argument113求批改

hsloner · 发表于 2012-10-29 19:53:44

Topic:
The following is arecommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company.
"Many othercompanies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-ReadingCourse has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the coursewas able to read a 500-page report in only two hours; another graduate rosefrom an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year.Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in asingle workday. Moreover, Easy Read would cost Acme only $500 per employee—asmall price to pay when you consider the benefits. Included in this fee isa three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the EasyRead newsletter. Clearly, Acme would benefit greatly by requiringall of our employees to take the Easy Read course."
Write a responsein which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Besure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what theimplications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.
很多其他公司最近指出他们的员工参加了Easy Read 的速读课程之后生产效率显著提高。这个课程的一名毕业生能够在两个小时之内读完长达500 页的报告，另一名毕业生在一年内从助理经理上升到了副总裁。显然，你的阅读速度越快，在一天之内所能吸收的信息就越多。而且，Easy Read 的学费只有每人500 元，当考虑到它给A 公司带来的效益的时候这就是个小数目。这个费用包括在S 市举行的为期三周的研讨会和EasyRead 新闻刊物的终生赠阅。显然，为了提高A 公司的整体生产效率，它要求所有员工参加Easy Read 的课程。

Outline:
论者的结论是为了提高生产力，Acme应该让他的员工参加培训课程。为此，作者列出了四个论据。
第一，作者列举了做多公司成功的例子。首先，那些公司所说的事情可靠吗？是否经过核实？其次，即便上述事情可信，那些公司有普遍的代表性吗？论者所说的many other companies中的many到底是多少？10，20，50？最后，作者有类比不当的嫌疑。别的公司使用，自己的公司也使用吗？自己公司的情况和他们具有可比性吗？
论据二说一个人读的速度越快，吸收的信息量就越大咋听起来似乎有道理，但不起推敲。如果一个人阅读很快，但是缺乏基础知识，逻辑思维混乱不善于把书本信息同实际经验联系起来，他们不可能从阅读中吸收多少有用的信息。
论据三说，Easy Readwould cost Acme only $500 per employee—a small price to pay when you considerthe benefits。言下之意是，这笔投入很划算，但问题是：第一，benefits都是听来的，其真实性未证实。第二，假如Easy Read培训课程不仅不能取得预期效果，反而耽误了员工的工作时间，其代价还会是一笔简单的$500 per employee的投入吗？第三，到底这家公司有多少员工？假如员工太多的话，那会是一笔不小的资金，这还会是论者所说的a small price吗？
论据四说，培训课程每个员工500美元的报价中还包括is a three-week seminar in Spruce City anda lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter。这听起来很诱人。公司员工也许会喜欢，但是老板呢？员工三个星期不干活对公司意味着什么？哪个老板会养闲人？这个课程从长期来看，也许有利与该公司增强其人力资本的储备。但对这些远期的潜在收益，公司老板未必真的关心。毕竟，这些员工随时有可能离职。今天对他们进行培训，明天他们就可能成为竞争对手的人力资本。
所有的论据都是作者的片面之词，那些例子也不够有说服力。即使培训有那样的效果，公司有足够的资金，你还得保证那些培训的员工不被挖走，否则公司就是一场空。

Text:
The author`s argument is weak. The authorindicated to improve productivity, Acme should require all of our employees totake the Easy Read course. For supporting it the author listed four grounds ofthe argument.
The first ground of the argument is that theauthor cited examples that many other companies have recently stated thathaving their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatlyimproved productivity. I have to ask is it reliable in such companies. Then, isit representative even if it is true above. The author referred to ‘many othercompanies’, how many is the ‘many’? two, ten or forty? It is unconvincing ifthe quantity is small. Ultimately, the author is suspected with unsuitableanalogy. Would it be worked in Acme although it was practicable in otherscompanies? There may be not analogous of the situation between Acme and others companies.

The second ground of the argument showed thefaster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Itis sound justified. But one would not obtain useful information enough if onewas lack with basic knowledge, was not good at linking information in book withpractice or one is disorderly logic mind.

The first ground of the argument revealed EasyRead would cost Acme only $500 per employee—a small price to pay when youconsider the benefits. The implication is that is cost effective for theinvestment. But the problem is: firstly, the considerable benefits was listenedfrom others. The truth was not attested. Secondly, it would be a waste ofemployee`s time instead if the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course could not reachthe anticipated effect. Thirdly how many employees in Acme? It would be a largenumber of money if there were too many employees in Acme. Would it be a smallprice of the author said?

The fourth ground of the argument stated thisfee Included is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscriptionto the Easy Read newsletter. It sounds tempting. Employees perhaps will enjoyit. But how about bosses? What is the meaning for companies if employees didnot work for three weeks? Any company would adopt idlers. It is benefic forcompanies in a long time toward the course. But probably bosses are not care ofthe potential benefits. After all, there is the risk of leaving of employeesfor companies. They would be competitors because of today`s course.
The whole arguments are one-sided phrasesof the author, and it is not convincing for the author`s examples. No oneensures that employees will work for one company all the time.

竹林中人 · 发表于 2012-10-29 22:01:49

indicated to improve ？ｉｎｄｉｃａｔｅ后面需要加ｔｈａｔ。
第一段，第一句话就下了结论，而后面的两句又没有提供足够的支撑。个人觉得，有必要在首段中先概括下题目的结论和依据，然后再表明自己因为什么原因（这题根据题目的要求是因为有些没有说明的前提或者假设）而认为题目结论靠不住。
The first ground of the argument is that theauthor cited examples that many other companies have recently stated thathaving their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatlyimproved productivity.这句话如果重新组织下会更好，避免连续地用ｔｈａｔ，ｅｇ．The first ground of the argument is the examples the author cites that beacuse of taking the ERSRC the productivity of the employees in many other companies have greatly improved.尽量把句子的中心内容放在前面。
I have to ask is it reliable in such companies 这句话中it指代不明，另外，句子的语序也不对。如果换成I strongly question the reliability of the examples for ……

竹林中人 · 发表于 2012-10-29 22:08:21

Then, isit representative even if it is true above.既然是句话，就应该是陈述句语序，而非一般疑问句的语序。
how many is the ‘many’这个说法是很不地道的，不如直接说，the saying is too vague for we do not have specific numbers and comparison。
was lack with？
first ground of the argument revealed 怎么还是first
The implication is that is ？？
But the problem is: firstly, the considerable benefits was listenedfrom others. The truth was not attested. Secondly, it would be a waste ofemployee`s time instead if the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course could not reachthe anticipated effect. 这种表述太随意了。

竹林中人 · 发表于 2012-10-29 22:14:19

不知道LZ是先准备考托福呢还是GRE，无论怎样，我建议LZ先学习下托福作文，尤其是满分作文，从准确地语言表达到有逻辑地组织，这是写好GRE作文的一个基础。接下来再提高GRE作文对内容和结构上的要求。AW作文的要求是critical和specific，如何做到critical，体现在你的论述和分析前后衔接自然，逻辑性强，严密，而不觉得有什么漏掉的，尤其是我们认为那些比较显然的东西，更是不能省，整个的就是要把我们的那个严谨的推理分析过程写出来，而不在于你的结论。specific在于你的论述和分析不停留在抽象的说理，而能通过的具体的事例或者数据来支撑你的分析。所以LZ还需继续努力，语言准确是前提，才能知道你写了什么，再提高。

hsloner · 发表于 2012-10-30 18:31:41

嗯谢谢

hsloner · 发表于 2012-10-30 18:47:09

谢谢，用你的句子感觉就是比较地道，读起来有那么点意思。向你学习

hsloner · 发表于 2012-10-30 20:38:58

Then, isit representative even if it is true above.既然是句话，就应该是陈述句语序，而非一般疑问句的语序。
how many is the ‘many’这个说法是很不地道的，不如直接说，the saying is too vague for we do not have specific numbers and comparison。
was lack with？
first ground of the argument revealed 怎么还是first
The implication is that is ？？
But the problem is: firstly, the considerable benefits was listenedfrom others. The truth was not attested. Secondly, it would be a waste ofemployee`s time instead if the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course could not reachthe anticipated effect. 这种表述太随意了。

-- by 会员竹林中人 (2012/10/29 22:08:21)

But the problem is: firstly, the considerable benefits was listenedfrom others. The truth was not attested. Secondly, it would be a waste ofemployee`s time instead if the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course could not reachthe anticipated effect 这句话我也觉得不大好能否帮我转换下？？？谢谢

竹林中人 · 发表于 2012-10-31 16:19:55

But the problem with ths evidence is that the benefit from the course is not explicit for it lacks comparison woth others who may read faster or rise to a higher position which lead to the course‘s usefulness and even a waste of time 你看怎么样，更好的表述还需LZ多多读一些比较好的文章，体会并积累

[作文互改] argument113求批改

所属分类: GRE考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()