Argument185 【0906G ANap Hand 作文互改小组】第五次作业 by zju-jenny 请猛拍

jenny11235UID: 2585428

TOPIC: ARGUMENT185 - The following appeared in a letter from the owner of the Sunnyside Towers apartment building to its manager.

"One month ago, all the showerheads on the first five floors of Sunnyside Towers were modified to restrict the water flow to approximately 1/3 of its original force. Although actual readings of water usage before and after the adjustment are not yet available, the change will obviously result in a considerable savings for Sunnyside Corporation, since the corporation must pay for water each month. Except for a few complaints about low water pressure, no problems with showers have been reported since the adjustment. Clearly, restricting water flow throughout all the 20 floors of Sunnyside Towers will increase our profits further."
WORDS: 496          TIME: 01:10:00          DATE: 2009-1-5 20:24:21

The letter, stating profits increase by restricting water flow, provides us some well-presented causes which are not somehow well-reasoned. The author accolades the water restriction, however, as well overlooked some important facts.

First of all, we could notice that there have been some complaints after adopting the restriction in the first month. Not mention that whether one month is a particular long time frame for the manager to determine the true effect bought by the restriction, we cannot help asking: Will the owner receive more complaints in future? We can boldly assume that most complaints are made by people living on higher floors. So if such condition, low water pressure, existing in the next months, maybe those people will reconsider the Sunnyside Towers as their domiciles, which will contribute to a decline of the profits.

Additionally, as the actual readings of water usage is unavailable now, hastily believing considerable water saving also is not deemed as a wise decision. It is entirely possible that though water flow is restricted, the time used washing is prolonged. So the whole volume of water may be as same as before. Even if readings of water usage are truly fewer than before, there still exist other factors influencing the readings. Maybe some residents are on business, not living in the Towers, or maybe the conscious --- saving water--- has rising. Unless the owner provides us with more details to illustrate the water saving indeed owes to the restriction, we cannot approval her assertion. Even it is true, we cannot equal the water saving to profits rising as we don't know the feeling of the people living on the first five floors. Water restriction probablely brings to them much convenience. For example, people who used showering in huge water will feel uncomfortable thanks to the less water flow. So if we emerge all the above, just consider the water flow and then believe profits increase, it is apparently unpersuasive.

Lastly, no problems with showers have been reported don't mean that they will not appear in future and even they don’t exist now. It is very likely that people are engaged in their works and then they share little time to care their showerheads or even they know there is some wrong with it. Thanks to the busy day, they have no time to report. And as common sense tells us, problems with showers may not appear too soon after modification. Only when we meet an occasion that too many people shower at the same time, it will be emerge probably. Viewing that no further information are presented in the letter, we hardly believe modification won’t bring some troubles.

To sum, the owner overlook many factors which is reference to the profits. And whether there will be a saving is also in further discussion. Furthermore, only the owner provides some authorial identification to ensure no problems bought by modification, we can take the restriction thoroughly out of all 20 floors in consideration.  

[ 本帖最后由 jenny11235 于 2009-1-5 20:48 编辑 ]

cynthia219UID: 2465245

The letter, stating profits increase by restricting water flow, provides us some well-presented causes which are not somehow well-reasoned. 读起来不算顺畅,如果是我,我会写(The letter stated that profits would increase by restricting water flow, which seems to be well-presented causes, but actually not.)The author accolades the water restriction, however, as well overlooked some 加上other会不会看起来更客观 important facts.

First of all, we could notice that there have been some complaints after adopting the restriction in the first month. Not mention that whether one month is a particular long time frame for the manager to determine the true effect bought by the restriction, we cannot help asking: Will the owner receive more complaints in future?我很喜欢这句话 We can boldly assume that most complaints are made by people living on higher floors. So if such condition (in that case) 会不会更好, low water pressure, existing in the next months, maybe those people will reconsider the Sunnyside Towers as their domiciles, which will contribute to a decline of the profits.

Additionally, as the actual readings of water usage is unavailable now, hastily believing considerable water saving also is not deemed as a wise decision. It is entirely possible that though water flow is restricted, the time used washing is prolonged. So the whole volume of water may be as same as before. Even if readings of water usage are truly fewer than before, there still exist other factors influencing the readings. Maybe some residents are on business, not living in the Towers, or maybe the conscious --- saving water--- has rising. Unless the owner provides us with more details to illustrate the water saving indeed owes to the restriction, we cannot approval her 不准确 assertion.建议另开一段,并建议这段的前半部分作为分支段落的第一部分,因为表的读数是第一个逻辑错误,而民众意愿比较靠后. Even it is true, we cannot equal the water saving to profits rising as we don't know the feeling of the people living on the first five floors. Water restriction probablely brings to可删去 them much convenience. For example, people who used showering in huge water will feel uncomfortable thanks to the less water flow. So if we emerge all the above, just consider the water flow and then believe profits increase, it is apparently unpersuasive.

Lastly, no problems with showers have been reported don't 我觉得应该用第三人称单数,因为主语是个句子mean that they will not appear in future and even they don’t exist now. It is very( most) likely that people are engaged in their works and then they share little time to care their showerheads or even they know there is some wrong with it. Thanks to the busy day, they have no time to report. And as common sense tells us, problems with showers may not appear too soon after modification. Only when we meet an occasion that too many people shower at the same time, it will be emerge probably. Viewing that no further information are presented in the letter, we hardly believe modification won’t bring some troubles.

To sum, the owner overlooks many factors which is reference to the profits. And whether there will be a saving is also in further discussion. Furthermore, only the owner provides some authorial identification to ensure no problems would be bought by modification, we can take the restriction thoroughly out of all 20 floors in consideration.  
感觉整体布局上有待于提高:)