AA017

17. The following appeared in an article in a consumer-products magazine.

“Two of today’s best-selling brands of full-strength prescription medication for the relief of excess stomach acid, Acid-Ease and Pepticaid, are now available in milder nonprescription forms. Doctors have written 76 million more prescriptions for full-strength Acid-Ease than for full-strength Pepticaid. So people who need an effective but milder nonprescription medication for the relief of excess stomach acid should choose Acid-Ease.”

In the argument, the author concludes that people who need an effective but milder nonprescription medication for the relief of excess stomach acid should choose Acid-Ease. To justify the argument, the author cites that the Acid-Ease and Pepticaid are two of today’s best-selling brands of full-strength prescription medication for the relief of execess stomach acid and they are also available in milder nonprescription forms, but doctors have written 76 million more prescriptions for full-strength Acid-Ease than for full-strength Pepticaid. However, the reasoning in this argument is questionable in several respects.

of sth's sth...里of 和's两种所有格混用不好，至少在语法题里面算错，嘻嘻。

excess打字手误哦！

To begin with, the author assumes that the high effectiveness of Acid-Ease alone has caused the medicine’s popularity with doctors. However, no evidence is offered that this is the case. It is possible that most people who choose the Acid-Ease as full-strength prescription medication have suffered the serious side effects since taking the medication. Or possibly, some doctors often prescript the Acid-Ease to their patients are motivated by the commission promised by the manufacturers who produce Acid-Ease. Because the author ignores the aforementioned possibilities, the argument is not very sound and persuasive.

that this is the case 有点chiglish...is offered to demonstrate/ support...之类的比较好吧，或者that this is in point / to the point.更能表示相关的，切题的。

highlight处的例子举得不好...主观猜想过于严重~况且和本段开头的论点“AE在医生中的流行，并非是由于其有效性而引起的”没有太大的关系。

Moreover, it is highly groundless that the factors drew from the past experience and statistics of full-strength prescription can be applicable to the cases of nonprescription. The differences between the cases of nonprescription and those of full-strength prescription may dramatically diminish the effects of Acid-Ease. Even if the assumption that the popularity of Acid-Ease in the condition of full-strength-prescription is caused by its high effectiveness, no evidence is provided to prove that those effectivenesses are stronger than those of Pepticaid in any situation. Thus, the author’s recommendation is unacceptable.

黑体的地方是我改动的，这样2、3段的逻辑顺序就比较清晰了，先反驳，3段说即使让步，assumption正确，也有错。

Last but not the least, the author just mentions that doctors have written 76 million more prescriptions for full-strength Acid-Ease than for full-strength Pepticaid, but does not supply evidence to prove that the trend will continue. It is possible that when the Pepticaid was invented, Acid-Ease has been used for several years and that the Pepticaid has prevailed Acid-Ease, becoming the most popular medication last year. If so, it is hard to say that Acid-Ease is a better choose than Peptocaid, thereby the author’s conclusion will be undermined seriously.

短语last but not least...没有the

choose不能做n...应该是choice...

又手误...最后还少句号！

In sum, the argument is weak. To substantiate the argument, the author would have to supply more statistics and detailer information to prove that Acid-Ease is more effective than Pepticaid in every aspect and that the popularity of Acid-Ease is resulted from its own effectiveness alone.

more detail 是正确的用法。

最后最好加上一句收尾：Otherwise, both the common sense and rational thinking will lead us to show opposition to the author's statement...类似的。

这篇AA是掐时间写的，我觉得这三段的前后顺序变一变会更好，但是...保持历史真实性吧！请版主看看大概几分吧。谢谢！写的不好直说也无妨