- UID
- 859921
- 在线时间
- 小时
- 注册时间
- 2013-2-24
- 最后登录
- 1970-1-1
- 主题
- 帖子
- 性别
- 保密
|
3. The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner.
“Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadily decreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plaza store owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard users in plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalism users in the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. If skateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to the previously high levels.”
What questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result.
正文：
The arguer’s recommendation of prohibiting skateboarding seems effective at first glance to recover the business of the plaza. However, one should consider seriously on some essential questions that may refute the argument. Is the decrease in shoppers really due to the popularity of skateboarding? Will any evidences be provided to say that the skateboarding causes the increasing litter and vandalism users? Have the arguer considered sufficiently on the potential counterproductive effects if the skateboarding is prohibited?
First, the arguer bases the recommendation on the unwarrantedly assumption that the decrease of shoppers is caused by the increasing popularity of skateboard. Indeed, an increasing popularity of skateboarding would likely to cause a chaotic circumstance and further obstruct those purchasers who require quiet to shop. No concrete evidences in the argument, however, are provided to build a causal relationship between the two facts. Actually, some other explanations can also account for the decreasing shoppers. For example, it is probable that the economic depression has been taking place during the past two years and the whole market is entrapped in depression. Possibly the residential income decreased or the price of commodities improved dramatically. As a result, people have no enough money to purchase frequently. Under this situation, it is not surprised that the plaza will lose lots of shoppers. If the business is affected by the factors mentioned above, the recommendation to prohibit skateboarding will make no sense to the recovering of business. Consequently, before the arguer can explain more reasonably on the causal relationship between business and skateboarding, the recommendation is doubtful to bring the predicted results.
Second, the arguer ignores that the skateboarding unnecessarily causes the increasing litter and vandalism users. Though the two facts occur simultaneously, no concrete connection can be made according to the arguer’s statement. The increasing litter and vandalism users may be due to the lack of regulations in the plaza. If this is the fundamental reason that leads to the increasing litter and vandalism users, the situation will not improve even though the arguer’s recommendation is taken. Therefore, to achieve the expected results, the arguer should first clarify whether the skateboarding is the reason of the increasing litter and vandalism users.
Finally, even if all the above two questions are confirmed, the arguer still insufficiently evaluates the outcome of prohibiting the skateboarding. Perhaps one of the most attractive advantages of the plaza is that it provides possibility for skateboarding. For this reasons, lots of people come here to enjoy themselves. Further, in this way, the fame of the plaza will improve, as a result of which more potential purchasers are attracted. This will incontrovertibly accelerate the business of the plaza. Once the skateboarding is prohibited, the fans of skateboarding together with the accompanying benefits will all be missed, imposing an imponderable loss in business for the plaza. Thereafter, the arguer should think more seriously on the possible negative effects of prohibiting the skateboarding. If not, the predicted results will never come.
The argument for prohibiting the skateboarding is worthy of being considered by the administrators of the plaza. Before one can expect the predicted results by the recommendation, however, definite answers to the above questions are requested. After all, a hasty execution to prohibit the skateboard has potential risk to make the situation worse.
自己觉得存在的问题：
（1）第一点的前四行是根据末班自己总结的写法，是不是太罗嗦了反而不好？其实这四行完全可以用一两句话表示的。
（2）看很多地方说在一点中other explanations 和examples都要有，但是我总觉得这两点其实是一码事，就是谢谢可能的其他解释，不知道这种想法对不对呢？
（3）不知道这样的东西能拿到多少分呢？
|
|
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号
发表于 2013-3-11 19:29:58
收藏
收藏
楼主
