argument12 三天没写了，生疏了~~~~帮我看看吧

bunnymz2005UID：2146758

TOPIC：ARGUMENT 12 - The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Alta Manufacturing.

"During the past year, Alta Manufacturing had thirty percent more on-the-job accidents than nearby Panoply Industries, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts believe that a significant contributing factor in many on-the-job accidents is fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Alta and thereby increase productivity, we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that our employees will get adequate amounts of sleep."
写了30分钟，只写了453个字，内容惨不忍睹，遂改了一遍，现在是500多字，请指教。
正文：
Prior to choosing to shorten each of three work shifts by one hour in consideration of sleep quality of employees in Alta Manufacturing, the evidence presented in this argument requires an in-depth scrutiny from several aspects. By doing that, I find that the author seems to have unduly relied on a series of problematic evidence as well as the experience of Panoply Industries and thus draws a conclusion that is fundamentally flawed.

The threshold problem with this argument is that the author fails to recognize the inherent differences between Alta Manufacturing and Panoply Industries. It is entirely possible that Alta is a firm that primarily produce dangerous things, say, fireworks or pernicious chemicals which tend to invite more accidents, while Panoply may only make some clothes or shoes, which are relatively safe. Moreover, the author hardly provides any information about the total number of workers in these two firms. For that matter, it is also possible that there are fifty percent more employees in Alta than those in Panoply, which indicates that the rate of accidents happening in Alta is actually lower than that in Panoply although the total number of accidents of the former one is more. Since the author fails to respond to these concerns, the assumption that on-the -job accidents must result from longer work shifts is untenable.

In addition, the author also illogically presumes that the accidents must be attributable to fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers without considering other possibilities. While it may be true that fatigue and sleep deprivation, to certain extent, can make the worker absent-minded or careless during work, however, they are absolutely not the only alternatives for on-the-job accidents. Other alternatives may embrace that workers who involved in accidents may be bored with the repetitive work, or perhaps they just always think about going home or what dishes should be prepared this evening. In addition, it may also be their lacking of responsibility and safety consciousness that at length lead to accidents. Without taking into consideration these possibilities, the author cannot justify the authenticity and credibility of his assertion.

Before coming to finish my analysis, we might as well turn our focus to the author's conclusion which suggests that elimination of on-the-job accidents would contribute to the increase of productivity, which, however, may be not the case either. As we all know, the productivity depends on several factors such as，attitude of workers towards their work, the professional skills workers possess, or the appliance and machines in the factory. In that case, there is a good chance that workers, though away from accidents, still feel depressed about their work. Or perhaps they themselves do not receive much education before and thus cannot finish work excellently even if they actually want to. Worse still, employees in Alta may be required to work more faster beyond their capabilities with the new work shifts being adopted, which may cause severe psychological diseases. Possibly, in that case, employees tend to make more severe mistakes or accidents during their work.

To sum up, further information and more convincible evidence should be offered before the author can sweep out the doubt whether the new work shifts can be effective and render the work safer: Only in that way could this argument be better evaluated.

@amy@UID：209096

占位~~  你也帮我看看我这篇吧，呵呵

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthread.php?tid=408482

lawrence1984UID：178326

argument12 三天没写了，生疏了~~~~帮我看看吧

TOPIC：ARGUMENT 12 - The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of Alta Manufacturing.

"During the past year, Alta Manufacturing had thirty percent more on-the-job accidents than nearby Panoply Industries, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts believe that a significant contributing factor in many on-the-job accidents is fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Alta and thereby increase productivity, we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that our employees will get adequate amounts of sleep."
写了30分钟，只写了453个字，内容惨不忍睹，遂改了一遍，现在是500多字，请指教。
正文：
Prior to choosing to shorten each of three work shifts by one hour in consideration of sleep quality of employees in Alta Manufacturing, the evidence presented in this argument requires an in-depth scrutiny from several aspects. By doing that, I find that the author seems to have unduly relied on a series of problematic evidence as well as the experience of Panoply Industries and thus draws a conclusion that is fundamentally flawed.（文章的开头和以前差不多，很好！）

The threshold problem with this argument is that the author fails to recognize the inherent differences between Alta Manufacturing and Panoply Industries. It is entirely possible that Alta is a firm that primarily produce dangerous things, say, fireworks or pernicious chemicals which tend to invite more accidents, while Panoply may only make some clothes or shoes, which are relatively safe（这点想得很细！）. Moreover, the author hardly provides any information about the total number of workers（对于数字的驳斥！） in these two firms. For that matter, it is also possible that there are fifty percent more employees in Alta than those in Panoply, which indicates that the rate of accidents happening in Alta is actually lower than that in Panoply although the total number of accidents of the former one is more.（对于数字的驳斥往往举出具体的数字会更好一些，不知道你觉得如何？ ETS有一篇范文对于数字举出的是具体的数字！） Since the author fails to respond to these concerns, the assumption that on-the -job accidents must result from longer work shifts is untenable.

In addition, the author also illogically presumes that the accidents must be attributable to fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers without considering other possibilities. While it may be true that fatigue and sleep deprivation, to certain extent, can make the worker absent-minded or careless during work, however, they are absolutely not the only alternatives for on-the-job accidents. Other alternatives may embrace that workers who involved in accidents may be bored with the repetitive work, or perhaps they just always think about going home or what dishes should be prepared this evening. In addition（这里有点用词重复！）, it may（might）  also be their lacking of responsibility and safety consciousness that at length lead to accidents. Without taking into consideration these possibilities, the author cannot justify the authenticity and credibility of his assertion.(这段还好啊，没有那么差 。)

Before coming to finish my analysis, we might as well turn our focus to the author's conclusion which suggests that elimination of on-the-job accidents would contribute to the increase of productivity, which, however, may be not the case either(neither) . As we all know, the productivity depends on several factors such as，attitude of workers towards their work, the professional skills workers possess, or（or去掉） the appliance and machines in the factory. In that case, there is a good chance that workers, though away（free of） from accidents, still feel depressed about their work. Or perhaps they themselves do not receive much education before and thus cannot finish work excellently even if they actually want to. Worse still, employees in Alta may be required to work more faster beyond their capabilities with the new work shifts being adopted, which may cause severe psychological diseases.（驳斥上没有问题，其实你还可以这样考虑，就算减少工作时间，工人也不一定把这些时间拿去睡觉，可以做很多别的事，也许以前的时间已经足够，与睡觉时间的长短没有关系，还有这段的驳斥，就算减少工作时间可以提高效率，增加产量依然要受到很多因素的影响，也许管理不善，器械过时等） Possibly, in that case, employees tend to make more severe mistakes or accidents during their work.

To sum up, further information and more convincible evidence should be offered before the author can sweep out the doubt whether the new work shifts can be effective and render the work safer: Only in that way could this argument be better evaluated. 总de来说，还可以，没有以前写的给人的整体感觉和细节方面那么完美，但是思路基本清晰。不要紧张！！

[ 本帖最后由 lawrence1984 于 2006-2-15 18:32 编辑 ]

lawrence1984UID：178326

我的提纲如下，供你参考：
1．30%的更多地因公受伤没有说服力，因为没有提供工人总数的基数；
2．就算上面的数字有说服力，也不能说明由于睡觉的问题导致的；可以考虑工厂生产的内在问题和其他因素：
3．就算更多的事故是由于睡觉的问题，也没有证据说明减少工作时间意味着就会用更多的时间睡觉：
4．就算会用更多的时间睡觉，这于提高产量没有必然联系

lawrence1984UID：178326

Argument20 想不明白了，帮我看看吧。
ARGUMENT 20 - The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Balmer Island Gazette.

"The population of Balmer Island increases to 100,000 duing the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by each of the island's six moped and bicycle rental companies from 50 per day to 30 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council is sure to attain the 50 percent reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year in the neighboring island of Torseau, when Torseau's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals."
我的提纲如下：
1．文章中存在一个潜在的没有证实的假设：就是当人数增加到100，000，由于租车导致的事故会增多，或者说有更多的人租车，但是这不一定正确；
2．假设由于人的增多事故会增多，同时就算每天50辆会导致事故增加，不一定非要改为每天 30不可，也许低于30 或者是30到50之间的如何一个数；
3．T的措施就算有效，也不一定说明同样的措施会在B生效，错误类比，这点不难写好，就算有效，也没有能够保证减少50%的可靠证据。
你参考！PLEASE GIVE ME AN MESSAGE IF YOU HAVE RECEIVED MY REPLY!THANK YOU!

reffoUID：2185625

占位～！"During the past year, Alta Manufacturing had thirty percent more on-the-job accidents than nearby Panoply Industries, where the work shifts are one hour shorter than ours. Experts believe that a significant contributing factor in many on-the-job accidents is fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers. Therefore, to reduce the number of on-the-job accidents at Alta and thereby increase productivity, we should shorten each of our three work shifts by one hour so that our employees will get adequate amounts of sleep."
写了30分钟，只写了453个字，内容惨不忍睹，遂改了一遍，现在是500多字，请指教。
正文：
Prior to choosing to shorten each of three work shifts by one hour in consideration of sleep quality of employees in Alta Manufacturing, the evidence presented in this argument requires an in-depth scrutiny from several aspects. （这话不太明白那个prior to 引导的和后面什么关系啊）By doing that, I find that the author seems to have unduly relied on a series of problematic evidence as well as the experience of Panoply Industries and thus draws a conclusion that is fundamentally flawed.（fundamentally好像说的重了）
The threshold problem with this argument is that the author fails to recognize the inherent differences between Alta Manufacturing and Panoply Industries. It is entirely possible that Alta is a firm that primarily produce dangerous things, say, fireworks or pernicious chemicals which tend to invite more accidents, while Panoply may only make some clothes or shoes, which are relatively safe. （说的好）Moreover, the author hardly provides any information about the total number of workers in these two firms. For that matter, it is also possible that there are fifty percent more employees in Alta than those in Panoply, which indicates that the rate of accidents happening in Alta is actually lower than that in Panoply although the total number of accidents of the former one有点多余 is more. Since the author fails to respond to these concerns, the assumption that on-the -job accidents must result from longer work shifts is untenable.

In addition, the author also illogically presumes that the accidents must be attributable to fatigue and sleep deprivation among workers without considering other possibilities. While it may be true that fatigue and sleep deprivation, to certain extent, can make the worker absent-minded or careless during work, however, they are absolutely not the only alternatives for on-the-job accidents. Other alternatives may embrace that workers who involved in accidents may be bored with the repetitive work, or perhaps they just always （两个副词最好别连用）think about going home or what dishes should be prepared this evening. In addition, it may also be their lacking of responsibility and safety consciousness that at length lead to accidents. Without taking into consideration these possibilities, the author cannot justify the authenticity and credibility of his assertion.

Before coming to finish my analysis, we might as well turn our focus to the author's conclusion which suggests that elimination of on-the-job accidents would contribute to the increase of productivity, which, however, may be not （是may not be吧）the case either. As we all know, the productivity depends on several factors such as，（没有逗号）attitude of workers towards their work, the professional skills workers possess, or the appliance and machines in the factory. In that case, there is a good chance that workers, though away from accidents, still feel depressed about their work. Or perhaps they themselves do not receive much education （教育改成专业技能培训更恰当些）before and thus cannot finish work excellently even if they actually want to. Worse still, employees in Alta may be required to work more faster（语法错误：）） beyond their capabilities with the new work shifts being adopted, which may cause severe psychological diseases. Possibly, in that case, employees tend to make more severe mistakes or accidents during their work.

To sum up, further information and more convincible evidence should be offered before the author can sweep out the doubt whether the new work shifts can be effective and render the work safer: Only in that way could this argument be better evaluated.

[ 本帖最后由 reffo 于 2006-2-15 20:44 编辑 ]

reffoUID：2185625

https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... &extra=page%3D8

@amy@UID：209096

啊，这么多人改啊，呵呵，那小花我改一篇你别的吧