argument143 【METTLE小组】第五次作业 by 一米八四

一米八四UID: 2317911

143The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a national newspaper.

"Your recent article on corporate downsizing* in the United States is misleading. The article gives the mistaken impression that many competent workers who lost jobs as a result of downsizing face serious economic hardship, often for years, before finding other suitable employment. But this impression is contradicted by a recent report on the United States economy, which found that since 1992 far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated. The report also demonstrates that many of those who lost their jobs have found new employment. Two-thirds of the newly created jobs have been in industries that tend to pay above-average wages, and the vast majority of these jobs are full-time."

*Downsizing is the process in which corporations deliberately reduce the number of their employees.

你们最近关于美国集体裁员的文章是有误导性的。该文章给人们一种错误的印象，即很多在企业面临严重经济困难的时候裁员而导致失业的有能力的工人通常要用几年的时间找到另一份合适的工作。但这种感觉与最近一次关于美国经济的报告相矛盾，报告发现自1992年以来新增的就业机会数量远超过消失的岗位数量。该报告也指出很多失业人员已经找到了新工作。新增就业机会中有三分之二是那些提供高于平均水平薪酬的企业提供的，而且这些岗位绝大多数是全职工作。

提纲
完全根据一次报告是不可信的
1 新增机会并不一定用在失业人口上，也许人口在增加，可能他们需要更多的技能，这些技能又是失业人群缺乏的，各种因素（年龄，技术）限制失业人口。
2 很多失业人员找到工作了，并不代表全部人员，而且也许他们花了很大的精力才找到。
3 2/3的新增就业机会不一定就是那些失业的工人得到了，可能是一些本在工作的人，想换一个环境，更好的薪水。


题目：ARGUMENT143 - The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a national newspaper.

"Your recent article on corporate downsizing* in the United States is misleading. The article gives the mistaken impression that many competent workers who lost jobs as a result of downsizing face serious economic hardship, often for years, before finding other suitable employment. But this impression is contradicted by a recent report on the United States economy, which found that since 1992 far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated. The report also demonstrates that many of those who lost their jobs have found new employment. Two-thirds of the newly created jobs have been in industries that tend to pay above-average wages, and the vast majority of these jobs are full-time."

*Downsizing is the process in which corporations deliberately reduce the number of their employees.
字数：428   

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the editor's article is misleading. To substantiate the conclusion, the arguer gives a recent report on the U.S. economy as an example. A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless it is.

First of all, the arguer says according to the report, there are far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated. It seems as great news for the ones who lost their jobs. It seems somewhat logical, but in fact controversial. Because there is no evidence to prove that the job opportunities is given for them. May be the population in U.S. is growing fast which need for jobs. It is possible that these new job opportunities are not suitable for these unemployed men, as for its specific request for young age, higher degree, skilled expertise, and so forth. Those may become a big obstacle for these men, which make the re-work harder.

In addition, many of those who lost their jobs have found new employment does not mean the editor's article is misleading. The conception about "many of those" is very vague, an accurate, external proof is a better way to demonstrate the correctness of what the arguer said. Besides, there is another possibility that those who finally recover a new job may suffer a hard time during the job-searching, may be years, may expend lots of money or else. So it is obvious that what the arguer said is lack-proved.

Finally, there is no certain relationship between the full-time jobs, the better salaries and the unemployed men, which means that the one who get these jobs is the one who is not at-work. It is likely that some people are tired of the situation of their jobs, or the low-salary, or the bad interpersonal relationships, which push him/her to a new opportunity.  As the commonsense, the one who is working now may have a easier chance to change a new job for their recent work experience. Meanwhile, because of many factors, the unemployed men are trapped in the bog which named job-seeking.

To sum up, though the argument seems to be plausible, in fact, it is neither sound nor persuasive. Not only the ambiguous data in the report, but also cites in the analysis the evidence, which does not lend strong support to what arguer claims. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer take serious attitude to the report he cited and better evidences to proof what he said. If the argument includes the given factors discussed above, it would have been more thorough and adequate.

drlzUID: 2329258

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the editor's article is misleading. To substantiate the conclusion, the arguer gives a recent report on the U.S. economy as an example.A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless it is. First of all, the arguer says according to the report, there are far more jobs(there are 去掉, 不然这个句子有语法问题了) have been created than have been eliminated. It seems as(我觉得as有点多余) great news for the ones who lost their jobs. It seems somewhat logical, but in fact controversial. Because there is no evidence to prove that the job opportunities is given for them. May be the population in U.S. is growing fast which need for jobs.(觉得着句话这样调整一下比较好May be the population in U.S., which need for jobs, is growing fast ) It is possible that these new job opportunities are not suitable for these unemployed men, as for its specific request for young age, higher degree, skilled expertise, and so forth. Those may become a big obstacle for these men, which make the re-work harder. In addition, many of those who lost their jobs have found new employment (这是一个主语从句,好象句首要加个that吧?)does not mean the editor's article is misleading. The conception about "many of those" is very vague, (此处要加个连词把两个分句连起来,不然就有语法问题了,暂且加个so吧)an accurate, external proof is a better way to demonstrate the correctness of what the arguer said. Besides, there is another possibility that those who finally recover a new job may suffer a hard time during the job-searching, may be years(有点不懂??), may expend lots of money or else.(这句话语法有问题,连着在一个句子里面出现三个may做谓语,没有用一个连词,) So it is obvious that what the arguer said is lack-proved. Finally, there is no certain relationship between the full-time jobs, the better salaries and the unemployed men, which means that the one who get(s) these jobs is the one who is not at-work. It is likely that some people are tired of the situation(个人觉得用condition好点) of their jobs, or the low-salary, or the bad interpersonal relationships, which push him/her to a new opportunity.  As the commonsense, the one who is working now may have a easier chance to change a new job for their recent work experience. Meanwhile, because of many factors, the unemployed men are trapped in the bog which named job-seeking. To sum up, though the argument seems to be plausible, in fact, it is neither sound nor persuasive. Not only the ambiguous data in the report, but also cites in the analysis the evidence,(这句话有问题, 我帮你改下, Neither the ambigious data in the report, nor the reprot cited as the evidence lends strong support to what the arguer claims ,后面的就不要了) which does not lend strong support to what arguer claims. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer(觉得加个should 好点) take serious attitude to the report he cited and (provide)better evidences to proof what he said. If the argument includes the given factors discussed above, it would have been more thorough and adequate.(这句话你如果要用虚拟语气的话, if部分语法有误, 再说 would have 表示对过去的虚拟,我觉得应该用对现在的虚拟,个人改法, 仅供参考 If the argument have included the given factors discussed above, it would be more thorough and adequate.)

[ 本帖最后由 drlz 于 2007-6-30 21:16 编辑 ]