argument29 G-89-互助社8.12作业 请大家拍我，必回拍

OceanDUID: 2118730

交作业喽，:) 必回拍的，感觉自己写得还行，只是时间控制得很差很差:L
前几天在大家的打击下，我感觉自己有了些进步，尤其要谢谢我们社的安卓美达，外社的tangjikede大哥，还有版主明明，最后还有我的bf:lol 希望新老朋友都能继续帮助我，我也会帮助大家的，共同进步 :handshake

抱歉，由于第一次没用word,虽然检查了还是有很多问题，有兴趣的朋友可以先占座，留下链接。容我把错误改改，再帮我拍。谢谢支持，多包涵:L
29. When Ida McAllister ran for mayor of Lake City four years ago, she failed to win even 30 percent of the vote. But since then, McAllister has made public her commitment to environmental causes. She would be wise, therefore, to announce her intention to close all Lake City parks to automobile traffic, thus following the example of the former mayor of Plainsville, Alecia Yu. On the recommendation of a small group of concerned citizens, Mayor Yu prohibited automobile traffic in all Plainsville parks, and therefore was credited with solving the pollution problem and improving the quality of life in Plainsville. This action would have great appeal to the citizens of Lake City, most of whom participate in the community's recycling program, and would guarantee McAllister's success in her current quest to be Lake City's new mayor.

正文：
The author begins by an failed experience of McAllister not to be the major of Lake City four years ago. Base on that experience, the author then brings forward the new commitment McAllister would do if she would be selected this time. Although, the author holds the profoundly belief that McAllister would win this time, I still find dubious based on the reasoning the author gives.

First of all, the author believe that the success of McAllister environmental commitment would play a great role in election this time. However, I do not think so. We are not informed the reason MacAllister failed four years ago. Is it because she did not show her focus on environment? It is entirely possible that she was lacking experience to govern the city four years ago. Or maybe she had fewer accomplish than other candidates. Lacking the reason of her failure, we cannot sure commitment to environment can guarantee her to win this time.

Even if the reason is her less attention to environment, can the action she would take be success? First, we are not the environmental situation of Lake City now. Is this city suffering severe automobile pollution? Perhaps it is a just small city, there are not many automobiles or perhaps although it gets a great number cars, the fuel produce less poisonous gases so other pollutions are more acute such as the waste water releasing into rivers or some noise pollution brought by construction of buildings. Even if the automobile pollution indeed bothers a myriad of residents, I still doubt about the effective of this action. We are informed that this action is based on a success experience of former mayor, Yu, of Plainsville. Different city has different characters. As mentioned above, is the amount of automobile of this two cities almost same? Maybe at that time in Plainsville the automobile pollution disturbs them much. Also, Is the amount of parks of them same? We cannot rule out the possibility that Lake City may just have two parks or its residents hardly drive in the park. If so, whether takes this action has no much effects. Finally, even if those situation are same in both cities, is this action Yu takes success? The recommendation of this action is given by just a small group concerned citizens. I believe that their opinion cannot typify most citizens in Plainsville. Perhaps abeyance of this action would happened in just a few weeks or perhaps the reason of Yu not be mayor any more is just because of this action absent considering.

Furthermore, even if the action is wonderful, the assumption that it would fascinate citizens, most of whom engage in the community's recycling program is unreasonable. Is there any relationship of recycling program and automobile pollution? Recycling program always makes interaction with papers, cans or bags while automobile pollution may relate to some chemical material such as gasoline or coal oil. We cannot make sure they would be interested in this project. Even if they are interested and they support McAllister, we still cannot guarantee she would be selected. Based on the failure that she failed to win even 30 percent of the vote last time, although add people in that recycling program, is this time she could?

In conclusion, as mentioned above, the reasoning of the author has got so many fallacious points that I had to disbelieve that McAllister could absolutely be elected to be new mayor in Lake City this time. To persuade me, the author must try to give me more evidence to prove the feasibility of this action and indeed a great many citizens support that. Moreover, we still need some information about other aspects of McAllister.

[ Last edited by OceanD on 2005-8-12 at 18:01 ]

OceanDUID: 2118730

只好自己顶一下。总是往下沉

禾慕繁星UID: 194496

The author begins by an failed experience of McAllister not to be the major of Lake City (改成 McAllister’s failure in the voting for the major of Lake City会好一点)four years ago. Base on that experience （fact）, the author then brings forward the new commitment McAllister would do if she would be selected this time (McAllister’s new commitment 就可以了，没必要说那么多吧). Although, the author holds the profoundly （firm） belief that McAllister would win this time, I still find (it) dubious based(basing) on the reasoning the author gives.

First of all, the author believe that the success of McAllister(‘s) environmental commitment would play a great role in (the) election this time. However, I do not think so. (是不是argument最好不要出现这样的句子，因为argument主要是考查客观的逻辑思维，不是主观看法) We are not informed the reason (why)  MacAllister failed four years ago. Is(Was) it because she did not show her focus on (改为concern about) environment? It is entirely possible that she was lacking (lacked) (the) experience to govern(of governing) the city four years ago. Or maybe she had fewer accomplish(accomplishments) than other candidates. Lacking the reason of(for) her failure, we cannot(are not) sure(that the) commitment to environment can guarantee her to win(her winning)  this time.

Even if the reason is her less attention to(neglect of) environment(environmental problems), can the action she would take be success(successful)? First, we are not the environmental situation of Lake City now. Is this city suffering (from) severe automobile pollution? Perhaps it is a just (just a) small city, (where) there are not many automobiles or perhaps although it gets (possesses) a great number (of)cars, the fuel produce less poisonous gases(they just exhaust moderately) so other pollutions(types of pollution) are more acute(urgent) such as the waste water releasing(drained) into rivers or some noise pollution brought(caused) by construction of buildings. Even if the automobile pollution indeed bothers a myriad of (有a myriad of这种说法吗？我好像没见过……)residents, I still doubt about(去掉about) the effective(effect) of this action. We are informed that this action is based on a success experience(experience作“经验”之意应为不可数，作”经历“才可数，应改为the successful experience) of former mayor, Yu, of Plainsville. Different city(cities) has(have) different characters(characteristics). As mentioned above, is(are) the amount(amounts) of automobile of this (these) two cities almost (the) same? Maybe at that time in Plainsville the automobile pollution disturbs them much. Also, Is (are)  the amount(s) of parks of them (the)  same? We cannot rule out the possibility that Lake City may(有possibility就不要再may了吧) just have two parks or its residents hardly(seldom) drive in the park. If so, whether takes(to take) this action has no much effects(hardly any effect). Finally, even if those situation(s) are (the) same in both cities, is this action Yu takes success(ful)? The recommendation of this action is given by just a small group (of) concerned citizens. I believe that their opinion cannot typify most citizens in Plainsville. Perhaps abeyance of this action would happened (This action may be repealed) in just a few weeks or perhaps the reason of Yu not be mayor any more is just because of this action absent considering. (unconsidered action)

Furthermore, even if the action is wonderful, the assumption that it would fascinate citizens, most of whom engage in the community's recycling program is unreasonable. Is there any relationship of (between) recycling program and automobile pollution? Recycling program always makes interaction with (usually involves) papers, cans or bags while automobile pollution may relate to some chemical material(chemicals) such as gasoline or coal oil. We cannot make sure they would be interested in this project. Even if they are interested (in it) and they support McAllister, we still cannot guarantee she would be selected. Based on the failure(fact) that she failed to win even 30 percent of the vote last time, although add people in that recycling program, (even if the increasing number of people in the recycling program are counted)  is this time she could(can she be successful this time)?

In conclusion, as mentioned above, the reasoning of the author has got so many fallacious points that I had to disbelieve (he cannot persuade me)that McAllister could absolutely be elected to be new mayor in(of)  Lake City this time. To persuade me, the author must try to give me more evidence(s) to prove the feasibility of this action and indeed a great many citizens support that. Moreover, we still need some information about other aspects of McAllister.
()

禾慕繁星UID: 194496

对不起哦，不知道该怎么用变色……

OceanDUID: 2118730

谢谢禾慕繁星，真抱歉，这回我没用word写，虽然写完放去检查了，可是还有这么多低级错误，太抱歉了。论坛里有变色工具，但是是同学帮我下的，我不太清楚。你去找明明发表的帖子，davidjacky的，他的签名档里好象有入口。

OceanDUID: 2118730

忘记问了，禾慕繁星如果有需要改的文章，最好是argu，留链接给我！