Argument2 sally组作业12日

小室黄瓜UID: 2155213

ＡＲＧＵＥＭＥＮＴ
Argument2
------题目------
The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.
'Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting.'
论断：统一外观就能提高地价
1 错误类比。并没有这两个地区的具体条件。7年太遥远了。
2 即使要参照D区的，也要看d区的地价提高是否由这两个变化引起的。文中没有提到别的原因，例如小区的地理位置好，由于7年后交通便利了。
3 如果统一了外观，是弊大于利的。A 这回抹杀个性。 B 这需要一定额外的花费。是冒险。C 这是强制性的，不一定能得到所有人的满意。
正文：words 532
In this argument, the author suggest that all the homeowners of Deerhaven Acres should do like the Brookvile to landscape the community’s yard and paint the homes in order to raise the property values because of their success in raising the property values. However, the reasons are not cogent and it is very hasty to make the conclusion.

The first problem is the false analogy. There is not any information about the D and B areas. The only relationship with each other is that one is located nearby. So we will certainly doubt with the possibility of this analogy. Firstly, the two community may have wholly different conditions such as the size and the kind of people lived in these community. If D is small and have not many people living there, it may be easier for it to get the idea of how to landscape the yard and what the color will be the best for its homes. On the contrary, B is very large and have a large quantity of people living there, it will not be as simple as getting the best answer of how to arrange its yard and home’s color. Secondly, D’s success was 7 years before, not nowadays, which will be rather different with the condition at present. The people choosing community may consider more for the landscaping of yard and the color of the homes, but now, people’s focus may not be stationary as what was 7 years ago. Therefore, to say that B should do as D have not enough reasons.

Even if D can be regarded as a reference, It is still a question that whether D’s property value’s rising was due to the change of the yard and the color of the homes. Whether there are other reasons as well or not? On one hand, the rising of values may due to the natural environment of the community such as the fresh air and the resource of the water which will be good for people’s health. On the other hand, the rising of values may due to the good geographic location. A community locates near the market, the shopping center, hospital and bus stop which is convenient may be a good choice for people.

Imagine that if we unify the color and the style of the yard, it may probably be a disadvantage rather than an advantage for this community. Firstly, it may not be benefit for develop people’s personality. All the homes should be unique and some people may think it boring. Secondly, to landscape the yard and paint the homes need extra fees for this work. This kind of extra payment may not be a good reason for people’s choice but a good reason for people’s negation. Thirdly, it may be compelling to call for a unique style. People living there have their rights to adorn their houses, and design them as they like.

As it stands, the argument is not well reasoned, To makes it logically acceptable, the argue should have to demonstrate the detailed reasons for D community and the information for the two’s condition, what’s more important, the survey of people’s requirements for their choice of community.

frankkuUID: 2136240

ＡＲＧＵＥＭＥＮＴ
Argument2
------题目------
The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.
'Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting.'
论断：统一外观就能提高地价
1 错误类比。并没有这两个地区的具体条件。7年太遥远了。
2 即使要参照D区的，也要看d区的地价提高是否由这两个变化引起的。文中没有提到别的原因，例如小区的地理位置好，由于7年后交通便利了。
3 如果统一了外观，是弊大于利的。A 这回抹杀个性。 B 这需要一定额外的花费。是冒险。C 这是强制性的，不一定能得到所有人的满意。
正文：words 532
In this argument, the author suggest that all the homeowners of Deerhaven Acres should do like the Brookvile to landscape the community’s yard and paint the homes in order to raise the property values because of their success in raising the property values. However, the reasons are not cogent and it is very hasty to make the conclusion.

The first problem is the false analogy. There is not any information about the D and B areas. The only relationship with each other is that one is located nearby. So we will certainly doubt with the possibility of this analogy. Firstly, the two community（communities） may have wholly different conditions such as the size and the kind of people lived in these community（communities）. If D is small and have（has） not many people living there, it may be easier for it to get the idea of how to landscape the yard and what the（去掉the或者which color） color will be the best for its homes. On the contrary, B is very large and have（has） a large quantity of people living there, it will not be as simple as D in getting the best answer of how to arrange its yard and home’s color. Secondly, D’s success was 7 years before(应该用ago吧), not nowadays, which will be（应该是was吧，为什么是will be呢？） rather different with the condition at present. The people choosing community may consider more for the landscaping of yard and the color of the homes（The people who chose community might consider more for the landscaping of yard and the color of the home in the past）, but now, people’s focus may not be stationary as what was 7 years ago. Therefore, to say that B should do as D have（has） not enough reasons.

Even if D can be regarded as a reference, It(it) is still a question that whether D’s property value’s rising was due to the change of the yard and the color of the homes. Whether there are other reasons as well or not? On one hand, the rising of values may due to the natural environment of the community such as the fresh air and the resource of the water which will be good for people’s health. On the other hand, the rising of values may due to the good geographic location. A community locates near the market, the shopping center, hospital and bus stop which is convenient may be a good choice for people. 最后这句话有问题，我想把LOCATES删掉应该就能解决

Imagine that if we unify the color and the style of the yard, it may probably be a disadvantage rather than an advantage for this community. Firstly, it may not be benefit for develop (developing) people’s personality. All the homes should be unique and some people may think it (feel) boring. Secondly, to landscape the yard and paint the homes need extra fees for this work. This kind of extra payment may not be a good reason for people’s choice but a good reason for people’s negation. Thirdly, it may be compelling to call for a unique style. People living there have their rights to adorn their houses, and design them as they like.

As it stands, the argument is not well reasoned, To makes (to make) it logically acceptable, the argue should have to demonstrate the detailed reasons for D community and the information for the two’s condition, what’s (what is more) more important, the survey of people’s requirements for their choice of community.

[ 本帖最后由 frankku 于 2006-2-15 08:16 编辑 ]