Argument18【Chasing For "6" Score】第一次作业

hbezllsUID: 2392974

1.       Safety effort不一定failed
2.       BC不一定因为道路改善计划而降低事故发生率
3.       错误类比
TOPIC: ARGUMENT18 - The following appeared in an editorial in a Prunty County newspaper.

"In an attempt to improve highway safety, Prunty County recently lowered its speed limit from 55 miles per hour to 45 on all major county roads. But the 55 mph limit should be restored, because this safety effort has failed. Most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate throughout Prunty County has decreased only slightly. If we want to improve the safety of our roads, we should instead undertake the same kind of road improvement project that Butler County completed five years ago: increasing lane widths and resurfacing rough roads. Today, major Butler County roads still have a 55 mph speed limit, yet there were 25 percent fewer reported accidents in Butler County this past year than there were five years ago."
WORDS: 426          TIME: 0:51:06          DATE: 2008-2-27

In this argument, the author intends to recommend that the speed limit on all major county roads of Prunty should be restored. To substantiate this analysis, the author provides the evidence that the safety effort has failed because most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate does not decrease too much. Then, the author point out the example of Butler County which is five years ago to advice the government to increase lane widths and resurface rough roads. However, there are some important concerns that may undermine the argument seriously which author fails to address in the argument.
First of all, the author unfairly considers the attempt is feeble for most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate does not decrease too much. Perhaps it is not enough time passed to determine the effectiveness of the program, because most drivers have not heard about of the limit decrease yet in a short time. Therefore, without providing reliable evidence of effectiveness of the limit, the author’s conclusion is unjustified.
Next, the arguer cites an example that Butler County completed a road improvement to improve highway safety in five years ago to explain that there were 25 percent fewer reported accidents in Butler County this past year than there were five years ago. Perhaps the author overlooks some other possible factors contributed to reduce the accident rate, such as the increased safety sense of the BC citizen and the law which punish the troublemakers more strict. Without ruling out all possible alternatives, the author cannot indicate hastily that the road improvement is the exclusive cause of the decrease of reported accidents in BC.
Third, even if the condition remains the same in future, the argument also relies on what might be a false analogy between PC and BC. It is entirely possible that PC is much bigger than BC, and the road width and surface smooth has already met the needs of traffic. Common sense informs me that any one of a myriad of other differences—environmental, traditional concept, and economic level—might explain that.
In conclusion, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer should have to prove that the attempt is really noneffective, and the condition of B.C remains as five years ago, and the mean will be and only be effective in P.C as increasing lane width and resurfacing rough roads. Moreover, the arguer must provide evidence to rule out all the above-mentioned possibilities which might weaken the argument.

springelfUID: 2458536

In this argument, the author intends to recommend that the speed limit on all major county roads of Prunty should be restored. To substantiate this analysis, the author provides the evidence that the safety effort has failed because most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate does not decrease too much. Then, the author point （point points写的时候稍微注意点人称时态。）out the example of Butler County which is five years ago to advice the government to increase lane widths and resurface rough roads. However, there are some important concerns that may undermine the argument seriously which author fails to address in the argument.（这个开头受北美的影响很深，本来是没有什么挑剔的，只是在我看来相对与整篇文章而言可能过于长了写，有点头重脚轻的感觉。如果有可能的话，以后开头可以稍微短一点。）
First of all, the author unfairly considers the attempt is feeble for most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate does not decrease too much. （①）Perhaps it is not enough time passed to determine the effectiveness of the program, because most drivers have not heard about of the limit decrease yet in a short time.（②）Therefore, without providing reliable evidence of effectiveness of the limit, the author’s conclusion is unjustified.
（这段问题有点点多①如果按北美的模式，每段开头都几乎是作者提出了什么样的观点，然而我却认为怎么怎么样，因为什么什么原因，这就很有可能出现什么什么情况；当然不必每段都如此，但就这段来说，你先说了作者不公正的认为什么什么，接着就说可能的情况。这样的论证似乎不够丰满。②就这个可能性来说，只假设一种可能似乎显得单薄了些。如果要丰满一点的话，可以写：很有可能什么什么，也有可能什么什么，即使怎么怎么样，也有可能什么什么。这样会比较有环环相扣的感觉。Robin跟我说有人跟她说可以多用让步，真的不失为一个好办法。）
Next, the arguer cites an example that Butler County completed a road improvement to improve highway safety in five years ago to explain that there were 25 percent fewer reported accidents in Butler County this past year than there were five years ago. Perhaps the author overlooks some other possible factors contributed to reduce the accident rate, such as the increased safety sense of the BC citizen and the law which punish the troublemakers more strict. Without ruling out all possible alternatives, the author cannot indicate hastily that the road improvement is the exclusive cause of the decrease of reported accidents in BC.（这段的问题跟上段差不多。对了，还有一个感觉，就是你复述题目所用的字数比论证来的要多，这样的话会觉得论证很干瘪。）
Third, even if the condition remains the same in future, the argument also relies on what might be a false analogy between PC and BC. （这个让步没有看懂，因为上面似乎没有提到什么在未来相似的东西哦！）It is entirely possible that PC is much bigger than BC, and the road width and surface smooth has already met the needs of traffic. Common sense informs me that any one of a myriad of other differences—environmental, traditional concept, and economic level—might explain that. （再加个小结论就更好了:loveliness: ）
In conclusion, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer should have to prove that the attempt is really noneffective, and the condition of B.C remains as five years ago and the mean will be and only be effective in P.C as increasing lane width and resurfacing rough roads. Moreover, the arguer must provide evidence to rule out all the above-mentioned possibilities which might weaken the argument（结论没有问题）
（这个也只是我的愚见，而且我也没有给你改语言方面的问题，因为我自己也很白痴。其实第一次能写成这样真的很好了。算是猛拍了吧，希望对你有点帮助！：））

[ 本帖最后由 springelf 于 2008-3-4 00:38 编辑 ]

springelfUID: 2458536

那个什么V3怎么用啊？我是用那个改的啊，结果到头来还是要自己编辑！:funk: :funk: :funk:

ljc-dreamUID: 2166457

In this argument, the author intends to recommend that the speed limit on all major county roads of Prunty should be restored. To substantiate this analysis, the author provides the evidence that the safety effort has failed because most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate does not decrease too much. Then, the author point out[points out] the example of Butler County which (is five years ago to ) [时态] advice the government to increase lane widths and resurface rough roads. However, there are some important concerns that may undermine the argument seriously which author fails to address in the argument.

First of all, the author unfairly considers the attempt is feeble for most drivers are exceeding the new speed limit and the accident rate does not decrease too much. Perhaps it is not enough time passed to determine the effectiveness of the program, because most drivers have not heard about of[要么是heard of；要么是heard about] the limit decrease yet in a short time. Therefore, without providing reliable evidence of effectiveness of the limit, the author’s conclusion is unjustified.

Next, the arguer cites an example that Butler County completed a road improvement to improve highway safety in five years ago to explain that there were 25 percent fewer reported accidents in Butler County this past year than there were five years ago. Perhaps the author overlooks some other possible factors contributed[应该是contributing] to reduce the accident rate, such as the increased safety sense of the BC citizen[应该用citizens] and the law which punish the troublemakers more strict. Without ruling out all possible alternatives, the author cannot indicate hastily that the road improvement is the exclusive cause of the decrease of reported accidents in BC[有一个疑问：考试的时候能够这样缩写吗？].

Third, even if the condition remains the same in future[没读懂], the argument also relies on what might be a false analogy between PC and BC. It is entirely possible that PC is much bigger than BC, and the road width and surface smooth has already met the needs of traffic. Common sense informs me that any one of a myriad of other differences—environmental, traditional concept, and economic level—might explain that.[没有论述清楚，完全可以分析的more detailed]

In conclusion, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer should have to prove that the attempt is really noneffective, and the condition of B.C remains as five years ago, and the mean will be and only be effective in P.C as increasing lane width and resurfacing rough roads. Moreover, the arguer must provide (evidence)[edivence] to rule out all the above-mentioned possibilities which might weaken the argument.

语法上：注意名次的单复数形式；
论述上：基本问题都说到了，但有些不够透彻；
结构上：段内的衔接，段与段之间的衔接都有些僵硬。
第一次已经很不错了，以后多总结，熟悉argu的用语习惯，加油！

hbezllsUID: 2392974

谢谢两位的仔细修改，让我受益匪浅
恩，大家一起加油

hbezllsUID: 2392974

原帖由 springelf 于 2008-3-4 00:39 发表
那个什么V3怎么用啊？我是用那个改的啊，结果到头来还是要自己编辑！:funk: :funk: :funk:

那个我也没用过。。。。。。
我现在开头也比较矛盾，不知道是在开头复述下好，还是在后面复述下好
开头复述的话，在后面驳论的时候，可以相照应，但开头就比较冗长
现在中间的论证还不熟练，多谢指出:loveliness:

hbezllsUID: 2392974

原帖由 <i>ljc-dream</i> 于 2008-3-4 01:27 发表<br />
In this argument, the author intends to recommend that the speed limit on all major county roads of Prunty should be restored. To substantiate this analysis, the author provides the evidence that ...

<br />
恩，谢谢指出我的问题，我也觉得我段落间的连接比较生硬，哎，英语功底不行，不知道有没有好一点的建议或意见，thx

springelfUID: 2458536

原帖由 hbezlls 于 2008-3-5 19:48 发表
<br />
恩，谢谢指出我的问题，我也觉得我段落间的连接比较生硬，哎，英语功底不行，不知道有没有好一点的建议或意见，thx

最简单也是最直接的办法，写、写、写……:loveliness: