argument220 【kito作业】

kito9695UID：209685

第二十二次作业
＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝Argument＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝＝
Argument220（2005年2-9月总频21次）
【题目】The following appeared in an article in a magazine for writers.

"A recent study showed that in describing a typical day's conversation, people make an average of 23 references to watching television and only 1 reference to reading fiction. This result suggests that, compared with the television industry, the publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability. Therefore, people who wish to have careers as writers should acquire training and experience in writing for television rather than for print media."

【翻译】最近一次研究显示当描述日常对话的时候，人们平均有23次提到看电视而只有一次提到读小说。这一结果说明与电视行业相比，出版和书籍销售行业的盈利能力可能会下降。因此，想要以作家为职业的人应该接受为电视而不是为印刷媒体写作的训练和经验。

【提纲】
1、研究结果是否可靠？研究对象的选择是否随机？样本是否充足？
2、提到读小说的次数少于看电视，不能说明出版和书籍销售行业盈利能力可能会下降；
第一，总所周知，电视非常普及，提到电视多也许只是看电视多一些，很正常，跟出版和书籍行业的盈利能力没关系；电视看得多一样可以买书
第二，小说只是书籍的一部分，不能代表整个行业
第三，没有对比以前的情况和以后的情况，不能说明下降趋势
3、即便电视行业盈利比较多，想成为作家也无需接受为电视写作的训练，两者没有联系；要根据作家的意愿和兴趣来定，与盈利无关

【正文】（421words）
In the argument, the arguer unfairly advises people who desire to be writers to acquire training and experience in writing for television rather than for print media, based on a recent study of typical day's conversation. However, a careful scrutiny reveals its ridiculous points as follows.

To begin with, the validity of the study’s result is open to doubt. Is sample big enough？Or is it selected at random to keep the study convincing? It is possible that the people taking the study are just the ones who prefer watching TV to reading books or the ones engaging in TV industry. Unless rule out the possibility, we could not guarantee that the study is valid to lend support to the argument.

In addition, granted that the study is valid, in other words, it is true that people make more references to watching television comparing to reading fiction in describing a typical day’s conversation, it does not indicate that the publishing and bookselling industries are likely to decline in profitability while the television industry will not, as I explains below in there aspects. Firstly, as is known to everyone, television is so popular that it is common that people watch TV more and mentions it a lot when making a typical day’s conversation. However, it has little relationship with the profitable ability of the publishing and bookselling industries. People who like watching television may also like buying books; Secondly, fictions are just part of books, and thus could not represent the whole situation of the publishing and bookselling industries; thirdly, no evidence about the past and future of the publishing and bookselling industries is provided to illustrate the declining trend of its profit. Even if less references may because of low profit, however, we don’t know whether this situation is becoming better or worse.

Last but not least, the arguer fails to establish a relationship between profitability of an industries and what writers should acquire training and experience in writing for. No matter what is more profitable, television or the publishing and bookselling industry, the people who want to be professional writer should choose what they are interest in for training or experience.

In sum, the argument is rather not reasonable as it stands. What to choose to train to be a writer depends on what the writer is interested in rather than what is more profitable. To make it logically accept, the arguer should first keep the validity of the study then draw the conclusion on a more rational reference.