argument183【0906背水一战三月小组】第七次作业 by yuxin

周禹馨UID??2526495

题目：ARGUMENT183 - Many employees of major United States corporations are fearful that they will lose their jobs in the near future, but this fear is largely unfounded. According to a recent study, a majority of companies expected to make new hires in the coming year, while fewer companies expected to lay off employees. In addition, although it is very disturbing to be laid off, the proliferation of programs and of workshops designed to improve job-finding skills has made being laid off far less painful than it once was.
字数：526
用时：00:30:00
日期：3/13/2009 8:13:07 PM

报告类问题 报告的可信度，且不能表明总job 增加
program 不一定能less painful
In the argument, the author claims that the fear of many employees of major US corporations about losing jobs in the near future is largely unfounded on the basis of a recent survey about the situation of companies as well as the proliferation of programs designed to improve job-finding skills. Close scrutiny to each piece of evidence, however, indicates that these proofs are unwarranted.

To begin with, in citing the recent study, the author implies that during the next year, new hires and fewer laid-offs will be made. However, it is not actually the case. Without the information about how the study was conducted, who responded to the study, and how to get the conclusion in the study, we have good reason to doubt the credibility of the study. Granted that the study is reliable, it does not follow that the fear is groundless. First, fewer companies expected to lay off employees is not equal to fewer people will be fired. Lacking the accurate number of the planned lay offs, the evidence seems untenable. A possibility cannot be excluded is that the fewer companies are the big ones in United States, and they plan to dismiss a remarkable amount of employees, which will far exceed the number of new hires. Moreover, just as the speaker states that a majority of companies expected t make new hires, this may be a potential threat to the current employees. As common sense, the total number of workers in a company will largely in balance, unless the company plans to enlarge its scale. However, we find no such sign. In brief, according to the study, since the author fails to substantiate that the number of the dismissed will not exceed the number of new hires, we cannot be convinced that the fear is meaningless.

Besides, the proliferation of programs and of workshops designed to improve job-finding skills lends scant support to the conclusion. On the one hand, in the absence of the effect of the programs, the author cannot convince us that the laid off will be far less painful than it once was. How long does it take for the laid off to find another job after taking such programs, 1 year, 2 year or even longer? If it is actually the case, it is unreasonable that people will feel less painful. On the other hand, even assuming that they do find another job in a relatively short period, the author fails to provide information about the jobs. Perhaps, the laid offs are very dissatisfied with their new job, as they work in major companies before with better welfare and health care, while their new jobs is far away from their expectation and they are urged to take these jobs by the financial burden. Without ruling the scenario, the author cannot guarantee the programs will make people feel less painful.

In sum, the argument is untenable as it stands. To make the argument more convincing, the author needs to provide more information about the employ situation in the coming year with details and accurate figures and the effect of the programs. If the argument would have included such factors, it will be more reasonable.

yang1989UID??2534880

1# 周禹馨

In the argument, theauthor claims that the fear of many employees of major US corporationsabout losing jobs in the near future is largely unfounded on the basisof a recent survey about the situation of companies as well as theproliferation of programs designed to improve job-finding skills. Closescrutiny to each piece of evidence, however, indicates that theseproofs are unwarranted.
//好！开头让人看得非常舒服.

To begin with, inciting the recent study, the author implies that during the next year,new hires and fewer laid-offs will be made. However, it is not actuallythe case. Without the information about how the study was conducted,who responded to the study, and how to get the conclusion in the study,we have good reason to doubt the credibility of the study. （抽象的句子后面一定要跟具体的阐释）Granted thatthe study is reliable, it does not （necessarily加这个词才构成表示不证明的短语）follow that the fear is groundless.First, fewer companies expected to lay off employees is not equal tofewer people will be fired. Lacking the accurate number of the plannedlay offs, the evidence seems untenable. A possibility cannot beexcluded is that the （those，以及fewer可加引号或者加一个补足语as the author has mentioned，否则有歧义）fewer companies are the big ones（giant co-operations） in United States,and they plan to dismiss a remarkable amount of employees, which willfar exceed the number of new hires. Moreover, just as the speakerstates that a majority of companies expected t make new hires, this maybe a potential threat to the current employees. As common sense （has informs me,as后面最好跟完整的句子）, thetotal number of workers in a company will largely in balance, unlessthe company plans to enlarge its scale. However, we find no such sign.In brief, according to the study, since the author fails tosubstantiate that the number of the dismissed will not exceed thenumber of new hires, we cannot be convinced that the fear ismeaningless.
//总体来说这一段论述得很流畅很完整，但论证细节要多加注意。可以把对调查本身的疑问单独拿一段出来驳斥。

Besides, theproliferation of programs and of workshops designed to improvejob-finding skills lends scant support to the conclusion. On the onehand, in the absence of the effect of the programs, the author cannotconvince us that the laid off will be far less painful than it oncewas. How long does it take for the laid off to find another job aftertaking such programs, （：）1 year, 2 year or even longer? （加一句说说员工在这期间所需要面临的困难风险会更好）If it is actuallythe case, it is unreasonable that people will feel less painful. On theother hand, even assuming that they do find another job in a relativelyshort period, the author fails to provide information about the （new）jobs.Perhaps, the laid offs are very dissatisfied with their new job, asthey work(ed) in major companies before with better welfare and healthcare, while their new jobs is far away from their expectation and (theyare urged to take these jobs by the financial burden另开一句话更好。). Without rulingthe scenario, the author cannot guarantee the programs will make peoplefeel less painful.


In sum, the argumentis untenable as it stands. To make the argument more convincing, theauthor needs to provide more information about the employ situation inthe coming year with details and accurate figures and the effect of theprograms. If the argument would have included such factors, it will （would have，注意虚拟语气的用法）bemore reasonable.

//总体来说论证非常流畅，但抽象的表述后面一定要丰富的细节展开。像第二段第二层就做得很好。语法上也多加注意一下就好～

嗯，加油～