刨根问底看范文之argument篇--第二集 学校确实不善于做广告

berninaUID：2503038

The University of Claria is generally considered one of the best universities in the world because of its instructors' reputation, which is based primarily on the extensive research and publishing record of certain faculty members.In addition, several faculty members are internationally renowned as leaders in their fields.
For example, many of the faculty from the English department are regularly invited to teach at universities in other countries.Furthermore, two recent graduates of the physics department have gone on to become candidates for the Nobel Prize in Physics.And 75 percent of the students are able to find employment after graduating.Therefore, because of the reputation of its faculty, the University of Claria should be the obvious choice for anyone seeking a quality education.:
              
                还是先来看题目：
这篇是做广告类，通篇都说uc怎么怎么好，好了，按照习惯我们分以下部分
作者目的：宣传uc,让大家都来这。
因为：1，教师方面：8 X instructors' reputation 好 为什么呢？
  G










                      因为1）extensive research
                       2）publishing record
        另外：several faculty members are internationally renowned as leaders in their fields.
        注意：举例子啦！
        英语系的老师相继到别的国家去教课
        注意这里：这里的举例子其实就是作者的逻辑推理，他的逻辑是，因为这点所以他们的很多老师称得上是行业的领头人，
        大家想想，能这么推理么？

      2，学生方面：41） 物理系的部分毕业生成为np的candidates
                  2）75%的毕业生能找到工作。
所以：the University of Claria should be the obvious choice for anyone seeking a quality education.
好了，这就是短文的全部推理。我们的思路就是，一上来看到作者目的是做广告，就找作者的理由，为什么说他好，并且找出它的逻辑漏洞，大家可以自己想想先。
我们看范文是怎么说的
为
While the University of Claria appears to have an excellent reputation based on the accomplishments and reputations of its faculty, one would also wish to consider other issues
before deciding upon this particular institution for undergraduate or graduate training. The（1） Physics and English departments are internationally known, but these are only two of the areas in which one might study.Other departments are not listed; is this because no others are worth mentioning, or because no other departments bothered to turn in their accomplishments and kudos to the publicity office?
绿色的绿色的：一下把短文的目的打击了~大家看到没？作者承认了excellent reputation based on the accomplishments and reputation,大家想，为什么作者不去质疑这点呢？因为这点作者根本就没有对此进行逻辑推理，这是陈述个事实，这样的情况我们以后也可以考虑不去质疑。

橙色的，我标出第一点，是作者给出的第一个建议，仅仅两个专业不能说明问题应该也说说别的专业，关于physics and english,大家看，短文里说several faculty members are internationally renowned as leaders in their fields这个观点是怎么进行论证的？就是说关于english department的老师去国外教学和 physics的学生参加np，首段里仅仅提了这两点，质疑短文说“你怎么仅仅说了这两个专业呢，那别的呢”这个就是典型的用特殊掩盖一般，但是作者并没有用专业的表达，而用了反问句，我觉得这样的表达特别好，我们可以借鉴


*The assumption is that because English and Physics have excellent brains in the faculty offices, their teaching skills and their abilities to pass on knowledge and the love of learning to their students are equally laudable.
（2）Unfortunately, this is often not the case. A prospective student would certainly be advised to investigate thoroughly the （1）teaching talents and attitudes of the professors, the （2）library and research facilities, the
（3）physical plant of the departments in which he or she was planning to study, as well as the （4）living arrangements on or off campus, and the（5）facilities available for leisure activities and entertainment.

橙色的（2）是作者的第二点建议，难道老师水平高就能代表他会教学么，你应该说说老师的教学能力和愿不愿意从学生身上学到东西？这段我标上个星星，有些问题，大家可以想想~~
蓝色的是作者给出的他因，这个很好想到

This evaluation of the University of Claria is too brief, and too general. Nothing is mentioned about the quality of overall education; it only praises the accomplishments of a few recent graduates and professors.（3）More important thaninvitations to teach elsewhere, which might have been engineered by their own departmental heads in an attempt to remove them from the campus for a semester or two, is the relationship between teacher and student.) Are the
（1）teaching faculty approachable? （2）Are they helpful? Have they an interest in passing on their knowledge? （3）Are they working for the future benefit of the student or to get another year closer to retirement? （4）How enthusiastic are the students about the courses being taught and the faculty members who teach those classes? Are there sufficient classes available for the number of students? （6）Are the campus buildings accessible; how is the University handling all those cars?
（7）Is the University a pleasant, encouraging, interesting, challenging place to attend school? （5）What are its attitudes about education, students, student ideas and innovations, faculty suggestions for improvement?

绿色的粗体是作者给出的他因，绿色的数字是作者认为的老师重要的品质，大家看我这里面有蓝色的，不是我脑抽，我也不敢在这抽，还有那数字，也不是因为我不会数数，到底因为什么大家可以想想~~
橙色的作者给出的第三点建议


What about that 75% employment record? Were those students employed in the field of their choice, or are they flipping burgers and emptying wastebaskets while they search for something they are trained to do. （4）A more specific statement about the employability of students from this University is needed in order to make the argument forceful.

The paragraph given merely scratches the surface of what must be said about this University in order to entice students and to convince them that this is the best place to obtain a quality education. （总）Much more work is needed by the public relations department before this can be made into a four-color brochure and handed out to prospective students.
第四点建议：应该多多谈谈学生的就业能力才能让你这个文章有说服力

绿色的是作者相关质疑，
最后作者说，要是想让你的广告更有说服力，你就应该考虑全面。作者还是站在短文的立场，在帮他补充漏洞，而不是上来就把它怒斥一通，这点是我们写所有a应该注意的~~


现在来总体看下
大家思考什么学校才能算是好学校？
一，
硬件设施

校内环境，学校设施，图书馆，体育场，教学楼，寝室，实验室等等~~~ 大家brainstorming~~
二，
软件设施

老师水平，教学能力，教学态度，学生成绩，毕业生就业率继续Brainstorming
但是广告并没有完全把这些都包括，所以他不能说服人，当大家自己看了这个广告后有没有被吸引？没有吧，那就说明他是失败的广告！所以我们应该给他补充漏洞，让他能够说服人！

看看范文，我说这个范文和上篇相比简直差距很大，结构有点乱，我标出*的那段，举得例子并不是有关老师their teaching skills and their abilities to pass on knowledge and the love of learning to their students的，而成了说硬件设施怎么怎么样，我觉得不好。
而到了body2,还是应该说老师的，说着说着就跑到学校建设那里了，这就是我为什么要把那两条标成蓝色的原因了
蓝色是硬件设施，绿色是软件设施。
Body3 放在这里很突兀，也是写学生的，就应该都归类到软件里一起写，为此comments 也进行了批评，大家要注意

我们现在来挖掘一下comments对这篇文章的表扬和批评，看看我们能学到什么：
表扬：
1，表扬了作者的四点逻辑补充，说“the writer probes each questionable assumption and offers alternative explanations, pointing  out, for instance”注意这里，特别提出了作者的两点逻辑补充：“That invitations for faculty to teach elsewhere may have been purposely arranged in order to temporarily remove them from campus and that the employed students may be "flipping burgers and emptying wastebaskets"" 这点告诉我们，当我们论证的时候也应该给出其他原因，并且举出例子使其更有说服力，还有作者给出的这两个他因，我们读下来感觉很合理，所以我们在写文章的时候，不要抓住细枝末节不放，而是要找出他的大的逻辑漏洞予以补充。
2， 表扬了作者给出的他因，也就是短文忘记说的硬件设施的情况，“ideally one would also ask about reserach facilities, the university's physical plant, availability of classes, even the parking arrangements!”最后一点还给了个感叹号，说明高度评价了作者的思维全面性，把所有应该考虑的问题都说到了，这个告诉我们，如果我们想的时候也要尽量想到更多的可能性，来展示我们的思维全面性。
3， 表扬了几个用词：kudos,laudable, engineered, entice 现在大家就把这些记下来，还有文章中相应的句子，在我们写的时候，这些词就是我们的亮点了，我给大家两个解释：
       kudos: an expression of approval and commendation
                   syn: praise,congratulation, extolment  
                   当我们想表达praise的时候就请顺手打成kudos吧
        engineer: (Ｖ) plan and direct=matermind, direct, organize, orchestrate
                   当我们想说organize的时候，想想能不能用engineer 呢？
批评：就是那个75% ，放在那里太突兀
我认为：我之前说文章很乱，就是在这里，觉得没有分好类，如果我写的话，我会在body1写软件设施，body2写硬件设施，我觉得这样的话就会清楚一些，大家觉得呢？

irvine666UID：2575525

字体咋老小...凑合着看看～

米饭袜子UID：2532172

嗯，关于文中对硬软件的分析我也觉着混乱，揉在一起了，应该分开来讲，而且就老师与学生关系这点有很多重复分析的地方，JJ这里分析地很透彻，不赘述


我还有个疑问~除了对UC本身自身条件的质疑，我们能不能质疑
the University of Claria should be the obvious choice for anyone seeking a quality education.:
这句呢？ 就算一个学校再好，也不一定是适合anyone 的呀，每个学校各有特色，学生本身也各有所长。

但想想这个毕竟是广告，当然要说服别人来自己学校。。。。。。。SO，这点有点迷茫

P.S.这几天RP极度低迷又忙得晕头转向，都没好好跟JJ做作业~愧~
上课去鸟~

winning1030UID：2538401

先踩~看过了，睡觉的时候思考~明天补上偶的思考

berninaUID：2503038

又重新编辑了一下，补上了官方评价，大家来发表发表意见啦~~~

艾尘草UID：2591798

占~

cjluUID：2448066

    首先还是要赞一下Bernina的分析。^^
    我想想进学校的学生一定不外乎两种目的，一是工作，二是继续深造。因此如果要成为一个可以吸引学生的好的学校，就应该兼顾这两种群体。这则广告显然也想通过这两则吸引学生，可是做的却并不成功。
    首先，对于想继续深造的学生来说，这则广告只提到了英语院和物理院。就像范文中说的那样，两个院只是一个大学中很小的一部分，那么其他院的情况呢？整个广告都没有给出答案。并且，在物理院的介绍中它又选择了特殊中的特殊，两个学生的成就并不能代表整个院的学术水平。而英语院出国教书显然不能被认为是站在行业的前端。
    其次，对于想要就业的学生来说，这则广告只提到了75%的就业率，并没有提到学生都在什么样的地方就业，也没有调查学生是不是喜欢他们的工作，这显然并不具有说服力。因为即使没有上过大学，也有很多人是可以凭借自己的能力就业或是创业的。仅仅是提到75%的就业率的话并不能显示学校在帮助学生得到自己喜爱工作中的作用。
    因此，根据以上两种不同的分类，老师就应该有不同的针对性才对。可是在广告开头提到的“generally considered one of the best universities in the world because of its instructors' reputation”并没有说明这一点，如果是从“its instructors' reputation”来说的话，我们只能说这是一个很好的研究机构，并不能认为它是一个很优秀的大学。因为在大学中老师注重的往往是自己的科研项目和学术攻关，而这和教导学生显然并不是一个方向的。从自己身边我们就可以看到这样的例子，这里可以举例分析。
    再者，就我个人而言，我认为学校的硬件设施不是非常重要，但是为了文章的全面性，我想用一组排比的它因说一句就好。如安静的学习环境、有丰富学习资料的图书馆、宽敞明亮的教室、美丽的校园环境等。
    最后，广告的结尾提到“because of the reputation of its faculty”也不具有说服力，参考上面分析大学生学习的两种理由可以看出只依靠学术名声选择大学显然是片面的。
    请Bernina和大家指正啦^^

justdoit!UID：2533175

的确不错

seiranzcc1UID：2514067

谢谢Bernina的精彩分析！
题目最大的特点，陈述的都是很客观很正确的事实，逻辑漏洞就在于他的推理（感觉A不就是这样么。。。但我觉得还是和数据型还有调查类有差别的。。。。再斟酌，咳）
老师：1、extensive research and publishing record

2、serveral members are international renowned
学生：1、two graduates become np candidates

2、75% find employment
综上两点推出结论。
逻辑问题，大点：1、老师好学校质量就好？没有考虑硬件设施

2、学生np或者75%就业学校就好？

小点(针对大点1)：1、学术的优秀就是好老师？

2、只有两个部门的例子就说全校情况？
While the University of Claria appears to have an excellent reputation based on the accomplishments and reputations of its faculty, one would also wish to consider other issues before deciding upon this particular institution for undergraduate or graduate training.
The Physics and English departments are internationally known, but these are only two of the areas in which one might study.Other departments are not listed; is this because no others are worth mentioning, or because no other departments bothered to turn in their accomplishments and kudos to the publicity office?
在总述之外先提出了一个点，和我所知道的传统的开头段有所不同，这里用了反问的手法，感觉上其实这个点在这里放出来的目的还是引出后面的观点，引起读者兴趣。虽然效果真的很好，但是用不好会不会有反效果呢？。。。

The assumption is that because English and Physics have excellent brains in the faculty offices, their teaching skills and their abilities to pass on knowledge and the love of learning to their students are equally laudable.Unfortunately, this is often not the case.（我认为这是一种好转折手法）A prospective student would certainly be advised to investigate thoroughly the teaching talents and attitudes of the professors, the library and research facilities, the physical plant of the departments in which he or she was planning to study, as well as the living arrangements on or off campus, and the facilities available for leisure activities and entertainment.

This evaluation of the University of Claria is too brief, and too general.Nothing is mentioned about the quality of overall education; it only praises the accomplishments of a few recent graduates and professors.More important than invitations to teach elsewhere, which might have been engineered by their own departmental heads in an attempt to remove them from the campus for a semester or two, is the relationship between teacher and student.
Are the teaching faculty approachable?Are they helpful?Have they an interest in passing on their knowledge?Are they working for the future benefit of the student or to get another year closer to retirement?How enthusiastic are the students about the courses being taught and the faculty members who teach those classes?Are there sufficient classes available for the number of students?Are the campus buildings accessible; how is the University handling all those cars?
Is the University a pleasant, encouraging, interesting, challenging place to attend school?
What are its attitudes about education, students, student ideas and innovations, faculty suggestions for improvement?

这段比较赞同Bernina的看法，TS写的是对软件（quality of overall education ）的评估，但是末句加入了对硬件设施的分析，如果是我，硬件分析就写在第二段了


What about that 75% employment record?
Were those students employed in the field of their choice, or are they flipping burgers and emptying wastebaskets while they search for something they are trained to do.（意思我不太懂）
A more specific statement about the employability of students from this University is needed in order to make the argument forceful.（对于employment这个点，我自己看题目的时候没有啥明确攻击思路，作者说重点应在关注学生就业能力的培养我觉得很有力）
就不知道是不是要把np那个问题当做学生点一起说了，感觉不说也没有什么不完整的感觉，Np应该是把个别学生的成就加在整体上了，和开头faculty member的问题是一样的，和EMPLOMENT的毛病不一样。
如果写了又会怎么样呢？。。。。

The paragraph given merely scratches the surface of what must be said about this University in order to entice students and to convince them that this is the best place to obtain a quality education.Much more work is needed by the public relations department before this can be made into a four-color brochure and handed out to prospective students.
总结+提建议，简洁又有说服力。

蓝-我的分析
紫-我的看法
粉红-好句好词
橙色-不懂

zzz.321UID：2600329

辛苦辛苦，支持～～

B已经分析得非常好了，我就再说说自己的感觉吧，这篇文章比上一篇确实差了不少，十分混乱，（6）Are the campus buildings accessible; how is the University handling all those cars?
（7）Is the University a pleasant, encouraging, interesting, challenging place to attend school?  插在段落中间感觉很突兀，不知道作者是怎么想的。最后一个逻辑缺陷，觉得应该对比一下其他学校的情况比较好，要不自己吹得再天花乱坠也没用，说不定其他学校都是百分之九十以上，还有工作的具体情况，比如说薪水之类的指标；还有这些人是怎么找到工作的，如果别的学校都是单位抢着去学校招人，而这个学校是学生自己跑了一家又一家好不容易才找到工作，这个也应该可以说明一些问题。另外这篇文章在论证时只是简单的罗列一些细节，感觉这样不太好，应该挑一些重点的然后深入分析一下应该会好很多，当然作为范文，这篇文章还是不错，语言什么的都很值得学习，什么时候我才能写出这样的文章呢。。。

ddcmj519UID：176326

占。下周。。。

winning1030UID：2538401

1.硬件设施
游泳池，住宿设备，保安措施，餐厅，现代化程度，学校的地理位置（交通是否方便，周围环境的文化艺术活动或商业气息）
2.软件设施
研究成果、录取难易、奖学金提供情况、学费与生活费，毕业生起薪水平等指标
3.75%还可以这样批：没有和其他学校的就业率比较，单凭这个数据是无法断定该学校在就业率上占优势的。即使就业率占优势，需要提供这些职业的情况，如范文说的Were those students employed in the field of their choice, or are they flipping burgers and emptying wastebaskets while they search for something they are trained to do.和雇主的评价，起薪水平。

jessicaluluUID：2471730

蓝色－TS，思路，评
粉色－好词好句
While the University of Claria appears to have an excellent reputation based on（引出前提的标志词） the accomplishments and reputations of its faculty, one would also wish to consider other issues before deciding upon this particular institution for undergraduate or graduate training.The Physics and English departments are internationally known, but these are only two of the areas in which one might study.Other departments are not listed; is this because no others are worth mentioning, or because no other departments bothered to turn in their accomplishments and kudos to the publicity office?（部分人的good reputation不能代表all falcuty）

The assumption is that because English and Physics have excellent brains in the faculty offices, their teaching skills and their abilities to pass on knowledge and the love of learning to their students are equally laudable.
Unfortunately, this is often not the case. A prospective student would certainly be advised to investigate thoroughly the teaching talents and attitudes of the professors, the library and research facilities, the physical plant of the departments in which he or she was planning to study, as well as the living arrangements on or off campus, and the facilities available for leisure activities and entertainment.

This evaluation of the University of Claria is too brief, and too general. Nothing is mentioned about the quality of overall education; it only praises the accomplishments of a few recent graduates and professors. More　important than invitations to teach elsewhere, which might have been engineered by their own departmental heads in an attempt to remove them from the campus for a semester or two, is the relationship between teacher and student.Are the teaching faculty approachable? Are they helpful? Have they an interest in passing on their knowledge? Are they working for the future benefit of the student or to get another year closer to retirement? How enthusiastic are the students about the courses being taught and the faculty members who teach those classes? Are there sufficient classes available for the number of students? Are the campus buildings accessible; how is the University handling all those cars? Is the University a pleasant, encouraging, interesting, challenging place to attend school? What are its attitudes about education, students, student ideas and innovations, faculty suggestions for improvement?（2,3段都在讲软硬件设施这件事，即前提推不出结论。）

What about that 75% employment record? Were those students employed in the field of their choice, or are they flipping burgers and emptying wastebaskets while they search for something they are trained to do. A more specific statement about the employability of students from this University is needed in order to make the argument forceful.

The paragraph given merely scratches the surface of what must be said about this University in order to entice students and to convince them that this is the best place to obtain a quality education.
Much more work is needed by the public relations department before this can be made into a four-color brochure and handed out to prospective students.　（给出建议）

今天读了一篇叫“argument就应该这样写”的文，有醍醐灌顶的感觉。按照作者的提示，尝试用他的方法来分析这篇范文昂～
我们先来分析一下这篇文的逻辑链，再将自己的思考过程与范文作比较，看一下哪些地方需要改进，哪些地方是范文想到而我们没想到的，哪些地方是胜过范文还可以拓展的。
Conclusion: the University of Claria should be the obvious choice for anyone seeking a quality education
前提：good reputation of its faculty
论点：
１、extensive research and publishing record of certain faculty members
２、several faculty members are internationally renowned as leaders in their fields
l
many of the faculty from the English department are regularly invited to teach at universities in other countries
l
two recent graduates of the physics department have gone on to become candidates for the Nobel Prize in Physics
3、75% employment
Logic chain：所有想得到好的教育的人都应该选C大学，因为他们的faculty具备良好的声誉，有三点可以支持：１，２，３分论点如上述
１、这时候问题出现了，良好的声誉等于高教学质量么？故这是我们应该攻击的最重要点，应该放在文章的最醒目部分。其实范文的2,3段都在说这件事我认为，只不过一个从硬件、一个从软件来说，也尽管阐述上稍微有点混乱正如Bernina分析的样。也就是说这个前提推不出这个结论，我认为这个应该首先阐述。
２、此外，我红笔勾出的certain, several, anyone不正是第二个漏洞么？某些专业某些人的成绩并不能代表整个学校的所有系都具备良好的声誉，如此这个前提也是不成立的，那么让所有人都来选这个学校也就有了问题了。
３、75% employment，缺乏employment的详细资料，找到工作和找好工作还是不一样的，用人单位是否满意也不知道，是否找到后立马被辞退也还是不知道。所以我们认可75%这个数据，没有必要去攻击这个数据是不是真实的啊这些问题，重点应该放在75％这个数据得不出来good reputation这个前提继而亦无法得出 everyone should choose C university这个结论。
４、此外还有一些小的逻辑漏洞，诸如英语系出去教书亦不能说明good reputation等

读范文后：
１、问句的使用：这篇范文不像交通那篇读起来论证严密，但是大量问句的使用很有特色，有点辩论席上步步为营的感觉。我们可以学习在文中掺杂问句，丰富句式，加强论证。
２、不一定要每一段对应作者的一个论点的写法，可能这是我自己之前的误区。重要的逻辑漏洞应该用最强的火力攻击且放在最醒目位置
３、不一定要让步才写得好argument
４、我们写作人的立场，就好比是帮助客户完善其广告或者计划书，说服其改进不足

berninaUID：2503038

非常清晰的思路，特别是在抓目的那部分，学校的目的是干什么？就是教书育人么，所以他的广告里有没有体现呢？这是考虑的最基本因素！另外你说觉得硬件设施不重要，其实我觉得很重要的，图书馆，实验室，学校环境会直接影响学生的学习成果啊，你说呢？呵呵 8# cjlu