argument17 按机经顺序写的,argument到底怎么复习呢?

mkb57288UID：2105771

这几天在写阿狗，先占个位子

mkb57288UID：2105771

In this argument, the arguer recommends the government to continue using EZ Disposal instead of ABC Waste for trash collection services. To support this recommendation, the arguer cites the facts about the frequencies and numbers of trucks of the two companies. The arguer also cites a survey to indicate people's satisfaction about this company. This argument suffers from a few logical flaws which render it unconvincing.原来我也这么写开头，但现在关于开头我的建议是把中加复述题目的部分缩短，哪怕不完整，最后比较详细的指出所犯的逻辑错误的类型，为下文做好铺垫，让全文的整体性和逻辑性提高——见ETS的关于旱冰保护装置的6分范文，像这篇文章的开头是标准的北美范文式的，那些范文的开头部分作者有说明，开头复述题目只是为了读者方便，实际没有必要

To begin with, the frequencies of trash collections are scant evidence in substantiating the efficiency of the two companies. Since the arguer provides little evidence about the amount of trash collected by each company every time, it is quite possible that EZ collects less trash than ABC and has to increase the frequency of trash collection to meet the needs of the public. Or perhaps even if EZ could collect the same amount of trash as  ABC, two times a week is not necessary because the totally amount of trash is small and once a week could be enough. Therefore, unless the arguer provides further evidence to substantiate that ABC has no capability of meeting the needs of people in the town, the superiority of EZ is still open to doubt.

Furthermore, the mere fact that EZ has ordered additional trucks also lends little credibility in EZ's effectiveness. It is quite likely that EZ ordered additional trucks because its trucks are too old or too small compared with ABC and needed to be updated to satisfy the needs of the public. Without providing any concrete evidence about the trucks of the two companies, the arguer fails to convince me that more trucks mean more efficiency.还可以攻击一下20辆车的分配，可能不都是为这个城市服务的

Finally, the survey is too vague to be reliable evidence for people's satisfaction about EZ. It is necessary for us to know the number of the people involved in the survey as well as the number of the respondents. If the sample is too small, the survey could be unreliable in every possibility. Likewise, if the respondents take up a small portion of the sample, it could also lend incredibility to the survey. Moreover, 后面这个点很有力:) even if the sample and respondents could be representative, the arguer fails to consider people's satisfaction about ABC. It is highly possible that the respondents could be more satisfied with ABC's service. In this case, this argument could be greatly weakened.

In sum, this argument is unconvincing as it stands. To bolster it, the arguer should provide further evidence including the capacities of the trucks in each company and the amount of trash they collect at each time. To better assess the survey, I would like to know the number of the sample as well as the respondents. The arguer should also make further investigation into people's attitudes about ABC. Otherwise, it could end with the choice of a costly and less effective company.至于结尾，不知你有没有什么好的办法，或者认为这样的结尾是必须的，毕竟83个字的结尾的机会成本可不小啊，欢迎讨论

mkb57288UID：2105771

这是我最近的一篇argument，其实也有两天了:L,，尽管也不怎么样，但还是欢迎交流一下
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... ge=1&highlight=