0910AW 同主题写作第十三期 ARGUMENT7 by swif

swifUID: 2530426

题目主帖：https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=989214&extra=page%3D1%26amp%3Bfilter%3Dtype%26amp%3Btypeid%3D103

0910AW 同主题写作第十三期 ARGUMENT7 by swif

7.The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper.

"In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council, because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."

In this argument, the editorial suggests that Clearview  residents vote for Ann Green, rather than for Frank Braun on the basis of these facts: during the past year, the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, which result in the increase of air pollution levels ;And thus the local hospital has treated one fourth more patients with respiratory illness;Frank is a member of the town council while Ann is a member of the Good Earth Coalition , so the editorial infers electing Ann will certainly solve the city's environmental problems. However, the argument rest on several unsubstantiated assumptions,which render it unconvincing as it stands.

In the first place, the argument unfairly assumes that the increase in the number of the factories is due to the city council's wrong decision .Maybe whether a factory can open legally is not in the power of the city council. Or it is possible that some other reasons such as employment rate compel the city council to make such decisions. Without ruling out these and other possibilities, we can not conclude that the city council should be responsible for the increase in the number of the factories, let alone for the worsen of the environment.

In the second place, the editorial assumes that the factories opened lately are all letting out exhaust gas which can pollute the air gravely . But he provides no evidence to sustain this assumption. It is entirely possible that most of these factories do no harm to the environment.

In the third place, the argument rests on a unsubstantiated assumption that the city council's attitudes can fully replace Frank's while making decisions . But no phenomenon can sustain this assumption. Without knowing Frank's real stand on these issues, we could not make the conclusion that Frank is guilty for Clearview's environmental problems.

Finely, even the foregoing assumptions are substantiated , no material can show that Ann is competent for the position of mayor to solve the environmental problems and deal with lots of other affairs, let alone to be more effective than Frank . We cannot be sure that Ann has the ability to help solve Clearview's environmental problems and can be better competent to be the mayor than anyone else just because of his membership of the Good Earth Coalition. Without more information about Ann's abilities and strongpoint, it's unconvinced that Ann is the best candidate for mayor.

In sum, the editorial's suggestion that Clearview's residents should vote for Ann is not persuasive. To bolster it, the argument must provide enough evidence such as the following: materials show that the increase in the number of factories is due to the city council's wrong decision and Frank's real stand on these issues; Ann is more competent and effective than Frank and any other candidate in mayor's position.  

家家☆yoonjaeUID: 2646910

7.The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper.

"In the next mayoral election, residents of Clearview should vote for Ann Green, who is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, rather than for Frank Braun, a member of the Clearview town council, because the current members are not protecting our environment. For example, during the past year the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, air pollution levels have increased, and the local hospital has treated 25 percent more patients with respiratory illnesses. If we elect Ann Green, the environmental problems in Clearview will certainly be solved."

In this argument, the editorial 【这个editorial是adj. 按照句式，楼楼用author或者arguer就可以了】 suggests that Clearview  residents vote for Ann Green, rather than for Frank Braun on the basis of these facts: during the past year, the number of factories in Clearview has doubled, which result in the increase of air pollution levels; And thus the local hospital has treated one fourth more patients with respiratory illness; Frank is a member of the town council while Ann is a member of the Good Earth Coalition, so the editorial infers electing Ann will certainly solve the city's environmental problems. 【太冗余了，提炼出作者的逻辑链，简化用语就可以，rater注定比你熟悉题目哇 >.< 对于这种对题干内容大幅重复的，个人比较感冒】However, the argument rests on several unsubstantiated assumptions, which render it unconvincing as it stands.

In the first place, the argument unfairly assumes that the increase in the number of the factories is due to the city council's wrong decision. Maybe whether a factory can open legally is not in the power of the city council. 【这个他因说得不够透，council的确没有权力批准工厂的开设，但是它可以宣传和鼓吹么，不要留给rater任何问"so what”的机会】Or it is possible that some other reasons such as employment rate compels the city council to make such decisions.【这个他因也是，为什么雇佣率能导致council做这种决定捏？凡事不要想当然，rater只会止步你的论述，不会做任何进一步deduce的】 Without ruling out these and other possibilities, we can not conclude that the city council should be responsible for the increase in the number of the factories and let alone for the worsen of the environment. 【不要乱断句，意思也会断的】

In the second place, the editorial assumes that the factories opened lately are all letting out exhaust gas which can pollute the air gravely. 【"An important part of performing well on the Argument task is remembering what you are not being asked to do. You are not being asked to discuss whether the statements in the argument are true or accurate; instead, you are being asked whether conclusions and inferences are validly drawn from the statements. You are not being asked to agree or disagree with the position stated; instead, you are being asked to comment on the thinking that underlies the position stated. You are not being asked to express your own views on the subject being discussed (as you were in the Issue task); instead, you are being asked to evaluate the logical soundness of an argument of another writer and, in doing so, to demonstrate the critical thinking, perceptive reading, and analytical writing skills that university faculty consider important for success in graduate school." 以上内容引自awintro，可以很清楚地看到，ETS并没有要我们引申作者所列的evidence。所以这一段的驳斥，我持保留意见】But he provides no evidence to sustain this assumption. It is entirely possible that most of these factories do no harm to the environment.

In the third place, the argument rests on【这个词组之前用过了，我觉得可以的话，变一个】 a unsubstantiated assumption that the city council's attitudes can fully replace Frank's while making decisions. 【个人感觉这个归谬可以换个角度，当然现在这个也是可以的，咳咳，好像废话了一句，只是觉得这个表述有点中式】But no phenomenon can sustain this assumption. Without knowing Frank's real stand on these issues, we could not make the conclusion that Frank is guilty for Clearview's environmental problems.

Finally, 【finely是“美好地”的意思】even the foregoing assumptions are substantiated, no material can show that Ann is competent for the position of mayor to solve the environmental problems and deal with lots of other affairs, let alone to be more effective than Frank. We cannot be sure that Ann has the ability to help solve Clearview's environmental problems and can be better competent to be the mayor than anyone else just because of his membership of the Good Earth Coalition. Without more information about Ann's abilities and strongpoint, it's unconvinced that Ann is the best candidate for mayor.

In sum, the editorial's suggestion that Clearview's residents should vote for Ann is not persuasive. To bolster it, the argument must provide enough evidence such as the following: materials show that the increase in the number of factories is due to the city council's wrong decision and Frank's real stand on these issues; Ann is more competent and effective than Frank and any other candidate in mayor's position.  

基本上攻击思路还是OK的，关键在于段间衔接和整体构架，而且攻击点找到了，攻击力度却不够，内容显得有些单薄，还需要积累跟丰富。P.S 楼主请注意审题，是a letter to the editor。
Anyway, fighting啦~

swifUID: 2530426

首先非常感谢家家童鞋的认真修改:)

里面你提到的两个拼写错误editorial 和 finally，我查过词典了，应该是没错，家家童鞋最好去确认一下哦

还有，提到认为我有攻击原文事实的嫌疑，我还是没想通，原文只提到了新开了一倍的工厂这个事实，而并没有说这些工长都是有污染的，这只是没有根据的推论。。我攻击这点，貌似没有问题啊？？:L







2# 家家☆yoonjae

家家☆yoonjaeUID: 2646910

额，那个editorial我是真不知道有名词用法

至于finally，那是我拼的。。你拼成finely了。。。。

家家☆yoonjaeUID: 2646910

okay查到了。。。editorial的确是有“n.主编，社论”的意思，但是对象错了。。是写给主编的，不是主编写的。。。

7.The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Clearview newspaper.