Argument18 [METTLE互助小组]第一次作业 by hejielady再次修改

hejieladyUID: 2282175

Argument 18-------"In an attempt to improve highway safety, Prunty County recently lowered its speed limit from 55 miles per hour to 45 on all major county roads. But the 55 mph limit should be restored, because this safety effort has failed. Most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate throughout Prunty County has decreased only slightly. If we want to improve the safety of our roads, we should instead undertake the same kind of road improvement project that Butler County completed five years ago: increasing lane widths and resurfacing rough roads. Today, major Butler County roads still have a 55 mph speed limit, yet there were 25 percent fewer reported accidents in this past year than there were five years ago."


The statement in the argument seems sound at the first glance, a further analyzing nevertheless indicated that it is not that reasonable simply took granted that the Butler County successfully decreased it's accidence rates by increasing lane widths and resurfacing rough roads without lowering its speed limit. The argument also failed to take into account other important elements may serve the conclusion that the safety effort in the main roads of Prunty County is ineffective and then its original speed limit should be restored.

In the first place, I have to point out that slightly decrease in the accident rate "throughout" Prunty County can not prove that the safety effort does not work in "major county" roads. It is completely possible that the accident rate down largely in major roads while increase in other roads, therefore the partly results have been augmented. In addition, the Prunty County just "recently" carried out this measure, and it is not even nearly queer to get that unsatisfactory result. Scanning over the human history, laws or regulations, or guidance, measures or principles, all have be put into practice for months or years or even longer, then their effectiveness can be tested. Thus, it is far from convincing that the safety effort has failed.
  
Moreover, any other possibilities may have caused the accidence rate also should be taken into consideration. While in this argument, the author assumed other important elements unchangeable but failed to illustrate supports. May it impossible happens to be a period of bad weather that led to more accidence? May it impossible that by coincidence to be the most occurrence-occur season in a year? May it impossible that accidentally the concerned authority relaxed roads restrictions caused the disappointed result?  Without considering and scientifically investigating the above mentioned and any other factors which may serve the raise of accidence rate since the speed limit was lowed, it is not rational to make such a hasty verdict.


Last but not least, it is illogical to assert that the improvement "major" road condition contribute to the reduced accidence rate in the "overall" Butler County. Reasons are as same as stated in the second paragraph. Nationwide survey may differ a lot in specific areas. Meanwhile, the reported accidents were 25 percent lowered, unreported accidents nonetheless were possible to be an increasingly large percentage. Yet increasing lane widths and resurfacing rough roads may reduce a large percent of accident rate, it cannot be that confident to infer that results without ruling out these and other alternative explanations for the conclusion.

Having analyzed all those illogical and unreasonable evidence, it is clear that we cannot safely draw the conclusion claimed in the editorial. To strengthen the argument, the author should present more details and investigate scientific statistics and account every rational factors which may serve both the slightly decrease accident rate in Prunty County and increasingly raise in Butler County.

[ 本帖最后由 hejielady 于 2007-6-25 15:28 编辑 ]

yangzengliUID: 2332195

The statement in the argument seems sound at the first glance, a further analyzing nevertheless indicated that it is not that reasonable simply took granted that the Butler County successfully decreased it's accidence rates by increasing lane widths and resurfacing rough roads without lowering its speed limit. The argument also failed to take into account这个要挪到后面 other important elements whichmay serve the conclusion that the safety effort in the main roads of Prunty County is ineffective and then its original speed limit should be restored.
In the first place, I have to point out that slightly decrease in the accident rate "throughout" Prunty County can not prove that the safety effort does not work in "major county" roads. It is completely possible that the accident rate down largely in major roads while increase in other roads, therefore the partly results have been augmented. In addition, the Prunty County just "recently" carried out this measure, and it is not even nearly queer to get that unsatisfactory result. Scanning over the human history, laws or regulations, or guidance, measures or principles, all have be put into practice for months or years or even longer没主语, then their effectiveness can be tested. Thus, it is far from convincing that the safety effort has failed.
  
Moreover, any other possibilities (may have caused)influencing the accidence rate also should be taken into consideration. While in this argument, the author assumed other important elements unchangeable but failed to illustrate supports. May it impossible happens to be a period of bad weather that led to more accidence? May it impossible that by coincidence to be the most occurrence-occur season in a year? May it impossible that accidentally the concerned authority relaxed roads restrictions caused the disappointed result?三个MAY句均缺少BE动词，而且用的也不是很恰当  Without considering and scientifically investigating （the above mentioned）??? and any other factors which may serve the raise of accidence rate since the speed limit was lowed, it is not rational to make such a hasty verdict.

Last but not least, it is illogical to assert that the improvement "major" road condition contribute to the reduced accidence rate in the "overall" Butler County. Reasons are as same as stated in the second paragraph. Nationwide survey may differ a lot in specific areas. Meanwhile, the reported accidents were 25 percent lowered, unreported accidents nonetheless were possible to be an increasingly large percentage. Yet increasing lane widths and resurfacing rough roads may reduce a large percent of accident rate, it cannot be that confident to infer that results without ruling out these and other alternative explanations for the conclusion.
Having analyzed all those illogical and unreasonable evidence, it is clear that we cannot safely draw the conclusion claimed in the editorial. To strengthen the argument, the author should present more details and investigate scientific statistics and account every rational factors which may serve both the slightly decrease accident rate in Prunty County and increasingly raise in Butler County.
总评：从思想角度来讲，大家都是差不多的，还行。但从语言角度来讲，和你的那篇ISSUE一样，存在着相当一部分的语法错误和词汇的用法错误，以及中式英语。

hejieladyUID: 2282175

最新修改

The statement in the argument seems sound at the first glance, a further analysis nevertheless indicating that it is not reasonable to take granted that the Butler County successfully decreased it's accidence rates by increasing lane widths and resurfacing rough roads without lowering its speed limit. The argument also fails to take into account other important elements may serve the conclusion that the safety effort in the main roads of Prunty County is ineffective and then its original speed limit should be restored.

In the first place, I have to point out that slightly decrease in the accident rate "throughout" Prunty County can not prove that the safety efforts does not work in "major county" roads. It is completely possible that the accident rate decreased largely in major roads but increased in other roads, therefore the partly results have been augmented. In addition, the Prunty County just "recently" carried out this measure, and it is not even nearly queer to get that unsatisfactory result. Scanning over the human history, laws or regulations, guidance or principles polices, measures or polices, we can find that all of them have been put into practice for months or years or even longer, then their effectiveness can be tested. Thus, it is far from convincing that the safety effort has failed.
  
Moreover, any other possibilities that may have caused the accident rate also should be taken into consideration. While in this argument, the author assumed other important elements unchangeable but failed to illustrate supports. May it impossible happens to be a period of bad weather that led to more accidents? May be it is by coincidence turned out to be the most occurrence-occur season in a year; may be it is accidentally that the concerned authority relaxed roads restrictions, both of which would caused the disappointed result. Without considering and scientifically investigating the above mentioned and any other factors which may serve the raise of accidence rate since the speed limit was lowed, it is not rational to make such a hasty verdict.


Last but not least, it is illogical to assert that the improvement "major" road condition contribute to the reduced accidence rate in the "overall" Butler County. Reasons are the same as which are stated in the second paragraph. Nationwide survey may differ a lot in specific areas. Meanwhile, the reported accidents were 25 percent lowered, unreported accidents nonetheless were possible to be an increasingly large percentage. Yet increasing lane widths and resurfacing rough roads may reduce a large percent of accident rate, it cannot be that confident to infer that results without ruling out these and other alternative explanations for the conclusion.

Based on the analysis of all those illogical and unreasonable evidence, we cannot safely draw the conclusion claimed in the editorial. To strengthen the argument, the author should present more details and investigate scientific statistics, and account every rational factor that may leads to the accident rate in Prunty County and Butler County.