argument2 G-89-互助社 17日写作 高频啊

huangdaoUID：190018

差一点就限时成功了 唉 大家看看吧

Argument2  
------摘要------
   共用时间：30分25秒     375 words
------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.'
------正文------
The author of the editorial recommends that the homeowners in Deerhaven Acres should adopt the some restrictions as Brookville for raising values. To support the suggestion, the author cites the fact that the average property values have tripled in Brookville after the restrictions carrying out. But there are several flaws rendering the conclusion unconvincing as it stands.

First of all, the author assumes that the increase of property value in Brookville is the result of the restrictions. However, there is no evidence supporting this assumption. The increase happened after the policy carried out, but that did not mean the former one is the cause of the later. Maybe there are other reasons, like the boost of economy in the area, and so on. Unless author ruling out these possible causes, the assumption remains unconvincing.

Secondly, the author mentioned the affair happening seven years ago, and it is not sufficient to reinforce deduce. The author counter a fallacy that things happen differently when time is different. Maybe several years ago, the economy is better than now, and the property values are the hottest in market, but now the economy is not so well as that time. And the same actions could not make any sense, but waste money.

Finally, the author offers no evidence to prove there are any similarities between the two areas. If the conditions of the two areas are different, even they take the same actions to improve the atmosphere, maybe receive nothing. It is likely that Brookville are the prosperous downtown of the state, as the improvement of economy, the property values of the house is increasing. Meanwhile, Deerhaven Acres is a village where economy is not so well, and worse, may decreasing, so even the actions take place, the property values may not increase. The author does not offer the details of the two areas, therefore conclusion is hasty to make.

In sum, the author relies on a series of incredible assumptions to make a hasty conclusion. To strength the proof, the author should offer the relationship between the actions and the increasing values, and the exact conditions of the two areas. To make the conclusion more convincing the author also need to rule out the other possibilities hamper the conclusion.

vickycy6UID：2107893

占个坐:)

vickycy6UID：2107893

晚些来改,不要急!

vickycy6UID：2107893

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.'
------正文------
The author of the editorial recommends that the homeowners in Deerhaven Acres should adopt the some restrictions as Brookville for raising values. To support the suggestion, the author cites the fact that the average property values have tripled in Brookville after the restrictions carrying out. But there are several flaws rendering the conclusion unconvincing as it stands.

First of all, the author assumes that the increase of property value in Brookville is the result of the restrictions. However, there is no evidence supporting this assumption. The increase happened after the policy carried out, but that did not mean the former one is the cause of the later//写错了吧//. Maybe there are other reasons, like the boost of economy in the area, and so on. Unless author ruling out these possible causes, the assumption remains unconvincing.//感觉就是句子好短啊。//

Secondly, the author mentioned the affair happening seven years ago, and it is not sufficient to reinforce //the你前面也有几个地方没有加the，要注意顶关词用法哦//deduce. The author counter a fallacy that things happen differently when time is different. Maybe several years ago, the economy is better than now, and the property values are the hottest in market, but now the economy is not so well as that time. And the same actions could not make any sense, but waste money.

Finally, the author offers no evidence to prove there are any similarities between the two areas. If the conditions of the two areas are different, even they take the same actions to improve the atmosphere, maybe receive nothing//distinct results//. It is likely that Brookville are the prosperous downtown of the state, as the improvement of economy, the property values of the house is increasing. Meanwhile, Deerhaven Acres is a village where economy is not so well, and worse, may decreasing, so even the actions take place, the property values may not increase. The author does not offer the details of the two areas, therefore conclusion is hasty to make.

In sum, the author relies on a series of incredible assumptions to make a hasty conclusion. To strength the proof, the author should offer the relationship between the actions and the increasing values, and the exact conditions of the two areas. To make the conclusion more convincing the author also need to rule out the other possibilities hamper the conclusion.

第死段跟第3段换一下为好，你的第2段是讲的是时间问题，而1、3都是地区问题。继续加油。还没有发现什么大的错误。就是语言要加强。这是我的，也帮我看看吧
http://edu.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=322076

[ Last edited by vickycy6 on 2005-8-18 at 21:04 ]