ISSUE43【六人行】7.30作业by D

killthegUID: 2862114

首先对抽出宝贵时间帮我改AW的同学表示感谢
希望改的时候侧重于逻辑错误，关于语法：比如词汇重复，句型简单或者句子长度问题的就不必费心了，我个人就是意思能表达明白足矣，虽然也很纠结，但因为短时间这些很难提高，如果意思表达不明，逻辑不正确，请狠狠的暴力的指出，并直接说出来，我不会介意，反而是感谢这些宝贵的意见，再次感谢

TOPIC:  - "To be an effective leader, a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards."
WORDS: 401
TIME: 00:42:54
DATE: 2010-7-30 18:19:43

According to the statement, the speaker says that a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards to be an effective leader. I agree with part of that, The reasons are state as follows.

In the first place, I think that what the charm of a leader is having a high ethical ,The person who has
virtue always be respected by others, and this could call the people to follow him to fight together for a common objective. Martin Luther King was a person like that, who tried to break down racial discrimination and lead the civil rights movement successfully. And we also could think about Gandhi, another person who got a wonderful moral set up a magnificent image in the Indian people.

But when we talk about the moral standards, we should hold the yardstick in different fields. I think what the high ethical of the leaders of business should be the ability of dealing the crisis and getting out of the precipice, And the standard to the leader of political field should reach the ultimate achievement like "Of the people, by the people, and for the people", or we also describe it as the leaders could be alien to the ethical standard for the national benefit. Just like what Truman did in 1945. Giving an order to throw two atom bombs into the territory of Japan, which ending the war ahead of time and saving a lot of lives of American soldiers. That would be a sensible decision of a leader of country. The people’s interests is the most important. That is what the highest ethical to a leader.

For the longer term, inordinate violation of the moral standards would bring the disaster to the individual and the nation. Hitler indeed had a high popularity rating because he bring the people prosperous society, But if the leader act arbitrarily, he would lost the support of the people, after he start the unjust war, he gave a way of death to the public. And than, he became the dishonour of the Germany soon

To sum up, the leader should find a balance between the national benefit and the highest ethical ,because the final target is giving a better society to the people, just like a great person said: "No matter if it a white cat or a black cat, a cat can catch rats is a good cat."

killthegUID: 2862114

A112【六人行】7.30作业by D

WORDS: 425          TIME: 00:35:52          DATE: 2010-7-30 19:41:19

In this argument, the arguer advocates that the plan should be adopted , because it is necessary to reduce the flight delays, and the wetlands restoration part of the plan endures that the bay's environment will actually be helped. Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, it is in fact ill-conceived,. The reasons are stated as follows.

In the first place, the arguer assumes that the airport management wants to build new runways to increase capacity, but which would fill in 900 acres of the bay. Although this is entirely possible, the arguer offers no evidence to substantiate this crucial assumption , It is very likely that whether filling in the bay would change the flight delays or not, what if it doesn't work after build the new runways, there is no information about the reason why flights always delays is lacking runways. Maybe it is about the place of the airport which is nearby the bay, so the weather always have an big effect on flight delays. The arguer's reasoning is definitely flawed unless the arguer can convince me that these and other possible scenarios are unlikely.

In this second place , the arguer assumes that the airport will fund the restoration of 1000 acres of wetlands in areas of the bay that have previously been damaged by industrialization. Nevertheless, there is no guarantee that it is necessarily the case , and the arguer does not supply any evidence to confirm this assumption , It is quite possible that no matter whether the will restore the wetlands or not, the land remains reduce 900 acres ,and we also don't know that whether the restoration of wetlands would recover the harm to wildlife. Sometime, the money is not everything. Without accounting for and ruling out these and other alternative explanations, the arguer cannot bolster the recommendation.

The last but not the least important, even id the evidence turns out to support the foregoing assumption, but the BC organization objected that filling in the bay will disrupt tidal patterns, and the airport doesn't care that situation at all, What if the tidal pattern would bring disaster to the airport? Maybe filling in the bay would make the situation worse than before.

To sum up, the arguer’s argument mention above is not based on valid evidence or sound reasoning. Neither of which is dispensable for a conclusion argument. In order to draw a better conclusion, the arguer should reason more convincing, cite some evidence that is more persuasive, and take every possible consideration into account.

xyjprcUID: 2412778

既然如此我下面就着重逻辑和行文上的问题啦。不过，语言还是要尽量提高呢，还有时间~
段落结构很清晰，但一个比较致命的问题就是没有抓住题干中的“effective”。如果第四段也是“顶”的话，和第三段换一下位置吧，放到第二段前面都没关系，总之先顶后踩或者先踩后顶都可以，但不要来回穿插，不然就显得有些乱了。
这篇文章的确很难写，不过练过总比不练好，加油啦~

According to the statement, the speaker says that a public official must maintain the highest ethical and moral standards to be an effective leader. I agree with part of that, The[and the] reasons are state[d] as follows.[波澜不惊的开头，嗯，如果能稍带着分析一下论题，或者暗示一下下文会从哪些方面展开就更好了。]

In the first place, I think that what the charm of a leader is having a high ethical ,The person who has virtue always be respected by others, and this could call the people to follow him to fight together for a common objective. Martin Luther King was a person like that, who tried to break down racial discrimination and lead the civil rights movement successfully. And we also could think about Gandhi, another person who got a wonderful moral set up a magnificent image in the Indian people.[既然着重改逻辑那我就说逻辑了，前面的论证和例子都不错，但例子像是堆砌上去的，也就是说，更好的写法是例子的字里行间里都要为你的论点服务，比如说要突出Martin Luther King如何有高的伦理道德水平，同时他的领导又怎么effective了，后面的例子也一样，最后再针对例子小结一下就完美了]

But when we talk about the moral standards, we should hold the yardstick in different fields. I think what the high ethical of the leaders of business should be the ability of dealing the crisis and getting out of the precipice, And the standard to the leader of political field should reach the ultimate achievement like "Of the people, by the people, and for the people", or we also describe it as the leaders could be alien to the ethical standard for the national benefit. Just like what Truman did in 1945. Giving an order to throw two atom bombs into the territory of Japan, which ending the war ahead of time and saving a lot of lives of American soldiers. That would be a sensible decision of a leader of country. The people’s interests is the most important. That is what the highest ethical to a leader.[这一段是在说，高的伦理道德水平在不同领域下的标准么？这个问题倒是论证清楚了，但是和题目中的关键字EFFECTIVE有什么关联呢？没有看出来。所以说如果这样写的话，这一段是没有用的。你不如换个角度来说，说什么样的人是effective的领导，从政治上讲XXX是effective，从商业来讲XXX是effective，但对于伦理道德来讲，政治上和商业上又是怎么样，这两者间可能会有冲突，有时候必须在它们间找到平衡。再举例，XXX由于YYY的缘故，不能坚持最高的道德标准，而选择了别的什么做法，以做到effective，来尽到自己的职责。或者你的意思正好相反，那就反过来说，为了伦理道德放弃什么。但一定要讲到effective，不然就跑题了。]

For the longer term, inordinate violation of the moral standards would bring the disaster to the individual and the nation. Hitler indeed had a high popularity rating because he bring the people prosperous society, But if the leader act arbitrarily, he would lost the support of the people, after he start the unjust war, he gave a way of death to the public. And than, he became the dishonour of the Germany soon[这里说不能违反伦理道德标准，但是也没有和effective联系起来。应该从effective的角度出发，说如果领导者不讲伦理道德，虽然从短期讲可以effectively地实现自己的目的，但长远讲注定会失民心，会遭到大多数人的反对，会失败，再随便你举Hitler或国民党或什么例子都可以了。]

To sum up, the leader should find a balance between the national benefit and the highest ethical ,because the final target is giving a better society to the people, just like a great person said: "No matter if it a white cat or a black cat, a cat can catch rats is a good cat."[邓爷爷说的，呵呵。名句结尾不错]

xyjprcUID: 2412778

Argument主要问题找出来了，但一个非常非常大的问题就是句子的表述不清楚，因为它们不能正确地传达你的意思，所以会很影响阅卷人对你逻辑的理解，这个希望你一定要下功夫。具体的语法错误就不指出来了，主要问题在于二、三段的开头段以及零碎句子的表述。
还有时间，加油加油~

In this argument, the arguer advocates that the plan[最好在这里从句说一下是什么Plan,是填海以增加跑道的数目] should be adopted , because it is necessary to reduce the flight delays, and the wetlands restoration part of the plan endures that the bay's environment will actually be helped. Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, it is in fact ill-conceived,. The reasons are stated as follows.

In the first place, the arguer assumes that the airport management wants to build new runways to increase capacity, but which would fill in 900 acres of the bay.[这是assumption么？应该说，那个人的argument是建立在增加跑道就一定能解决飞机延误的问题这个假设之上的，或者说，是建立在飞机延误的根本原因就是跑道不够的假设之上的。虽然你想表达这个意思，但没有表述清楚，导致下面再看了几行才明白你的意思] Although this is entirely possible, the arguer offers no evidence to substantiate this crucial assumption , It is very likely that whether filling in the bay would change the flight delays or not, what if it doesn't work after build the new runways, there is no information about the reason why flights always delays is lacking runways. Maybe it is about the place of the airport which is nearby the bay, so the weather always have an big effect on flight delays. The arguer's reasoning is definitely flawed unless the arguer can convince me that these and other possible scenarios are unlikely.[论证是可以的，但此段里面句子的顺序有点乱，特别是what if句前后。]

In this second place , the arguer assumes that the airport will fund the restoration of 1000 acres of wetlands in areas of the bay that have previously been damaged by industrialization.[这个是fact，不是assumption，你要写出的是assumption，比如这个restoration能很好地补偿填海带来的破坏这个assumption。如果不写清楚，下面所有的支撑都没用了。] Nevertheless, there is no guarantee that it is necessarily the case[什么是什么case？有点套用模板句而指代不明] , and the arguer does not supply any evidence to confirm this assumption , It is quite possible that no matter whether the will restore the wetlands or not, the land remains reduce 900 acres ,and we also don't know that whether the restoration of wetlands would recover the harm to wildlife.[你的意思其实是说，对那900 acres的地造成的损害是无法补偿的，那就直说嘛，现在这样的表述很晦涩] Sometime, the money is not everything.[单纯这一句不是特别有力，建议结合到其它的句子中去。] Without accounting for and ruling out these and other alternative explanations, the arguer cannot bolster the recommendation.

The last but not the least important, even id the evidence turns out to support the foregoing assumption, but the BC[第一次使用缩写要声明] organization objected that filling in the bay will disrupt tidal patterns, and the airport doesn't care that situation at all, What if the tidal pattern would bring disaster to the airport? Maybe filling in the bay would make the situation worse than before.

To sum up, the arguer’s argument mention above is not based on valid evidence or sound reasoning. Neither of which is dispensable for a conclusion argument. In order to draw a better conclusion, the arguer should reason more convincing, cite some evidence that is more persuasive, and take every possible consideration into account.[模板句吧？似乎太明显了，有点言之无物，最好结合本例谈一下，对此argument的可信度的可能的改进方案会有哪些]