ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 2633|回复: 7
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[作文互改] argument第二篇 求狠拍!!!WWAC电台取消摇滚音乐换新闻那篇!!个人觉得写的有点问题 特别是第三段 in addition那里

[复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2012-9-4 22:59:06 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
2. The following appeared in a memorandumfrom the manager of WWAC radio station.

"WWAC must change from its currentrock-music format because the number of listeners has been declining, eventhough the population in our listening area has been growing. The populationgrowth has resulted mainly from people moving to our area after theirretirement, and we must make listeners of these new residents. But they seem tohave limited interest in music: several local stores selling recorded musichave recently closed. Therefore, just changing to another kind of music is notgoing to increase our audience. Instead, we should adopt a news-and-talkformat, a form of radio that is increasingly popular in our area."
Write a response in which you discuss whatquestions would need to be answered in order to decide whether therecommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure toexplain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate therecommendation.


40分钟  453字
In this memo the arguer comes to theconclusion that the radio station must change from its current rock-musicformat. To justify the conclusion, the arguer shows that the number oflisteners has been declining though the population of the listening area increases.The arguer also points out that the radio station must change the contents ofthe program to meet the demands of the new residents coming to the listeningarea after their retirement. However, close scrutiny of this argument revealsthat it is unconvincing in several aspects.

To begin with, the arguer unfairly claimsthat the decline of the listeners in the area is stemming from the rock musicof the program, which is entirely probably ascribed to the music typeconcerning that the people after their retirement might be less likely to enjoythe rock music. Without ruling out an appropriate explanation to why the arguermakes this judgment, I could hardly be convinced of the effectiveness of thedecision coming after.

In addition, the arguer unfairly claimsthat the new-coming residents have limited interest in music, showing the factthat several music stores selling recorded music are closed, which seems tosupport the claim made by arguer. Whereas, the arguer overlooks a myriad ofother possible method in which the audience enjoy the music, since that it istotally possible that the listeners listen to the music on the internet giventhe abundant merits of the online music, such as plentiful genres and artistsavailable. In short, the argument cannot be justified to be valid until thearguer proves that listening to the radio is the only way the audience enjoythe music.

Finally, the arguer unjustly claims thatthe change from the rock music to the news-and-talk format is going to be morepopular in the area without testifying the effectiveness of it, this againcasts doubt on the validity of the argument. First, the rest of the listeners, suchas the teenagers and some students, except the new residents after retirementmight not enjoy the program. Second, there is no previous successful precedentshowing that this news format program was once popular. On the consequence,these logical flaws lend little support to prove the argument to be valid.

In sum, the conclusion reached in theargument is invalid and misleading. To make it logically acceptable, the arguershould have to demonstrate that there are actually numerous audience willing tolistening to the news program. Moreover, I would suspend my judgment about thecredibility about the argument until the arguer can provide exact reason forwhy the listeners of the area declined and whether it is attributed to thecontents of rock music or some other possible reasons.
收藏收藏 收藏收藏
沙发
发表于 2012-9-5 07:54:30 | 只看该作者
In addition, the arguer unfairly claims that the new-coming residents have limited interest in music, showing the fact that several music stores selling recorded music are closed, which seems to support the claim made by arguer.

一个句子里两个arguer, 第二个前面还没有定冠词。
showing那段在本局结构里是什么成分?主谓宾?定状? 反正此句结构很不严谨。麻烦作者和高手对这句话进行深入剖析。
板凳
发表于 2012-9-5 10:15:12 | 只看该作者
To begin with, the arguer unfairly claimsthat the decline of the listeners in the area is stemming from the rock musicof the program, which is entirely probably ascribed to the music typeconcerning that the people after their retirement might be less likely to enjoythe rock music. Without ruling out an appropriate explanation to why the arguermakes this judgment, I could hardly be convinced of the effectiveness of thedecision coming after.感觉这种写法不够具体,关于怎么具体,我建议你好好读读OG上的范文。
地板
发表于 2012-9-5 10:19:38 | 只看该作者
另外对于instruction还是没有做出应有的回应。
, which seems tosupport the claim made by arguer这句话完全是没必要的堆砌。
感觉LZ应当放开手写,不要受范文形式上的束缚,也不要刻意去写长句,注意保证句子意思直接易懂比较关键。
5#
 楼主| 发表于 2012-9-5 20:58:18 | 只看该作者
In addition, the arguer unfairly claims that the new-coming residents have limited interest in music, showing the fact that several music stores selling recorded music are closed, which seems to support the claim made by arguer.

一个句子里两个arguer, 第二个前面还没有定冠词。
showing那段在本局结构里是什么成分?主谓宾?定状? 反正此句结构很不严谨。麻烦作者和高手对这句话进行深入剖析。
-- by 会员 普渡哥 (2012/9/5 7:54:30)





这里的showing是做伴随状语成分 因为看到了作者在阐述的时候limited interest in music后面有个冒号,紧跟着说recorded music stores关闭了 不知道这样的结构是不是合理 请普渡哥解答一下哈
6#
 楼主| 发表于 2012-9-5 21:06:22 | 只看该作者
另外对于instruction还是没有做出应有的回应。
, which seems tosupport the claim made by arguer这句话完全是没必要的堆砌。
感觉LZ应当放开手写,不要受范文形式上的束缚,也不要刻意去写长句,注意保证句子意思直接易懂比较关键。
-- by 会员 竹林中人 (2012/9/5 10:19:38)



我也觉得长句评卷人分析起来也很费劲,一直在写作的时候避免出现简单句,所以句子越写越长,结构复杂,对于这种问题中人有没有什么建议呢,谢谢中人!
7#
发表于 2012-9-5 22:30:43 | 只看该作者
写句子有一个最简原则,就是说一个意思如果用简单句表达比用长句表达用词少而精,就用短句,如果用长句显得简洁明了就用长句,最终的目的是一样的,都是更好地表达意思,通通是简单句肯定不行,但刻意写长句也是不可取的。具体怎么操作一方面自己多读一些好的文章,一方面自己多揣摩吧,写的时候
8#
 楼主| 发表于 2012-9-5 22:52:45 | 只看该作者
写句子有一个最简原则,就是说一个意思如果用简单句表达比用长句表达用词少而精,就用短句,如果用长句显得简洁明了就用长句,最终的目的是一样的,都是更好地表达意思,通通是简单句肯定不行,但刻意写长句也是不可取的。具体怎么操作一方面自己多读一些好的文章,一方面自己多揣摩吧,写的时候
-- by 会员 竹林中人 (2012/9/5 22:30:43)

谢谢中人
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, 2025-6-4 03:40
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