[YB-1]7月3日作业 by wangerdai

wangerdaiUID: 2586666

TOPIC: ARGUMENT53 - Thirteen years ago, researchers studied a group of 25 infants who showed signs of mild distress when exposed to unfamiliar stimuli such as an unusual odor or a tape recording of an unknown voice. They discovered that these infants were more likely than other infants to have been conceived in early autumn, a time when their mothers' production of melatonin-a hormone known to affect some brain functions-would naturally increase in response to decreased daylight. In a follow-up study conducted earlier this year, more than half of these children-now teenagers-who had shown signs of distress identified themselves as shy. Clearly, increased levels of melatonin before birth cause shyness during infancy and this shyness continues into later life.


提纲：
1，
复述题目
2，
攻击样本太少，且没代表性
3，
攻击melatonin水平和婴儿mild distress 无关
4，
攻击没有考虑其他影响shyness因素，例如，环境，家庭，经历
5，
小结
  In this argument, the arguer advocate that increased levels of melatonin birth results in shyness during infancy and this shyness lasts into later life. To support this conclusion, the arguer cites the result of a recent survey that a group of 25 infants who have been conceived in early autumn, a time their mother’s production of melatonin would increase, are mild distress to unfamiliar stimuli. Moreover the survey points out that most of these children show signs of identified themselves as shy. Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, it is in fact ill-conceived. This argument suffers from several critical flaws as follows.

In the first place, since the study involved only 25 samples, it is impossible to confidently draw any conclusions about the general population from it. Secondly, the infants may be not representative. Perhaps the infants are chosen by the similar age, which results that they were mostly conceived in the same season. Without comparison with other infants who are burn in other seasons, we cannot be convinced by this survey.

In the second place, the arguer fails to establish a causal relationship between the fact that infants showed signs of mild distress and the levels of melatonin of their mothers increase when conceived. Although the mothers’ production of melatonin increase in early autumn, there is no significant evidence to prove that this increase will affect the infant.
Even if the mild distress of infants was caused by melatonin, it is open to doubt that the shyness will continue into their later lives. Specially, the argument overlooks other possible reasons, such as the environment, the family, and an especial experience. All these characters will affect the behavior of shyness. From the follow-up study, we can find that not every infants show signs of shyness, which means the teenagers with shyness would get rid of it when they grow up.
To sum up, the arguer’s argument mentioned above is not based on valid evidence of sound reasoning, neither of which is dispensable for conclusive argument. In order to draw a better conclusion, the arguer should assure me the sample size is big enough and representative. Besides that, other factors which may result mild stress are also needed.



题目：ISSUE13 - "Many of the world's lesser-known languages are being lost as fewer and fewer people speak them. The governments of countries in which these languages are spoken should act to prevent such languages from becoming extinct."
提纲：
1，
复述题目，同意语言与文化重要，应当保护，但是政府有其它重要事情
2，
不同意政府保护，1，语言后裔自己不保护，政府干涉也没用2，可以给语言专家保护
3，
语言的消失自身是时代必然。
4，
总结。保护不应该仅仅推给政府，且政府也应当顺其自然

   
Should the lesser-known languages be prevented from becoming extinct, as this statement suggests? In response to this issue we need to analyze the proposition comprehensively and systematically. In a sense, I agree insofar as the language roots in specific culture and plays an important role in the culture. So with the extinction of lesser-known language, culture itself is being in danger of extinction. Hence, governments should take steps in order to protect the culture diversity. However, the government should pay more attentions on more realistic problems, such as poverty and war.

First and foremost, there is no denying the fact that we should take the responsibility to prevent lesser-known languages from extinction, because a language is the key to understand a culture. Despite the merits of the speaker’s claim, however, I disagree with the statement that it is government that should take the responsibility to take the preservation in virtue of the factors in two respects. Firstly, if the descendants themselves ignore the importance of their language, no matter how hard the government works, there will be less effective. Secondly, deeply research through study of language and more preservation could be left to the experts in this language, all the efforts the government should do are only to give fund to these experts. In another word, lots of more realistic problems should be taken into account firstly in the government’s schedule.
  
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, the speaker seems to fail to take into account the fact that the progress of being global is a convergence evolution progress. It means using the world-wide language is becoming a trend in global communication. Moreover, if people living in a region keep speaking only the minor spoken language, the language itself will be the barrier for them to communicate with the outside world. Because the minor language cannot catch up the pace of globalization, it will disappear in the history eventually.

From the analysis made above, I commit to the optimal approach that we need to seek a balance and take an all-sided consideration. The survival of minor language should obey the law of survival of the fittest. If it could never fit the environment, the protection is still illegal to the nature law. On the other hand, languages are the most important elements in the culture of human communities. In a word, to protect a minor spoken language is reasonable as is an action to protect a culture. But the protection should not only depend on the government but also the joint efforts of scientists, linguists and the descendants who use the language. And the only aim of the government is only let it go naturally.

liusisi644644UID: 2573256

In this argument, the arguer advocate that increased levels of melatonin birth results in shyness during infancy and this shyness lasts into later life. To support this conclusion, the arguer cites the result of a recent survey that a group of 25 infants who have been conceived in early autumn, a time their mother’s production of melatonin would increase, are mild distress to unfamiliar stimuli. Moreover the survey points out that most of these children show signs of identified themselves as shy. Although this argument might seem reasonable at first glance, it is in fact ill-conceived. This argument suffers from several critical flaws as follows.

In the first place, since the study involved only 25 samples, it is impossible to confidently draw any conclusions about the general population from it. Secondly(what’s more)the infants may be not representative. Perhaps the infants are chosen by the similar age, which results that they were mostly conceived in the same season. Without comparison with other infants who are burn in other seasons, we cannot be convinced by this survey.
蓝色的我觉得是重复的，不好，最好换个说法，例如additionally，what’s more之类的 In the second place, the arguer fails to establish a causal relationship between the fact that infants showed signs of mild distress and the levels of melatonin of their mothers increase when they were conceiving. Although the mothers’ production of melatonin increase in early autumn, there is no significant evidence to prove that this increase will affect the infant.
Even if the mild distress of infants was caused by this kind of melatonin, it is open to doubt that the shyness will continue into their later lives. Specially, the argument overlooks other possible reasons, such as the environment, the family, and an especial experience. All these characters will affect the behavior of shyness. From the follow-up study, we can find that not every infants show signs of shyness, which means the teenagers with shyness would get rid of it when they grow up.
To sum up, the arguer’s argument mentioned above is not based on valid evidence of sound reasoning, neither of which is dispensable for conclusive argument. In order to draw a better conclusion, the arguer should assure me the sample size is big enough and representative. Besides that, other factors which may result mild stress are also needed.


   
Should the lesser-known languages be prevented from becoming extinct, as this statement suggests? In response to this issue we need to analyze the proposition comprehensively and systematically. In a sense, I agree insofar as the language roots in specific culture and plays an important role in the culture. So with the extinction of lesser-known language, culture itself is being in danger of extinction. Hence, governments should take steps in order to protect the culture diversity. However, the government should pay more attentions on more realistic problems, such as poverty and war.

First and foremost, there is no denying the fact（a undeniable fact） that we should take the responsibility to prevent lesser-known languages from extinction, because a language is the key to understand a(这个可以去掉) culture. Despite the merits of the speaker’s claim, however, I disagree with the statement that it is government that should take the responsibility to take the preservation in virtue of the factors in two respects. Firstly, if the descendants themselves ignore the importance of their language, no matter how hard the government works, there will be less effective. Secondly, deeply research through study of language and more preservation could be left to the experts in this language, all the efforts the government should do are only to give fund to these experts. In another word, lots of more realistic problems should be taken into account firstly in the government’s schedule.
  
Finally, and perhaps most importantly (跟First and foremost矛盾), the speaker seems to fail to take into account the fact that the progress of being global is a convergence evolution progress. It means using the world-wide language is becoming a trend in global communication. Moreover, if people living in a region keep speaking only the minor spoken language, the language itself will be the barrier for them to communicate with the outside world. Because the minor language cannot catch up the pace of globalization, it will disappear in the history eventually.

From the analysis made above, I commit to the optimal approach that we need to seek a balance and take an all-sided consideration. The survival of minor language should obey the law of survival of the fittest. If it could never fit the environment, the protection is still illegal to the nature law. On the other hand, languages are the most important elements in the culture of human communities. In a word, to protect a minor spoken language is reasonable as is an action to protect a culture. But the protection should not only depend on the government but also the joint efforts of scientists, linguists and the descendants who use the language. And the only aim of the government is only let it go naturally.
开头我觉得过于亢长，尽量简单明了，过长虽然保证了字数，但不一定是好事
观点很好啊~
以上纯属个人意见 能力有限 见谅～

wangerdaiUID: 2586666

2# liusisi644644
谢谢了，其实我也很挫的，东拼西凑加上大笔时间，但还是很糊涂。不知道哪天才能完全独立限时得完成呢，哎，共同努力吧~~