ARGUMENT37 写得很不爽啊 很不爽啊 一直想着要写好，可是最好结果偏偏不好 很郁闷

86390216UID: 2102486

------题目------
Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been unique to the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a 'Palean' basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could only have crossed it by boat, but there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats. And boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared. Moreover, Paleans would have had no need to cross the river—the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game. It follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea.
------正文------
The arguer asserts that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea. To support the assertion the arguer give the reason that archaeologists discovers such a 'Palean' basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea.The arguer also lists several reasons that be considered to attest the people of Palea can't go across the river and there is not necessary for them to the other bank of the river. However, the assertion is groundless after careful examination.

Firstly, although the river is very deep and broad now, there is no evidence that the river is as deep and broad as now thousands of years before. Perhaps the river is deeper and broader gradually year by year. Even the river is deep and broad as now, it could not to say that the people of Palean couldn't come across the river. Boating is not the only way to go to the other side of the band. People can swim to the other side with the help of a wood, or perhaps people would not go by water at all, it is possible that they went across several hills to the other side of river.

Secondly, although there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats and boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared, there are some mistakes to assert the basket could not be brought to the other side of the river. On one hand, no evidence doesn't mean that boat never appear in that time. On the other hand, it is on need to use large boats to carry the basket to the other side.

Thirdly, that the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game could not provide enough evidences that Palean people would have no need to cross the river .Besides eating, there are many other possibilities that lead to people in Palea want to the other side of the river. Perhaps they would like to see the world in the other side to meet their curious. Even the people of Palea did not need to cross the river, the people living in the other side maybe wanted to pick game in Palea. They came to Palean and went back with the basket full of nuts and berries.

In sum, there are many other possible ways to cross the river. The arguer could not rule out the possibility of contacting with Palean and the other side of river. The assertion is groundless at all.

翦瞳UID: 184872

The arguer asserts that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea. To support the assertion the arguer gives the reason that archaeologists discovers such a 'Palean' basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea.The arguer also lists several reasons that be considered to attest the people of Palea can't could not go across the river and there is not necessary for them to the other bank of the river. However, the assertion is groundless after careful examination.万能结尾
Firstly, although the river is very deep and broad now, there is no evidence that the river is as deep and broad as now thousands of years before是否改作ago更好呢？请指教. Perhaps the river is deeper and broader gradually year by year. Even the river is deep and broad as now, it could not to? say that the people of Palean couldn't come across the river. Boating is not the only way to go to the other side of the band?bank. People can swim to the other side 跟我的想法一样with the help of a wood, or perhaps people would not go by water at all, it is possible that they went across several hills to the other side of river.

Secondly, although there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats and boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared, there are some mistakes to assert the basket could not be brought to是否是from的感觉？ the other side of the river. On one hand, no evidence doesn't mean that boat never appear in that time. On the other hand, it is on need to use large boats to carry the basket to the other side.

Thirdly, that the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game could not provide enough evidences that Palean people would have no need to cross the river .Besides eating, there are many other possibilities that lead to people in Palea want to the other side of the river. Perhaps they would like to see the world in the other side to meet their curious?curiosity. Even the people of Palea did not need to cross the river, the people living in the other side maybe wanted to pick game in Palea. They came to Palean and went back with the basket full of nuts and berries.

In sum, there are many other possible ways to cross the river. The arguer could not rule out the possibility of contacting with?是否between更好 Palean and the other side of river. The assertion is groundless at all.有一点点太绝对

分层挺清楚地，但是感觉第二个反驳点有一点点的单薄，好像展开一些会更好一些。我也是新手了，比较弱。

haodongkingUID: 2101796

The arguer asserts that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea. To support the assertion the arguer give the reason that archaeologists discovers such a 'Palean' basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea.The arguer also lists several reasons that be considered to attest the people of Palea can't go across the river and there is not（no） necessary for them to the other bank of the river. However, the assertion is groundless after careful examination.

Firstly, although the river is very deep and broad now, there is no evidence that the river is as deep and broad as now thousands of years before. Perhaps the river is deeper and broader gradually year by year. Even the river is deep and broad as now(少了一个as,就算加上as还是感觉不好，不知道用the same怎么样), it could not to say that the people of Palean couldn't come across the river. Boating is not the only way to go to the other side of the band. People can swim to the other side with the help of a wood, or perhaps people would not go by water at all, it is possible that they went across several hills to the other side of river.

Secondly, although there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats and boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared, there are some mistakes to assert the basket could not be brought to the other side of the river. On one hand, no evidence doesn't mean that boat never appear in that time. On the other hand, it is on need to use large boats to carry the basket to the other side.
感觉这段的逻辑有点乱，前面既然用although作了让步，就等于承认了这个事实。下面又说这两个事实是错的，感觉很别扭。第一个句子最好改一下，直接说这两个假设不成立就行了。
Thirdly, that the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game could not provide enough evidences that Palean people would have no need to cross the river .Besides eating（我觉着food好一些）, there are many other possibilities that lead to people in Palea（我记着是lead sb to do把people in Palea 提前） want to the other side of the river. Perhaps they would like to see the world in the other side to meet their curious. Even the people of Palea did not need to cross the river, the people living in the other side maybe wanted to pick game in Palea. They came to Palean and went back with the basket full of nuts and berries.

In sum, there are many other possible ways to cross the river. The arguer could not rule out the possibility of contacting with Palean and the other side of river. The assertion is groundless at all.
（结尾简单了点，我不知道是好还是坏）

纯属一家之言，错误再所难免，楼主无怪！


我也有一些疑问希望大家讨论：
开头结尾问题，首先开头到底要不要复述原题信息，有的说不要，但我看老美范文都要了，而且我觉着要了可以增加子数一般100字左右，还是很有分量的，但好象稍微烦琐了一些。至于结尾，新东方的老师说错误找的充分时可以不要结尾，但我看老美都有而且都是提出改进性建议，现在自己也不知道该不该要
我的同主题，楼主帮忙改一下
https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D1

yuhangjfUID: 2111099

――――我自己还没有写过一篇文章，呵呵，先看看你们的文章体验一下那种感觉，改的不好，请见谅――――
The arguer asserts that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea. To support the assertion the arguer give(s) the reason that archaeologists discovers(discovered) such a 'Palean' basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea.The arguer also lists several reasons that be considered to attest the people of Palea can't(could not) go across the river and there is not necessary(was no necessity) for them to the other bank of the river. However, the assertion is groundless after careful examination.

Firstly, although the river is very deep and broad now, there is no evidence that the river is as deep and broad as now thousands of years before(ago). Perhaps the river is deeper and broader gradually year by year. Even the river is deep and broad as now（少一个as，我也觉得这句很别扭，感觉与第一句重复，如果改为：even the river was as deep and broad as that is now 是不是好些？）, it could not to （to 不要）say that the people of Palean couldn't come across the river. Boating is not the only way to go to the other side of the band(the other bank,或者the other side of the river). People can swim to the other side with the help of a wood, or perhaps people would（need） not go by water at all, it is possible that they went across several hills to the other side of river.

Secondly, although there is no evidence that the Paleans had boats and boats capable of carrying groups of people and cargo were not developed until thousands of years after the Palean people disappeared, there （加个still是不是好些）are some mistakes to assert the basket could not be brought to the other side of the river. On one hand, no evidence doesn't mean that boat never appear（ed） in that time. On the other hand, it is on need（maybe there was no need） to use large boats to carry the basket to the other side.

Thirdly, that the woods around Palea are full of nuts, berries, and small game could not provide enough evidences that Palean people would have no need to cross the river .Besides eating, there are(were) many other possibilities that lead to people in Palea want to the other side of the river. Perhaps they would like to see the world in the other side to meet their curious. Even the people of Palea did not need to cross the river, the people living in the other side maybe wanted to pick game in Palea. They came to Palean and went back with the basket full of nuts and berries.（even后面的放在上面一段是不是更好？）

In sum, there are many other possible ways to cross the river. The arguer could not rule out the possibility of contacting with Palean and（改成：Palean’s contacting with） the other side of river. The assertion is groundless at all.(结尾是不是写的不够丰满啊)

yuhangjfUID: 2111099

真不好意思，我在机子上用不同颜色标记了，怎么到这里就没有颜色了呢？请各位指教。

86390216UID: 2102486

谢谢楼上 你改得很仔细 时态方面的我的确没有很大注意 我把它粘贴到WORD里去 会显不同颜色的 大家的意见都很好 很多地方是我疏忽了 ：）