ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 1678|回复: 3
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[作文互改] 新手第一篇ARGUE-5,求拍

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2012-4-19 08:35:21 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
5 The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Balmer Island Gazette.



"On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by the island's moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council will attain the 50 percent annual reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year on the neighboring island of Seaville, when Seaville's town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals."



Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.



----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The claim that by limiting the number of rental can contribute to the decrease of accidents seems to be persuasive at first glance.If more attention are paid,however,it's not difficult to find that this argument is full of hypotheses,which make it not firm enough to substantiate that this policy can be effective.


To lower the amount of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians,the author suggests to reduce the permissive number of mopeds rental per day.However,there is no certain relationship between the number of mopeds and of such accidents.There is the possibility that the people living on the Balmer Island are all well educated,which means that either walking or driving a moped,they are cautious enough to avoid bumping.And meanwhile the roads are all in high quality,suitable for driving. Even if reducing the number of mopeds can lower the incidence of accidents,it's still doubtful whether reducing the permissive number of mopeds rental per day can really reduce the amount of the mopeds on the road.We don't know how many percent of people who use mopeds have bought ones?If the majority of moped drivers have their own mopeds,then the plan that by constraining the rental number of mopeds per day to decrease the amount of mopeds on the road becomes pointless. Unless more valid information be provided can we judge whether this suggestion is effective or not.



In addition,even if this advise will be valid,however,when the purpose is to obtain the annual reduction in these kinds of accidents,to what degree can taking this measurement only in summer can help?While there is a increase in the population in summer(and assumes that there is a increase in accidents,too),we still have to question how many accidents take place in the other three seasons?If the sum of the accidents happening in the other three seasons is much larger than in summer,just take action in summer will do little to the annual reduction.In that case,we need more detailed data for a more cogent conclusion.



What's more,the author makes a fallacious analogy between Balmer Island and neighboring island of Seaville,which propose the that the limitation valid in Seaville last year can also be effective in Balmer now.Though these two islands are near ,many intrinsic differences between them should not be overlooked.The traffic management,for example,maybe different between two islands.It's possible that in Seaville,the traffic signals are more adequate,the traffic police more qualified,the roads flatter,which all can help to reduce the accidents.Even if the inherent difference is so little that can almost be omitted,we can't ignore that this policy was effective in Seaville last year.Apparently,this year is not equal to last year.For instance,we have to ask what events happened last year in Seaville?How about this year? We don't know,and we can assume that there were no grand events took place last year,this year,however,there is a nationwide football match going to be held on the island,which will cause millions of tourists to come.In that case,the policy may fail to reach its original goal.Unless we can know more about these two islands,it's not proper to make a conclusion upon this inadequate information.



In sum,based on the message only in this letter,it's difficult to draw a cogent conclusion that this policy of limitation can contribute to decrease these kinds of accidents.That is,more information is needed to reach a final decision whether this policy of limiting the number of mopeds rental can reduce the amount of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians.



收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2012-4-19 11:25:29 | 只看该作者
关于这个题目,我的想法是,先说另一个岛上取得的效果是不是完全是因为减少mopeds带来的,会不会有其他的原因;再说即使真的是因为减少moped带来的,但两个岛的情况是否完全一样,如果不一样,会不会必然带来同样的效果。3.即使能奏效,会不会有负面效果,比如游客减少、经济发展受阻等。4.会不会有更好的措施,既能减少accident,又可以促进岛上经济社会的发展等等。
关于argument的质疑点,我觉得每一段,不要杂糅太多的信息,一方面看的人看得不明不白,而且写的时候也不容易说清楚。再就是几个中间段落上不要有交叉,最好形成一种递进的结构。每一段的内部加强组织,比如先指出问题在哪里,再说明其不合理性,接着指出这种不合理的可能结果(可有可不有),最后指出其他的可能性。
板凳
 楼主| 发表于 2012-4-19 12:22:00 | 只看该作者
先谢过斑竹的建议。
我写的时候的思路大致是一段段的让步批驳:第二段质疑是否是因为人口的增加导致了事故的增加(这段确实杂糅了另一个问题:控制日出租量能否限制电动车的数量),第三段让步,假如人口增加确实会导致事故的增加,但是为了降低整一年的事故率,仅仅在夏季限制是否有效?第四段也是接第二段的让步,假如人口增加确实会导致事故的增加,再举出两个岛地点、时间不可比(斑竹是否觉得地点不可比和时间不可比只说一个,或者一详一略的话会更好?),来说明限制不定会有效。
不过看过斑竹的思路,倒确实感觉我这个让步很勉强。。。回去再改改
地板
发表于 2012-4-19 20:35:11 | 只看该作者
先谢过斑竹的建议。
我写的时候的思路大致是一段段的让步批驳:第二段质疑是否是因为人口的增加导致了事故的增加(这段确实杂糅了另一个问题:控制日出租量能否限制电动车的数量),第三段让步,假如人口增加确实会导致事故的增加,但是为了降低整一年的事故率,仅仅在夏季限制是否有效?第四段也是接第二段的让步,假如人口增加确实会导致事故的增加,再举出两个岛地点、时间不可比(斑竹是否觉得地点不可比和时间不可比只说一个,或者一详一略的话会更好?),来说明限制不定会有效。
不过看过斑竹的思路,倒确实感觉我这个让步很勉强。。。回去再改改
-- by 会员 lz4032003 (2012/4/19 12:22:00)

在这题里面,时间可能有点勉强,不构成主要的质疑点
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-10-12 14:19
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部