A59，状态不好，渴望被拍醒。。

大剑Jade

提纲： 1.nationwide不具有代表性。 2.competitor的高价格和高销量和结构没有必然联系。 3.群众的意见可能被误解。

Argument
新G题号：59
题目：The following appeared in a memo from the president of Bower Builders, a company that constructs new homes.
A nationwide survey reveals that the two most-desired home features are a large family room and a large, well-appointed kitchen. A number of homes in our area built by our competitor Domus Construction have such features and have sold much faster and at significantly higher prices than the national average. To boost sales and profits, we should increase the size of the family rooms and kitchens in all the homes we build and should make state-of-the-art kitchens a standard feature. Moreover, our larger family rooms and kitchens can come at the expense of the dining room, since many of our recent buyers say they do not need a separate dining room for family meals."
写作要求：Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.


This argument is well presented yet far-fetched. It lays a claim that they should increase the size of the family rooms and kitchens in all the homes they build and make state-of-the-art kitchens a standard feature in order to boost sales and profits. Nevertheless, this recommendation is in effect definitely impractical due several apparent flaws after a close scrutiny, albeit it may appear plausible at a cursory glance.
First off, a threshold problem arises in this argument that the author clearly presumes that the nationwide survey is representative. He thinks the survey could be all the same regardless of scope of it. However, this contention is open to a number of interpretations. Perhaps the nationwide survey includes diverse situations where small family rooms and kitchen are more desired in some regions. We would never if the nationwide survey could reflect the situation of only a small location compared with the whole nation, because there might be different climates and cultures and other such factors affecting different areas. Hence, without accounting for as well as ruling out other likely scenarios, by no means could the author assumes that the nationwide survey is convincing.
Moreover, even though the author might be able to provide evidence for us to deduce a solution to the problem presented above afterwards, the argument still maintains ill-conceived. Another problem lies in the author’s assumption of perceiving a number of homes in their area built by their competitor company as the cause of much faster sales and higher prices. It may be reasonable that the booming of the business of their competitor company might be related to the feature they build, but it’s totally possible that there are other factors influencing the sales of the company. For example, the competitor should have other means to attract consumers by wiser strategy of advertisement or better fame based on the past experience of their business. To corroborate his point, the author should pay a close heed to as well as cope with the representative possibilities of other factors affecting the sales. Only with evidence of ruling out other factors could he bolster his recommendation.
Ultimately, even if the foregoing assumptions might turn out to be supported by ensuing evidence, a crucial problem remains that the author assumes that the buyers’ opinion could be representative of all buyers of their company. But this doesn’t make sense since we don’t even know the details of this survey. In this light, it’s reasonable to cast doubts upon the author’s presumption which I reject as inadequate, in that the buyers might occupy only a slight proportion of the whole number of buyers. Or the author might simply misunderstand the opinion of them. What if they prefer going outside for meals to having meals in the dining room? In this case, they might be implying that they would rather go outside for dinner than have a bad dining room. Pursuing this line of reasoning, it proves to be the author’s responsibility to mull over his assumptions and then provide relative evidence so as to pave the way for a more tenable argument.
In retrospect, it seems precipitous for the author to jump to the conclusion based on a series of problematic premises. To dismiss the specter of implausibility of this argument, the author ought to come to grips with all existing flaws, such as the effectiveness of the nationwide survey, the reason for good sales of their competitor company, and the true opinion of their buyers. After all, feckless attempts with a fallible method could be nothing but a fool’s errand. Thus, only by grasping the gist of assumptions could the author put forth a convincible recommendation.
612words,35min

大剑Jade

ETS试验好几年了，他们宣称这个技术已经没有误差了

ppguo

真的这么神啊？我想象不出来机器怎么评作文。

jz20000cn

可怕

大剑Jade

嗯哪，OG上写的啊，估计尤其是10月之后应该没有人批卷了。。

ppguo

大家都是高手啊。我是落后了，现在都机器评分？

cqcn1991

我状态也很差……看题目不知所云……想个提纲就不知道想了多久了……
而且想出来的是些很奇怪的点：（除了你们说的那些之外）
1.假设了其他情况都相同，但适合于A的不一定适合于B公司，比如 受众市场
2.假设 recent Buyers和偏好大房子的都是同一批人，但是……

大剑Jade

刚刚发现了一个攻击点，profit和sale的区别，豪华设计之后成本必然提高，因此利润是否能够提高还有待商榷

大剑Jade

嗯，这个提纲挺不错的，嘿嘿攻击点很明确~~

冷月钟笛

攻击骨架：
1. 两大参考标准——房子卖得好
2. 竞争对手的房子符合两标准且卖得好——仅此而已？（卖得好也未必得证，质疑平均与售房规格档次）
3. 增大住房面积——增加收益，提高竞争力
4. 艺术风格厨房——增加收益
5. 许多近期买房的顾客喜欢大餐厅——大餐厅可以弥补增大面积的成本

1+2一起打（其他标准——卖得好；调查不准）~ 销售人群的喜好、装修、地段、格局设计、广告宣传等等
3+4一起打（增大面积与艺术风格有效性）：面积增加多大？什么样的艺术风格更为受众？市场有多大？房屋效益是否最大化？等等——可能不有效吧~
5单独打：近期房客之代表性——消费阶层、人数、时段；他们意见的准确性（说说而已，也许不是主要参考标准）；省略单独餐厅能否满足大厨房和房间需求？更不要说设计、技术、格局的限制与成本了~

这是我设想的攻击路线~ 这两天脑袋有点犯浑，呵呵  所以索性全写出来~ 以供参考~
大剑的模版的确可以随时改变~ 写得挺好！有些地方可以微调、丰满一些~