曼哈顿一道句子求指点

CRX1230

The owner of a small publishing company plans
to lease a new office space that has floor-to-ceil-
ing windows and no internal walls,
[owner准备扩充空间]

arguing that the new space will enhance worker
productivity.
[新的空间提升生产力 ]

The owner cites a recent study showing that
workers exposed to natural light throughout the
day tended to report, on average, a higher level
of job satisfaction than did those who worked in
office spaces that used fluorescent lighting.
[研究表明，这样一个空间会让员工do better]


Thus, the owner concluded, exposure to natural
light has a positive effect on workers’ job satisfac­
tion
[因此，让员工处在这样一个空间有好处]

曼哈顿的解构说这是：背景-结论-前提-中段结论
Background - Conclusion - Premise - Intermediate Conclusion

我搞不清楚，我觉得owner要扩空间才是结论啊，
因为员工处在这样一个空间会do better，所以我要制造这样一个空间。 而研究表明应该是背景吧？

另外曼哈顿说用therefore来区分最终结论和中段结论
那么以我的思路，是 Conclusion[A] - Premise -Background - Intermediate Conclusion[B]

扩充空间[A]，therefore 员工处在这样一个空间有好处[B]
员工处在这样一个空间有好处[B]，therefore 扩充[A]

这样看来第2句通，所以A是大结论，B是小结论
和曼哈顿的解答冲突了。。 求指教

CRX1230

UPUP  

susieffy

Background
owner打算扩充空间，空间里有abc
- Conclusion
这个事情好！
- Premise
研究说cde
- Intermediate Conclusion
研究表明空间abc可以让工人满意
（支持conclusion这个事情好，连接background给的信息和最终conclusion中间的gap）

susieffy

求大家也去帮忙解决我的问题！http://forum.chasedream.com/thread-917907-1-1.html

CRX1230

susieffy 发表于 2014-9-12 21:17
Background
owner打算扩充空间，空间里有abc
- Conclusion

thx!
没错， 你这个就是按曼哈顿的逻辑走的，不过我这么解释 是在哪里错了？