ARGUMENT69

陈太白 · 发表于 2012-10-15 23:45:01

The following appeared in a memo from a vice president of a large,
highly diversified company.
“Ten years ago our company had two new office buildings constructed as
regional headquarters for two regions. The buildings were erected by
different construction companies—Alpha and Zeta. Although the two
buildings had identical floor plans, the building constructed by Zeta cost
30 percent more to build. However, that building’s expenses for
maintenance last year were only half those of Alpha’s. In addition, the
energy consumption of the Zeta building has been lower than that of the
Alpha building every year since its construction. Given these data, plus
the fact that Zeta has a stable workforce with little employee turnover, we
recommend using Zeta rather than Alpha for our new building project,
even though Alpha’s bid promises lower construction costs.\n”+
“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.”;

The president, working in a large, highly diversified company, suggests that his or her company should use Zeta rather than Alpha for the company’s new building project.To support his or her suggestion , the president points out that the building constructed by Alpha cost 30 percent more to build with the identical floor plans between the two building in different regions, and that the energy consumption of Zeta building has been lower than that of the Alpha building every year. It seems logical by considering the whole factor provided by the presidents, however, the argument relies on several unsubstantiated assumption could not convince me.

To begin with, the mere fact that Alpha cost 30 percent more to construct the building than Zeta’s cost with the similar floor plans does not necessarily mean that Alpha are not good enough to save money. The author fails to take into account the possibility that the construction built by Alpha is higher than Zeta’s while their building floors plans are identical, or Alpha use the superior quality of raw materials which are used longer than Zeta’s use. Plus, it is entirely that the Alpha’s equipments, such as the air-conditioning, the illumination installation and the security system, are more advanced than Zeta’s.Those factors could cost considerable part of the overall cost. Therefore, there is no sufficient evident presented by the president than Zeta is more suitable for the new building projection if we discuss the details of cost between Alpha and Zeta.

Additionally, the evidence that energy consumption of Zeta building has been lower than that of the Alpha building every year since its construction seem reasonable to indicate that Zeta are more appropriate for the new projection.However, if we seek the further factor result in the different consumption, we would be likely to find the evidence provided by the author turn to be unreasonable.The two buildings are built in different regions, which give one possibility that Alpha’s building is located in region with foggy climate and that would lead to the consumption of illumination, on one hand.On the other, different consumption would possibly arise from the fact that two buildings are used by the different groups of people with different use.

Finally, the president claims that Zeta has stable workforce with little employee turnover and that is also a factor should be considered of the selection of the two company in the new building projection.The information appears acceptable but if we connect the work productivity with the stable work employee, we may there is no necessarily linking between them.In general, the work productivity is attributable to the skilful workers in their filed, which will guarantee the project carrying out effectively.Also, the effective management to the project, the abundant, high-quality material and the () are responsible for the high work productivity.In a nutshell, the stable work employee is not a necessarily reliable indicator of the high work productivity. Thus, the assumption, Zeta is better than Alpha to carry out the new building project in some degree is insufficient and the recommendation needs more warranted evidence to support.

In sum, the suggestion, the president’s company should use rather than Alpha for contemplated new building project is supported by suspicious evidence. To strengthen the argument, the author should provide clear evidence that the Alpha use the materials and equipments in the older building comparing with Zeta but cost 30 percent more to construct the building, and that the two regions which the different building located in are in the same(equal) surrounding.

普渡哥 · 发表于 2012-10-16 08:01:23

In sum, the suggestion, the president’s company should use rather than Alpha for contemplated new building project is supported by suspicious evidence.

少了一个重要的单词。

普渡哥 · 发表于 2012-10-16 08:02:54

To strengthen the argument, the author should provide clear evidence that the Alpha use the materials and equipments in the older building comparing with Zeta but cost 30 percent more to construct the building,

use应该是uses, 还有有comparing with 就应该有more或者less。

陈太白 · 发表于 2012-10-18 13:53:41

O， rather than Zeta 打漏了现在看起来作文各种错字谢谢普渡哥

陈太白 · 发表于 2012-10-18 14:01:47

the author should provide clear evidence that the Alpha uses identical materials and equipments just like Zeta in the older building but cost 30 percent more to construct the it. 这样该可以么？

[作文互改] ARGUMENT69

所属分类: GRE考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()

浏览过的版块