argument143 [0710G +U小组] --xiefen0223--第三次作业

xiefen0223UID: 2301911

字数：384          用时：0:30:00          日期：2007-07-27

In this letter, the writer holds an opposite view on the editor's impression of that many competent workers who lost jobs because of downsizing face serious economic hardship, often for years before finding another suitable employment. To support his conclusion, he provides another recent report on the United States economy, which lists many facts of the flourish in the job market. But carefully examination of the letter, we can see this argument suffers from many fallacies.
Firstly, the arguer commits a fallacy of hasty generalization. Though there is a recent report presenting the job market is having a bright  future, it has nothing to do with the impression the editor are trying to make here, because the editor has made it clear that the unemployed workers would face the economic hardship before finding other suitable job. Obviously the writer has missed the point that the workers are still under unemployment situation.
Secondly, the editor used the words carefully to make the impression, which did not expel some exceptions that some workers will still have money to lead a comfortable life. But oppositely to editors’ carefulness, the writer takes it for granted that the flourish of job market will solve most of workers’ problems by giving them new jobs. But new job vacancies are not only opened to the compete workers who get hired, but also available to other job seekers such as the students who are just graduated from schools, can they beat the young competitors and get the job successfully? Even if the compete workers can get the new job, can he afford their previous life by the new salary? As we know, the new salary, even above-average, is often not comparable with the previous wage which they have strived for years, not to say to pay for the life cost they were having at that time before fired. So from this point, it makes sense that the worker will still face the economical problems until they find a suitable job.
In conclusion, the writer is not well reasoned as it stands. To make it logically acceptable, the writer should demonstrate the facts like that the government or the company where the unemployed workers worked before have provided some help for them to get through the hard time before finding a good job.

384个字，忘记具体时间了，卡的时间写完了后继续在WORD里面写的。哎。

[ 本帖最后由 xiefen0223 于 2007-7-27 20:41 编辑 ]

ldsunUID: 2329026

In this letter, the writer holds an opposite view on the editor's impression of that many competent workers who lost jobs because of downsizing face serious economic hardship,[你这样说是承认了那篇文章给人以如此印象了，是不是这样呢，还是the writer自己的感觉，我觉得这也是个错误] often for years before finding another suitable employment. To support his conclusion, he provides another[?这里我觉得作者只提供了一个evidence,就是那个report吧] recent report on the United States economy, which lists many facts of the flourish in the job market. But carefully[careful?] examination of the letter, we can see this argument suffers from many fallacies.

Firstly, the arguer commits a fallacy of hasty generalization. Though there is a recent report presenting the job market is having a bright  future[我觉得有些问题，不知怎么改合适，你再看下], it has nothing to do with the impression the editor are trying to make here, because the editor has made it clear that the unemployed workers would face the economic hardship before finding other suitable job. Obviously the writer has missed the point that the workers are still under unemployment situation. [呵呵，这一点和我找到一样，我觉得算是找到主要错误了]

Secondly, the editor used the words carefully to make the impression, which did not expel some exceptions that some workers will still have money to lead a comfortable life. But oppositely to editors’ carefulness, the writer takes it for granted that the flourish of job market will solve most of workers’ problems by giving them new jobs. But new job vacancies are not only opened to the compete workers who get hired, but also available to other job seekers such as the students who are just graduated [graduates or graduated]from schools, can they beat the young competitors and get the job successfully? Even if the compete[competent] workers can get the new job, can he afford their previous life by the new salary? As we know, the new salary, even above-average, is often not comparable with the previous wage which they have strived for years, not to say to pay for the life cost[expenditure是不是更好?] they were having at that time before fired. So from this point, it makes sense that the worker will still face the economical problems until they find a suitable job.[这一点也和我说得一样，]

In conclusion, the writer[argument?] is not well reasoned as it stands. To make it logically acceptable, the writer should demonstrate the facts like that the government or the company where the unemployed workers worked before have provided some help for them to get through the hard time before finding a good job. [结尾似没有结束呵。]

你可能考虑下我第一段提的逻辑错误是否存在。第三段好大的一段，呵呵，可以考虑一下分解下。另外，我觉得 a写个300多一点字就差不多了，只要论证的有理有据，能说服ets 就ok啦。

[ 本帖最后由 ldsun 于 2007-7-28 19:48 编辑 ]