Argument221 [黄金十二宫山羊]第三次作业(5.29)

魏玛竹林UID: 2201594

第2周---周1(5.29)---第三次作业
TOPIC: ARGUMENT221 - The following appeared in the editorial section of a student newspaper.
"In a recent survey, most students who were studying beginning Russian gave higher course-evaluation ratings to classes taught by non-native Russian speakers than to classes taught by native Russian speakers. The reason that the non-native speakers were better teachers of Russian is easy to see: the non-native speakers learned Russian later in life themselves, and so they have a better understanding of how the language can be taught effectively. Therefore, in order to improve instruction for all languages and also save money, our university should hire non-native speakers as language instructors instead of trying to find and recruit native speakers."


1．        不明调查。可能是由小机构执行的，受访人态度也不认真。
2．        非因果关系。评分低并不能说明教学差。或许是俄国老师太严格遭学生反感。
3．        错误类比。仅从俄语的初级教学不能推得所有语言的教学。
4．        无理假设。外教不一定更贵。

In this editorial, the editor advocates that the university should hire non-native speakers as language instructors instead of trying to find and recruit native speakers to attain the goal of improving instruction for all languages and saving money. The recommendation is based on a recent survey from which it seems "obvious" that the non-Russian speakers are better teachers of Russian.However, a careful examination will reveal that the "obvious" is not true and the editor’s advice is also thoughtless.
To begin with,the survey cited is too vague to be imformative.Because it fails to indicate who conducted the suvey,who responded,or how the survey was conducted to lend credibility to the claim. Perhaps,the conductor who carry out the survey is a small institution.When faced with it ,the responder are too careless to provide an exact answer. If so, the result is worthless and the validity is doubtful.
Even if the survey is reliable,it is presumptuous to judge a teacher's work merely according to the beginner's course-evaluation ratings. Given that, the students,who were studing beginning Russian,were such unruly little children that they hate to be grounded.But the native Russian speakers were much stricter than the non-native ones for they realized the crucial role that a stable fundamental played in the course of learning Russian.It's highly probable that the tender non-native speakers' points were higher than the native Russian ones'.Without ruling out these and other possible factors,the editor cannot conclude that who were actually the better teachers of the language.
Granted that the non-native speakers performed better teaching the beginners Russian,the editor's claim is unwarranted because some factors such as the particular language and the level of the student hardly remain the same. For example , Chinese,a language with five thousand of years history, is almost impossible for a teacher without years of personal experience living in the very country to teach effectively. And maybe when it comes to the advanced student who studies Russian,the native speakers' performance would be so excellent because of their cultural background that the non-native one's couldn't be compared with.
Last but not the least,hiring non-native speakers as language instructors instead of native ones does not necessarily follow that the university could save it's money.In fact,many native speakers of minority languages have a strong feel of the responsibility to popularize their languages.For this reason,they are so glad to teaching their own languages in foreign countries that they care little about the payment.
To sum, the editorial relies on an unclear survey before draws a conclusion far from cogent that non-native speakers are better Russian teacher than the native speakers.After that,the editor advised hastily to hire non-native speakers as language instructors only for they are more effectively and would ask less than the native ones.The analysis above stands,the editor does not constitute a logical argument in favor of the recommendation.

[ 本帖最后由 魏玛竹林 于 2006-5-30 07:30 编辑 ]

asong2004UID: 2178054

In this editorial, the editor advocates that the university should hire non-native speakers as language instructors instead of trying to find and recruit native speakers to attain the goal of improving instruction for all languages and saving money. The recommendation is based on a recent survey from which it seems "obvious" that the non-Russian speakers are better teachers of Russian.However, a careful examination will reveal that the "obvious" is not true and the editor’s advice is also thoughtless.
To begin with,the survey cited is too vague to be imformative.Because it fails to indicate who conducted the suvey,（谁主持是吧）who（谁参与多少人回应） responded,or how the survey was conducted to lend credibility to the claim. Perhaps,the conductor who carry（语法） out the survey is a small institution（investigation group）.When faced with it ,the responder are too careless（粗心么？还是轻视好些吧） to provide an exact（正确就可以了exact程度过了点） answer. If so, the result is worthless and the validity is doubtful.（worthless和后面的重复吧）
Even if the survey is reliable,it is presumptuous to judge a teacher's work merely according to the beginner's course-evaluation ratings. Given that, the students（,who were） studing beginning Russian,were such（so） unruly little children that they hate to be grounded（憎恨被。。。）.But the native Russian speakers were much stricter than the non-native ones for they realized the crucial role that a stable fundamental played in the course of learning Russian.（这个好像站不住脚哟，native就比non懂这些么）It's highly probable that the tender（这个tender在此何解？） non-native speakers' points were higher than the native Russian ones'.Without ruling out these and other possible factors,the editor cannot conclude that who were actually the better teachers of the language.
Granted that the non-native speakers performed better teaching the beginners Russian,the editor's claim is unwarranted because （of） some factors such as the particular language and the level of the student hardly remain the same（晕，水平保持一致是这么写得么,偶也不懂）. For example , Chinese,a language with five thousand of years history（这个写法也很中国化吧~ 而且of？）, is almost impossible for a teacher without years of personal experience living in the very （这个修饰什么意思呢？）country to teach effectively. And maybe when it（指代ch吗）comes to the advanced student who studies Russian,the native speakers' performance （总觉得和分句的主语不一致，很不舒服）would be so excellent because of their cultural background that the non-native one's couldn't be compared with.（总之很晕这句的语法。。。。。。）
Last but not the least,hiring non-native speakers as language instructors instead of native ones does not necessarily follow（follow在这里的用法没懂） that the university could save it's money.In fact,many native speakers of minority languages have a strong feel of the responsibility to popularize their languages.（这个，这个他们是怎么想的？）For this reason,they are so glad to teaching their own languages in foreign countries that they care little about the payment.（俺明白了——白求恩啊！）
To sum, the editorial relies on an unclear survey before draws a conclusion far from cogent that non-native speakers are better Russian teacher than the native speakers.After that,the editor advised hastily to hire non-native speakers as language instructors only for they are more effectively （谁说有效率了）and would ask less than the native ones（是因为他们要求的工资低么？）.The analysis above stands,the editor does not constitute a logical argument in favor of the recommendation.

魏玛竹林UID: 2201594

谢谢ASONG 改的真仔细
我都还没来得及改你的~~
现在就去！！

魏玛竹林UID: 2201594

第二版&几个问题

In this editorial, the editor advocates that the university should hire non-native speakers as language instructors instead of trying to find and recruit native speakers to attain the goal of improving instruction for all languages and saving money. The recommendation is based on a recent survey from which it seems "obvious" that the non-Russian speakers are better teachers of Russian.However, a careful examination will reveal that the "obvious" is not true and the editor's advice is also thoughtless.
To begin with,the survey cited is too vague to be imformative.Because it fails to indicate who conducted the suvey,who responded,or how the survey was conducted to lend credibility to the claim. Perhaps,the conductor who carried out the survey was a small institution.When faced with it ,the responder were too careless to provide an exact answer. If so, the result is worthless and the validity is doubtful.
Even if the survey is reliable,it is presumptuous to judge a teacher's work merely according to the beginner's course-evaluation ratings. Given that, the students,who were studing beginning Russian,were such unruly little children that they hated to be grounded.Maybe the native Russian speakers were much stricter than the non-native ones for they realized the crucial role that a stable fundamental played in the course of learning Russian.It's highly probable that the tender non-native speakers' points were higher than the native Russian ones'.Without ruling out these and other possible factors,the editor cannot conclude that who were actually the better teachers of the language.
Granted that the non-native speakers performed better teaching the beginners Russian,the editor's claim is unwarranted because some factors such as the particular language and the level of the students hardly remain the same. For example , Chinese,a language with five thousand years history, is almost impossible for a teacher without years of personal experience living in the very country to teach effectively. And maybe when it comes to the advanced student who studies Russian,the native speakers' performance would be so excellent because of their cultural background that the non-native one's couldn't be compared with.
Last but not the least,hiring non-native speakers as language instructors instead of native ones does not necessarily follow that the university could save it's money. In fact, many native speakers of minority languages have a strong feeling of the responsibility to popularize their languages. For this reason, they are so glad to teach their own language in foreign countries that they care little about the payment.
To sum, the editorial relies on an unclear survey before drawing a conclusion far from cogent that non-native speakers are better Russian teacher than the native speakers.After that,the editor advised hastily to hire non-native speakers as language instructors only for they are more effectively and would ask less than the native ones.As the analysis above stands, the editor does not constitute a logical argument in favor of the recommendation.

我的句子之间确实没什么连接过渡 就像老大说的碎碎的~ 严重时还感觉在跳跃~~这个问题要怎么解决呢

困惑：1。四个点是不是太多了一点，而且每一个都平均分配，显得每个点都不彻底 若要分析透了 场上时间似乎不够。
         2。对于出现的错误 一定要先命名或者说下定仪么 感觉有时候像什么急于概括 非因果什么的很难区分

njutleeUID: 2179673

附件