Argument2 (GOGOGO)可以拍以下

yunziluoUID: 2164829

Argument2

The following appeared in a letter sent by a committee of homeowners from the Deerhaven Acres to all homeowners in Deerhaven Acres.
"Seven years ago, homeowners in nearby Brookville community adopted a set of restrictions on how the community's yards should be landscaped and what colors the exteriors of homes should be painted. Since then, average property values have tripled in Brookville. In order to raise property values in Deerhaven Acres, we should adopt our own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting."

七年前，附近的Brookville社区的业主实施了一系列关于该社区的庭院应如何布置以及房屋应涂何种颜色的规定。从那以后，Brookville的地产平均价格翻了三番。为使Deerhaven Acres的地产升值，我们也应该对于景观和房屋涂色实施自己的规定。


正文

In this letter, the author recommends that in order to raise property, Deerhaven Acres should adopt its own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting like Brookbille does. To support the conclusion, the author cites the fact that property values of Brookville have triple after a set of restriction being adopted seven years ago. The deduction sounds reasonable. However, a careful examination of the letter would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.
To begin with, the author commits a fallacy of after this, therefore because of this. Although a set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting might increase property values, it is not necessarily so. It entirely possible that many another factors are the true explanations for the increasing of property values. For example, perhaps in past seven years, population of Brookville has dramatically increased, the losing balance of supply and demand induce property values increased. Perhaps property firms in Brookville adopt advanced management and efficient sale strategy. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author's assumption that restrictions on landscaping and housepainting in Brookville stimulated the growth of real estate values is unwarranted.
Aside from this unreliable inference, the evidence the author uses to support the assumption is also dubitable. The author fails to inform us the level of average property values of Brookville. If the average was much lower than normal level seven years ago, “has tripled” as the author emphasizes would say nothing. Moreover, if the current average of real estate values of Brookville remain lower than that of Deehaven, the author’s conclusion that Deehaven should adopt the same way as Brookville did is unconvincing.
Even if the restrictions on landsaping and housepainting indeed has increased property values of Brookville, it is not equal to apply to Deerhaven Acres. Perhaps people in Deerhaven are minority, they are more conservative and not willing to change their custom. Since the author fails to prove that Brookvlle and Deerhaven Acres are highly similar in all resects, I cannot accept the author’s conclusion.
Last but not least, high property values do not mean high profits. If people cannot afford the excessive prices, the high values must decline again.
In sum, the author's conclusion is unsubstantiated. To strengthen the conclusion, the author must show that the real factors inducing the growth of property values in Brookville. And the author also must show that the way of restrictions on landscaping and housepatinting is also productive in Deerhaven.

WORD: 403

加一UID: 2168628

In this letter, the author recommends that in order to raise property, Deerhaven Acres should adopt its own set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting like Brookbille does. To support the conclusion, the author cites the fact that property values of Brookville have triple after a set of restriction being adopted seven years ago. The deduction sounds reasonable. However, a careful examination of the letter would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.

To begin with, the author commits a fallacy of after this, therefore because of this. (这句不大明白啊 this?)Although a set of restrictions on landscaping and housepainting might increase property values, it is not necessarily so. It entirely possible that many another factors are the true explanations for the increasing of property values. For example, perhaps in past seven years, population of Brookville has dramatically increased, the losing balance of supply and demand induce property values increased. (这个例子表述的比较好,赞!)Perhaps property firms in Brookville adopt advanced management and efficient sale strategy. Without ruling out these possibilities, the author's assumption that restrictions on landscaping and housepainting in Brookville stimulated the growth of real estate values is unwarranted. (总结)

Aside from this unreliable inference, the evidence the author uses to support the assumption is also dubitable. The author fails to inform us (感觉比较怪异 fails to claim会好一点)the level of average property values of Brookville. If the average was much lower than normal level seven years ago, “has tripled” as the author emphasizes would say nothing. Moreover, if the current average of real estate values of Brookville remain lower than that of Deehaven, the author’s conclusion that Deehaven should adopt the same way as Brookville did is unconvincing.

Even if the restrictions on landsaping and housepainting indeed has increased property values of Brookville, it is not equal to apply to Deerhaven Acres. (very good)Perhaps people in Deerhaven are minority, they are more conservative and not willing to change their custom. Since the author fails to prove that Brookvlle and Deerhaven Acres are highly similar in all resects, I cannot accept the author’s conclusion.

Last but not least, high property values do not mean high profits. If people cannot afford the excessive prices, the high values must decline again.
这个观点好象不大有说服力吧... 而且引入这种泛学术问题会很难论述清楚.
文章是说房产升值,和国内的炒房似乎区别蛮大的

In sum, the author's conclusion is unsubstantiated. To strengthen the conclusion, the author must show that the real factors inducing the growth of property values in Brookville. And the author also must show that the way of restrictions on landscaping and housepatinting is also productive in Deerhaven.

这篇文章中的不少词值得我们学习,毕竟写作文的时候常常会发现翻来覆去就那么几个词.但楼主应该注意到本文的逻辑连贯性,感觉没有那篇issue的逻辑部分出色.可能是思路上受了国内房地产市场的干扰吧,呵呵.