argu 142 ,求批改

winnalegh · 发表于 2012-11-20 21:09:41

ARGU 142
In this memo, the author cites the serious roller-skating accidents which in his/her opinion result from no protective instruments, and advises investing in protective gear and reflective equipment to reduce the accidents.However, the author dose not give enough and convincing evidence to demonstrate that the accidents are the result of none-protective device and that protective gear and reflective equipment will reduce the accidents effectively.

The author presents a statistical result that 75 percent skaters who had accidents in streets or parking lots had no protecting instruments.Assuming that these 75 percent people can represent most of the injured skaters’ conditions, the author indicates scarcity of protective device is an

important reason for the accidents.However, in my opinion, the condition of the 75 percent of the skaters playing on streets or parks cannot be good epitome unless adequate evidence shows a large proportion of the hurt skaters were skating on streets or parks when they got injury.It is possible that most of the injured who go to the emergency room after roller-skating accidents did wear some protecting clothing, but they played in some places neither streets nor parks, such as indoor stadium.In this case, we cannot make a conclusion that no protection contributes to accidents, but the author ignores this possibility when considering only the injuries on streets or parks.To strength his/her position, the author should learn more thoroughly about the all the injured skaters’ condition and make sure that most of them did not have any secure instruments when they hurt.

Secondly, the author emphasizes the role of reflective equipment in reducing the accidents, alleging that both of these instruments will greatly reduce the risk of injuring. Referring reflective equipment, he/she assumes that many of the serious accidents resulted from the invisibility of drivers or other people on streets or parking lots.But he/she ignores other possibility that skaters may hurt themselves because they had not watched out those obstacles in their ways thus tripped themselves.If this is the most likely situation and drivers or passers – by do little harm to skaters, the reflective equipment will do little efficiency to diminishing accidents’ number.To make his/her advice reasonable, the author should show that reflective equipment is really in need by testifying that many accidents were caused by the invisibility and carelessness of drivers and pedestrians.

And lastly, the author also suggests investing in high-quality protective gear.He/she may imply that poor quality of gears is an important reason for skaters’ injuries, which may make it more likely for skaters to stumble.However, he/she give little evidence to illustrate the importance of protective gears. If most of the injuries are caused by the rugged land where they skate rather gears, the protective gears will make little difference.

In a nut shell, unless the author gives enough evidence to show that no protection results in most of the serious accidents especially the want of reflective equipment and high-quality protective gear, we will not agree that the two instruments will reduce the skating accidents greatly.

普渡哥 · 发表于 2012-11-21 11:15:58

the want of ..

want 可以做名次吗？我也不是很确定。

结构挺好的。

winnalegh · 发表于 2012-11-21 20:46:01

谢谢！
w-b上：want做名词表deficience，lack（suffers from a want of good sense）。

竹林中人 · 发表于 2012-11-24 21:59:32

In this memo, the author cites the serious roller-skatingaccidents which in his/heropinion result from no protectiveinstruments, and advises investing in protective gear and reflective equipmentto reduce the accidents. However, the author dose not give enough andconvincing evidence to demonstrate that the accidents are the result ofnone-protective device and that protective gear and reflective equipment willreduce the accidents effectively.

Theauthor presents a statistical result that 75 percent skaters who had accidentsin streets or parking lots had no protecting instruments. Assuming that these75 percent people can represent most of the injured skaters’ conditions, theauthor indicates scarcity of protective device is an important reason for the accidents.However, in my opinion（个人觉得这个短语出现在argument中不讨合适）, thecondition of the 75 percent of the skaters playing on streets or parks cannotbe good epitome unless adequate evidence shows a large proportion of the hurtskaters were skating on streets or parks when they got injury. It is possiblethat most of the injured who go to the emergency room after roller-skatingaccidents did wear some protecting clothing, but they played in some placesneither streets nor parks, such as indoor stadium. In this case, we cannot makea conclusion that no protection contributes to accidents, but the authorignores this possibility when considering only the injuries on streets or parks.To strengthen his/her position, the author should learn more thoroughly aboutthe all the injured skaters’ condition and make sure that most of them did nothave any secure instruments when they hurt.

Secondly,the author emphasizes the role of reflective equipment in reducing theaccidents, alleging that both of these instruments will greatly reduce the riskof injuring. Referring reflective equipment, he/she assumes that many of theserious accidents resulted from the invisibility of drivers or other people onstreets or parking lots. But he/she ignores other possibility that skaters mayhurt themselves because they had not watched out those obstacles in their waysthus tripped themselves. If this is the most likely situation and drivers orpassers – by do little harm to skaters, the reflective equipment will do littleefficiency to diminishing accidents’ number. To make his/her advice reasonable,the author should show that reflective equipment is really in need bytestifying that many accidents were caused by the invisibility and carelessnessof drivers and pedestrians.

Andlastly, the author also suggests investing in high-quality protective gear. He/shemay imply that poor quality of gears is an important reason for skaters’injuries, which may make it more likely for skaters to stumble. However, he/shegive little evidence to illustrate the importance of protective gears. If mostof the injuries are caused by the rugged land where they skate rather gears,the protective gears will make little difference.
这一段能否继续充实两句，跟上面的保持均匀。

Ina nut shell, unless the author gives enough evidence to show that no protectionresults in most of the serious accidents especially the want of reflectiveequipment and high-quality protective gear, we will not agree that the twoinstruments will reduce the skating accidents greatly.

[作文互改] argu 142 ,求批改

所属分类: GRE考试

正在浏览此版块的会员 ()