argument45，还有1个星期就要考了，请大家帮忙拍啊，留链乎拍

didinjUID: 2144641

TOPIC: ARGUMENT45 - The following appeared as an editorial in a wildlife journal.

"Arctic deer live on islands in Canada's arctic region. They search for food by moving over ice from island to island during the course of a year. Their habitat is limited to areas warm enough to sustain the plants on which they feed, and cold enough, at least some of the year, for the ice to cover the sea separating the islands, allowing the deer to travel over it. Unfortunately, according to reports from local hunters, the deer populations are declining. Since these reports coincide with recent global warming trends that have caused the sea ice to melt, we can conclude that the decline in arctic deer populations is the result of deer being unable to follow their age-old migration patterns across the frozen sea."
WORDS: 372          TIME: 00:40:00          DATE: 2008-1-23 17:44:38

In this argument, the author concludes that the number of deer is declining is the result of sea ice melting that deer unable to migrate in their own patterns . While several evidences seem logical as they stand, there do exist some flaws in this argument.

The author draws the conclusion relied on the assumption that it is global warming that caused the sea ice to melt. There is no evidence to support this.
Recent global warming may not so quickly influence there, and even if it does have an impact on sea ice, it does not mean sea ice will melt so immediately to sea water. As a common sense, sea ice in Arctic areas are too thick to melt. Without giving enough evidences to support his or her assumption, the author's conclusion is baseless.

Even if global warming caused sea ice to melt, the author based on the additional assumption that the number of Arctic deer is declining. The author reasons that local hunters report that the populations are decreased. However, the author fails to consider other alternative explanations that lend local hunters to believe the number of deer is declining. Perhaps it is hunters that caused the number to decline for the hunters hunt without limitation that destroy the natural balance. Or it is entirely possible that due to the more and more human begin to cultivate the island, deer move to more severity places in order to avoid to be hunted. Fails to consider these possible explanations, the author cannot draw the conclusion too hastily.

Even if Arctic deer cannot move to other islands through ice, it does not mean they do not have enough food to sustain themselves. Maybe they can move to other islands by  methods like  climb over several mountains to have plenty of food to sustain. Or maybe food in this island is quantity enough for them to eat, not need to go to other islands. For that matter, the number of deer will not decrease due to not having enough food.

In sum, this argument is not convincing for lacking many substaniate evidences to support that the population of deer is declining and global warming is the cause of sea ice to melt.

iq28UID: 2152875

简单说几点吧，觉得楼主写argument风格和我自己当时很像的，感触比较深。
简单的开头结尾，把主要时间重点留在中间段落，这么做很好。当然，如果想要更上一层楼的话，开头能够比较有特点的分析题目，结尾写出点针对性的改进文章思路的意见是肯定有好处的。后一个容易做到点，但是每个题目不一样；前面一个归纳起来比较难，但是套路形成了可能很多题目都可以用。

主体段落的写作，楼主都是段首给出错误，说理，然后给出大量的例子。段落之间都用了even if来衔接。
先说这个even if吧。现在觉得如果没有强烈的让步关系，就不要用even if来追求所谓的段间逻辑了，过于牵强，还不如不说。而且就算是有着让步的关系，见到让步就用even if来套，恐怕这种公式化的做法最后会和填模板一样，不会有什么好效果，可以试着讲解下两个因素之间的关系。
可能这样讲解不会适合所有人，提一个思路而已，只是希望楼主能够多多思考试着有自己的写法。

至于段内，同样是没有太多必要那么公式化，每一个段落结构都完全一样。其实argument写作可以适当地issue化一点。给你看一个我以前看过的习作https://bbs.gter.net/thread-643215-1-1.html，不必完全照搬他，也不必参考我当时的评论，看看别的写作风格就好。这个题目也有官方范文，可以参考一下，拓宽思路。以及使徒版主对于argument的一些理解https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=692647&extra=page%3D1%26amp%3Bfilter%3Dtype%26amp%3Btypeid%3D413，也可以看看。

说理的内容我不多说了，以前喜欢改，现在觉得个人有个人的思路，没法统一的，不怎么愿意多干涉了，而且觉得你的说理内容虽然字数很少但是话还是相当清楚的，从全文你的平均水平角度来说，没有太多不协调的地方：）

至于举例，我觉得你的例子有些多了。有的内容可以不用举例，说理了就好；有的内容举例了可以试着省略一些（  Perhaps it is hunters that caused the number to decline for the hunters hunt without limitation that destroy the natural balance. ）有的则是针对性明显不强显得勉强，那就不用再说了，或者简略地说上几个可能的点就好，比如官方范文的路况导致车祸的几个经典的词。

别的细节，段落结尾尽量不要也很武断地得出背景类的结论（For that matter, the number of deer will not decrease due to not having enough food.）展示你能够理清作者思路以及考虑到可能存在的漏洞即可。每个段尾的模板套话和整个文章的语言风格显得冲突。

就这些了，希望好运。整体看四百字不到写得还行，呵呵。

didinjUID: 2144641

看了版主的见解，确实觉得模板的举的那些所谓的例子没什么意义，看了版主写的那篇对ARGUMENT的认识和给的那个链接，确实具体的才是好的，不然还不如不举。看了版主的文章，感慨很多，哈哈，牛人啊

2点多还在改，实在是辛苦了。