Argument 61 帮忙修改之，非常感谢

zsy2975 · 发表于 2012-11-4 15:19:12

In this argument, some city commissioners recommended that the funding for Grandview Symphony can be eliminated from the city’s budget because it can support itself with increasing tickets income and private contributions. However, a series of questions should be answered before the arguer takes these two reasons for granted.
Firstly, the commissioners assumes that private contributions for this symphony amounts to sufficient percentage of the total cost for supporting it by referring to the fact that private contributions increased by 200 percent. However, one may wonder “what exactly is the percentage of private donations to the overall spending of this symphony?” If private donations contributed to just about 10% of the whole cost in those years before last year, the 200 percentage increase would not make a great influence at all. On the other hand, even if private contributions really made up a significant part of the total spending last year, the question of if there will be sustainable and sufficient amount of contributions in the future still needs answers.

Secondly, attendance at one part of the symphony lends incredible evidence to the assumption that more people went to the symphony last year. Questions can be raised like if there were more people in other series besides the concerts-in-the-park series. It is entirely possible that more people spent their whole night’ time in this series because it introduced a new entertainment facility or some exciting performance while the whole number of symphony attendance did not change much or even decreased last year.
Last but not least, the commissioners base their conclusion on the assumption that there will be increasing income from tickets because the symphony will increase its ticket price next year. However, will there still be that many tourists then? Questions can be asked about if the increasing ticket price will impede some tourists from attending this activity at all. Without further information we can never guarantee that the total amount of tickets income would increase or even remain the approximate number if most of the potential tourists are intimidated by the high ticket prices. If the private contributors have considered about this condition, it is another question if they will still donate money as fewer people will be included.
This argument in reducing government funding is questionable in several aspects. Without insurance of reliable private contributions and tickets income, we cannot see if there is possibility of self-supporting. In conclusion, accurate calculations about the cost, donations and income should be done before making such final recommendations.

竹林中人 · 发表于 2012-11-4 15:34:38

麻烦在作文签到帖签到

竹林中人 · 发表于 2012-11-4 21:58:27

In this argument, some city commissionersrecommended that the funding for Grandview Symphony can be eliminated from thecity’s budget because it can support itself with increasing tickets income andprivate contributions. However, a series of questions should be answered beforethe arguer takes these two reasons for granted.
Firstly, the commissioners assumes that privatecontributions for this symphony amounts to sufficient percentage of the totalcost for supporting it by referring to the fact that private contributionsincreased by 200 percent. However, one may wonder “what exactly is thepercentage of private donations to the overall spending of this symphony?” Ifprivate donations contributed to just about 10% of the whole cost in thoseyears before last year, the 200 percentage increase would not make a greatinfluence at all. On the other hand, even if private contributions really madeup a significant part of the total spending last year, the question of if therewill be sustainable and sufficient amount of contributions in the future stillneeds answers.

Secondly, attendance at one part of the symphony lendsincredible evidence to the assumption that more people went to the symphonylast year. Questions can be raised like if therewere more people in other series besides the concerts-in-the-park series. It isentirely possible that more people spent their whole night’ time in this seriesbecause it introduced a new entertainment facility or some exciting performancewhile the whole number of symphony attendance did not change much or evendecreased last year. 这段内容相对略少了些
Last but not least, the commissioners base their conclusionon the assumption that there will be increasing income from tickets because thesymphony will increase its ticket price next year. However, will there still bethat many tourists then? Questions can be asked about ifthe increasing ticket price will impede some tourists from attending thisactivity at all. Without further information we can never guarantee that thetotal amount of tickets income would increase or even remain the approximatenumber if most of the potential tourists are intimidated by the high ticketprices. If the private contributors have considered about this condition, it isanother question if they will still donate money as fewer people will beincluded.
This argument in reducing government funding isquestionable in several aspects. Without insurance of reliable privatecontributions and tickets income, we cannot see if there is possibility ofself-supporting. In conclusion, accurate calculations about the cost, donationsand income should be done before making such final recommendations.
这篇文章写的很不错，没明显问题，红色字体部分，能换个更自然的方式就好了。
下次写的时候最好能附上题目和提纲，便于修改时查看。

[作文互改] Argument 61 帮忙修改之，非常感谢

所属分类: GRE考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()