ARGUMENT37 同主题写作 我的第一篇ARGUMENT 欢迎大家指点

sharonhyUID: 2102195

上班时断断续续写的，未限时，前后大概40分钟。昨天才开始看ARGUMENT，模板都记的不熟。写的不好，请大家多指点。
字数：819

37. 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.

By deduction from ungrounded premises and evidence, the author draws the conclusion that the Palean baskets were not unique to Palea. To support the conclusion, the author argues that there is not clear evidence showing that the Palean People have the boat or the necessity to trouble themselves to cross the river and bring the basket to Lithos people. Yet in my point of view, three flaws make this seemingly logical argument problematic.

First of all, the arguer failed to consider other means rather than boats for the basket to go to the other side of the river because the river is “very deep and broad”. Either the Palean or the Lothos people might have processed the means and techniques to build a bridge on the river, so that there could be several bridges, through which people on both sides were able to communicate and transport easier than the author assumed. In that case, taking a small basket to the other side of the river would be really a piece of cake. Or if building a bridge was too much for people of that time, they might be able to make a canoe or other simpler vehicle, which was a more arduous but possible way for them to go across the river. Or if making a canoe or other simpler vehicle was still too much for people of that time, that the Palean and Lithos people were really completely isolated from each other, there also exists the possibility that, one day, a Palean randomly dropped the basket in the river, and the river current randomly took the basket to the Lithos people’s side, and a Lithos people randomly picked up the basket, thinking it a precious gift of the God, when she/he randomly walked by the river. Or even, the river might be neither deep nor broad at that time, since the author didn’t give any evidence on that at all. The arguer ignored all other possibilities but simply asserted that boats were the only way for transportation between the river, making the first step of her/his argument already ungrounded.

Furthermore, the arguer took it for granted that the Palean people didn’t have a boat because no evidence showed that they had. Even if the boats were the only way for people to cross the river, no evidence showing, doesn’t mean that there was definitely no boat at all among the Palean people. Palean people might be able to make boats, or they might have gained a boat from other tribes. However, after so many years, the boats-making skill might has disappeared among Palean people, for the possible reason that the only one person who knew the skill died without teaching the skill to any others. Or the Palean people failed to maintain their boats, which were broken and out of use. Or those boats maintained and in-use well by Palean people were destroyed afterwards by climate, geographical changes, or other reasons, so that we just failed to find any track that the Palean people used to have a boat. Before concerning these possibilities, the arguer magnified the few evidences she/he got without further investigation and simply reached the assumption, which again weakened the logic of the argument.

Last but not least, the arguer ignored other motivations other than foods that drove the Palean people to go across the river. Although there were berries and small games near Palea, the Palean people might go to Lithos in want of other foods like cereal or vegetables that they didn’t have. Even if the food nearby could satisfy the Palean people, they might go to Lithos for other purposes: they might go for some special treasures like shells that were owned only by Lithos people at that time, or perhaps a Palean man fell in love with a Lithos girl and he troubled all the way up to go across the river and took the girl back (with a basket as gift maybe), or perhaps the population ballooned so much that Palean people had to go to the Lithos region to fight for spaces to live. Or even, the Palean people didn’t need to mess up to find a way to go to the other side of river. The Lithos people came! The Lithos people made the boat. The Lithos people went across the river. The Lithos people took the basket back, and there were so many reasons as mentioned above for the Lithos people to came to the Pathean’s side The Pathean people only needed to stay at home and do their own things. The basket just went to Lithos without bothering any Pathean people at all.

Overall, the arguer based the argument on dubious evidence and oversimplified assumptions, making it not logical and persuasive as it stands. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer at least should consider not all but other possibilities and provide more persuasive evidence.

[ Last edited by sharonhy on 2005-7-8 at 14:17 ]

sharon84UID: 2110816

字数太多了。。。

sharonhyUID: 2102195

多少字数合适？

sharon84UID: 2110816

350-370字左右就够了^^

sharonhyUID: 2102195

那么少就够了嘛？汗～但是我看ETS的6分范文都是600字以上啊。

[ Last edited by sharonhy on 2005-7-8 at 15:52 ]

sharon84UID: 2110816

不是所有的范文字数都这么多的
而且在半个小时内写600多字的文章不大可能吧
ps. 我现在每次写400多字还超时:L

sharonhyUID: 2102195

我收不了手啊。以前考试是半小时八百字。三百字老觉得还没开头。下次控制在600字好了。

fhxyweiUID: 157384

300字就够了

sharonhyUID: 2102195

多点不要紧的吧？我改改看。