【☆09GRE作文冲刺组☆】09/03/02号作业

tanyujing2UID: 2600111

Argument161 In a study of reading habits of Leeville citizens conducted by the University of Leeville, most respondents said they preferred literary classics as reading material. However, a follow-up study conducted by the same researchers found that the type of book most frequently checked out of each of the public libraries in Leeville was the mystery novel. Therefore, it can be concluded that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits.

想法：许多论坛里头的帖子都说，SURVEY 和 study 最好不要变成攻击的焦点，可是，这篇文章通篇只存在一个逻辑链加2个assumptions（后来发现，凡是assumption，都可以被反驳）:
前提一：L大学的一个调查说L市的市民喜欢读经典文学
前提二：后来的一个调查说L市的图书馆被借走频率最高的书是神秘小说
Assumptions: 接受第一个调查的SAMPLE=去图书馆借小说的人=所有L市看书的人们
结论：在第一个调查中，respondent说谎。。。

（诶。。我本来想写一个好一点的A，但是现在不知道怎么发挥，难道又要堕入“无理取闹”里头？）

As what the author claims, the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits for the precondition that the second study which was conducted by the same researchers shows the type of book mostly checked out of this town’s libraries is the mystery book. However, from my point of view, it is not the matter that if the respondents in the first study lie to the researchers, but the matter that the author gives the vague assumptions to reach his conclusion.

The result of the first study shows nothing about that the citizens of Leeville only regard literary classics as their best choice and have other favorite types of literary works, so much so that the author cannot assume that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits. The respondents who indicate that they like literary classics, maybe like other types of literary works. Maybe they like to read mystery novel as well as classics. And furthermore, those who participated in the first study cannot be represented of all the reading population in this city who always go to libraries to borrow the books.


Secondly, with what is showed by the second study of the city’s libraries that mystery novel is the most popular type of literary work which is checked out by the public, the conclusion is unwarranted, since the author maybe artificially assume that the background of the samples in the first research is the one of those who check the mystery novel is equal to or related to those who took the first study and respond that they like literary classics. Maybe the first study’s participants are mostly the students of L university who frequently involve themselves in the subtle classical literature world and they always borrow books from the school’s library other than public libraries, while those who join the second study maybe the office woman or man or someone like this who work in this city and likely to choose the amusing and relaxing mystery novel as the time killer.

Moreover, the facts that in these libraries the mystery book is the most popular book cannot prove that all the reading populations in the town all like to read mystery book. Perhaps some people who like to read literary classics in this town likely buy their own books instead of borrowing books from the libraries. Perhaps because of the difficulties of finishing the literary classics, the time of turning the literary classics book back is longer than that of turning the mystery one. Maybe this is the reason to explain the high FREQUENCY of checking out of the mystery book.

Lastly, I suggest the author should not make assumptions between those two samples of populations, since those two groups of people cannot represent each other.

_xtUID: 2599830

As what the author claims, the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits for the precondition that the second study which was conducted by the same researchers shows the type of book mostly checked out of this town’s libraries is the mystery book. However, from my point of view, it is not the matter that if the respondents in the first study lie to the researchers, but the matter that the author gives the vague assumptions to reach his conclusion.(开头方式不模式~~nice！)

The result of the first study shows nothing about that the citizens of Leeville only regard literary classics as their best choice and have other favorite types of literary works, so much so that the author cannot assume that the respondents in the first study had misrepresented their reading habits. The respondents who indicate that they like literary classics, maybe like other types of literary works. Maybe they like to read mystery novel as well as classics. And furthermore, those who participated in the first study cannot be represented of all the reading population in this city who always go to libraries to borrow the books.（那两个“不等于”是我没有想到的！学习了！）


Secondly, with what is showed by the second study of the city’s libraries that mystery novel is the most popular type of literary work which is checked out by the public, the conclusion is unwarranted, since the author maybe artificially assume that the background of the samples in the first research is the one of those who check the mystery novel is equal to or related to those who took the first study and respond that they like literary classics. Maybe the first study’s participants are mostly the students of L university who frequently involve themselves in the subtle classical literature world and they always borrow books from the school’s library other than public libraries, while those who join the second study maybe the office woman or man or someone like this who work in this city and likely to choose the amusing and relaxing mystery novel as the time killer.

Moreover, the facts that in these libraries the mystery book is the most popular book cannot prove that all the reading populations in the town all like to read mystery book. Perhaps some people who like to read literary classics in this town likely buy their own books instead of borrowing books from the libraries. Perhaps because of the difficulties of finishing the literary classics, the time of turning the literary classics book back is longer than that of turning the mystery one. Maybe this is the reason to explain the high FREQUENCY of checking out of the mystery book.（同样的逻辑，但你的表达清晰多了~~惭愧）

Lastly, I suggest the author should not make assumptions between those two samples of populations, since those two groups of people cannot represent each other.

呵呵，很好哦~~
首先，句子和结构，包括开头和结尾都没有范文模板的印子。看来LZ写了不少了哦~~
其次，虽然我跟你找的错误差不多，但你的表达明显清晰很多。