【Flyer杀G作文组】07月08日Argument137-By 潇

红绡UID: 2839171

ARGUMENT 137

137. The following appeared in an editorial in the Mason City newspaper.
"At present, Mason City residents seldom use the nearby Mason River for any kind of recreational activity, even though surveys of the region's residents consistently rank water sports (swimming, fishing, and boating) as a favorite form of recreation. Since there have been complaints about the quality of the water in the river, residents must be avoiding the river because they think that it is not clean enough. But that situation is about to change: the agency responsible for rivers in our region has announced plans to clean up Mason River. Therefore, recreational use of the river is likely to increase, so the Mason City council will need to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River."

难度：★★

In the statement, the author asserts that the Mason City council need to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River relied on several arbitrary arguments or suspicions. At the beginning, the editorial put out results of surveys that the residents enjoy the water sports as favorite. And then the author verdicts the complaints about the weak quality of the water in the river come from the reasons that unclear water in the river avoids them from using the river for recreation. However, I have to point out several flaws unreasonable or lacking of logicality in line with inferring.

Firstly, the editorial states present situation that the Mason City’s residents seldom use the water of Mason River for amusement without any evidence describing why the situation can come out. Moreover, the author introduces the residents’ favorite items of water sports such as swimming, fishing, and boating. There is a loophole of farfetched causal connection between these data. If people prefer swimming, it is possible the city has established some well-equipped natatoriums providing for the residents where sanitary conditions comply with standards. This reason can also prove why people seldom use the river.

Secondly, there are many complaints for the weak environment of the river, however, it cannot certify the argument significantly because unclean water probably affects people’s ordinary lives, even influences people’s healthy. And these reasons seem more powerful to explain why the complaints would produce. At the same time, if the water supply companies have not supply enough water for daily lives of residents or be late for supplying water, people would also complaint.

Furthermore, even if I concede that residents seldom use the water in the river for recreation because of unclean situation of water in the river, the author concludes this argument ridiculously. I cannot understand why the government should increase its budget for improvements. The author has mentioned that the agency responsible for rivers in the region announced plans to clean up Mason River. Since the rivers are responsibilities of the agency, they are in duty to clean up the river. And I consider region’s government has offered enough financial support for protecting. Cleaning up the river is not a huge project which need more budget. Thus, this conclusion cannot be proved as it stands.

To sum up, if the author wishes to enhance the rigor in reasoning process, more evidences are needed. The editorial must introduce concrete information about the current state of Mason River and resident’s favorite water sports; carry out a strict survey about the relevant facilities of the city and people’s recreation; develop opinions poll and so on. In addition, the ultimate conclusion needs to be proved by powerful data which can explain why the cleaning project of Mason River needs excess budget.

师大菜菜UID: 2838404

In the statement, the author asserts that the Mason City council need to increase its budget for improvements to the publicly owned lands along the Mason River relied on several arbitrary arguments or suspicions. At the beginning, the editorial put out results of surveys that the residents enjoy the water sports as favorite. And then the author verdicts the complaints about the weak quality of the water in the river come from the reasons that unclear water in the river avoids them from using the river for recreation. However, I have to point out several unreasonable flaws(换个位置) or lacking of logicality in line with inferring.

Firstly, the editorial states present situation that the Mason City’s residents seldom use the water of Mason River for amusement without(改成 but fails to give ) any evidence describing why the situation can come out. Moreover, the author introduces the residents’ favorite items of water sports such as swimming, fishing, and boating. There is a loophole of farfetched causal connection between these data. If people prefer swimming, it is possible the city has established some well-equipped natatoriums providing for the residents where sanitary conditions comply with standards. This reason can also prove why people seldom use the river.

这段的topic sentence有问题,作者给出来证据，比如，之前对水质的报怨
应该是：It is arbitrary that the editorial contributes MC’s residents seldom playing in the Mason River to the water quality of Mason River without convincing evidence.



Secondly, there are many complaints for the weak environment of the river, however, it cannot certify the argument significantly because unclean water probably affects people’s ordinary lives, even influences people’s healthy. And these reasons seem more powerful to explain why the complaints would produce than the editorial assumption. At the same time, if the water supply companies have not supply enough water for daily lives of residents or be late for supplying water, people would also complaint. The editorial fails to take into account these possibilities, so the conclusion is unpersuasive.
个人觉得每段结尾应该加一句概括，不要举完例子，却没有论证和说明

Furthermore, even if I concede that residents seldom use the water in the river for recreation because of unclean situation of water in the river, the author concludes this argument ridiculously. I cannot understand why the government should increase its budget for improvements. The author has mentioned that the agency responsible for rivers in the region announced plans to clean up Mason River. Since the rivers are responsibilities of the agency, they are in duty to clean up the river. And I consider region’s government has offered enough financial support for protecting(是for improvements to the publicly owned lands) . Cleaning up the river is not a huge project which need more budget . Thus, this conclusion cannot be proved as it stands.
这段你理解有点偏差，题目说的budget是用来支持岸边土地建设(建立娱乐设施)，而不是局限清洁河流。这是两个独立的工作。当然你也可以猜想，是一起的，作为他因。但是，上面的一些说法欠妥
另unclear可以修饰situation么?质疑一下，我在句酷上没有查到,感觉有点怪
可以用bad quality of water


To sum up, if the author wishes to enhance the rigor in reasoning process, more evidences are needed. The editorial must introduce concrete information about the current state of Mason River and resident’s favorite water sports; carry out a strict survey about the relevant facilities of the city and people’s recreation; develop opinions poll on the people’s attitudes toward to recreational use of the river and so on. In addition, the ultimate(改成final) conclusion needs to be proved by powerful data which can explain why the cleaning project of Mason River needs excess budget.
Concrete information在句酷上没查到， 可以用particular information

总结一下： 字数挺多的，语言也很流畅，有点小问题，瑕不掩玉
======== 4分 ============