qiuzirumeng 作文评析

对酒当歌UID: 2210051

The report writtenin the archaeology journal make the conclusion that the pots were spreaded (spread)by migration other(rather) than by tradingbased on the evidence that the bones around the pot contains a high level ofmetalic element. However, this conclusion is too cursory to justify itsposition.
To begin with, the author provide (时态)two possible explanation for the pot scattered around withoutconsidering other possibilities. It is likely that the pots buried are neighter(?) by trading nor by migration. It is possible thatthey are just the custom for these prehistoric people to scatter these potsaround there sites. Or  they make use these pots to restore rain inprevent of lacking water. Without considering these possobilities, it is hardlyto say that the conclusion in the report is convincing enough. Additionally,even it has only two possoblities, the author based on(on 应去掉) his or her judgment merely on supporting the secondone.  It is possible that trading does happened at the same time.Only by in support of the second explanation cannot delete the firstexplanation at all.
Secondly, the author mentions that there is a strong link between the level ofcertain metalic (metallic) element  people who migrate to a new placeafter a childhood. However, this connection hardly support that people whosebone have high quantity of such metalic definetely have migrated during theirchildhood. It is possible that people in this site have a food all containswith such metallic element. Another possibility is that it is the pot, whichcontaining（应该过去时吧） water andfood  by  these prehistoric people everyday, that containsthis metalic element. And therefore lead these people with highly level of suchelement. The author fails to consider the other ways lead to the situation, andhence leave this report with fallacy in logic.

Finaly （Finally）, authormakes the assumption that the pot over the site is belonged to the people whosebone has the certain metalic elements around the same place. This assumption isalso dubious at best. Being found in the same area does not necessarily meansthat these people is the make of the pots. It is possible that even thesepeople indeed have migrated in there childhood, they just got these pots bytrading with the pot-makers. It is also likely that these people are not buriedwith these pots at the same era so they does not have any conneciton at all.Without considering and prevent out with these facts, the author cannot justifyhis conclusion at all.

In a summary, the auther only listing the facts that have connection with theexpanation of migration but fails to consider other possiblities. To strenththis  conclusion, the author need firstly to establish the cause andeffect relatioship（relationship） andruling out any other possible explanation of this phenominance. Withoutconsidering all of the factors that lead to the same result, it is not safe tosay that the conclusion is a convincing one.  safe to say that theconclusion is a convincing one.

1：引入了较为新的一个观点，即pots不一定和bones是一个时代的，令人耳目一新
2: 可能是限时的缘故，每个论点本来都可以更加充实的。呵呵。
3：语法与拼写错误较多，建议先用word看一下，自己早发现，有好处。

goldzincUID: 2378390

The report written in the archaeology journal make the conclusion that the pots were spreaded(spread) by migration other than by trading(trade 还是按照题目中的用词吧) based on the evidence that the bones around the pot contains a high level of metalic element. However, this conclusion is too cursory to justify its position.

To begin with, the author provide(provides) two possible explanation for the pot scattered around without considering other possobilities(possibilities). It is likely that the pots buried are neighter by trading nor by migration.(上句刚用的it is…,下句改成they are probably just… 吧) It is possible that they are just the custom for these prehistoric people to scatter these pots around there sites. Or they make use these pots to restore rain in prevent of lacking water. Without considering these possibilities(possibilities), it is hardly to say that the conclusion in the report is convincing enough. Additionally, even it has only two possoblities(possibilities), the author based on (去掉on) his or her judgment merely on supporting the second one.  It is possible that trading does happened at the same time. Only by in support of the second explanation cannot delete the first explanation at all.(first/second改成former/letter比较好)
（逻辑上比较完整，就是话说的有点绕）
Secondly, the author mentions that there is a strong link between the level of certain metalic element(少了and) people who migrate to a new place after a(their) childhood. However, this connection hardly support that people whose bone have high quantity of such metalic(metallic) definetely(definitely) have migrated during(由题中原意应该是after) their childhood. It is possible that people in this site have a food all contains with such metallic element. Another possibility is that it is the pot, which containing water and food by these prehistoric people every day that contains this metalic(metallic) element. And therefore lead these people with highly level of such element. The author fails to consider the other ways lead to the situation, and hence leave this report with fallacy in logic.
（后两个证据旨在解释的是原题所说的association 可能不存在，而不是ts中所说的这个association的存在说明不了有metallic element的人就真的migrated，建议改一下ts）
Finaly (Finally), author makes the assumption that the pot over the site is belonged to the people whose bone has the certain metalic (metallic) elements around the same place. This assumption is also dubious at best (at least?). Being found in the same area does not necessarily means(mean) that these people is the maker of the pots. It is possible that even these people indeed have migrated in(after…) there childhood, they just got these pots by trading with the pot-makers. It is also likely that these people are not buried with these pots at the same era so they does not have any connection at all. Without considering and prevent out with these facts, the author cannot justify his conclusion at all.
（这段逻辑也还不错）
In a summary, the auther (authur)only listing the facts that have connection with the expanation (explanation)of migration but fails to consider other possiblities(possibilities). To strenth(strengthen) this conclusion, the author need firstly to establish the cause and effect relatioship(relationship) and ruling out any(去掉吧) other possible explanation of this phenominance(phenomena). Without considering all of the factors that lead to the same result, it is not safe to say that the conclusion is a convincing one.
所有的possibility都拼错了 第五个字母是i不是o～
整体思路比较清晰 字数好多呀 努力把时间也提起来吧