Argument150[同主题写作]第2期

loudUID: 2387861

Argument150 The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine.

"The decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide clearly indicates the global pollution of water and air. Two studies of amphibians in YosemiteNational Park in California confirm my conclusion. In 1915 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there were abundant numbers of each species. However, in 1992 there were only four species of amphibians observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. The decline in Yosemite has been blamed on the introduction of trout into the park's waters, which began in 1920 (trout are known to eat amphibian eggs). But the introduction of trout cannot be the real reason for the Yosemite decline because it does not explain the worldwide decline."

Words    528                    time   45  

In this argument, the author acclaims that the decline of amphibians worldwide means the pollution of water and air all over the world. To support this, he cites two studies of amphibians in Yosemite National Park(Y Park). Through the comparison of the number of amphibians in 1915 and 1997, he concludes that amphibians decreased drastically not only in Y Park but also on all the earth and the water and air pollution is the significant reason. A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.

The major problem in this argument is that the arguer fails to provide any information to demonstrate that the decline of amphibians is relevant to the water and air pollution closely. On the one hand, the arguer provides no data about the decline in the world. If the number decreases just a little, it is more likely to be normal phenomena and it does not need to be care about. On the other hand, more other reasons which can also impact the number of amphibians should be taken into account such as the climate. The change of climate in the world can also lead to the decline of amphibians. And another possibility is that people’s activities changed amphibians’ living environment. The farms and buildings occupied too many lands which was ever suitable for amphibians. So the number will decrease naturally. Or it is perhaps some other reasons caused the decrease of the food for amphibians. All those can impact the number of amphibians too. Thus, the author should build the direct relation between the decline and the pollution of water and air firstly.

In addition, the two studies cited by the author can not support his viewpoint substantially. First, the change of number of amphibians in Y Park can not be extended to the world. The decline maybe happened locally. If it is true, there will be nothing with the water and air. Second, there is no information about the change of water and air in Y Park. If the water and air did not be polluted at all, it is ridiculous to blame the decline on the pollution of water and air. Third, it is a long time from 1915 to 1997, the author should clarify that there is nothing happened during this time, which might cause the decrease of amphibians. Without clear information about Y Park in these years, the conclusion can stay on imagination only.

Finally, even if the decline in Y Park is caused by the water and air pollution, it is not necessary to indicate the water and air all over the world is polluted. It is possible that the pollution just took place in Y Park rather all the world. So more other substantial evidence should be provided.

To sum up, the information in this argument is not abundant enough to support the author’s conclusion. Too many imaginations were involved. If he wants to convince us, he should provide more information about the change in the number of amphibians and the pollution of water and air all over the world. The history of environment and amphibians in Y Park should also be provided.


[ 本帖最后由 liyue24 于 2008-3-1 17:31 编辑 ]

xiahsoulUID: 2441730

Argument150 The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine."The decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide clearly indicates the global pollution of water and air. Two studies of amphibians in YosemiteNational Park in California confirm my conclusion. In 1915 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there were abundant numbers of each species. However, in 1992 there were only four species of amphibians observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. The decline in Yosemite has been blamed on the introduction of trout into the park's waters, which began in 1920 (trout are known to eat amphibian eggs). But the introduction of trout cannot be the real reason for the Yosemite decline because it does not explain the worldwide decline."

提纲：
1 没有信息表明世界上amphibians的减少和污染有必然联系   
2 提供的两个studies 不能支持他观点   
3 就算y park是由于污染引起的野不能说世界上水和空气都被污染了。  

In this argument, the author acclaims[acclaim是称赞的意思，你在这里应该是想表示claims] that the decline of amphibians worldwide means the pollution of water and air all over the world. To support this[support 后面要加n, this 是adj/pron， 后面要加conclusion之类的，或者是改成it], he cites two studies of amphibians in Yosemite National Park(Y Park). Through the comparison of the number of amphibians in 1915 and 1997, he concludes that amphibians decreased drastically not only in Y Park but also on all the earth and the water and air pollution is the significant reason.[两处加下划线的地方太重复了，前面开头就提出作者结论，然后列出论据就就行了，不用再把结论说一遍] A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.

The major problem in this argument is that the arguer fails to provide any information to demonstrate that the decline of amphibians is relevant to the water and air pollution closely. On the one hand, the arguer provides no data about the decline [+of amphibians] in the world. If the number decreases just a little, it is more likely to be normal phenomena and it does not need to be[去掉be] care about[这一个攻击的错误不太对，argument中明确说了drastically decreased， 肯定不会只是少了一点点]. On the other hand, more other reasons which can also impact the number of amphibians should be taken into account such as the climate. The change of climate in the world can also lead to the decline of amphibians. And another possibility is that people’s activities changed amphibians’ living environment. The farms and buildings occupied too many lands which was ever suitable for amphibians. So the number will decrease naturally. Or it is perhaps some other reasons caused the decrease of the[去掉the] food for amphibians. All those can impact the number of amphibians too. Thus, the author should build the direct relation between the decline and the pollution of water and air firstly. [最后的总结感觉不太对，前边基本上是说没有考虑到其他因素，而后面的段落总结说的是应该建立直接联系，不太对题，可以试试 so as to build the direct relationship between ```,  the author should exclude other possibilities]

In addition, the two studies cited by the author can not support his viewpoint substantially. First, the change of number of amphibians in Y Park can not be extended to the world. The decline maybe happened locally[这句话很不错，一下就点明了原因，学习！]. If it is true, there will be nothing with the water and air. Second, there is no information about the change of water and air in Y Park. If the water and air did not be polluted at all, it is ridiculous to blame the decline on the pollution of water and air. Third, it is a long time from 1915 to 1997, the author should clarify that there is nothing happened during this time, which might cause the decrease of amphibians. Without clear information about Y Park in these years, the conclusion can stay on imagination only. [这一段论证很精彩，严密，全面，层层递进，如果要说改进的话，可以把1915-1992这段时间能够影响数量的原因举个例，specific 一下]

Finally, even if the decline in Y Park is caused by the water and air pollution, it is not necessary to indicate the water and air all over the world is polluted. It is possible that the pollution just took place in Y Park rather all the world. So more other substantial evidence should be provided.[同样的，我认为可以具体的举个例子，比如 Y park所在地方对污染的要求和治理不严格，但总的来看，全球都提倡可持续发展，然后基本上没有这么严重的污染问题，使amphibians drastically decreased]

To sum up, the information in this argument is not abundant enough to support the author’s conclusion. Too many imaginations were involved. If he wants to convince us, he should provide more information about the change in the number of amphibians and the pollution of water and air all over the world. The history of environment and amphibians in Y Park should also be provided.

论证已经达到了完善严密的水平了，可以往specific，和语言方面努力，这样你的分数应该很好看了

[ 本帖最后由 liyue24 于 2008-3-1 17:35 编辑 ]