[2013.03.14] Argument 10 求意见 谢谢

baiyan305

之前写了几篇argument,现在算是形成了自己的一个套路吧，虽然还不完全。这篇是先看题目，然后写好提纲，然后计时30mins写的。
最后时间不够了，所以结尾就草草收场了...之后我自己纠正了拼写错误发上来

辛苦大家看看！十分感谢！

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
题目:

Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia. Using an observation-centered approach to studying Tertian culture, he concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. Recently another anthropologist, Dr. Karp, visited the group of islands that includes Tertia and used the interview-centered method to study child-rearing practices. In the interviews that Dr. Karp conducted with children living in this group of islands, the children spent much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. Dr. Karp decided that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture must be invalid. Some anthropologists recommend that to obtain accurate information on Tertian child-rearing practices, future research on the subject should be conducted via the interview-centered method.


Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

我的作文：

Base on the comparison of report of Dr Field and Karp, the anthropoligists consider Dr Filed’s research is not accurate. They recommend using interview-centered method to obtain accurate information. This argument seems reasonable and advisable at first glace, but a close scrutiny will reveal that additional question should be answer for better evaluation of this recommend.


At the first place, anthropoligists believed that Dr Karp’s researchis accurate. However,as Dr Karp use interview-centered method with children and these children come from several islands, how many children in them come from Tertia? As this reasearch object is Tertia island, so If most of children come from other islands rather than Tertia, their words can not be taken as evidences to support Dr Karp’s research. That will disprove Dr Karp’s research and further strongly weaken this argument. On the contrary, if most children participated in this interview come from Tertia, then their reaction could reflect that the situation on Tertia and it’s justifiable for further discussion of this argument. So for a objective evaluate this argument, the question should be answered explicitly.


At the second place, granted that most children in Dr Karp’s interview are from Tertia, Dr Karp believe that children were reared by their biological parents as children spend much time talking about their biological parents. However, is that an persuasive evidence prove children are rearing by their biological paretns? It’s highly probable explain the children are rearing by an entire village so they can’t stay with theirbiological parent long time, so they talk much with theirbiological parents as they miss them so much. And that will prove Dr Karp’s research is wrong and demonstrate interview-concentrate method maybe not effective. That will make the anthropoligists’s recommed very questionable. On the other hand, if further survey indicate the children are really rearing by their biological parents. It will strongly enhance the recommend.


Finally, granted above two question get positive answers so Dr Karp’s research is accurate. The anthropoligists affirm Dr Filed’s research is invalid. Does the difference between Dr two results could prove Dr Field’result is invalid? As this is an crucial point, also it’s very questionable, a tenable answer is desirable for better evaluate this argument. Dr Field’s research is taken twenty years ago, maybe the children were reared by an entire village at that time. When Dr Karp got there twenty years afters, the custom of this island have been changed. So both of the two scientists’s result are accurate and they will cause the recommend of  anthropoligists untenable. If there are other information demonstrate that children wear reared by their biological parents twenty years ago, Dr Field’s research maybe invalid. That will be an crucial evidence back anthropoligists’s recommend.


To sum up, there are several suspected points in this argument. To evaluate this argument preciously and objectively, above question should be answered.

竹林中人

Based on the comparison of report of Dr Field and Karp, the anthropoligists consider Dr Filed’s research is not accurate. They recommend using interview-centered method to obtain accurate information. This argument seems reasonable and advisable at first glace, but a close scrutiny will reveal that additional question should be answered for better evaluation of this recommend.


At the first place, anthropoligists believed that Dr Karp’s research is accurate. However,as Dr Karp use interview-centered method with children and these children come from several islands, 这点题目里有？how many children in them come from Tertia? As this reasearch object is Tertia island, so If most of children come from other islands rather than Tertia, their words can not be taken as evidences to support Dr Karp’s research. That will disprove Dr Karp’s research and further strongly weaken this argument. On the contrary, if most children participated in this interview come from Tertia, then their reaction could reflect that the situation on Tertia and it’s justifiable for further discussion of this argument. So for a objective evaluate this argument, the question should be answered explicitly.


At the second place, granted that most children in Dr Karp’s interview are from Tertia, Dr Karp believe that children were reared by their biological parents as children spend much time talking about their biological parents. However, is that an persuasive evidence to prove that children are rearing by their biological paretns? It’s highly probable explain the children are rearing by an entire village so they can’t stay with theirbiological parent for a long time, and they talk much with theirbiological parents as they miss them so much. Absolutely this will prove Dr Karp’s conclusion is wrong and demonstrate interview-concentrate method may not be effective，which will make the anthropoligists’s recommendation very questionable. On the other hand, if further survey indicate the children are really rearing by their biological parents. It will strongly enhance the recommend.


Finally, granted above two question get positive answers so Dr Karp’s research is accurate. The anthropoligists affirm Dr Filed’s research is invalid. Does the difference between Dr two results could prove Dr Field’result is invalid? As this is an crucial point, also it’s very questionable, a tenable answer is desirable for better evaluate this argument. Dr Field’s research was taken twenty years ago, maybe the children were reared by an entire village at that time. When Dr Karp got there twenty years afters, the custom of this island have been changed. So both of the two scientists’s result are accurate and they will cause the recommend of  anthropoligists untenable. If there are other information demonstrate that children wear reared by their biological parents twenty years ago, Dr Field’s research maybe invalid. That will be an crucial evidence back anthropoligists’s recommend.


To sum up, there are several suspected points in this argument. To evaluate this argument preciously and objectively, above question should be answered.

问题：句子表达能更清晰些，也就是说句子里面意思明确，长句里面能用更好的连接词，而不是多个简单句的简单并列，这样句子读起来文采也会好很多。
有点：分析推理比较到位。第一点算是失误

baiyan305

多谢版主，确实我的作文基础比较差，所以句式和用词都比较基础和简陋，还需要看看例文。