Argument221 [黄金十二宫--天蝎宫]第三次作业(5.29)

njutleeUID: 2179673

Argument221 [黄金十二宫--天蝎宫]第三次作业(5.29)
我归纳的逻辑错误：
1、调查样本不具代表性。仅仅学习beginning Russian的学生受到调查，他们有代表性吗？学习中级Russian和高级Russian的学生又是如何评价的呢？ 显然仅仅对学习beginning Russian的学生的调查是不能反映Russian的整体教学情况的；
2、仅凭一项调查结果就认为“the non-native speakers were better teachers of Russian”过于武断。是否better不是仅仅学生是否欢迎就能评价的，还有其他一些因素；
3、即使在Russian上情况如此，但不能因此推广到all languages。


In this argument, the arguer asserts that in order to improve instruction for all languages and also save money， the university should hire non-native speaker s as language intructors instead of native ones.  To substantiate his conclusion, he cites the result of a recent survey concering students who were studing beginning Russian, based which he assumes that non-native speakers were better teachers of Russian than native ones.   However, after serious consideration, I  find this argument suffers several critic fallaciies in reasonning.

First of all, the result of a recent survey cited in this argument does not lend strong support to the assumption he made.  Only the students who were studying beginning Russian were engaged in this survey, but what about the others who studied senior Russian?  Without further statistics concernning the opinon of those other students, this survey is meaningless.  

Secondly, the arguer hastily assuems that the non-native speakers were better Russian speakers just based the evalution of students learning beginning Russian, which perhaps are not represetative of all students learning Russian at different level.  As we know, which ones are the better teachers of Russian does not merely depends on the opinion of students.  There may be a lot of factors concerning the teaching level of Russian, such as the results of the tests and other people's opinion other than students'.  Without consideration of these factors, the arguer cannot come to the assumption so hastily.

Thirdly, even if the non-native speakers teached better than native ones in Russian, which is still unwarranted, it cannnot apply to the instruction of all languages.  The arguer once assume that 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. However, we may find some parodox when the question comes to the country’s own native language.  Without concrete evidence indicates that this is just the same case for all other languages, it would be too groundless to come to the conclusion that hiring non-native speakers as language instructors instead of native speakers for all languages would be more effective. Moreover, with no evidence at all, it is still unconvicing to assert that these measures could also save money.

To sum up, without providing further evidence, which could strongly support his assumption that the non-native speakers were better teachers of Russian and that the Russian teaching has much the same condition with other languages, I would have to reserve my consent on his recommendation.
(415 Words)

thisisjaneUID: 2185183

Argument221 [黄金十二宫--天蝎宫]第三次作业(5.29)
我归纳的逻辑错误：
1、调查样本不具代表性。仅仅学习beginning Russian的学生受到调查，他们有代表性吗？学习中级Russian和高级Russian的学生又是如何评价的呢？ 显然仅仅对学习beginning Russian的学生的调查是不能反映Russian的整体教学情况的；
2、仅凭一项调查结果就认为“the non-native speakers were better teachers of Russian”过于武断。是否better不是仅仅学生是否欢迎就能评价的，还有其他一些因素；
3、即使在Russian上情况如此，但不能虼送乒愕絘ll languages。


In this argument, the arguer asserts that in order to improve instruction for all languages and also save money, the university should hire non-native speakers as language intructors[instructors] instead of native ones.  To substantiate his conclusion, he cites the result of a recent survey concering[concerning] students who were studing[studying] beginning Russian, based[on这里应该要加] which he assumes that non-native speakers were better teachers of Russian than native ones.  [好复杂的句子啊！什么时候我也能写这样的呢？顺便问下，G的作文句子相对长点好，是吗？] However, after serious consideration, I find this argument suffers several critic fallacies[fallacies] in reasonning[reasoning].
[对照了一下北美提出写开头时应该做到以下几点：1指出题目的最终结论；2简洁的描述题目的推理过程；3按照题目的推理过程和论据的顺序大概提一下主要错误；你的开头貌似只重复了以下题目而已，这个是很忌讳的呀，第二点第三点可以说都没做到，需要好好改改]

First of all, the result of a recent survey[这句话与第一段出现过的一模一样，尝试换一种表达方式。个人认为前面已经提过的内容，在这里只要写 the survey 就可以了] cited in this argument does not lend strong support to the assumption he[he这里指谁啊？前文好像没有提到，虽然我知道指谁^-^] made.  Only the students who were studying beginning Russian were engaged in this survey, but what about the others who studied senior Russian?  Without further statistics concernning[concerning] the opinon[opinion] of those other students, this survey is meaningless.[用meaning在这里过于武断，这个调查只是不够全面insufficient 比较好]  

Secondly, the arguer hastily assuems[assumes] that the non-native speakers were better Russian speakers just based[base sth. on sth.牛津看过了，要加ON] the evalution[evaluation] of students learning beginning Russian, which perhaps are not represetative[representative] of all students learning Russian at different level.  As we know, which ones[这个表达方式奇怪哦，直接用who] are the better teachers of Russian does not merely depends on the opinion of students.  There may be a lot of factors concerning the teaching level of Russian, such as the results of the tests and other people's opinion other than students'.  Without consideration of these factors, the arguer cannot come to the assumption so hastily.

Thirdly, even if the non-native speakers teached[taught] better than native ones in Russian, which is still unwarranted, it cannnot [cannot]apply to the instruction of all languages.  The arguer once assume[assumes] that 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. However, we may find some parodox[paradox] when the question comes to the country’s own native language.[这句话说得有点莫名其妙，我看不出有什么paeodox，也许你应该具体解释一下]  Without concrete evidence indicates that this is just the same case for all other languages, it would be too groundless to come to the conclusion that hiring non-native speakers as language instructors instead of native speakers for all languages would be more effective. Moreover, with no evidence at all, it is still unconvicing [unconvincing]to assert that these measures could also save money.[具体说明]

To sum up, without providing further evidence, which could strongly support his assumption that the non-native speakers were better teachers of Russian and that the Russian teaching has much the same condition with other languages, I would have to reserve my consent on his recommendation.
(415 Words)

真佩服你的长句啊？从句加从句加从句，看得我好累。也许功力还不深啊!值得我好好学习。
文章最后一段应该总结所有的逻辑错误，你这个结尾给人草草了事的感觉，可能我也有这样的问题因，为每当写到最后一段我就如释重负了，随便写个结尾。这样是不行的，考试的时候结尾可能会没时间，所以我们现在应该更花时间来写结尾（这是我今天改你文章的一个大收获！）。再说开头，前面我已经提出了你的问题了，这样看来，你在开头和结尾都没有明确的提出所有你要写的逻辑错误，这是这篇文章的最大毛病。在论证也没有很好的展开，总是在否定，没有提出更有建设性的假设，使文章更有说服力。

个人愚见，仅供参考！啊～～～还没吃午饭呢！要好好修改啊！

                                                 ----Jane
                                                    2006．5．30

[ 本帖最后由 thisisjane 于 2006-5-30 15:59 编辑 ]

njutleeUID: 2179673

谢谢  jane 妹妹：），我一定好好修改

微末三月UID: 205072

In this argument, the arguer asserts that in order to improve instruction for all languages and also save money， the university should hire non-native speaker s as language instructors instead of native ones.  To substantiate his conclusion, he cites the result of a recent survey concerning students who were studying beginning Russian, based which he assumes that non-native speakers were better teachers of Russian than native ones.   However, after serious consideration, I find this argument suffers several critic fallacies in reasoning.

First of all, the result of a recent survey cited in this argument does not lend strong support to the assumption he made.  Only the students who were studying beginning Russian were engaged in this survey, but what about the others who studied senior Russian?  Without further statistics concerning the opinion of those other students, this survey is meaningless.  

Secondly, the arguer hastily assumes that the non-native speakers were better Russian speakers just based the evaluation of students learning beginning Russian, based on吧 which perhaps are not representative of all students learning Russian at different level.  As we know, which ones are the better teachers of Russian does not merely depends on the opinion of students.  There may be a lot of factors concerning the teaching level of Russian, such as the results of the tests and other people's opinion other than students'.  Without consideration of these factors, the arguer cannot come to the assumption so hastily.

Thirdly, even if the non-native speakers teached better than native ones in Russian, 有这个词吗，taught吧 which is still unwarranted, it cannot apply to the instruction of all languages.  The arguer once assumes that 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. However, we may find some paradoxwhen the question comes to the country’s own native language.  Without concrete evidence indicates that this is just the same case for all other languages, 介词短语不能做主语it would be too groundless to come to the conclusion that hiring non-native speakers as language instructors instead of native speakers for all languages would be more effective. Moreover, with no evidence at all, it is still unconvincing to assert that these measures could also save money.

To sum up, without providing further evidence, which could strongly support his assumption that the non-native speakers were better teachers of Russian and that the Russian teaching has much the same condition with other languages, I would have to reserve my consent on his recommendation. 这个句子有点怪啊，不是…有，改成there be句型吧

语言不错，不过感觉论点没有很好的被支持，也就是说，论据不够。
一个小意见：先修改下拼写错误吧，一打开一片红….

永远的圣者UID: 2182901

少少头重脚轻，第一段不是说最重要吗，没有深入，仅仅说没有证据就完了（实际上我也是这样的，经常被人批评）。