:)

ciludali21UID: 2173816

:0

general727UID: 2494818

In this analysis, the arguer claims that the decline in arctic deer populations is because of deer being not able to follow their traditional migration models across the frozen sea. To support his claim, the arguer cited the reports from local hunters, who said the number of the deer is declining. The major reasoning course of the arguer can be deducted as follows: he firstly presumes the global warming leads to melted ice in arctic region, and hence the arctic deer cannot move from one island to another, and as a result, the population of them starts to decline. This argument is not convincing for several reasons.

First of all, the arguer fails to establish a causal relationship between global warming and the decline in the deer number. The arguer believes that the global warming trends have lead to the sea ice in Arctic region to melt, but no solid evidence in this argument can prove that Arctic ice have already been affected by the global warming trends as global warming is an overall situation. Even if Arctic ice is melting as the arguer expects, it is not necessary that the ice linked to islands which have plants for deer are all melted. The possibility exists that part of the ice nearby the island does not melt or there are still parts of ice left for deer to move over. So it is possible that the deer can still follow their traditional moving paths. Therefore, the arguer's assumption that the global warming caused ice melting in Arctic region and deer cannot follow the old moving paths is not convincing as it stands.

Secondly, the reports from the hunters cannot be regarded as solid evidence to prove that the number of Arctic deer is truly decreasing. As hunters are not scientific researchers, they might draw their conclusion only through several times observations, which might not be able to reflect the reality. It is possible that the hunters observed fewer deer because the deer group had migrated to other islands to search for food, or the deer learnt how to avoid the hunters for hunters are dangerous for them.(很好的假设，借用了) Without ruling out all these possible factors, the arguer cannot reach to any conclusion based on these unreliable reports.

Last but not the least, even assuming the hunters' report is reliable, which means the number of deer is declining, and the global warming does accelerate the speed of ice melting and then cut off parts of the migration routes of the deer, the arguer cannot accuse the global warming is the determine reason for deer decrease. Perhaps there are other causes for the decline in deer number. For instance, large-scale hunting, it is possible that the hunters themselves hunted too many deer and lead to direct decrease in the deer number. Or, it may because of the short of food supply (plants), or some certain infectious diseases, that cause the decline in deer number.

To sum up, although this argument has its merits, there are considerable fallacies which seriously undermine this analysis. To better support the argument, the arguer should provide more specific information about the Arctic region and the living status of the deer. Also, he will need more evidences to justify his assumption.

实在不知道该什么了．加个复数吧．
难得笔者一边上班还坚持考Ｇ，精神可嘉！
关于你提的问题，我在书上看到，意群段间最好有间隔，一个意群下的自然段就不用了，这样会比较清晰。但北美机经里就没有间隔，估计不是很重要的问题吧！
Ａｄｄ　ｏｉｌ！

[ 本帖最后由 general727 于 2008-7-23 17:34 编辑 ]

zhuzhuorUID: 2452739

囧,我3和4次的作业只写了issue,我只能给你改这篇argu了,抱歉...

恩,段与段之间空一行,就像你现在写的这样

In this analysis, the arguer claims that the decline in arctic deer populations is because of deer being not able to follow their traditional migration models across the frozen sea. To support his claim, the arguer cited the reports from local hunters, who said the number of the deer is declining. The major reasoning course of the arguer can be deducted as follows: he firstly presumes the global warming leads to melted ice in arctic region, and hence the arctic deer cannot move from one island to another, and as a result, the population(s?) of them starts to decline. This argument is not convincing for several reasons.

First of all, the arguer fails to establish a causal relationship between global warming and the decline in the deer number. The arguer believes that the global warming trends have lead to the sea ice in Arctic region to melt, but no solid evidence in this argument can prove that Arctic ice have already been affected by the global warming trends as global warming(这是虾米...) is an overall situation. Even if Arctic ice is melting as the arguer expects, it is not necessary that the ice linked to islands which have plants for deer are all melted. The possibility exists that part of the ice nearby the island does not melt or there are still parts of ice left for deer to move over. So it is possible that the deer can still follow their traditional moving paths. Therefore, the arguer's assumption that the global warming caused ice melting in Arctic region and deer cannot follow the old moving paths is not convincing as it stands.

Secondly, the reports from the hunters cannot be regarded as solid evidence to prove that the number of Arctic deer is truly decreasing. As hunters are not scientific researchers, they might draw their conclusion only through several times observations, which might not be able to reflect the reality. It is possible that the hunters observed fewer deer because the deer group had migrated to other islands to search for food, or the deer learnt how to avoid the hunters for hunters are dangerous for them. Without ruling out all these possible factors, the arguer cannot reach to any conclusion based on these unreliable reports.

Last but not the least, even assuming the hunters' report is reliable, which means the number of deer is declining, and the global warming does accelerate the speed of ice melting and then cut off parts of the migration routes of the deer, the arguer cannot accuse the global warming is the determine reason for deer decrease. Perhaps there are other causes for the decline in deer number. For instance, large-scale hunting(删掉?), it is possible that the hunters themselves hunted too many deer and lead to direct decrease in the deer number. Or, it may because of the short of food supply (plants), or some certain infectious diseases, that cause the decline in deer number.

To sum up, although this argument has its merits(argu不用这样吧...), there are considerable fallacies which seriously undermine this analysis. To better support the argument, the arguer should provide more specific information about the Arctic region and the living status of the deer. Also, he will need more evidence to justify his assumption.(细一些,你总结的有点笼统了)

中间的每个分论点展开都比较好(比如第二段),层次也比较鲜明,不像我一个论点写两句话就没有了
另外,语言比较好...受教了