argument2 [0806G-desperado小组]第二次作业bypmsf

流淌的月光UID: 2414493

题目
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."

提纲
1 统一外观就能提高地价 ?这是他人经验，尽管离得近，但是否适用于该地很可疑.
2 他地区地价提高并不一定是因为统一了外观。七年可发生很多变化，交通，商业区，社区内部设施提高了。
3 地价要提高得有人愿意住进来。统一外观抹杀个性，会引人反感.

正文
In this argument, the arguer concludes that we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting. At first glance, the arguer's reasoning seems to be appealing, while clearly examining the arguer's reasoning, we may find that it is unconvincing. The argument contains several facets that are questionable.

On the one hand, the argument is based on a false analogy. It is true that average property values increase in Broolville after restricting on landscaping and housepainting, But he does not provide any evidence that it will also work in Deerhaven. Even though these two communities are nearby to each other, they may also exist foundmental differences. As a result, Broolville community and Deerhaven Acres community establish a warranted analogy.

On another hand, the arguer points out that average property values have tripled in Brookville after restricting on landscaping and housepainting, however, it is possible that other factors might also contributed to the change. There are too much changes for a place, for instance, transportation, business and inner construction of the community might improved.

Finally, we do not know that there are still many people who wish to live in the community after increasing property values. If few people will live in the community, all of the investment is a waste of money and energy. Moreover, people in the community might do not like the restrictions, because this will obliterate their personalities.


To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to provide more evidence to rule out other possible causes to the increase of average property values in a community. What’s more, we need more information about Deerhaven Acres community concerning the geography, culture and so on.


[ 本帖最后由 流淌的月光 于 2007-12-9 14:08 编辑 ]

summer330UID: 2175256

提纲
1 统一外观就能提高地价 ?这是他人经验，尽管离得近，但是否适用于该地很可疑.
2 他地区地价提高并不一定是因为统一了外观。七年可发生很多变化，交通，商业区，社区内部设施提高了。
3 地价要提高得有人愿意住进来。统一外观抹杀个性，会引人反感.

正文
In this argument, the arguer concludes that we(who?) should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting. At first glance, the arguer's reasoning(claim) seems to be appealing, while clearly examining the arguer's reasoning, we may find that it is unconvincing. The argument contains several facets that are questionable.

On the one hand, the argument is based on a false analogy. It is true that average property values increase in Broolville after restricting(restriction) on landscaping and housepainting, But he does not provide any evidence that it will also work in Deerhaven. Even though these two communities are nearby to each other, they may also exist foundmental differences. As a result, Broolville community and Deerhaven Acres community establish a warranted analogy.(好像应该是作者建立错误类比吧)

On another hand(On the other hand), the arguer points out that average property values have tripled in Brookville after restricting on landscaping and housepainting, however, it is possible that other factors might also contributed to the change. There are too much changes for a place, for instance, transportation, business and inner construction of the community might improved.

Finally, we do not know that (whether) there are still many people who wish to live in the community after increasing (increase of) property values. If few people will (would) live in the community, all of the investment is a waste of money and energy. Moreover, people in the community might do not like the restrictions, because this will obliterate their personalities.


To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to provide more evidence to rule out other possible causes to the increase of average property values in a community. What’s more, we need more information about Deerhaven Acres community concerning the geography, culture and so on.

PursueDreamUID: 2426799

提纲
1 统一外观就能提高地价 ?这是他人经验，尽管离得近，但是否适用于该地很可疑.
2 他地区地价提高并不一定是因为统一了外观。七年可发生很多变化，交通，商业区，社区内部设施提高了。
3 地价要提高得有人愿意住进来。统一外观抹杀个性，会引人反感.

正文
In this argument, the arguer concludes that we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting(没有读懂,We?). At first glance, the arguer's reasoning seems to be appealing, while clearly examining the arguer's reasoning, we may find that it is unconvincing. The argument contains several facets that are questionable.

On the one hand, the argument is based on a false analogy. It is true that average property values increase in Broolville after restricting(restrictions?) on landscaping and housepainting, But he does not provide any evidence that it will also work in Deerhaven. Even though these two communities are nearby to each other, they may also exist foundmental differences. As a result, Broolville community and Deerhaven Acres community establish a warranted(unwarranted?) analogy.

On another(the other?) hand, the arguer points out that average property values have tripled in Brookville after restricting(restrictions?) on landscaping and housepainting, however, it is possible that other factors might also contributed(contribute?) to the change. There are too much(many) changes for a place, for instance, transportation, business and inner construction of the community might improved(一句话中时态是不是可以不一样？There have been too many changes for a place, for instance, transportation, business and inner construction of the community? 个人感觉 ).

Finally, we do not know that there are still many people who wish to live in the community after increasing property values. If few people will live in the community, all of the investment is a waste of money and energy. Moreover, people in the community might do not like the restrictions, because this will obliterate their personalities.


To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the arguer would have to provide more evidence to rule out other possible causes to the increase of average property values in a community. What’s more, we need more information about Deerhaven Acres community concerning the geography, culture and so on.
Argument 中人称代词是不是出现少一点为好，个人感觉（he,we,....）