0910AW 同主题写作第十五期 ARGUMENT134 by AdelineShen

AdelineShenUID: 2630498

提纲：
1. 作者错误地认为过去两年神秘小说在市场上广受欢迎，它就一定会在未来的市场上继续保有扩大的趋势，而事实上神秘小说完全有可能只是一时的流行，马上就会失去市场份额。同时作者模糊地指出读神秘小说的人比读任何其他小说的人都多，却没有给出明确的数据和调查的方法，值得怀疑。
2. 作者的另一个证据指出去年出版的神秘小说几乎一半都是第一次写小说的作家的作品。作者没有考虑到这些第一次写小说的作家的身份，可能他们原本就是在另一方面（比如议论文和散文）表现突出的著名作家；作者也没有明确这几乎一半的首次写小说的作家的作品是否畅销。
3. 即使上述证据成立，作者关于所有出版商都会想要增加神秘小说的出版份额的结论也是错误的。虽然神秘小说的市场份额可能继续增大，大的出版商很有可能因为神秘小说作为边缘作品没有足够的影响力而不愿意出版过多的神秘小说。
因此，作者基于上述证据得出的结论，即神秘小说的市场份额会在未来继续加大，所有出版商都会想要出版更多的神秘小说，是不具有说服力的。同时，作者基于此结论的建议：即新的作家应该写神秘小说来增加自己在大出版公司出版处女座的机会，也是不具有说服力的。为了更好地证明结论和建议，作者应该提供更多的证据证明神秘小说在未来市场上继续扩大的趋势，以及那一半的首次写小说的作家的身份及作品的畅销与否，同时作者还应该提供大出版商对神秘小说的态度。

In this argument the author cites the significant growth of the number of mystery novels published in the past two years. The author also cites the fact that almost half of the mystery novels published last year were written by first-time novel writers. Based on this evidence the author predicts an expanding market for mystery novels, thus recommending new writers to write mystery novels so that they will have more chance for first-time publication with a larger, prestigious company. This argument depends on several unsubstantiated assumptions and is therefore unpersuasive as it stands.

First of all, the author's inference that incentives which were affective in the past will also be effective in the future rests on the poor assumption that the significant publication growth in the number of mystery novels has remained unchanged. Perhaps the mystery novels have merely been popular during the past two years due to people's curiousness about new and fasion things, which will fade soon as time flies. Another critical flaw is that the author goes on to cite more people read mysteries than any other type of novel. However, as it stands this evidence is far to vague to support the author's conclusion. We are not informed about any statistics proving this statement. Now are we informed about how the survey is made. In short, lacking evidence that the number of mystery novels published will continuously increase and absent additional information about how the survey has been made, this evidence lend no credible support to the conclusion that mystery novels will have an expanding market in the future.

In addition, even assuming that mystery novels will continuously have an expanding market, a second problem involves the fact that almost half of the mystery novels published last year were written by first-time novel writers. The author unfairly assumes that first-novel writers' works contribute a lot to the popularity of the mystery novels while it is entirely possible that the almost half publication of mystery novels written by first-time novel writers is not popular at all. Another assumption the author has based on is that first-time novel writers are equal to new writers. Perhaps the first-time novel writers are some famous writers good at other forms of writing like commentary and essays. Since the article fails to account for this alternative explanation, the author cannot confidently recommend that new writers write mystery novels to increase their chances for first-time publication with a larger, prestigious company.

A final problem with the argument is the author's broad assertion that all publishers will want to increase the number of mystery novels they publish, which is entirely unconvincing. Even if I were to concede the expansion trend of the mystery novel publication and the new writers' increase chances for first-time publication due to such expansion, it is insufficient to draw the general conclusion that larger, prestigious companies will be interested in publishing more mystery novels, let alone all publishers. It is entirely possible that some larger, prestigious companies do not like to publish works that are not so influential in society. Without additional information about attitudes of the larger companies, I cannot accept the author's sweeping generalization about the future strategy in mystery novels of all publishers, nor can I accept the author's recommendation to write mystery novels with a larger, prestigious company as a new writer.

In sum, as it stands the argument is wholly unpersuasive. To bolster it the author must show the continuous trend of growth in the publication of mystery novels. The author must also clarify the position of the first-time writers whose works were published last year as almost half of the mystery novels and the popularity of these novels. To better assess the argument it will be useful to know the exact attitude of the larger, prestigious companies toward the mystery novel.

rockeyhooUID: 2920411

关于第二点：即使出版的新的小说作家占到了一半以上，但可能很多新的作家写，因此新作家发表的Chance 并不高