每日一帖，坚持到考试！argument 15 求拍

cir

写的有点多，也没有掐时间。题目是第15篇讲餐厅替换黄油的。不知道为什么好像显示不下了，最后一段放在了2楼。

In this memorandum the business manager claims that the Happy Pancake House should substitute margarine for butter in its restaurant in the southeast and northeast since this cost-saving change are accepted by customers in the southwestern United States. To justify this accommodation the manager cites the low percentage of complaints of the customers and points out that a number of customers who ask for butter do not complain when they are given margarine instead. For several reasons, this evidence provided scant support for the author’s recommendation, which render it logically unconvincing as it stands.

To begin with, the manager is presenting a false dilemma in explaining the percentage of customers’ complaints. The assumption that customers who do not complain about the change are happy with it is too simplistic. The manager unfairly deduct that customers would either be unhappy and complain about the change or be satisfied, while the two kinds of customers are not necessarily mutually exclusive. The fact that few customers complain when they are given margarine might be explained by other reasons. Perhaps many customers express their displeasure simply by not returning to the restaurant. The greater the percentage of such customers, the weaker the argument's evidence as a sign of customer satisfaction with the change. The conclusion that 98 people out of 100 are happy with the change is unconvincing unless the assumption on which it is based are proved valid by ruling out other possibilities.              

Secondly, as for the reporters from the servers , the manager fail to indicate the actual number of servers who reported, and what percentage of the whole server group do they make up, so the efficiency of the fact is open to doubt. Also, no explicit statics of the percentage of customers who do not complain is provided. For lack of detailed information, we can hardly evaluate whether the non-negative reaction among customers is representative.

 Even if customers in the southwest are happy about the change, the manager’s recommendation that the restaurants in the southeast and northeast should carry out the same strategy is specious. The recommendation is based on the unstated assumption that   customers in the southeast and northeast will respond similarly to the change as those in the southwest do, yet the analogy between them might be unsubstantiated. Perhaps South-westerners are generally less concerned than other people about whether they eat margarine or butter. Or perhaps South-westerners actually prefer margarine to butter, in contrast to prevailing tastes elsewhere. There are numbers of differences between customers in different regions ranging from flavor to eating habit and these differences may result in diverse outgrowth of the same action. Before taking these differences into account and making thorough investigation on the three areas, the Happy Pancake House should not extend the experience in the southwest hastily.

cir

In sum, the recommendation seem to go beyond the scopeof the information provided by the manager. To bolster it the manager must citemore specific facts and statics --perhaps by way of a reliable survey--toundergird the assumption that customers in the southwest are positive towardthe change and provide more background information about customers in differentareas to illustrate the comparability between them.  

普渡哥

结构要改进，你先谈你的观点，to begin with.............Secondly..........然后下一段even if....      段落间的逻辑关系有问题，至少看上去不正常，虽然能够看懂你的意思。

cir

我是这样想的：first和second分别从百分比的错误和服务员report的错误两个方面讲customer不一定真的满意用magarine替换butter，第三段even if讲它以上即使是对的也不能推广到其他地方去。不知道逻辑不清是这个逻辑不清还是语言方面的问题？还是说应该先引用作者的assumption然后再指出作者assumption的漏洞和错误？

竹林中人

你的结构是没有问题的，你的段首连接词不要随便用就是