argument2 [Jet]小组第一次作业

dreamstringUID: 2389201

TOPIC: ARGUMENT2 - 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."
WORDS: 346          TIME: 8：30          DATE: 2008-1-19



Citing a success example happened in nearby area on seven years ago, the committee of homeowners assert it will be materialized in Deerhaven Acres for the target to raise property values in this place. However, the argument is depended on some partial statements which make it less convinced.

For one thing, it is seven years ago when the action is exerted in Brookville community. To prove author’s argument by citing evidence which happened such a long time ago is not reasonable. Maybe Brookville’s effort made sense many years before, but whether the same operation can bring a similar effect now may get a negative answer, for almost everything has changed during such a long period. The committee has to consider carefully which action is adapted to contemporary.

For another thing, the proof is happened in a nearby area but exactly in Deerhaven Acres. Whether the action is suit to them is uncertain, even though it has tripled average property in Brookville. Maybe the way Brookville’s yards landscaped and colors of homes painted is harmonious to the environment around it, which made the view more beautiful and the values tripled. Query it is suit to the situation in Deerhaven Acres, though the same effort is made.

What makes the proof less convinced is that the arrangement of yards and the colors of houses might not be the key due to the success in Brookville. Just saying the actions which mentioned by author shift Brookville to success is suspected, since there might be some other efforts is exerted in Brookville, which could be the main point of its improvement. If there is no other evidences to prove that there is no any efforts is operated, I can’t be persuaded to trust they are the only reason which increased property values in Brookville.

In sum, the argument relies on evidences occurred in a nearby region years ago, which might not suit to Deerhaven Acres today. To strengthen the argument, the author has to search more evidences of analog examples in Deerhaven Acres now, and with a more comprehensive investigation.



[ 本帖最后由 dreamstring 于 2008-1-29 10:07 编辑 ]

goldin2008UID: 2140085

1.  argument2 [Jet]小组第一次作业
TOPIC: ARGUMENT2 - 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."
WORDS: 346          TIME: 8：30          DATE: 2008-1-19

Citing a success（successful） example happened (happening) in nearby area on (去掉) seven years ago, the committee of homeowners assert (三单，加s) it will be materialized in Deerhaven Acres for the target to raise property values in this place. However, the argument is （去掉） depended on some partial statements which make it less convinced.

For one thing, it is seven years ago when the action is exerted in Brookville community. To prove author’s argument by citing evidence which happened such a long time ago is not reasonable. Maybe Brookville’s effort made sense many years before, but whether the same operation can bring a similar effect now may get a negative answer（什么叫负回答，我想你是想说不好回答或者没有明确的答案吧）, for almost everything has changed during such a long period. The committee has to consider carefully which action is adapted to contemporary.

For another thing, the proof is happened（前面你用的挺好的，主动，这里用成了被动） in a nearby area but exactly in Deerhaven Acres.（这整个句子有问题，表述的有点乱，你是想说在某地已经证实的在另地不一定可以吧，这么说你感觉一下如何 The effectiveness which is effective in Brookville may not also be effective in DA.）Whether the action is suit (suit只能是名词或者动词，没有adj.) to them is uncertain, even though it has tripled average property in Brookville. Maybe the way Brookville’s yards landscaped and colors of homes painted is harmonious to the environment around it, which made the view more beautiful and the values tripled. Query it is suit to the situation in Deerhaven Acres, though the same effort is made.

What makes the proof less convinced is that the arrangement of yards and the colors of houses might not be the key due to the success in Brookville. Just saying the actions which (少个is)mentioned by author shift Brookville to success is suspected, since there might be some other efforts is（去掉is） exerted in Brookville, which could be the main point of its improvement. If there is no other evidences to prove that there is no any efforts is operated, I can’t be persuaded to trust they are the only reason which increased property values in Brookville.

In sum, the argument relies on evidences occurred in a nearby region years ago, which might not suit to Deerhaven Acres today. To strengthen the argument, the author has to search more evidences of analog（这是名词，应该用adj.） examples in Deerhaven Acres now, and with(要么去掉and，要么将with改为use，take) a more comprehensive investigation.
总结一下你的总体思路：1.七年前的经验现在不一定适用；2.一个地方的经验在另一地不一定适用；3.增值的原因可能有其它；基本的错误都找到了，但是写批驳性文章的时候要注意一下层次，也就是批驳的顺序，哪个最主要就把哪个放在第一个，不要分散力量，每个错误都用差不多的力量，最终的结果就是都蜻蜓点水，没有办法一击致命，建议（纯粹是建议）抓住最主要的放在第一段（文章的第二段）猛劈，然后再说当然还有一些其他的错误，列举一下，再做结论。因为其实小错误很多，没法说全，比如平均增长什么的，也可以作为小错来批，最最关键的还是逻辑上的大错，而不是他所用的例子上的小错，切忌这是逻辑写作。

[ 本帖最后由 goldin2008 于 2008-2-1 16:13 编辑 ]