lestou小组11月19日argument75

komy_leeUID: 2364433

Argument 75
In this analysis the arguer attempts to convince us that the increase in childhood obesity is probably due to the suburbanization of America and the associated decrease in the opportunities children have for exercise. To sustain the claim, the arguer provides the evidence that in the same time that the proportion of children living in suburbs has increased the obesity rates among children have been increasing since the 1970’s. The argument is also based on the assumption that children living in rural areas lack exercise and that a big portion of the children suffering from obesity are those living in suburbs. As it stands persuasive, the analysis is unconvincing for several critical flaws.

To begin with, the arguer observes a correlation between the place where children live and the obesity, then concludes that the former is the cause of the latter. However, the arguer fails to rule out other possible explanations for the increase of the rates of obesity of children. For example, since the 1970’s, it is entirely possible that people especially children has enjoyed am improvement of life quality and consequently most of them get an overnutrition. Moreover, other factors such as the preference of fast-food might also lead to the increase of obesity rates. Without ruling out all other such factors it is unfair to conclude that the suburbanization causes the increase in childhood obesity in America.

In the second place, the arguer groundlessly assumes that being driven everywhere bears some relation to childhood obesity. At first glance the assumption is sort of reasonable. However, the arguer provides no evidence to support that this is the case, nor does the arguer establish a casual relationship between the two. It is highly possible that the children living in rural areas do other kinds of exercises such as climbing, swimming to keep themselves from obesity, though they do little walk when they need to go somewhere. It is equally possible that the children living in cities don’t do any physical exercises except for that they have to walk a short distance to school. They may prefer to stay at home watching TV because there are not any interesting places for them to play.
Accordingly, it is presumptuous to suggest that going everywhere by bus or car was responsible for children’s obesity.

In summary, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the arguer has to provide information about the distribution in area of the children suffering from obesity. In order to better evaluate the argument, the arguer must also show that there are no other factors accounting to obesity of children and the children living in areas don’t take any kinds of physical exercises.

请大家指教

[ 本帖最后由 komy_lee 于 2007-11-21 10:58 编辑 ]

兰子UID: 2404184

Argument 75
In this analysis the arguer attempts to convince us that the increase in childhood obesity is probably due to the suburbanization of America and the associated decrease in the opportunities children have for exercise. To sustain the claim, the arguer provides the evidence that in the same time that the proportion of children living in suburbs has increased (应该加上一个while表示同时发生)the obesity rates among children have been increasing since the 1970’s. The argument is also based on the assumption that children living in rural areas (are)lack (of)exercise and suburbs. (觉得这几句话在引用作者的论据时表述得有些不清楚)As it stands persuasive, the analysis is unconvincing for several critical flaws.To begin with, the arguer observes a correlation between the place where children live and the obesity, then concludes that the former is the cause of the latter(小拼写错误吧,呵呵). However, the arguer fails to rule out other possible explanations for the increase of the rates of obesity of children. For example, since the 1970’s, it is entirely possible that people especially children has enjoyed am(an) improvement of life quality and consequently most of them get an overnutrition. Moreover, other factors such as the preference of fast-food might also lead to the increase of obesity rates. Without ruling out all other such factors it is unfair to conclude that the suburbanization causes the increase in childhood obesity in America.In the second place, the arguer groundlessly assumes that being driven everywhere bears some relation to childhood obesity. At first glance the assumption is sort of reasonable. However, the arguer provides no evidence to support that this is the case, nor does the arguer establish a casual relationship between the two. It is highly possible that the children living in rural areas do other kinds of exercises such as climbing, swimming to keep themselves from obesity, though they do little walk when they need to go somewhere. It is equally possible that the children living in cities don’t do any physical exercises except for that they have to walk a short distance to school. They may prefer to stay at home watching TV because there are not any interesting places for them to play.Accordingly, it is presumptuous to suggest that going everywhere by bus or car was responsible for children’s obesity.In summary, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the arguer has to provide information about the distribution in area of the children suffering from obesity. In order to better evaluate the argument, the arguer must also show that there are no other factors accounting to obesity of children and the children living in (?)areas don’t take any kinds of physical exercises.

范文上说一般要攻击三到四个明显的错误,你只列举了两个,有些少!
我没有看出什么大的语法错误,因为我自己水平也有限,但是觉得文章在反驳作者论点是语言还是很平淡的,说服力也不强,缺乏很有理很出彩的句子,我写作文时也是遇到这个问题,大家一齐努力,共同进步!