Argument237，4月新出现题目

fishergirlUID: 152325

------题目------
The following appeared as part of an article in a local Beauville newspaper.
'According to a government report, last year the city of Dillton reduced its corporate tax rate by 15 percent; at the same time, it began offering relocation grants and favorable rates on city utilities to any company that would relocate to Dillton. Within 18 months, two manufacturing companies moved to Dillton, where they employ a total of 300 people. Therefore, the fastest way for Beauville to stimulate economic development and hence reduce unemployment is to provide tax incentives and other financial inducements that encourage private companies to relocate here.'
------正文------
In this argument, the author claims that because of the success in Dillton's new economical measurements, Beauville should imitate it for the probable goods. Although the article presents some evidence which seems reasonable, the conclusion of the author is still questionable for some critical fallacies.

Firstly, if the measures really stimulate Dillton's economic development or not is unconvincing. The author just mentions that two companies moved to Dillton in the past 18 months, and employed 300 workers, while how many tax they offered to the government and how significant they improves the Dillton's economic condition are unknown. In fact, to demonstrate its point of view persuasive, the author should take some precise economic figures as standards to evaluate Dillton's actual economic situation, then compare the figures with which 18 months ago and those of other cities during the same 18 months. Without more precise and significant figures presented, readers have good reasons to question the author's conclusion.

Secondly, even the economic situation in Dillton has improved greatly, there is no evidence to prove that it is the measure that attracts the two companies relocation to Dillton. In addition, people also wonder that do the change of tax rate and the amount of money offered as relocation funds have any significant sense. In fact, there may be many other causes lead to the companies movement. For example, Dillton's location beside a river is good for such manufacturing companies, or the consume ability of people in Dillton is high enough to appeal the manufacterors. As for the second puzzle, it would be helpful if the author present some concrete figures as a supplement. Hence, if the author cannot rule out other possibilities, the assumption that the companies' relocation is the result of its new favorable measures would still open to doubt. And it is a haste conclusion to take such favorable measures as the motivation of Dillton's economic improvement.

Last but not least, do the two cities can be well compared? In the article, the author mentions no word about Dillton's economic characters, and also that of Beauville. To be honest, if the economic situations and environments of Beauville are much different to those of Dillton, can the measures be useful in Beauville is highly questionable. Maybe Dillton's achievements come from its good location, but not the measures. Or maybe Beauville's tax rates are still very low, thus the real reason it fails to attract companies is some other things such as its low consume ability, insufficient man power, bad transportation conditions and so on. If so, what proved useful in Dillton will lead no improvements in Beauville.

In summary, there are still too many doubts in the author's account. People cannot draw the conclusion which the author presents in the article until more persuasive evidence are offered.

限时限得很失败，受打击加自我反省中。

fishergirlUID: 152325

大家现在对于非高频不感兴趣哦，呵呵。

aerozxyUID: 142241

没时间看了，写了写自己的提纲

1> false analogy
a. 两个城市的情况不同，D可能本来税就很高，而且原来没有提供
    比较优惠的政策；而B可能税已经很低了，并且一直有优惠政策。
b. 其他硬件设施也不一样，措施是否在B有效无法预测。
2〉没有证据表明D从中受益
a 只有两个公司搬过来不能表明它的经济增长了，没有具体数据。
b 18个月时间太短，不能表明还有其他的公司愿意投资
c 那300个人是雇佣的本地人吗，如果不是，怎么算解决了就业问题，
   而且即使是本地的，300人也显得太少。
3〉文中没有提到D的两家公司是private，所以能否吸引私有公司不知道。

fishergirlUID: 152325

提纲很清楚啊，我就是不太善于这样列逻辑错误，经常想到哪写到哪。

eaglezhouUID: 156651

The following appeared as part of an article in a local Beauville newspaper.
'According to a government report, last year the city of Dillton reduced its corporate tax rate by 15 percent; at the same time, it began offering relocation grants and favorable rates on city utilities to any company that would relocate to Dillton. Within 18 months, two manufacturing companies moved to Dillton, where they employ a total of 300 people. Therefore, the fastest way for Beauville to stimulate economic development and hence reduce unemployment is to provide tax incentives and other financial inducements that encourage private companies to relocate here.'
------正文------
In this argument, the author claims that because of the success in Dillton's new economical measurements, Beauville should imitate it for the probable goods. Although the article presents some evidence which seems reasonable, the conclusion of the author is still questionable for some critical fallacies.


Firstly（虽然firstly也有，但印象中好像是first, secondly, thirdly）, if（为啥用if，用whether更加保险点） the measures really stimulate Dillton's economic development or not is unconvincing.（感觉这个错误指的太含糊，最好明确一下） The author just mentions that two companies moved to Dillton in the past 18 months, and employed 300 workers, while how many tax they offered to the government and how significant they improves the Dillton's economic condition are unknown. In fact, to demonstrate its point of view persuasive（可以用justify）, the author should take some precise economic figures as standards to evaluate Dillton's actual economic situation, then compare the figures with which 18 months ago and those of other cities during the same 18 months. Without more precise and significant figures presented, readers have good reasons to question the author's conclusion.

Secondly, even the economic situation in Dillton has improved greatly, there is no evidence to prove that it is the measure that attracts the two companies relocation to Dillton. In addition, people also wonder that do (whether) the change of tax rate and the amount of money offered as relocation funds have any significant sense. In fact, there may be many other causes lead to the companies movement. For example, Dillton's location beside a river is good for such manufacturing companies, or the consume ability of people in Dillton is high enough to appeal the manufacterors. As for the second puzzle, it would be helpful if the author present some concrete figures as a supplement. Hence, if the author cannot rule out other possibilities, the assumption that the companies' relocation is the result of its new favorable measures would still open to doubt. And it is a haste conclusion to take such favorable measures as the motivation of Dillton's economic improvement.

Last but not least, do the two cities can be well compared (用了do还要can吗？直接改成can the two cities be well compared)? In the article, the author mentions no word about Dillton's economic characters, and also(是不是neither好点？) that of Beauville. To be honest, if the economic situations and environments of Beauville are much different to those of Dillton, can the measures be useful （这句话你写成了问句了，不能这么用的）in Beauville is highly questionable. Maybe Dillton's achievements come from its good location, but not the measures. Or maybe Beauville's tax rates are still very low, thus the real reason it fails to attract companies is some other things such as its low consume ability, insufficient man power, bad transportation conditions and so on. If so, what proved useful in Dillton will lead no improvements（lead improvement??） in Beauville.

In summary, there are still too many doubts in the author's account. People cannot draw the conclusion which the author presents in the article until more persuasive evidence are offered.

fishergirlUID: 152325

最初由 eaglezhou 发布
[B]In this argument, the author claims that because of the success in Dillton's new economical measurements, Beauville should imitate it for the probable goods. Although the article presents some evidence which seems reasonable, the conclusion of the author is still questionable for some critical fallacies.


Firstly（虽然firstly也有，但印象中好像是first, secondly, thirdly）, if（为啥用if，用whether更加保险点） the measures really stimulate Dillton's economic development or not is unconvincing.（感觉这个错误指的太含糊，最好明确一下） [能给我举个例子吗？] The author just mentions that two companies moved to Dillton in the past 18 months, and employed 300 workers, while how many tax they offered to the government and how significant they improves the Dillton's economic condition are unknown. In fact, to demonstrate its point of view persuasive（可以用justify）, the author should take some precise economic figures as standards to evaluate Dillton's actual economic situation, then compare the figures with which 18 months ago and those of other cities during the same 18 months. Without more precise and significant figures presented, readers have good reasons to question the author's conclusion.

Secondly, even the economic situation in Dillton has improved greatly, there is no evidence to prove that it is the measure that attracts the two companies relocation to Dillton. In addition, people also wonder that do (whether) the change of tax rate and the amount of money offered as relocation funds have any significant sense. In fact, there may be many other causes lead to the companies movement. For example, Dillton's location beside a river is good for such manufacturing companies, or the consume ability of people in Dillton is high enough to appeal the manufacturers. As for the second puzzle, it would be helpful if the author present some concrete figures as a supplement. Hence, if the author cannot rule out other possibilities, the assumption that the companies' relocation is the result of its new favorable measures would still open to doubt. And it is a haste conclusion to take such favorable measures as the motivation of Dillton's economic improvement.

Last but not least, do the two cities can be well compared (用了do还要can吗？直接改成can the two cities be well compared)?[我真是晕头了] In the article, the author mentions no word about Dillton's economic characters, and also(是不是neither好点？) [是的！] that of Beauville. To be honest, if the economic situations and environments of Beauville are much different to those of Dillton, can the measures be useful （这句话你写成了问句了，不能这么用的）in Beauville is highly questionable [the effect of the measures in Beauville will be highly questionable]. Maybe Dillton's achievements come from its good location, but not the measures. Or maybe Beauville's tax rates are still very low, thus the real reason it fails to attract companies is some other things such as its low consume ability, insufficient man power, bad transportation conditions and so on. If so, what proved useful in Dillton will lead no improvements（lead improvement??） in Beauville.

In summary, there are still too many doubts in the author's account. People cannot draw the conclusion which the author presents in the article until more persuasive evidence are offered.
.[/B]

这篇是限时写的，不过还是没有成功。写完后发现整个思路其实挺不清楚的，而且还有很多漏洞没有找出来，用词也挺简单，重复率也不低 :o

好久没有看到eagle了，觉得好亲切啊 :)

你说的对啊，我还要好好努力，加油！！！

nightsky2004UID: 155946

In this argument, the author claims that because of（感觉这里用because of不太好，但我一时也没有想出一个更好的词，等想到了再贴） the success in Dillton's new economical measurements, Beauville should imitate it for the probable goods. Although the article presents some evidence which seems reasonable, the conclusion of the author is still questionable for some critical fallacies.
（开头模板的痕迹挺明显，如果时间还有的话多看看范文吧，最好能摆脱模板）
Firstly, if the measures really stimulate Dillton's economic development or not is unconvincing. （这句话有问题，unconvincing应该指的是作者的观点，所以…）The author just mentions that two companies moved to Dillton in the past 18 months, and employed 300 workers, while how many tax they offered to the government and how significant they improves the Dillton's economic condition are unknown. In fact, to demonstrate its point of view persuasive, the author should take some precise economic figures as standards to evaluate Dillton's actual economic situation, then compare the figures with which 18 months ago and those of other cities during the same 18 months. Without more precise and significant figures presented, readers have good reasons to question the author's conclusion.

Secondly, even the economic situation in Dillton has improved greatly, there is no evidence to prove that it is the measure that attracts the two companies relocation to Dillton. In addition, people also wonder that do the change of tax rate and the amount of money offered as relocation funds have any significant sense. In fact, there may be many other causes lead to the companies’ movement. For example, Dillton's location beside a river is good for such manufacturing companies, or the consume ability of people in Dillton is high enough to appeal the manufacturers. As for the second puzzle, it would be helpful if the author present some concrete figures as a supplement. Hence, if the author cannot rule out other possibilities, the assumption that the companies' relocation is the result of its new favorable measures would still open to doubt. And it is a haste conclusion to take such favorable measures as the motivation of Dillton's economic improvement.
（感觉这两段的位置可以对调一下，这样似乎更符合逻辑思路）
Last but not least, do the two cities can be well compared?（直接用否定句就可以了） In the article, the author mentions no word about Dillton's economic characters, and also that of Beauville. To be honest, if the economic situations and environments of Beauville are much different to those of Dillton, can the measures be useful in Beauville is highly questionable（有问题）. Maybe Dillton's achievements come from its good location, but not the measures. Or maybe Beauville's tax rates are still very low, thus the real reason it fails to attract companies is some other things such as its low consume ability, insufficient man power, bad transportation conditions and so on. If so, what proved useful in Dillton will lead no（may not lead） improvements in Beauville.

In summary, there are still too many doubts in the author's account. People cannot draw the conclusion which the author presents in the article until more persuasive evidence are offered.

结尾有些仓促，全文没有明显的错误，只是句子没什么变化，加油吧。

fishergirlUID: 152325

感谢nightsky，我的开头的确是很模式化，包括全文都是这样。你说看范文是指ETS的官方范文还是老外的范文啊？呵呵，其实是废话，都看不就好了 :)

对于这几个词，我基本上没有区分他们的用法：unconvincing,questionable,groundless,doubtful，从中文的角度来理解都是近义词，不过英文中可能存有含义和用法上的区别。希望能有哪位高手点播一下 :D

body1和body2的位置，我一开始是换过来的，后来修改时换成了现在的样子，当时感觉这样好一些。能详细说一下你的思路吗？

谢谢咯 :cool: