ARGUMENT042【0906G Fight 4月同心砥砺冲刺组大帖】第1周第2作业 by SUP1428

sup1428UID：2576931

ARGUMENT42
The following appeared in a proposal from the economic minister of the country of Paraterra.
"In order to strengthen its lagging economy, last year the government of the nearby country of Bellegea began an advertising campaign to promote ecologically sound tourism (ecotourism). This year the number of foreign visitors arriving at Bellegea's main airport doubled, and per capita income in Bellegea increased by ten percent. To provide more income for the population of Paraterra and also preserve the natural environment of our tiny country, we too should begin to promote ecotourism. To ensure that our advertising campaign is successful, we should hire the current director of Bellegea's National Tourism Office as a consultant for the campaign."

提纲
1)BE and PA might not be comparable in tourist resources, environment,etc.
2)The success of ecotourism in BE, if any, may have no causal relationship with the director’s effort.
3)we don’t know what fraction of visitors arriving at BE came here for tourism.
  other factors could also account for the increase in per capita income in BE.
4)The author doesn’t provide any information about details of ecotourism,thus the assumption that the natural environment of PE will be preserved is not ensured.




In this proposal from the economic minister of the country of PA, the author concludes that PA should start to promote ecologically sound tourism(ecotourism), and also suggests that they need to hire the current director of BE’s national tourism office as a consultant for this projection. To support this conclusion the author points out that neighboring country BE began the similar campaign last year and the number of visitors arriving at BE’s main airport doubled this year. Furthermore, the income of per capita increased by 10 percent. For several reasons, I am not convinced that the proposal’s projection is accurate.

To begin with, the author ignored a crucial precondition whether we have enough ecotourism resources to support such a campaign due to BE and PA might not be comparable in tourist resources, environment, etc. if we are lack of these resources or our environmental conditions are not appealing enough, the campaign would not be effective as BE’s without such preconditions. Unfortunately, the author overlooked this point.

Moreover, the suggestion that we should hire the director from BE’s national office as our consultant is open to doubt, as a necessary premise that employing him is advantage to our projection is not guaranteed. The success of ecotourism in BE, if any, may have no causal relationship with the director’s effort. Thus, without providing more information about the premise, it is unfair to conclude that we should keep the director in our service.

Yet another problem with the proposal involves the grounds of the argument is not convinced. Firstly, we don’t know what fraction of visitors arriving at BE came here for tourism. Perhaps, the main airport in BE becomes a new transport hub lead to more floating visitors and businessmen who might not concern traveling here. Secondly, other factors could also account for the increase in per capita income in BE. Perhaps the development of other industries motives the enhancing of income. Without taking into account these possibilities, the author can not persuade me that PA should adopt the recommendation mentioned above.

Finally, the conclusion that by promoting ecotourism we can increase income for the population of PA as well as preserve the natural environment is unwarranted. The author doesn’t provide any information about details of ecotourism,thus the assumption that the natural environment of PE will be preserved is not ensured. As we don’t know exactly how it would function to reach the goals. It is entirely possible that many other more beneficial ideas are exist. Lacking such detailed information, the proposal cannot justify its conclusion that we should take the action to promote ecotourism

In sum, the proposal is not well supported. To strengthen it, the author must provide clear evidence of our nation’s detailed resources adapting development of ecotourism. To better bolster it, the author also should ensure that the hiring of the director is benefit to our campaign based on more specific measures of BE’s plan.

witchyayaUID：2494651

witchyaya修改，如果修改的不对地方，见谅哈，再讨论。




In this proposal from the economic minister of the country of PA(文章中第一次出现，是不是应该先将全称写出来，在其后标上简写呢？), the author concludes that PA should start to promote ecologically sound tourism(ecotourism), and also suggests that they need to hire the current director of BE’s national tourism office as a consultant for this projection（project?）. To support this conclusion the author points out that neighboring country BE began the similar campaign last year and the number of visitors arriving at BE’s main airport doubled this year. Furthermore, the income of per capita (per capita可做形容词或者副词，却没有名词或代词词性，所以不能这样用哦)increased by 10 percent. For several reasons, I am not convinced that the proposal’s projection（？） is accurate.

To begin with, the author ignored a crucial precondition whether we have enough ecotourism resources to support such a campaign due to BE and PA might not be comparable in tourist resources, environment, etc. if we are lack of these resources or our environmental conditions are not appealing enough, the campaign would not be effective as BE’s without such preconditions（这个去掉感觉要合适些，if本身就是一个条件状语，without…再加上的反重复）. Unfortunately, the author overlooked this point.

Moreover, the suggestion that we should hire the director from BE’s national office as our consultant is open to doubt, as a necessary premise that employing him is advantage to our projection is not guaranteed.（理解不了。感觉句子有语法错误，领悟不到作者想要表达的意思。。） The success of ecotourism in BE, if any, may have no causal relationship with the director’s effort. Thus, without providing more information about the premise, it is unfair to conclude that we should keep the director in our service.

Yet（YET是不是应该用在有转折含义的过渡的情况呢？） another problem with the proposal involves the grounds of the argument is not convinced.（这个句子有语法错过，如果这样是有两个谓语的，作者是不是想表达这个提议的谁基础是难以让人信服的？） Firstly, we don’t know what fraction of visitors arriving at BE came here for tourism（这个词是旅游业的意思，改为tour合适些）. Perhaps, the main airport in BE becomes a new transport hub lead to（这里作者想表达的是？） more floating visitors and businessmen who might not concern traveling here. Secondly, other factors could also account for the increase in per capita income in BE. Perhaps the development of other industries motives（motive是名词动机，目的，这里可以用motivates） the enhancing(enhancement) of income. Without taking into account these possibilities, the author can not persuade me that PA should adopt the recommendation mentioned above.

Finally, the conclusion that by promoting ecotourism we can increase income for the population of PA as well as preserve the natural environment is unwarranted. The author doesn’t provide any information about details of ecotourism,thus the assumption that the natural environment of PE will be preserved is not ensured. As we don’t know exactly how it would function to reach the goals. (有AS引导不能单独成为一个句子，可以改逗号与后一句连成一句)It is entirely possible that many other more beneficial ideas are exist.（exist就可以了） Lacking such detailed information, the proposal cannot justify its conclusion that we should take the action to promote ecotourism（take action是个固定词组，如果要用这个词组的话，the要用掉；如果不用，就是想表达，take the action of promoting ecotourism）

In sum, the proposal is not well supported. To strengthen it, the author must provide clear evidence of our nation’s detailed resources adapting development of ecotourism. To better bolster it, the author also should ensure that the hiring of the director is benefit(beneficial) to our campaign based on more specific
measures of BE’s plan.

witchyayaUID：2494651

模板句用的挺灵活的，羡慕中。。呵呵
有点语法点用的不太正确哈，如果有改的不合适的地方，现讨论哈。fighthing!

sup1428UID：2576931

谢谢修改~~~~~
努力改正中~~~
我基础。。的确头疼

witchyayaUID：2494651

:)

witchyayaUID：2494651

不谢不谢，互帮互进哈
昨天写第一篇，也是很费劲啊。。一起加油吧！

sup1428UID：2576931

In this proposal from the economic minister of the country of Paraterra（PA）, he concludes that PA should start to promote ecologically sound tourism(ecotourism), and also suggests that they need to hire the current director of Bellegea(BE)’s national tourism office as a consultant for this project. To support this conclusion the author points out that neighboring country BE began the similar campaign last year and the number of visitors arriving at BE’s main airport doubled this year. Furthermore, the income of per citizen increased by 10 percent. For everal reasons, I am not convinced that the proposal’s recommendation is accurate.

To begin with, the minister ignored a crucial precondition whether we have enough ecotourism resources to support such a campaign due to BE and PA might not be comparable in tourist resources, environment, etc. if we are lack of these resources or our environmental conditions are not appealing enough, the campaign would not be effective as BE’s. Unfortunately, the author overlooked this point.

Moreover, the suggestion that we should hire the director from BE’s national office as our consultant is open to doubt, for a necessary premise that employing him is advantageous to our project is not guaranteed. The success of ecotourism in BE, if any, may have no causal relationship with the director’s effort. Thus, without providing more information about the premise, it is unfair to conclude that we should keep the director in our service.

Another problem with the proposal involves the supports of the argument . Firstly, we don’t know what fraction of visitors arriving at BE came here for tour. Perhaps that the main airport in BE becomes a new transport hub leads to more floating visitors and businessmen who might not concern traveling here. Secondly, other factors could also account for the increase in per capita income in BE. Perhaps the development of other industries motivates enhancement of income. Without taking into account these possibilities, the author can not persuade me that PA should adopt the recommendation mentioned above.

Finally, the conclusion that by promoting ecotourism we can increase income for the population of PA as well as preserve the natural environment is unwarranted. The author doesn’t provide any information about details of ecotourism, thus we don’t know exactly how it would function to reach the goals. It is entirely possible that excessive development in the wild surroundings would damage the balance of the ecological system. Lacking such detailed information, the proposal cannot justify its conclusion that we should take action to promote ecotourism

In sum, the proposal is not well supported. To strengthen it, the minister must provide clear evidence of our nation’s detailed resources adapting development of ecotourism. To better bolster it, he also should ensure that the hiring of the director is beneficial to our campaign based on more specific measures of BE’s plan.