Argument161 [YB-1]9月13日作业 by3071001007

3071001007UID: 2662009

这个错误找的有点少，只找到两个，字数上倒是还能行。感觉这个写出逻辑性不是很容易，大家多注意一下吧。

TOPIC: ARGUMENT161 - In a study of reading habits of Leeville citizens conducted by the University of Leeville, most respondents said they preferred literary classics as reading material. However, a follow-up study conducted by the same researchers found that the type of book most frequently checked out of each of the public libraries in Leeville was the mystery novel. Therefore, it can be concluded that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits.
WORDS: 413
TIME: 01:37:07
DATE: 2009/7/13 19:34:42

A group of researchers in the University of Leeville recently delivered two reports about the reading habits of the readers in Leeville which seems go against each other, and therefore the first report was considered misrepresented the situation of the citizens reading habits by author. The author compares the results of the two studies, and draws to the final conclusion. But it is obviously not a convincing answer, since there exist many logical flaws in the discursion.

First of all, the author take it granted that those two studies reflect the same thing, but the situation is that there are some gentle differences between the two studies. In the first study, they get an answer that most of the respondents preferred literary classics, while the second one is about the frequency of the books borrowed in libraries. We all know that a lot of people share a habit that to buy and collect their favourite things, especially the classic ones. So a relatively low frequency of being borrowed in the libraries does not mean that they are not welcomed among readers. On the contract, a high rate of being borrowed shows the fact that the readers don't want to spend money on mystery novels, which indicates that these books are not so highly valued in readers' mind. So it is not comparable for those two conclusions, let alone to give such a ultimatenness.

Suppose that those two events are comparable, but there are still some reasons to deny the author's conclusion. The reason why the classics are called classics is that they are written so well that they worth the readers reading them again and again carefully and slowly, so once those books were borrowed, they surely would be kept for a long time by their readers. But it is different to mystery novels, one can even finish a novel in one day, it is undoubted that the frequency they are checked out will be higher than the classics. So the difference showed on data can't be a powerful evidence to deny the first study either.

Since we have pointed out those deadly flaws in author's reasoning, we can say that his argument is lack of persuasion and needs to be perfected. In order to prove the falsity of first research, more evidence have to be provided to deny it, and it will be better for the author to analyze the reason why the study is wrong, and gives his own opinion.

xxhhttUID: 2477361

TOPIC: ARGUMENT161 - In a study of reading habits of Leeville citizens conducted by the University of Leeville, most respondents said they preferred literary classics as reading material. However, a follow-up study conducted by the same researchers found that the type of book most frequently checked out of each of the public libraries in Leeville was the mystery novel. Therefore, it can be concluded that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits.
WORDS: 413
TIME: 01:37:07
DATE: 2009/7/13 19:34:42

A group of researchers in the University of Leeville recently delivered two reports about the reading habits of the readers in Leeville which seems go against(这句话短文逻辑说出来了，很不错) each other, and therefore the first report was considered misrepresented the situation of the citizens reading habits by author. The author compares the results of the two studies, and draws to the final conclusion. But it is obviously not a convincing answer, since there exist many logical flaws in the discursion.
First of all, the author take it granted that those two studies reflect the same thing, but the situation is that there are some gentle differences between the two studies. In the first study, they get an answer that most of the respondents preferred literary classics, while the second one is about the frequency of the books borrowed in libraries. We all know that a lot of people share a habit that to buy and collect their favourite things, especially the classic ones. (用常理来论证很不错)So(不能用so，so是连词这样整个句子就没主句了，应该用therefore) a relatively low frequency of being borrowed in the libraries does not mean that they are not welcomed among readers. On the contract（on the contrary ; by contrast）, a high rate of being borrowed shows the fact that the readers don't want to spend money on mystery novels, which indicates that these books are not so highly valued in readers' mind. So it is not comparable for those two conclusions, let alone to give such a ultimatenness.
主要区分了两个study研究的并非有可比性，一个研究的是frequency另一个研究的是喜爱程度

Suppose that those two events are comparable, but there are still some reasons to deny the author's conclusion. The reason why the classics are called classics is that they are written so well that they worth the readers reading them（改成 they are worth reading, 是be worth doing） again and again carefully and slowly, so once those books were borrowed, they surely would be kept for a long time by their readers. But it is different to mystery novels, one can even finish a novel in one day, it is undoubted that the frequency they are checked out will be higher than the classics. So the difference showed on data can't be a powerful evidence to deny the first study either.
Since we have pointed out those deadly flaws in author's reasoning, we can say that his argument is lack of persuasion and needs to be perfected. In order to prove the falsity of first research, more evidence have to be provided to deny it,（这里最好说说还需要做那些工作，提供哪些证据） and it will be better for the author to analyze the reason why the study is wrong, and gives his own opinion.
你的一些惯用短语没有用正确，希望以后用时先查一下吧 by xxhhtt