Argument2【0806G-Sunbird小组】第2次作业

edith_sleepingUID: 2368536

Argument 2 "The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.

“Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."

:)
time：2 hours
words：496
:)


In the letter, the writer, a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres recommends the restrictions on how the community’ yards for raising property values in Deerhaven Acres. To support this recommendation, the committee cites the facts that average property values have tripled in Brookville after community adopted a set of restrictions on yards seven years ago. Close scrutiny of the facts, however, reveals that the fact doesn’t lend credible support to the recommendation.


Firstly, that the average property values have tripled in Brookville does not necessarily indicate that we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting, or the raising is not for the reason of restriction. Perhaps, seven years ago, the authorities in Brookville took some measures or adopt some polities which are helpful for the property values raise. In short, without ruling out other possible reasons for the property values raise in Brookville seven years ago, the committee cannot convince me on the basis of them that the restriction on landscaping and housepainting lead to the raising of property values.

Secondly, even if the housepainting and landscaping lead to the raising of property values, the committee assumes further that this measure which is useful in Brookville will also be effective in Deerhaven. Perhaps, the basic industry in Brookville is tourism. The restriction on how the community’s yards improves the looking of the place and attracts more tourists here. And it is possible that the basic industry in Deerhaven is agriculture which needs little care of the looking, but more inputs in the machines and equipments. To sum up, the committee fails to convince me without providing more details about the differences between two places.

  Thirdly, even if the restriction leaded to the raising of property values, the raising seven years ago is little indication that seven years latter the restriction would be still effective. Seven years have passed. Perhaps, the community’s yards have been designed well enough to show the beauty of itself and harmony between neighbors without needs for the homeowners to restrict the yards. Or perhaps, the main and most important industry locally have been changed to others but tourism, even if it may be tourist seven years ago. Besides, the committee ignores the differences in character between the two places. Maybe people in Brookville like the consistency of the yards. To the contrary, Deerhaven residents would like the multi-appearance of the yards. If like this, the Deerhaven residents may be unwilling to follow the restriction.



  In sum, the recommendation relies on certain doubtful assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the recommendation, the writer who is a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven acres must provide clear evidence-perhaps by a report or survey of the comparison between the two places or a study of local economy structure and people preferences. To better assess the recommendation, I would need to know that whether the restriction on landscape and colors of the yards are feasible now.  

[ 本帖最后由 edith_sleeping 于 2007-11-10 08:54 编辑 ]

lewis0409220UID: 2238498

In the letter, the writer, a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres (是否要加个逗句呢)recommends the restrictions on how the community’ yards for raising property values in Deerhaven Acres. To support this recommendation, the committee cites the facts that average property values have tripled in Brookville after community adopted a set of restrictions on yards seven years ago. Close scrutiny of the facts, however, reveals that the fact doesn’t lend credible support to the recommendation.


Firstly, that the average property values have tripled in Brookville does not necessarily indicate that we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting, or the raising is not for the reason of restriction. Perhaps, seven years ago, the authorities in Brookville took some measures or adopt some polities which are helpful for the property values raise. In short, without ruling out other possible reasons for the property values raise in Brookville seven years ago, the committee cannot convince me on the basis of them that the restriction on landscaping and housepainting lead to the raising of property values.

Secondly, even if the housepainting and landscaping lead to the raising of property values, the committee assumes further that this measure which is useful in Brookville will also be effective in Deerhaven. Perhaps, the basic industry in Brookville is tourism. The restriction on how the community’s yards(感觉不通顺) improves the looking of the place and attracts more tourists here. And it is possible that the basic industry in Deerhaven is agriculture which needs little care of the looking(looking好像不能做名词), but more inputs in the machines and equipments.(不是谈的房价上涨吗,和机器设备有什么关系呢) To sum up, the committee fails to convince me without providing more details about the differences between two places.

  Thirdly, even if the restriction leaded to the raising of property values, the raising (有些重复)seven years ago is little indication that seven years latter the restriction would be still effective. Seven years have passed. Perhaps, the community’s yards have been designed well enough to show the beauty of itself and harmony between neighbors without needs for the homeowners to restrict the yards. Or perhaps, the main and most important industry locally have been changed to others but tourism, even if it may be tourist seven years ago. Besides, the committee ignores the differences in character between the two places. Maybe people in Brookville like the consistency of the yards. To the contrary, Deerhaven residents would like the multi-appearance of the yards. If like this, the Deerhaven residents may be unwilling to follow the restriction.



  In sum, the recommendation relies on certain doubtful assumptions that render it unconvincing as it stands. To bolster the recommendation, the writer who is a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven acres must provide clear evidence-perhaps by a report or survey of the comparison between the two places or a study of local economy structure and people preferences. To better assess the recommendation, I would need to know that whether the restriction on landscape and colors of the yards are feasible now.  



我觉得写得很好,逻辑很严密,还有递进关系,句式也很丰富,就是without用得有点多.我要能写这么好就好了. 我的基础很差,说错了的地方多指教啊

[ 本帖最后由 lewis0409220 于 2007-11-10 21:21 编辑 ]