Argument 114 求拍

Jugg · 发表于 2012-4-8 21:18:51

In the memo,the vice president concludes that the best means of saving money is to return to Buzzoff for all the pest control services of their food distribution company.To substantiate his conclusion,he makes a comparision between the effect of pest control of Fly-Away Pest Control Company and Buzzoff Pest Control Company.Be the argument ever so well-intentioned,it still enjoys many questions as follows to be solved.

The threshold problem is whether the worth mentioned above truly reflects the effect of the pest control between the two companies.Perhaps the based worth of W is less than that of P only because the destroyed food in W is mostly low in price and little in abundance while the destroyed food in P is expensive and much accientally,however,the situation of damage in W is more serious that P.And the circumstances around the warehouse in two different areas also determine the fairness of evaluation on the control effect by damage worth.Without a thorough and reliable survey about the background of the two places and the number and price of food in warehouse,the comparision is irrational and unpersuasive.

In addition,is it possible that the pest control of F company result in a more beneficial effect if the time extends longer?The F,as we know,has just signed a contrast while the B has been used for many years.The B was likely to hold a more bad control over pest at first than P,which we are not told. If so,allowing the F to take over the whole pest control services seems rash and inconceivable.

Finally,even if the two problems above can be settled perfectly-that is the situation between the two companies is the same and P company is always better at controling the pest for the equal time-is the means by returning P to the whole pest control services absolutely the best for saving money?First,there might be other companies handling the pest better and requiring less expense when applied to achieve the same purpose.Moreover,despite the best pest control of P,the extra charge to provide the P company all over the several cities may even exceed the saving money by reducing pest damage.Without ruling out these scenarios,there would be alternative for the best method of saving money.

It can be understanded for a vice president to concentrate much attention on the effect and expense when deciding the pest control company. However,to determine the best means,the arguer ought to invetigate the environments and the amount and price of food in the two distinctive places for a relatively equal time as well as evaluate the effects of other selective companies.

借鉴了别人的一些东西，不过学习到了很多东西
顺便问下各位G亲，question就是文章里叠几个问句就ok了吗？其实思想和老G没啥区别，就是做个句型变换？

竹林中人 · 发表于 2012-4-8 22:23:53

Finally,even if the two problems above can be settled perfectly-that is the situation between the two companies is the same and P company is always better at controling the pest for the equal time-is the means by returning P to the whole pest control services absolutely the best for saving money?这句话好长啊!
另外，关于你的问题，我觉得不是这么回事，所谓question，并不是说一定在文章中以问句的形式出现。这些instruction相对老G来说只是一个要求上的细化，指导我们如何写，并不是限制什么的，所以不要有太多顾虑。
文章中的段落需要重新组织下比较好，尤其是比较短的那段，还有长句并不可取，在你能准确地表达意思之前。

Jugg · 发表于 2012-4-8 22:49:29

恩谢谢那个长句长其实就是有个插入语 = =
不过我想请教一下结构的问题
我的结构就是：杀虫两地（仓库的食品和环境）可比性----即使可比，时间长度（一个多年一个刚签合同）有问题----即使时间问题解决了，F也不一定是最佳方式
这篇结构是仔细考虑过了才这么写的，不知道能不能给点准确的指导啊

[作文互改] Argument 114 求拍

所属分类: GRE考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()