ARGUMENT234 【Aero小组】第3次作业

lovemxfUID: 2335206

Argument 234The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.
'There is now evidence that the relaxed manner of living in small towns promotes better health and greater longevity than does the hectic pace of life in big cities. Businesses in the small town of Leeville report fewer days of sick leave taken by individual workers than do businesses in the nearby large city of Mason City. Furthermore, Leeville has only one physician for its one thousand residents, but in Mason City the proportion of physicians to residents is five times as high. And the average age of Leeville residents is significantly higher than that of Mason City residents. These findings suggest that people seeking longer and healthier lives should consider moving to small communities.'

The author concludes that residents in small towns will have better health and longevity than those in big cities and gives a suggestion that people who want to seek longer and healthier lives should consider moving to small communities. To support it, the arguer cites a town of Leeville and a big city of Mason City (MC) to compare. However, the comparison is insufficient and unpersuasive that could not lend credible support to the argument.

Firstly, the arguer cannot draw a conclusion that people in small towns would be better for health and longevity than those in big cities. It is because we do not know that the health and longevity of residents in other small towns are totally better than that in big cities. Thus, lacking evidence to illustrate it, the conclusion that a town’s size influences health and longevity of its residents is unreasonable.

Secondly, the argument depends on the evidence that it is fewer days of sick leave in Leeville than those in MC. However, we are not informed that the average days of sick leave per employee. It is possible that the total number of employee of MC are much more than that of Leeville, therefore the average days of sick leave per person in Leeville may be more than those in MC. If true, this fact would serve to refute the speaker's conclusion that people in small towns will have better health than those in the large city.

Thirdly, the arguer fails to convince me that the high number of physicians means residents there suffer bad health. Common sense informs me that more physicians in large cities than that in small towns for that people living in small towns prefer going to hospital in large cities. Besides, the arguer provides no evidence to prove that the workload per physician of MC is more than that of Leeville. Lacking evidence to illuminate it, the arguer cannot draw any convincing conclusion about that living in small towns promotes better health than that in large cities.

Finally, the arguer fails to convince us that people in small towns will have greater longevity than those in big cities; because the average age that the conclusion relies on does not represent people there have a long longevity. Perhaps that there are few young people in the small town, it is due to the average age higher than the big city. Therefore the arguer cannot make a conclusion based on the evidences of the average age in two places.

To sum up, the conclusion relies on vague data and problematic comparison which render it wholly unwarranted. To strengthen it, the arguer must provide more evidences that Leeville and MC is representative of small towns and big cites in the whole country. Besides, the arguer must provide the average days of sick leave per employee of Leeville is less than those of MC and physicians of MC have more workload than that of Leeville. To better assess the conclusion, I need to know why the average age of Leeville residents exceeds that of Mason City residents.
我已经查了三遍了，希望帮我改文章的同学在帮我找重看看有没有语法错误谢谢。

hziu2UID: 2326409

The author concludes that residents in small towns will have better health and longevity than those in big cities and gives a suggestion that people who want to seek longer and healthier lives should consider moving to small communities. To support it, the arguer cites a town of Leeville and a big city of Mason City (MC) to compare（with comparison）. However, the comparison is insufficient and unpersuasive that could not lend credible support to the argument.

Firstly, the arguer cannot draw a conclusion that people in small towns would be better for health and longevity than those in big cities. It is because we do not know that the health and longevity of residents in other small towns are totally better than that in big cities. Thus, lacking evidence to illustrate it, the conclusion that a town’s size influences health and longevity of its residents is unreasonable.

Secondly, the argument depends on the evidence that it is fewer days of sick leave in Leeville than those in MC. However, we are not informed that the average days of sick leave per employee. It is possible that the total number of employee of MC are much more than that of Leeville, therefore the average days of sick leave per person in Leeville may be more than those in MC. If true, this fact would serve to refute the speaker's conclusion that people in small towns will have better health than those in the large city.

Thirdly, the arguer fails to convince me that the high number of physicians means residents there suffer bad health. Common sense informs me that more physicians in large cities than that in small towns for that people living in small towns prefer going to hospital in large cities. Besides, the arguer provides no evidence to prove that the workload per physician of MC is more than that of Leeville. Lacking evidence to illuminate it, the arguer cannot draw any convincing conclusion about that living in small towns promotes better health than that in large cities.

Finally, the arguer fails to convince us that people in small towns will have greater longevity than those in big cities; because the average age that the conclusion relies on does not represent people there have a long longevity. Perhaps that there are few young people in the small town, it is due to the average age higher than the big city. Therefore the arguer cannot make a conclusion based on the evidences of the average age in two places.

To sum up, the conclusion relies on vague data and problematic comparison which render it wholly unwarranted. To strengthen it, the arguer must provide more evidences that Leeville and MC is representative of small towns and big cites in the whole country. Besides, the arguer must provide the average days of sick leave per employee of Leeville is less than those of MC and physicians of MC have more workload than that of Leeville. To better assess the conclusion, I need to know why the average age of Leeville residents exceeds that of Mason City residents.
作者写得很认真。文章也写得很不错。
我找不出什么毛病。作者的argu 应该写得很顺手了。
有个感觉就是文章模版味道重了些。
建议作者各个批驳点再深入点。

孑。。。UID: 2371205

ARGUMENT234 【Aero小组】第3次作业
Argument 234The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.
'There is now evidence that the relaxed manner of living in small towns promotes better health and greater longevity than does the hectic pace of life in big cities. Businesses in the small town of Leeville report fewer days of sick leave taken by individual workers than do businesses in the nearby large city of Mason City. Furthermore, Leeville has only one physician for its one thousand residents, but in Mason City the proportion of physicians to residents is five times as high. And the average age of Leeville residents is significantly higher than that of Mason City residents. These findings suggest that people seeking longer and healthier lives should consider moving to small communities.'

The author concludes that residents in small towns will have better health and longevity than those in big cities and gives a suggestion that people who want to seek longer and healthier lives should consider moving to small communities. To support it, the arguer cites a town of Leeville and a big city of Mason City (MC) to compare. However, the comparison is insufficient and unpersuasive that could not lend credible support to the argument.觉得这个开头很有条理很清晰。加入了自己的分析。比我用的重复作者观点的方式要好。

Firstly, the arguer cannot draw a conclusion that people in small towns would be better for health and longevity than those in big cities.（从第一局看不出来你这一段要指出的问题是什么，就这样提出来，好像没有什么说服力。感觉具体一点好或者点明。让人一目了然。好像老美比较喜欢这样的说。） It is because we do not know that the health and longevity of residents in other small towns are totally（all） better than that in big cities. Thus, lacking evidence to(这个句式之前出现过一次了。觉得你用的句式很多种了，比我专业。不过也要避免重复。我觉得你应该知道。只是没注意吧。) illustrate it, the conclusion that a town’s size influences health and longevity of its residents is unreasonable.

Secondly, the argument depends on the evidence that it is fewer days of sick leave in Leeville than those in MC. However, we are not informed that the average days of sick leave per employee.（可以用一个句子将一二句合并，理由和前面第一段讲的一样。这里两句话合并才是指出错误。） It is possible that the total number of employee of MC are much more than that of Leeville, therefore the average days of sick leave per person in Leeville may be more than those in MC. If true, this fact would serve to refute the speaker's conclusion that people in small towns will have better health than those in the large city.

Thirdly, the arguer fails to convince me that the high number of physicians means residents there suffer bad health. Common sense informs me that more physicians in large cities than that in small towns for that people living in small towns prefer going to hospital in large cities. Besides, the arguer provides no evidence to prove that the workload per physician of MC is more than that of Leeville. Lacking evidence to illuminate it, the arguer cannot draw any convincing conclusion about that living in small towns promotes better health than that in large cities.

Finally, the arguer fails to convince us that people in small towns will have greater longevity than those in big cities; because the average age that the conclusion relies on does not represent people there have a long longevity. Perhaps that there are few young people in the small town, it is due to the average age higher than the big city. Therefore the arguer cannot make a conclusion based on the evidences of the average age in two places.
感觉你论证的思路跟我的好像不太一样，你会先说作者的什么观点得不到证明，然后说因为它的什么什么论据或者论证不成立。我刚好相反，先说什么论据或者论证有问题，然后退出他的什么结论不成立。不知道那种更加符合口味。或者两种都行。。到时可以讨论下。
To sum up, the conclusion relies on vague data and problematic comparison which render it wholly（感觉太绝对了） unwarranted. To strengthen it, the arguer must provide more evidences that Leeville and MC is representative of small towns and big cites in the whole country. Besides, the arguer must provide the average days of sick leave per employee of Leeville is less than those of MC and physicians of MC have more workload than that of Leeville. To better assess the conclusion, I need to know why the average age of Leeville residents exceeds that of Mason City residents.

觉得你写argument已经比较专业了。。我看argument时间不长，只能这样改下了。而且我对语法也不敢冒。。唉。。不好意思哈~