Argument131 [ g群] 第二次作业

musicdwhUID: 2274248

1.提出问题
2.不一定是只有是污染会使鱼下降
3.报告不一定准备，准备不一定合适T地。
4.只说了鱼的情况，没说marine 结论两者都有，
5,结尾。




The conclusion, the best measure to keep the mount of fish and to protect all of Tria's marine wildlife is to abide our regulations and take those of Omni's way, drive from the comparison the situation of Tari Island, fishing is not banned, with Omni land, fishing is banned. In addition the author assert the populations of fish is result from overfishing.Though the author seems to be well presented, lack many credible evidence to convince us.
To begin with, the assertion that overfishing leading the reduce of population of fish results from declining is not because of pollution. Obviously, the author make a false dilemma mistake. He argue that only those two reason could let reduce of fish. However,  the environment of Tari land,if true, is no longer for the fish living and Omni's is suit to living, where most of fish migrate to. Farther more, even baning an dumping and offshore oil drilling within 20 miles of Tria, could not warrant the pollution of fish, water pollution often influence large area of sea or river. So lacking of ruling out other possibility factor, the conclusion is unwarranted.
In the second place, that,there is no report about decreasing of fish now, is not represent it regulation is good and well adopt the situation of us. First, the data from omni is surely valuable, only report say there is no significant decline could test fact. the report, when it was done, whether the collected the totally sample, could affect the valuable. Second, Onmi didn't ban fishing between arrange from 10 miles to 20 miles, if the population of fish decline in this area distinctively, should we adopt this so-called good regulation.
  Last but important, even the data is valuable,we should learn from the regulation from Omni. the all static of newsletter is about fish. The conclusion is about both the fish and marine. The author assume that fish is same to marine, however, the marine, which eat fish for food, may let the declining of fish. If it is so, the conclusion which achieve by the author, obviously, lack the evidence about the marine, and have little valuable.
In conclusion, the conclusion, which is seems logic, have several flaws as discussed above, and couldn't make us convince. To support his view, the author should provide some evidence about the environment, the data of marine and so on, both area of Tora and Omni.


[ 本帖最后由 musicdwh 于 2008-12-30 21:33 编辑 ]

pobosoUID: 2318913

The conclusion, the best measure to keep the mount of fish and to protect all of Tria's marine wildlife is to abide our regulations and take those of Omni's way, drive from the comparison the situation of Tari Island, fishing is not banned, with Omni land, fishing is banned. In addition the author asserts the populations of fish is(are) resulting from overfishing.(不确定，可以直接用result from 吧)Though the author seems to be well presented, lack many credible evidence（many 后接可数名词吧。。） to convince us.To begin with, the assertion that overfishing leading the reduce（reduction） of population of fish results from declining is not because of pollution(l两个谓语动词？？建议分开写吧). Obviously, the author make s a false dilemma mistake(不确定可以这样用吗？dilemma是名词，　如果可以的话我学习了). He argues(作者老是犯主谓不一致的错误，偶也是。。――) that only those two reason could let reduce of fish. However,  the environment of Tari land,if true,（什么if true?这句话毫无意义）is no longer　suitable for the(去掉) fish living and Omni's is suit to living, （这句是否该另起一句）where most of fish migrate to. Farther（further ） more, even baning an dumping and offshore oil drilling within 20 miles of Tria, could not warrant the pollution of fish, water pollution often influence large area of sea or river. So lacking of ruling out other possibility factor, the conclusion is unwarranted. In the second place, that,there(病句吧。。) is no report about decreasing of fish now, is not represent it regulation is good and well adopt the situation of us. First, the data from omni is surely valuable, only report say there is no significant decline could test fact.（l两个谓语） the report, when it was done, whether the collected the totally sample, could affect the valuable. Second, Onmi didn't ban fishing between arrange from 10 miles to 20 miles, if the population of fish decline in this area distinctively, should we adopt this so-called good regulation.  Last but important, even the data is valuable,we should learn from the regulation from Omni. the all （不能同时使用）static of newsletter is about fish. The conclusion is about both the fish and marine. The author assumes that fish is same to marine, however, the marine, which eat fish for food, may let(render) the declining of fish happens. If it is so, the conclusion which achieve by the author, obviously, lack the evidence about the marine, and have little valuable.(把and 后面的去掉吧，或者另起一句，虽然有问题，但是这个逻辑很好，我还没想到呢～)In conclusion, the conclusion（读起来会不会别扭呢，把后面一个conclusion改成suggestion, recommendation之类的吧）, which is seems logic, have several flaws as discussed above, and couldn't make us convince. To support his view, the author should provide some evidence about the environment, the data of marine and so on, both area of Tora and Omni.
作者似乎在乱用复杂句，感觉很多语法错误，从你的两篇作文看来，会犯很多低级错误，希望你写的时候不要只顾速度，稍微注意下语法会比较好，至于逻辑方面，我也是很混乱的，不能给你任何的建议sorry.