argument38,求拍呵~

billy4everUID: 2375586

题目：ARGUMENT38 - The following memo appeared in the newsletter of the West Meria Public Health Council.

"An innovative treatment has come to our attention that promises to significantly reduce absenteeism in our schools and workplaces. A study reports that in nearby East Meria, where fish consumption is very high, people visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds. Clearly, eating a substantial amount of fish can prevent colds. Since colds are the reason most frequently given for absences from school and work, we recommend the daily use of Ichthaid, a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil, as a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism."
字数：358          用时：00:31:07          日期：2007-12-10 22:21:36


By citing several pieces of evidence and a survey, the author arrives at the conclusion that we should adopt Ichthaid, a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil, as a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism. At first glance, it sounds reasonable; however, after further consideration, it suffers from several critical flaws which I will pick them out as follows.

To begin with, whether eating a substantial amount of fish could prevent colds is not convincing. First, the author does not provide us some background information between East Meria and West Meria. Does it much warmer in East Meria than that in West Meria? Because of this reason, residents in East Meria may visit the doctor fewer times that those live in West Meria. Besides, the high fish consumption does not equal to high fish eating rate. In other words, perhaps a large amount of fish are not used to be cooked and, other usages require such a large consumption. Thirdly, the health condition of residents in the two locations is still unclear. It is highly possible that inhabitants in East Meria is in better condition originally, thus they certainly seldom see a doctor. To sum up, the author fails to rule out dissimilarities between the two cities that may lead to completely different explanations.

Another problem with the newsletter is that whether getting colds can result to absenteeism. Though people feel uncomfortable when they get cold, do they definitely need to require a leave from workplace? The reply is highly possible not. Getting cold becomes a good excuse that people are able to be absence from school or workplace. It require further investigate about the relationship between colds and absenteeism.

Finally, even assuming eating fish could prevent colds and colds is a common reason of absenteeism; the author's claim still could not persuade us. I concede fish is good method for cold recovery, however, whether the nutritional supplement derived from fish oil can do a great help for cold treatment is unclear. No such information told us it is safe enough to take this medicine and, side effects will not happen. Before ensure the function, usage and making process of the nutritional supplement, few people dare to take it.

For what have discussed above, the newsletter fails to persuade us. To better evaluate, more convincing evidence and persuasive details should be provided.

这次限时写了，还是打字速度慢，而且不是很顺手。完后又花了时间改了一下。看来得提高打字速度了。这个严重制约了我的思路啊~

所以想跟改我作文的同学探讨一下，要是打字到考试时候还是慢，能不能不管文章的形式，把开头之类的套话省略，而直接批它的逻辑错误。再极端一点，我想伤其十指不如断其一指，对于一两个错误深入的批评和上文这样的论述，哪个更有效呢？

[ 本帖最后由 lastangel 于 2007-12-20 00:57 编辑 ]

最後の使徒UID: 2257608

By citing severalpieces of evidence and a survey(这个不是evidence? 与论据并列的是论证论断等，比如推论，或者逻辑关系，而证据则是实在事物，二者最好分清楚), the author arrives at the conclusionthat we should adopt Ichthaid, a nutritional supplement derived fromfish oil, as a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism（argument里准备表达作者意思很重要，特别是这些意思会成为攻击点的时候，比如daily....）. Atfirst glance, it sounds reasonable; however, after furtherconsideration, it suffers from several critical flaws which I will pickthem out as follows.（一般而言开头有两个作用， 1是梳理作者逻辑，2是给自己些时间来审题，后者可以不表达在纸面上， 而前者对题目需要有针对性，相比而言你的开头都是比较笼统的套话，所以作用不大，特别是那些没所指的evidence，critical flaws之类的， 完全可以简化成一两句话）

To begin with,whether （the author's deduction that） eating a substantial amount of fish could prevent colds is notconvincing. First, the author does not provide us some backgroundinformation between East Meria and West Meria.（这个很笼统，分句中心句最好能一句话就让人知道你要说什么，而不是靠展开去说明，展开是用于论证中心句的，不是用来补充中心句的。） Does it much warmer inEast Meria than that in West Meria? Because of this reason, residentsin East Meria may visit the doctor fewer times that those live in WestMeria.（so? 把话说完啊，所以跟鱼没关系，是气候的原因） Besides, the high fish consumption does not equal to high fisheating rate. In other words, perhaps a large amount of fish are notused to be cooked and, other usages require such a large consumption.（what usage? 出口啊制药啊什么的）Thirdly, the health condition of residents in the two locations isstill unclear.（这跟天气那个不是一回事么） It is highly possible that inhabitants in East Meria isin better condition originally, thus they certainly seldom see adoctor. To sum up, the author fails to rule out dissimilarities betweenthe two cities that may lead to completely different explanations.
这段显得论证层次混乱，因为你把作者两步假设并在一起说了，即 东比西消耗鱼多+东比西看医生少=鱼能防病，采用并列方式分别攻击两个基点， 然后再攻击后面那点会比较好，即 消耗鱼不代表吃鱼 看医生少不代表不得病，然后说即使吃鱼多，得病少，二者也未必有因果，这样层次会清晰很多。

Another problem withthe newsletter is that whether getting colds can result to absenteeism.Though people feel uncomfortable when they get cold, do they definitelyneed to require a leave from workplace? The reply is highly possiblenot.（why not？感冒可是很严重的病，重的话有生命危险，而且会传染，这个有些多余，直接说人们可能就是找借口） Getting cold becomes a good excuse that people are able to beabsence from school or workplace. （然后呢？继续论证指向作者论点：即使感冒被鱼油预防了，人们也未必会减少缺勤，可能会找别的理由，也可能压根没多少人感冒）It require further investigate aboutthe relationship  between colds and absenteeism.

分头找错误的方法虽然比较便捷，但会使段落之间很散，造成文章缺乏整体感，建议LZ看下参考区里有关ARGUMENT的层进式写作套路的内容。

Finally, evenassuming eating fish could prevent colds and colds is a common reasonof absenteeism; the author's claim still could not persuade us. Iconcede fish is good method for cold recovery, however, whether thenutritional supplement derived from fish oil can do a great help forcold treatment is unclear.（这句说是鱼油对感冒治疗未必有好处， 下一句是有害处，二这逻辑层次不同，这里你先把这点说完，鱼还有其它很多成分，所以鱼油是不是作用成分不知道） No such information told us it is safeenough to take this medicine and, side effects will not happen. Beforeensure the function, usage and making process of the nutritionalsupplement, few people dare to take it.（这里最好用情态动词，表示你也是在推测，一般时态在ARGUMENT里不太好用）

For what havediscussed above, the newsletter fails to persuade us. To betterevaluate, more convincing evidence and persuasive details should beprovided.

对于你的问题， 个人建议如果能想到足够的论据，那么就深入攻击二到三个点，而不要贪多，不然会造成论点论证不深入或者压根没点到点上，这样跟没写区别不大。象这种错误比较多的题找主要错误就行了。当然还是最好多练练打字，这个是有百利而且终身受益的技能，提高也很快，一周就效果很明显了。

对于大结构推荐看以前做的同主题，对题目的分析套路很严谨，相信能有些帮助：https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=637949&highlight=argument38