Argument6 同主题写作

WeOnUID: 2110447

TOPIC: ARGUMENT6 - The following was written as a part of an application for a small business loan by a group of developers in the city of Monroe.

"A jazz music club in Monroe would be a tremendously profitable enterprise. Currently, the nearest jazz club is 65 miles away; thus, our proposed club, the C Note, would have the local market all to itself. Plus, jazz is extremely popular in Monroe: over 100,000 people attended Monroe's jazz festival last summer, several well-known jazz musicians live in Monroe, and the highest-rated radio program in Monroe is 'Jazz Nightly,' which airs every weeknight. Finally, a nationwide study indicates that the typical jazz fan spends close to $1,000 per year on jazz entertainment. It is clear that the C Note cannot help but make money."

In this argument, the arguer concludes that their proposed club, the C note, in Monroe (M) would be a highly profitable enterprise simply by his thin and weak evidence. A close scrutiny will enable us to find out that this argument suffers from several critical flaws.

First and foremost, the argument rests on the gratuitous assumption that their proposed club C note would have the local market all to itself only because of the nearest jazz club being 65 miles away. However this is not necessarily the case. First the arguer neglects the possibility that there would be many other jazz clubs in M other than C note, which would be the rival to C note. In addition, if C note was not accepted by its potential consumers for its bad service or out-of-date jazz music, these consumers would go to other clubs, even drive a car for 65 miles to the nearest club mentioned in the argument.

In the second place, the popularity of jazz in M is merely based on the Monroe’s jazz festival last summer and a radio program in M. Nevertheless, the fact that 100000 people attended the festival does not lend support to the popularity of jazz in M. A large part of these 100000 people might come from other towns rather than M. People from M who attended the festival may be not more than 100 compared with a town with 100000 residents. Moreover, the highest rate of the radio program called "Jazz Nightly" cannot be a sufficient evidence to support the popularity. The fact that people listen to radio game does not mean people will go to jazz club.

Another fallacy undermining the argument is that the nationwide study cannot be compared with the situation of M. The arguer assumes that the characteristics of a nation apply to everywhere in it. However there is no guarantee that this is the case. Maybe the jazz fan who spends 1000 dollars on jazz is not from M, and the fan in M is not that rich.

In sum, the argument is not well reasoned and persuasive as it stands, and the evidence provided in the analysis does not lend strong support what the arguer maintains. To bolster the argument, the arguer must provide more statistical survey and evidence about the popularity of Monroe.

以前写的一篇，有拍必回！

[ 本帖最后由 WeOn 于 2006-3-19 14:37 编辑 ]

icallUID: 207433

谢谢你对我文章的修改~

In this argument, the arguer concludes that their proposed club, the C note, in Monroe (M) would be a highly profitable enterprise simply by his thin(dubious,用thin来修饰evidence不太正规吧） and weak evidence. A close scrutiny will enable us to find out that this argument suffers from several critical flaws.

First and foremost, the argument rests on the gratuitous assumption that their proposed club C note would have the local market all to itself only because of the nearest jazz club being 65 miles away. However this is not necessarily the case. First the arguer neglects the possibility that there would be many other jazz clubs in M other than C note, which would be the rival to C note（这句不太妥当，文章已经说是65miles里唯一一家，可以只说也许有其他的club，但是也会放jazz...）. In addition, if C note was not accepted by its potential consumers for its bad service or out-of-date jazz music, these consumers would go to other clubs.（既然提到具体经营问题，不如把人员工资等等也捎带说一下，总的来说这应该不是主要问题，可以放到后面段落里一块把这类琐碎问题谈一下）, even drive a car for 65 miles to the nearest club mentioned in the argument

In the second place, the popularity of jazz in M is merely based on the Monroe’s jazz festival last summer and a radio program in M. Nevertheless, the fact that 100000 people attended the festival does not lend support to the popularity of jazz in M. A large part of these 100000 people might come came from other towns rather than M. People from M who attended the festival may be not more than 100 compared with a town with 100000 residents（10000 residents in a town). Moreover, the highest rate of the radio program called "Jazz Nightly" cannot be a sufficient evidence to support the popularity （of jazz）. The fact that people listen to radio game does mean people will go to jazz club.

Another fallacy undermining the argument is that the nationwide study cannot (may not最好不要出现过于肯定的语气）be compared with （用fit之类的词比较适合）the situation of M. The arguer assumes that the characteristics of a nation apply to everywhere in it. However there is no guarantee that this is the case. Maybe the jazz fan who spends 1000 dollars on jazz is not from M, and the fan in M is not that rich（这一句表达的不够好it is possible that the jazz fans in M  consume less than the national level in jazz entertainment, moreover, no evidence warrants they would spend all these expend in the proposed club)
In sum, the argument is not well reasoned and persuasive （应该用动词的被动语态，前面的reasoned单独是形容词，但这里应该是reason的被动形式）as it stands, and the evidence provided in the analysis does not lend strong support（to） what the arguer maintains. To bolster the argument, the arguer must provides more statistical survey and evidence about the popularity of Monroe？

提几点意见，
1.文章里出现的论据，应当作为主要方面来反驳，不能漏，其他的推论可以稍后，你这篇文章里对于“艺术家住在当地是jazz popular的一个证据”没有进行攻击，而这恰恰是作者所罗列的三个主要证据之一
2.找到攻击点，但是展开的不是很好，其实也不需要太多语言，但是一定要把问题说清楚。
3.句子之间的衔接再注意一下，语句表达，常用词的替换还是很重要的。

嗯，希望继续共勉~

[ 本帖最后由 icall 于 2006-3-19 15:15 编辑 ]

北回归线UID: 2130044

WeOn同学~~!!!又见到你啦!
记不记得以前我们一起互改TWE的啊?
顶你一下,顺便先占个座,等下要上选修课,晚上回来就帮你改~!

下面是我写的这篇的链接~
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D3

北回归线UID: 2130044

In this argument, the arguer concludes that their proposed club, the C note, in Monroe (M) would be a highly profitable enterprise simply by his thin(在这里用thin来修饰确实感觉不太对，换一个吧，楼上说的dubious不错） and weak evidence. A close scrutiny will enable us to find out that this argument suffers from several critical flaws.

First and foremost, the argument rests on the gratuitous assumption that their proposed club C note would have the local market all to itself only because of the nearest jazz club being 65 miles away. However this is not necessarily the case. First（前面已经用过first了，这里就换个其他的吧，比如，for one side,后面再用个for the other side之类的好了） the arguer neglects the possibility that there would be many other jazz clubs in M other than C note, which would be the rival to C note（这个攻击点的选择有待商榷，感觉M那没别的JAZZ CLUB 是挺确定了的事了，这篇argu错误也蛮多，最好另换个攻击点，免得授人以柄）. In addition, if C note was not accepted by its potential consumers for its bad service or out-of-date jazz music, these consumers would go to other clubs.（这里说的应该属于经营策略问题，最好多谈谈关于经营的几个方面，丰富一下这块的内容）, even drive a car for 65 miles to the nearest club mentioned in the argument。

In the second place, the popularity of jazz in M is merely based on the Monroe’s jazz festival last summer and a radio program in M. Nevertheless, the fact that 100000 people attended the festival does not lend support to the popularity of jazz in M. A large part of these 100000 people might come from other towns rather than M. People from M who attended the festival may be not more than 100 compared with a town with 100000 residents（the 10000 residents in M，人和人比，非people和town比). Moreover, the highest rate of the radio program called "Jazz Nightly" cannot be a sufficient evidence to support the popularity （of jazz）. The fact that people listen to radio game does mean people will go to jazz club. （这里，我觉得最好先说一下这个节目受欢迎不代表人们喜欢jazz，然后再说更不表示人们会去jazz club了）

Another fallacy undermining the argument is that the nationwide study cannot (同意楼上的看法，最好是may或might，XDF老师说这两个是标准用词哦）be compared with （不太明白为何用compare,suit应该可以吧？）the situation of M. The arguer assumes that the characteristics of a nation （could）apply to everywhere in it. However there is no guarantee that this is the case. Maybe the jazz fan who spends 1000 dollars on jazz is not from M, and the fan in M is not that rich（应该说是他们不想花这笔钱在jazz entertainment上)
In sum, the argument is not well reasoned and persuasive as it stands, and the evidence provided in the analysis does not lend strong support（to） what the arguer maintains. To bolster the argument, the arguer must provides more statistical survey and evidence about the popularity of Monroe。

我也来说几点意见：
首先在结构上还是比较清晰的，看来对argu的大纲要还是掌握得不错。
但是我觉得攻击点把握得还不够好，抓住了大把柄要乘胜攻击阿~
这篇中还有些攻击点没有指出，或是论述不够充分。
摆出事实，提出与原文中相反的论断以阐述批驳；再让步，再继续批接下去的观点。这样似乎更有层次呢：）

不过这是你的第二篇，也很不错啦，继续努力啊~
我的文章也是漏洞百出的，是第三篇，而且限时失败，用了45min呢。我4月3就考了，也是心急如焚。不过，作文是急不来的，只有踏踏实实地写啦。我twe的教训就是限时太少，考试状态不行。
互勉互勉！！！！