|
In this argument, the author concludes that the common notion of worker's generally apathy about management issues is false or at least unavailable today. To serve this statement, the author illustrates that a recently published survey indicates that 79 percent of the nearly 1,200 workers who responded to that survey expressed a high level of interest in the topics of corporate restructuring and redesign of benefits programs. Although such illustration is to some extend （extent）related to the author's conclusion, it can not be entirely logically acceptable unless the following questions be answered in advance.
First, the author should answer if the samples of workers (i.e. the nearly 1,200 workers) well represent the whole workforce in that corporation. The response of the survey may be reasonable if the total number of workers in that corporation is equal to the number of workers who participate in the survey, or the nearly 1,200 workers are random selected to participate in the survey. On the other hand, if the sample is selected according to some given criteria or by some special incentives, the response of such survey is totally meaningless.
Second, the author should answer if the workers expressed a high level of interest ONLY in the topics of corporate restructuring and redesign of benefits programs. As we know, the issues of corporate restructuring and redesign of benefits programs are close to every worker's personal interest, so it is certain that most worker pay attention to these issues. However, management issues contain lots of sectors and aspects, it is unwarranted to suggest that workers nowadays pay more attention on management issue unless the author could provide more detail information that the workers show their interests in more aspects of management issue than the statement mentions.
（个人觉得这里的than 之后用the statement mentions不是很好，觉得可以用个what来连接比较好。个人意见来着，呵呵）
In conclusion, the argument is bold as it stands. To strengthen it, the author should answer what the samples of workers make up of and clarify what other topics of management issues the workers care about. After that, the argument could be more sound and convincing.
首先，觉得楼主在用词和句式方面已经不错了。但是最明显的一个缺点，字数338，太少了。主要原因是你只反驳了两个逻辑错误点，显然这是不够的。很明显，本文有三个逻辑点可以反驳，但是楼主就反驳了两个。
你可以参考一下下面的逻辑错误点：
1survey is doubtful: Detailed information should be given such as the absolute number of workers of that corporation.
2insufficient sample: The corporation is not representative of all the other corporations.
3gratuitous assumption: It is natural that workers are interested in the topics such as corporate structuring and design of benefits programs. This trend can not be cited to support the author’s allege.
在中间段形成三个反驳点，那就明显好多了，而且这样字数也会跟着上去，这样比较好。
| 
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2005-9-5 17:39:00
楼主
