【☆09GRE作文冲刺组☆】3.4号作业

血喑UID: 2603208

203.The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.
"At the small, nonprofit hospital in the town of Saluda, the average length of a patient's
stay is two days; at the large, for-profit hospital in the nearby city of Megaville, the
average patient stay is six days. Also, the cure rate among patients in the Saluda hospital
is about twice that of the Megaville hospital. The Saluda hospital has more employees per
patient than the hospital in Megaville, and there are few complaints about service at the
local hospital. Such data indicate that treatment in smaller, nonprofit hospitals is more
economical and of better quality than treatment in larger, for-profit hospitals."


     The statement given by the newspaper claims that treatment in smaller, nonprofit
hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger,for-profit
hospitals.To support the argument,the author lists several grounds which seemed reasonable
at first glance,but he overlooks some factors and finaly makes logic error in this
arugument.
    Firstly,the premise of the argument is that the Saluda hospital beyonds the Megaville
hospital in many ways,for example,the fewer average staying length of a patient.Maybe we can
make a conclusion that the former is economical and better than the later to a certain
extent.But the author obtain a result that the samller,nooprofit hospital is economical and
better than the larger,for-profit hoapitals based on the basises above. The author wrongly
believes that the Saluda hospitai singlely can be on behalf of all the samll,nonprofit
hospitals and so can the Megaville hospital.He/she doesn't offer other information which can
prove his/her argument.
    Secondly,the minor premise is also questionable.The author trusts that the average
length of staying,the cure rate among patients and the complains about service are elements
to evaluate whether a hospital economical and good or not.If a hospital's treatment is
thought economical and good,it will contain more and tighter standars such as the cure rate
for specific diseases and the working efficiency of the employees and so on.Because the
author fails to give further details,we cannot make sure that if the treatment in
samll,nonprofit hospitals is economical and of better.
    Thirdly,there are many fallacies in the basises of the argument.Above all, the average
length of staying in the hospitals can't illustrate anything.We konw that the Megaville
hospital is larger than the Saluda hospital,so can we consider that the patients going to
the Megaville hospital are ill seriously,while the patients coming to tha other one are for
some ailments.So the time spenting in the larger hospital will be longer
reasonablely.Next,based on the analysis above,the serious illness will be difficult to be
cured.Then the cure rate without distinguishing the diseases will mislead.Moreover,the
number of employees for per patient can't suggest that the Saluda hospital has a economical
and better treatment than the Megaville hospital.Because there maybe exist profligacy of
human capital in the Saluda hospital,while the employees in the Megaville hospital can work
more efficently.Finally,we cannot exclude that the patients have more demands and higher
criterions for large, for-profit hospital than the other one.So the Megaville hospital can
receive more complains about service.
    Let's draw a conclusion of the analysis,the argument contains too many faillings to be
believed.To bolster it,the author should provide more informations about a great amount  
small.nonprofit hospitals and compares the data with the large,for-profit hospitals.Even
better, the author could interview many people, those who should be chosed randomly,to know
their opinions about the hospitals to find out what are believed to be the standars of a
economical and better hospital and wheter the treatment of small,non-profit hoapitals are
economical and of better quanlity.

xiaoyao36UID: 2392780

1# 血喑
The statement given by the newspaper claims that treatment in smaller, nonprofit
hospitals is more economical and of better quality than treatment in larger,for-profit
hospitals.To support the argument,the author lists several grounds which seemed reasonable
at first glance,but he overlooks some factors and finaly makes logic error in this
arugument.
    Firstly,the premise of the argument is that the Saluda hospital beyonds(貌似不能做动词用的，exceed好不好？) the Megaville
hospital in many ways,for example,the fewer average staying length of a patient.Maybe we can
make a conclusion that the former is economical and better than the later（latter吧） to a certain
extent.But the author obtain a result that the samller,nooprofit hospital is economical and
better than the larger,for-profit hoapitals based on the basises above. The author wrongly
believes that the Saluda hospitai singlely can be on behalf of all the samll,nonprofit
hospitals and so can the Megaville hospital.He/she doesn't offer other information which can
prove his/her argument.
    Secondly,the minor premise is also questionable.The author trusts that the average
length of staying,the cure rate among patients and the complains about service are elements
to evaluate whether a hospital economical and good or not.（我觉得这几个问题列举出来了就应该仔细说说看为什么不合理，后面论证的太笼统了）If a hospital's treatment is
thought economical and good,it will contain more and tighter standars （standard） such as the cure rate
for specific diseases and the working efficiency of the employees and so on.Because the
author fails to give further details,we cannot make sure that if the treatment in
samll,nonprofit hospitals is economical and of better.
    Thirdly,there are many fallacies in the basises of the argument.Above all, the average
length of staying in the hospitals can't illustrate anything.We konw that the Megaville
hospital is larger than the Saluda hospital,so can we consider that the patients going to
the Megaville hospital are ill seriously,while the patients coming to tha other one are for
some ailments.So the time spenting in the larger hospital will be longer
reasonablely.Next,based on the analysis above,the serious illness will be difficult to be
cured.Then the cure rate without distinguishing the diseases will mislead.Moreover,the
number of employees for per patient can't suggest that the Saluda hospital has a economical
and better treatment than the Megaville hospital.Because there maybe exist profligacy（这个词用在这里太重了吧） of
human capital in the Saluda hospital,while the employees in the Megaville hospital can work
more efficently.Finally,we cannot exclude that the patients have more demands and higher
criterions for large, for-profit hospital than the other one.So the Megaville hospital can
receive more complains about service.
    Let's draw a conclusion of the analysis,the argument contains too many faillings to be
believed.To bolster it,the author should provide more informations about a great amount  
small.nonprofit hospitals and compares the data with the large,for-profit hospitals.Even
better, the author could interview many people, those who should be chosed randomly,to know
their opinions about the hospitals to find out what are believed to be the standars of a
economical and better hospital and wheter the treatment of small,non-profit hoapitals are
economical and of better quanlity.
我觉得文章看下来论证的条理不是很清晰的，如果一个问题提出了就应该就点展开说透。你那三个段里面含的层次太多了。
还有就是我很建议你写完文章之后放到word里查查错，很多拼写错误。还有就是写英文标点后是要空格的，格式要求要注意一下。

血喑UID: 2603208

谢谢你，我一定好好改。:)