PassonChen【同主题写作之Argument143】

PassonChenUID: 2614331

"Your recent article on corporate downsizing* in the United States is misleading. The article gives the mistaken impression that many competent workers who lost jobs as a result of downsizing face serious economic hardship, often for years, before finding other suitable employment. But this impression is contradicted by a recent report on the United States economy, which found that since 1992 far more jobs have been created than have been eliminated. The report also demonstrates that many of those who lost their jobs have found new employment. Two-thirds of the newly created jobs have been in industries that tend to pay above-average wages, and the vast majority of these jobs are full-time."

*Downsizing is the process in which corporations deliberately reduce the number of their employees.




    The writer of this letter intended to belie the editor's view on the condition of those who reduced to unemployment. He argues that the situation is more optimistic than pessimistic, which can be used to describe the "serious economic hardship" in the editor's opinion. But, so far as I am concerned, while the editor may be wrong, the letter fails to justify itself.

On the one hand, although the report did demonstrate that many of the laid-off workers have found new employment, yet neither did it
mention what the percentage was, nor how long it took them. A small proportion of the mass downsized may be quite a lot, and if several years have passed before they found new jobs, the report didn't contradict what the editor holds.

On the other hand, that more jobs have been created than have been eliminated does not necessarily mean more people under unemployment would get one. On the contrary, many elements that may prevent those who lost their jobs from finding new ones have been neglected by the letter-writer. With the growth of labor force, especially newly graduated college students, the advantages of the increase of new posts can be counteracted, for more people are in the competition. The conditions of the newly created jobs should also have been taken into account. It is possible that vacancies and unemployment coexist, given that the vacancies may be far from where those who need them live, or simply not suitable because of the special skills required. This seems more likely to happen when, as read in the letter, two-thirds of the newly created jobs have been in industries, which it is difficult for those who had been in the services to enter. As is often the case, it is services that are most prone to cutting jobs when there is some crisis.

PassonChenUID: 2614331

:victory:

Alex_2009UID: 2616286

The writer of this letter intended to belie the editor's view on the condition of those who reduced to unemployment. He argues that the situation is more optimistic than pessimistic(概括的不错), which can be used to describe the "serious economic hardship" in the editor's opinion. But, so far as I am concerned, while the editor may be wrong, the letter fails to justify itself.（这后一句的两个介词是否重复了）
On the one hand, although the report did demonstrate that many of the laid-off workers have found new employment, yet neither did it mention what the percentage was, nor how long it took them（指代不是很清楚）. A small proportion of the mass downsized may be quite a lot, and if several years have passed before they found（时态问题） new jobs, the report didn't contradict what the editor holds.（第一句的两个介词是否重复了）
On the other hand, that more jobs have been created than have been eliminated does not necessarily mean more people under unemployment would get one. On the contrary, many elements that may prevent those who lost their jobs from finding new ones have been neglected by the letter-writer. With the growth of labor force, especially newly graduated college students, the advantages of the increase of new posts can be counteracted, for more people are in the competition. The conditions of the newly created jobs should also have been taken into account. It is possible that vacancies and unemployment coexist, given that the vacancies may be far from where those who need them live, or simply not suitable because of the special skills required. This seems more likely to happen when, as read in the letter, two-thirds of the newly created jobs have been in industries, which it is difficult for those who had been in the services to enter. As is often the case, it is services that are most prone to cutting jobs when there is some crisis.

这篇文章结构很有特色，长句比较多，第三段读得有点绕，（本人现在长句还没练好，不敢妄下评论啊）。

建议最后最好总结一下文章，这样更有利于读者明白你的立场。

紫色代表非常好，值得推荐的
红色代表有问题的
蓝色代表不错的

PassonChenUID: 2614331

But 表与上句的转折，while 表句内让步。这个问题应该不大。
although 和yet可以连用。
have passed before they found（时态问题）
改为：had passed 这下应该可以了
谢谢。改得很细致。

winning1030UID: 2538401

The writer of this letter intended to belie the editor's view on the condition of those who reduced to unemployment. (抱歉，楼主我没理解这句话。on the condition of ，请解释下它在这里的用法和意义）He argues that the situation is more optimistic than pessimistic, which can be used to describe the "serious economic hardship" in the editor's opinion. But, so far as I am concerned, while the editor may be wrong, the letter fails to justify itself.

On the one hand, although the report did demonstrate that many of the laid-off workers have found new employment, yet neither did it
mention what the percentage was, nor how long it took them. （neither...nor的倒装句用得好）A small proportion of the mass downsized may be quite a lot, and if several years have passed before they found new jobs, the report didn't contradict what the editor holds.（觉得楼主可以扩展下，如果在几年内找不到工作会怎么样呢，虽然我们知道这不言而喻，但是你的文章没有提及后果，我觉得就没有批驳到经济困难这一点）
On the other hand, that more jobs have been created than have been eliminated does not necessarily mean（means) more people under unemployment would get one. On the contrary, many elements that may prevent those who lost their jobs from finding new ones have been neglected by the letter-writer. With the growth of labor force, especially newly graduated college students,the advantages of the increase of new posts can be counteracted,for more people, are in the competition. The conditions of the newly created jobs should also have been taken into account. It is possible that vacancies and unemployment coexist, given that the vacancies may be far from where those who need them live(?), or simply not suitable because of the special skills required. This seems more likely to happen when, as read in the letter, two-thirds of the newly created jobs have been in industries, which it is difficult for those who had been in the services to enter. As is often the case, it is services that are most prone to cutting jobs when there is some crisis.（觉得最后一句算是常识吧，运用得比较好，但是也许本文的的失业人员并非大部分来自服务业行业，所以楼主不要太绝对，换成如果这次裁员的人大部分是来自服务业，而。。。。。按照楼主的思维继写，会不会好些？~）

楼主偷懒了吧，居然没有写结尾。

楼主的句子间的链接自然，有些词和短语用得不错。尤其喜欢那个倒装，因为偶句式变换不行的说。。。楼主的句子比较长和复杂，有些用得很好，但说实在我看得比较头疼。。。太多的长句我觉得会适得其反，2句左右就够了（纯粹个人意见，偶也第二次写。。。。）

PassonChenUID: 2614331

The writer of this letter intended to belie the editor's view on the condition of those who reduced to unemployment.写信人企图证明编辑的关于那些失业者的境况的观点为不正确。
far from where those （who need them） live(?), 这里有宾语从句，定语从句。
我也写第二次。
谢谢认真对批改。下次我会更认真改的。
mean 是对的，因为上面有个does not
你提的扩展，我会注意吸收的。