argument131-spring第一次作业

hongdanUID: 2228730

In this environmental newsletter it is recommended that in order to restore the fish population and protect all of the marine wildlife the marine sanctuary on Tria Island should abandon their original regulations and adopt those of Omni. To support the recommendation the author compares the fish populations in Tria with those in Omni and points out the difference of regulations between the two places attributes to the distinct phenomena. This argument seems logical but is not thoroughly well-reasoned.
To begin with, the evidence that the argument provides is insufficient to support the conclusion that the decline of fish populations in Tria’s waters relies on overfishing. The evidence does not mention the quantity of fishmen in the area and not lend any support that the decline of fishing populations goes simultaneously with the increase of fishing. It is entirely possible that one or more other alternatives are responsible for the decline. The subsistence of wildlife can be influenced both by nature and society. Although the society’s impact is more significant, it is not eliminated that the nature’s sudden change can make fishes not accustomed to their location any more. The large amount number of migrations brings the decline of fish populations.   
Also, there is no evidence that the decline of fish populations in Tria's waters is not pollution. Due to lack of information that in a recent period the water quality in Tria does not take any changes, we should not exclude the possibility that the existence of pollution contributes to the decline of fish population. Although in the regulations it is banned to dump and drill offshore oil within 20 miles of Tria, it is likely that some citizens disobey this regulation. They dump polluted substances into the water, subsequently destroying the living space of fish. Accordingly, pollution rather than overfishing becomes the possible reason to explain the decline of fish populations.
Even assuming the constant population of Omin’s fish is attributable to the implementation of their regulations, the newsletter fails to consider possible differences between Omni and Tria that might help to bring about a different result for Teria. Any two districts’ environmental conditions can not be absolutely same. Even a small different factor may lead to a different conclusion. The climate, environment, economic, even the species of marine wildlife of the two areas may quite different. If the climate plays a much more role in affecting the number of fishing, simply banning fishing can not restore the fishing populations. Another possibility is that there are always a number of fish with 10 miles of Omni while there are even no fish within with 10 miles of Tria. The measurement of implementing any regulation does not help to restore fish in Tria. In other words, the analogy, extending the experiences of Omni to Teria, does not take account of the basic distinction of two different places and therefore results in an unreasonableness of the author’s best way to restore fish numbers.
Overall, the argument’s opinion on regulations in Tria that is reference to the actualization in Omin seems logical. However, before any final decisions are made about the regulations’ modification, the officials in Tria Island should investigate all possible alternatives, whether the reasons of fish populations’ decline or the nature environment. Only after a throughout study can the government bring forward the most suitable regulations.

xihaiweiwei3UID: 2390076

argument131-spring第一次作业

In this environmental newsletter it is recommended that in order to restore the fish population and protect all of the marine wildlife the marine sanctuary on TriaIsland should abandon their original regulations and adopt those of Omni. To support the recommendation the author compares the fish populations in Tria with those in Omni and points out the difference of regulations between the two places attributes to the distinct phenomena. This argument seems logical but is not thoroughly well-reasoned. （第一段能否直接些）

To begin with, the evidence that the argument provides is insufficient to support the conclusion that the decline of fish populations in Tria’s waters relies on overfishing.（over fishing）The evidence does not mention the quantity of fishmen in the area and not lend any support that the decline of fishing populations goes simultaneously with the increase of fishing. It is entirely possible that one or more other alternatives are responsible for the decline. The subsistence of wildlife can be influenced both by nature and society. Although the society’s impact is more significant, it is not eliminated that the nature’s sudden change can make fishes not accustomed to their location any more. The large amount number of migrations brings the decline of fish populations. （migrations 出现的有点突然，能否进一步阐述，让文章更有说服力）

Also, there is no evidence that the decline of fish populations in Tria's waters is not pollution. Due to lack of information that in a recent period the water quality in Tria does not take any changes, we should not exclude the possibility that the existence of pollution contributes to the decline of fish population. Although in the regulations it is banned to dump and drill offshore oil within 20 miles of Tria, it is likely that some citizens disobey this regulation. They dump polluted substances into the water, subsequently destroying the living space of fish. Accordingly, pollution rather than overfishing becomes the possible reason to explain the decline of fish populations.

Even assuming the constant population of Omin’s fish is attributable to the implementation of their regulations, the newsletter fails to consider possible differences between Omni and Tria that might help to bring about a different result for Teria. Any two districts’ environmental conditions can not be absolutely same. Even a small different factor may lead to a different conclusion. The climate, environment, economic, even the species of marine wildlife of the two areas may quite different. If the climate plays a much more role in affecting the number of fishing, simply banning fishing can not restore the fishing populations. Another possibility is that there are always a number of fish with 10 miles of Omni while there are even no fish within with 10 miles of Tria.（这句有点乱） The measurement of implementing any regulation does not help to restore fish in Tria. In other words, the analogy, extending the experiences of Omni to Teria, does not take account of the basic distinction of two different places and therefore results in an unreasonableness of the author’s best way to restore fish numbers.

Overall, the argument’s opinion on regulations in Tria that is reference to the actualization in Omin seems logical. However, before any final decisions are made about the regulations’ modification, the officials in TriaIsland should investigate all possible alternatives, whether the reasons of fish populations’ decline or the nature environment. Only after a throughout study can the government bring forward the most suitable regulations.

你的文章写的真好啊！除了开头部分我觉得应该简明一些，其他部分的语句都很好。感觉例子还是不能说的很透彻。如果加入几个实际例子展开来写，肯定会更好！第一次改文章没经验，请包含！
Ps: 你的文章有点套话多了。
:loveliness: :loveliness: 一起加油啊！

[ 本帖最后由 xihaiweiwei3 于 2007-10-28 11:00 编辑 ]