argument174 [0710G +U小组] --xiefen0223--第七次作业

xiefen0223UID: 2301911

题目：ARGUMENT174 - The following recommendation was made by the president and administrative staff of Grove College, a private institution, to the college's governing committee.

"We recommend that Grove College preserve its century-old tradition of all-female education rather than admit men into its programs. It is true that a majority of faculty members voted in favor of coeducation, arguing that it would encourage more students to apply to Grove. But eighty percent of the students responding to a survey conducted by the student government wanted the school to remain all female, and over half of the alumni who answered a separate survey also opposed coeducation. Keeping the college all-female, therefore, will improve morale among students and convince alumni to keep supporting the college financially."
字数：411          用时：0:57:02          日期：2007-07-31

In this argument, the arguer recommend that Crove Colleged should preserve all-female education to improve morale among students and convince alumni to support the college  continuously on financy.To support his suggestion, he gives the evidence that in one student government survey the eighty percent of students wanted the school to remain all female. And another reason the arguer cites here is the result of a separate survey which indicates that over half of the alumni opposed coeducation. However, considering about what really matter in this revolution, we can see how groundless the recommendation is.
To begin with, the arguer fails to take others into account while suggesting that the college sould stay all-female. He only shows the surveys of opinions among students and alumni, regardless of the views from the faculty and other related people, such as the prospecting students. Besides the opinions of people, there are still other respects that should be seriouly considered before the decision on whether taking revolution. One should list all the advantages and disadvantages of keeping all-female, and then decide which is best for the college. But it seems that the arguer only present one side of the case while fails to consider other factors in whether the Grove College should remain old tradition of all-female education.
In addition, the survey conducted by student government or the separate survey in alumni is not as objective as the auguer believes. It did not mention any background of the students and the alumni who responded the survey, and how many of them involved. For instance, If there is just 5 students answered the quesion, and 4 of them are prone to remain all female, will it represent most students' opinions? So from this point, we can see that the two of the surveys are not standable to support the arguer's recommendation.
Last but not least, the arguer takes it for granted that the alumni will stop supporting the college financially because opposing coneducation while the students will be no morale. That is really groundless because most students and alumni  will of course accept the fact if the revolution is reasonable and maybe later acodate it after seeing the indeed advance in the education of the Grove College.
So from the discussion of obove, we can see that the recommendation is not so reasonable as it stands. To sodify his conclusion, the arguer should firstly bases on objective surveys and then consider other factors before denying the revolution.

ldsunUID: 2329026

In this argument, the arguer recommend[recommends?] that Crove Colleged should preserve all-female education to improve morale among students and convince alumni to support the college  continuously on financy.To support his suggestion, he gives the [是不是去掉the 比较好些?]evidence that in one student government survey the[去掉the ] eighty percent of students wanted the school to remain all female. And another reason the arguer cites[ states?] here is the result of a separate survey which indicates that over half of the alumni opposed coeducation.[两个evidence 是一样的，可以考虑下是不是有更好的说这两个evidence的说法，觉得你的有些累赘] However, considering about what really matter in this revolution, we can see how groundless the recommendation is.

To begin with, the arguer fails to take others into account while suggesting[suggests?] that the college sould [should]stay all-female. He only shows the surveys of opinions among students and alumni, regardless of the views from the faculty and other related people, such as the prospecting[这个词挺] students. Besides the opinions of people, there are still other respects that should be seriouly considered before the decision on whether taking revolution. One should list all the advantages and disadvantages of keeping all-female, and then decide which is best for the college. But it seems that the arguer only present[presents] one side of the case while fails [failing？对比与前面你用的是动名词，你要弄清这种结构怎么样用,我觉得不应该是动名词。]to consider other factors in whether the Grove College should remain old tradition of all-female education.
[这一段前面说得很充分，指出未考虑其他人的意见,后面说了另一个原因，我个人觉得一段时有一个主要的意群较好，可能有些保守]

In addition, the survey conducted by student government or the separate survey in alumni is not as objective as the auguer[arguer] believes. It did[dose？] not mention any background of the students and the alumni who responded the survey, and how many of them involved. For instance, If there is just 5 students answered the quesion, and 4 of them are prone to remain all female, will it represent[represents?] most students' opinions? So from this point, we can see that the two of the surveys are not standable[？] to support the arguer's recommendation.[这段有个证法很好，就是具体化，很能说明问题。]

Last but not least, the arguer takes it for granted that the alumni will stop supporting the college financially because opposing coneducation while the students will be no morale[这一句话不完整吧，你再看下,是不是少了一个意思，为什么他们这样做呢 ]. That is really groundless because most students and alumni  will of course accept the fact if the revolution is reasonable and maybe later acodate it after seeing the indeed advance in the education of the Grove College.[这一段有点空，需要充实下]

So from the discussion of obov[?], we can see that the recommendation is not so reasonable as it stands. To sodify[?] his conclusion, the arguer should firstly bases on objective surveys and then consider other factors before denying the revolution.

这篇文章出现较多的单词错误，其实我也常有，以后的训练要克服这一点，否则考试会吃亏的。论证上的一些问题前面都说到了。

[ 本帖最后由 ldsun 于 2007-8-1 11:56 编辑 ]

571633UID: 2333480

找錯誤很麻煩，看了樓上的錯誤發現錯誤無處不在。很有感触。
另外想请问是不是每个文章都可以找到三个错误啊，另外是按照错误在文中的顺序排列吧，不按照错误的重要性排列吧。