ARGUMENT29 决战830拍砖组™"8月14日作业 同主题高频狂练,请兄弟们狂拍

momo56288860UID: 191433

Argument29  第1篇 让砖头来得更猛烈些吧！
1.the arguer fails to examine the reason why McAllister was defeated in the last election.
2.the argument is also based on false analogy.
------题目------
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------
In this argument, the aruger concludes that only McAllister announced her intention to close all Lake City parks to automobile traffic, she would succeed in her current quest to be Lake City`s new mayor.To support the conclusion, the arguer point out that the citizens of Lake City,who participate in the community`s recycling program, would answer this action what McAllister announced. In addition, the arguer cites the example of former mayor of Plainsville, Alecia Yu.,who prohibited automobile traffic in all Plainsville parks under the recommendation of a small group of concerned citizens, and therefore, Mayor Yu was credited with solving the pollution problem and improving the quality of life in Plainsville.This argument suffers from several critical fallacies.

In the first place, the arguer fails to examine the reason why McAllister was defeated in the last election.As we know, if it is the right reason that Lake City parks suffered from automobile traffic, which was the cause she lost in the election and the citizens payed more attention on, it would take its functions that she would succeed in her current quest to be Lake City`s new mayor by  annoucing her intention to close all Lake City parks to automobile traffic.However, if it was because she did not fit in the requirement of the Lake City`s citizens, such as her bad figure, lacking management ability, and short of leading ability, whatever she would promise to the citizens, she would not be Lake City`s new mayor.

In the second place, the argument is also based on false analogy. Although the former mayor of Plainsville, Alecia Yu., succeed in prohibiting automobile traffic in all Plainsville parks, solving the pollution problem and improving the quality of life in Plainsville,  McAllister would not certainly follow what mayor Yu had done.From the argument, the arguer fails to provide the evidences that the pollution in Lake City is serious as those in Plainsville or even worse. If the environment of Lake Ciye is less contaminated than Plainsville or even not polluted, her commitment to environmental causes just only earns her good reputation, but does not give the opportunity to succeed in the election even she is supported by citizens, who participate in the community`s recycling program and would guarantee her success.

In conclusion, the argument lacks reliability because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains.To strengthen the argument, the argur would have  to provide more evidence concerning the reason why McAllister lost in the last election. To better evalute the argument, we would need more information regarding what is the main electical topic that citizens in Lake City really care.

[ Last edited by staralways on 2005-8-14 at 18:25 ]

orange83UID: 2127694

In this argument, the aruger //arguer// concludes that only McAllister announced her intention to close all Lake City parks to automobile traffic, she would succeed in her current quest to be Lake City’s new mayor. // 改成only M...can she succeed in...会不会好一些//To support the conclusion, the arguer point //points// out that the citizens of Lake City, who participate in the community’s recycling program, would answer this action what //what应该改成 that// McAllister announced. In addition, the arguer cites the example of former mayor of Plainsville, Alecia Yu, who prohibited automobile traffic in all Plainsville parks under the recommendation of a small group of concerned citizens, and therefore, Mayor Yu was credited with solving the pollution problem and improving the quality of life in Plainsville. //我觉得这里应该加上一些转折的词语，使后面的话不会太唐突// This argument suffers from several critical fallacies. //我觉得第一段引述的内容太长了，难免有凑字数之嫌，其实评卷人对题目已经很熟悉，你只要概括说一下就好了//

In the first place, the arguer fails to examine the reason why McAllister was defeated in the last election. As we know, if it is the right reason that Lake City parks suffered from automobile traffic, //suffer from 后面应该跟一个不好的东西，而automobile traffic是一中性词，所以应该改为the problem of the automobile traffic or the automobile traffic jam// which was the cause she lost in the election and the citizens payed //paid// more attention on, // and the citizens...这一句最好分开说，不然看起来有点混乱// it would take its functions that she would succeed in her current quest to be Lake City’s new mayor by  annoucing //announcing// her intention to close all Lake City parks to automobile traffic. However, if it was because she did not fit in the requirement of the Lake City’s citizens, such as her bad figure, lacking management ability, and short of leading ability, whatever she would promise to the citizens, she would not be Lake City’s new mayor.

In the second place, the argument is also based on false analogy. //Although the former mayor of Plainsville, Alecia Yu., succeed in prohibiting automobile traffic in all Plainsville parks, solving the pollution problem and improving the quality of life in Plainsville, McAllister would not certainly follow what mayor Yu had done.// //我觉得这段话应该删掉，你指出作者犯了错，应该接着向指出犯错的体现，这段话削弱了文章的连贯性// From the argument, the arguer fails to provide the evidences that the pollution in Lake City is serious as those in Plainsville or even worse. // or even worse 应该分开说，看上去有点乱// If the environment of Lake Ciye is less contaminated than Plainsville or even not polluted, her commitment to environmental causes just only //just 跟only 重复了，而且just比较口语化// earns her good reputation, but does not give //加上her// the opportunity to succeed in the election even she is supported by citizens, //这句有点自相矛盾，既然support her，那她当然获胜了// who participate in the community’s recycling program and would guarantee her success.

In conclusion, the argument lacks reliability because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument, the argur //arguer// would have to provide more evidence concerning the reason why McAllister lost in the last election. To better evalute //evaluate// the argument, we would need more information regarding what is the main electical // 我查过字典，好像没有electical这个单词// topic that citizens in Lake City really care.

1．你最好先把文章放到word里检查一次，把拼写错误，空格多了的问题改正
2．我觉得你对于长句的把握不是太好，让人看起来很费劲，而且句子也不是越长越好，应该长短句结合
3．逻辑错误找出来了，但论述不够充分，应该把例外的情况说得详细点，不要老重复题目的话
4．说了一些打击你的话，请原谅，其实我作文也不太好，希望多多指教！