而不是将自己的观点提出来。因为你自己的观点可能也存在错误，别人也可以反驳） Athough
the Brookville community did take certain set of actions seven years ago, but（搭配错误） it does not
mean those kind of actions trigger the demands go beyond the supplies, then cause the price
to soar. There maybe other reasons that make the property values tripled. For instance, the
Brookville is likely a suburb area seven years ago, but nowsdays it become a prosperous area
and important business center of a city. Therefore, a great deal of people are willing to
live there, then make the property values tripled. And the property values of this area will
appriciate still without adopting these restrictions and housepainting, since those certain
kind of action are not the real cause of property values tripled in Brookville. （建议看看官方范文中的argument是怎样写他因的）
  
  Secondly, The arguer make a inapproriate comparison with Brookville and Deerhaven（最好加上taking into account the terrain and the local people’s appreciation toward such application，来对应这一段，这样才有层次感）. Even
assuming that these restrictions and housepainting actions can make the community a more
convinient and cozy place for the people in Brookville to live in, then attract more people
living there. We can not rush into the conclusion that these restrictions on landscaping and
housepainting will also be suitable for Deerhaven, for （+maybe）the terrain of Brookville and
Deerhaven are not the same. Perhaps it is easy for Brookville to apply these restrictions
and it is more convenient for people living in Brookville after these restrictions adopted
due to the specific terrain there. But it is not the case for Deerhaven, it is entire
possible that it will cost lots of money to adopt such kind of restrictions on landscaping （这句话好像跟前后文没什么关系）
and the restrictions can not make Deerhaven Acres a convenient place to live, since there
may be lots of hills there and the already exist buildings make the rules of the restriction
can not make them end meet（我觉得比如山啊，水啊这种具体的地形因素还是别说好，因为本身就不知道前提，猜得不一定对）. Also peoples reaction toward housepainting is different,
possiblely it attracts lots of people near Brookville, where people have such a sense of art
feeling. But people living around Deerhaven Acres may not have such a sense of art feeling,
the housepainting make them feel disgust and unwilling buy the house anymore.（这两句的对比有点罗嗦，改为一个长句子比较好） So the method
such as restrictions on landscaping and housepainting may generate a negative rather than
positive effect in Deerhaven Acres. And these method can not appriciate the property values
there.

  In sum, the arguer make the conlusion too hastely without a carefull obervations. The
argument do not make clear the real causes of the tripled property values and fausefully
exert the same adoptions can be applied in two different aeras.（建议作者多看官方范文）