刨根问底看范文之argument篇.doc

第一集交通事故的困扰Six months ago the region of Forestville increased the speed limit for vehicles traveling on the regions highways by ten miles per hour.4 l. u2 M, B; X* DSince that change took effect, the number of automobile accidents in that region has increased by 15 percent.9 # F4 g; H7 J5 But the speed limit in Elmsford, a region neighboring Forestville, remained unchanged, and automobile accidents declined slightly during the same six-month period.2 - U. j/ p; nTherefore, if the citizens of Forestville want to reduce the number of automobile accidents on the regions highways, they should campaign to reduce Forestvilles speed limit to what it was before the increase.大家想想我问什么要把这些词标出来，为什么用不同的颜色？答案随后揭晓The agrument is well-presented, but not thoroughly well-reasoned. By making a comparison of the region of Forestville, the town with the higher speed limit and therefore automobile accidents, with the region of Elmsford, an area of a lower speed limit and subsequently fewer accidents, the argument for reducing Forestvilles speed limits in order to decrease accidents seems logical.11首段：看看范文的首段都交代了什么我们也就能知道我们应该怎么写了1，短文的大框架是什么，也就是它的目的是什么，且为了达到这个目的，它通过了什么手段，从红色的文字我们可以看出来。By. ；in order to.2，通过比较的方法，那谁和谁作比较，把比较的双方简单描述 注意：重要的是要写出短文推理的逻辑关系，即紫色字体： therefore; subsequently这样就把这篇文章的目的，逻辑推理都总结出来了，所以我们在写首段的时候也要力争写出这些内容。However, the citizens of Forestville are failing to consider other possible alternatives to the increasing car accidents after the raise in speed limit. Such alternatives may include the fact that there are1less reliable cars traveling the roads in Forestville, or that the age bracket of those in Elmsford may be more conducive to driving safely.It is possible that there are more younger, inexperienced, or more elderly, unsafe drivers in Forestville than there are in Elmsford.In addition, the citizens have failed to consider the geographical and physical terrain of the two different areas./ Perhaps Forestvilles highway is2in an areaof more dangerous curves, sharp turns, or has many intersections or merging points where accidents are more likely to occur. It appears reasonable, therefore, for the citizens to focus on these trouble spots than to reduce the speed in the entire area. Elmsford may be an area of easier driving conditions where accidents are less likely to occur regardless of the speed limit.我标出一二的是作者提出的两种可能性一个关于人，一个关于地形，这两层关系中间的分割我用/给大家标出来了。大家在这里可以想想为什么作者要提这两个方面而不说别的？为什么在body 1 说这两点呢？答案随后揭晓红色的是作者的比较词，大家有没有想过问什么作者要紧紧抓住比较不放呢难道仅仅是为了切题么？每位同学都来思考一下11A six-month period is not a particularly long time frame for the citizens to determine that speed limit has influenced the number of automobile accidents in the area. This may have been a time, such as during1 harsh weather conditions, when less people were driving on the road and therefore the number of accidents decreased. However, Forestville citizens, perhaps coerced by employment or other requirements, were unable to avoid driving on the roads. It is possible that Elmsford citizens do not have to 2travel far from work or work from their home, or do not work at all. Are there3more people in Forestville than there were sic months ago?If so, there may be an increased number of accidents due to more automobiles on the road, and not due to the increased speed limits. Also in reference to the activities of the population, it is possible that Forestville inhabitants were 4traveling during less safe times of the day, such as early in the morning, or during twilight.Work or family habits may have encouraged citizens to drive during this time when Elmsford residents may not have been forced to do so.11我标出来的1234 是作者给出的四个出行的不安全因素，大家仔细看看就能发现，1是说天气，而234都在说在路上的时间长，车多，而且还在危险时段。大家想想作者为什么这么说，为什么要在body2说这些而不在body1 呢？11Overall, the reasoning behind decreasing Forestvilles speed limit back to its original seems logical as presented above since the citizens are acting in their own best interests and want to protect their safety. However, before any final decisions are made about the reduction in speed limit, the citizens and officials of Forestville should evaluate all possible alternatives and causes for the increased number of accidents over the six-month period as compared to Elmsford.11文章末段，作者先说了大家为了自己的安全要求限速这是合理的，但是在做这个决定前是不是应该尽量考虑周全呢？大家注意作者这里也用了一个should，是建议，而短文目的也是建议，仔细想想，作者的整篇文章并不是在批驳短文，并不是某些人说的简单的找错误，而是找出漏洞，哪里没有想到，我就帮你指出来，大家抱着这样的想法去写argument 也就不会写成抬杠的文章了。11揭晓答案时刻：红色的since和 therefore不就是短文的推理过程么？这不就是所谓的逻辑么？本文是比较型，大体意思就是，别人做某些事情获得了某种效果，而我们也想要这样的效果，所以我们也这样做。大家可以看出第一段用蓝色标出来的词是什么么？就是作者认为的两者可以相互比较的关系词，其实作者的逻辑就暗藏在这里了，它假定了如果两地是neighbor的关系，而且同样的事情发生在same time 那么一个地区采取的措施也在另一地可行。（这句话说的很绕，大家自己好好想一想）但是，很明显这是由逻辑漏洞的，我给大家画画图吧，这样清楚点11这就是文章所谓的逻辑，我们来看看作者是怎么补漏洞的。Body1我标出的蓝色的两点就是作者针对neighboring 这个词展开的漏洞补充，大家想想，一个neighbor能说明什么可比性？也许只有天气相同吧，可是造成车祸的原因不仅仅是天气不好，还有地形和驾驶人员的因素呢，好了第一点是不是说人，第二点是不是说地形？在举几个具体的例子，支撑自己的论点，body1 就大功告成啦11Body2 轮到same time 受审了，大家在想，一个时间段两个地点什么能想同？还是只有天气，但是可能是坏天气，或者好天气，我们就先写坏天气的可能性，瞧瞧瞧瞧，是不是body2的第一点？ 再想想，如果是好天气，该怎么写？那不就是人驾驶时间长，路远，而且开车的人还多，这样不就增大了发生事故的可能性么，如果每人开车谁去发生事故啊？好了，这不就是2，3点说的么？再想想，什么时候开车危险，不是天没亮的时候么，来，再说一条。作者只想到这些，我们可以brainstorming一下，想到的都可以写，当然在合理的情况下啦你不能说f 下大雪路太滑，而e 大晴天，道路情况良好，这就很搞笑了；还有最好不要说f 太发达了，车多，所以事故自然多，但是e 穷，本身没有多少车，自然事故少，这样的理由也很牵强，毕竟人家给了neighboring 这个词，咱们视而不见也不太懂礼貌，是不是11我认为：还有一个思维漏洞所这没有批，就是他假设了f 原来的限速和e 的限速一样！因为这句话if the citizens of Forestville want to reduce the number of automobile accidents on the regions highways, they should campaign to reduce Forestvilles speed limit to what it was before the increase.文章前面并没有说两者一样啊，也许你原来的限速还是比人家的高，那你不是白说了这么一大堆？你可以将限速改到和e一样。大家觉得对么？大家注意了，这篇的评语中并没有说The writer probes each questionable assumption and offers alternative explanations（这个评论在Claria university那篇提到了）说明也许他还有东西没有挖掘出来的，毕竟范文也不是非得十全十美吗嘿嘿11End 基于这篇文章是出于大家的安全考虑而提出的降低限速的建议，当然初衷是好的，但是考虑不周全，作者就是建议人的身份写出了这篇文章，我们在写的时候也要想想，它的目的是什么，那我们的应该和他一样的立场上，只不过我们要更有洞察力和全面思维的能力。111111111111QQ截图.bmp (896.92 KB) 下载次数:142009-3-20 20:22第二集 学校确实不善于做广告The University of Claria is generally considered one of the best universities in the world because of its instructors reputation, which is based primarily on the extensive research and publishing record of certain faculty members.In addition, several faculty members are internationally renowned as leaders in their fields.For example, many of the faculty from the English department are regularly invited to teach at universities in other countries.Furthermore, two recent graduates of the physics department have gone on to become candidates for the Nobel Prize in Physics.And 75 percent of the students are able to find employment after graduating.Therefore, because of the reputation of its faculty, the University of Claria should be the obvious choice for anyone seeking a quality education.: 还是先来看题目：这篇是做广告类，通篇都说uc怎么怎么好，好了，按照习惯我们分以下部分作者目的：宣传uc,让大家都来这。因为：1，教师方面：8 X instructors reputation 好 为什么呢？G 因为1）extensive research 2）publishing record 另外：several faculty members are internationally renowned as leaders in their fields. 注意：举例子啦！ 英语系的老师相继到别的国家去教课 注意这里：这里的举例子其实就是作者的逻辑推理，他的逻辑是，因为这点所以他们的很多老师称得上是行业的领头人， 大家想想，能这么推理么？ 2，学生方面：41） 物理系的部分毕业生成为np的candidates 2）75%的毕业生能找到工作。所以：the University of Claria should be the obvious choice for anyone seeking a quality education.好了，这就是短文的全部推理。我们的思路就是，一上来看到作者目的是做广告，就找作者的理由，为什么说他好，并且找出它的逻辑漏洞，大家可以自己想想先。我们看范文是怎么说的为While the University of Claria appears to have an excellent reputation based on the accomplishments and reputations of its faculty, one would also wish to consider other issuesbefore deciding upon this particular institution for undergraduate or graduate training. The（1） Physics and English departments are internationally known, but these are only two of the areas in which one might study.Other departments are not listed; is this because no others are worth mentioning, or because no other departments bothered to turn in their accomplishments and kudos to the publicity office? 绿色的绿色的：一下把短文的目的打击了大家看到没？作者承认了excellent reputation based on the accomplishments and reputation,大家想，为什么作者不去质疑这点呢？因为这点作者根本就没有对此进行逻辑推理，这是陈述个事实，这样的情况我们以后也可以考虑不去质疑。橙色的，我标出第一点，是作者给出的第一个建议，仅仅两个专业不能说明问题应该也说说别的专业，关于physics and english,大家看，短文里说several faculty members are internationally renowned as leaders in their fields这个观点是怎么进行论证的？就是说关于english department的老师去国外教学和 physics的学生参加np，首段里仅仅提了这两点，质疑短文说“你怎么仅仅说了这两个专业呢，那别的呢”这个就是典型的用特殊掩盖一般，但是作者并没有用专业的表达，而用了反问句，我觉得这样的表达特别好，我们可以借鉴*The assumption is that because English and Physics have excellent brains in the faculty offices, their teaching skills and their abilities to pass on knowledge and the love of learning to their students are equally laudable.（2）Unfortunately, this is often not the case. A prospective student would certainly be advised to investigate thoroughly the （1）teaching talents and attitudes of the professors, the （2）library and research facilities, the（3）physical plant of the departments in which he or she was planning to study, as well as the （4）living arrangements on or off campus, and the（5）facilities available for leisure activities and entertainment.橙色的（2）是作者的第二点建议，难道老师水平高就能代表他会教学么，你应该说说老师的教学能力和愿不愿意从学生身上学到东西？这段我标上个星星，有些问题，大家可以想想蓝色的是作者给出的他因，这个很好想到This evaluation of the University of Claria is too brief, and too general. Nothing is mentioned about the quality of overall education; it only praises the accomplishments of a few recent graduates and professors.（3）More important thaninvitations to teach elsewhere, which might have been engineered by their own departmental heads in an attempt to remove them from the campus for a semester or two, is the relationship between teacher and student.) Are the（1）teaching faculty approachable? （2）Are they helpful? Have they an interest in passing on their knowledge? （3）Are they working for the future benefit of the student or to get another year closer to retirement? （4）How enthusiastic are the students about the courses being taught and the faculty members who teach those classes? Are there sufficient classes available for the number of students? （6）Are the campus buildings accessible; how is the University handling all those cars?（7）Is the University a pleasant, encouraging, interesting, challenging place to attend school? （5）What are its attitudes about education, students, student ideas and innovations, faculty suggestions for improvement?绿色的粗体是作者给出的他因，绿色的数字是作者认为的老师重要的品质，大家看我这里面有蓝色的，不是我脑抽，我也不敢在这抽，还有那数字，也不是因为我不会数数，到底因为什么大家可以想想橙色的作者给出的第三点建议What about that 75% employment record? Were those students employed in the field of their choice, or are they flipping burgers and emptying wastebaskets while they search for something they are trained to do. （4）A more specific statement about the employability of students from this University is needed in order to make the argument forceful. The paragraph given merely scratches the surface of what must be said about this University in order to entice students and to convince them that this is the best place to obtain a quality education. （总）Much more work is needed by the public relations department before this can be made into a four-color brochure and handed out to prospective students. 第四点建议：应该多多谈谈学生的就业能力才能让你这个文章有说服力绿色的是作者相关质疑， 最后作者说，要是想让你的广告更有说服力，你就应该考虑全面。作者还是站在短文的立场，在帮他补充漏洞，而不是上来就把它怒斥一通，这点是我们写所有a应该注意的现在来总体看下大家思考什么学校才能算是好学校？一，硬件设施校内环境，学校设施，图书馆，体育场，教学楼，寝室，实验室等等 大家brainstorming二，软件设施老师水平，教学能力，教学态度，学生成绩，毕业生就业率继续Brainstorming但是广告并没有完全把这些都包括，所以他不能说服人，当大家自己看了这个广告后有没有被吸引？没有吧，那就说明他是失败的广告！所以我们应该给他补充漏洞，让他能够说服人！看看范文，我说这个范文和上篇相比简直差距很大，结构有点乱，我标出*的那段，举得例子并不是有关老师their teaching skills and their abilities to pass on knowledge and the love of learning to their students的，而成了说硬件设施怎么怎么样，我觉得不好。而到了body2,还是应该说老师的，说着说着就跑到学校建设那里了，这就是我为什么要把那两条标成蓝色的原因了蓝色是硬件设施，绿色是软件设施。 Body3 放在这里很突兀，也是写学生的，就应该都归类到软件里一起写，为此comments 也进行了批评，大家要注意我们现在来挖掘一下comments对这篇文章的表扬和批评，看看我们能学到什么：表扬：1，表扬了作者的四点逻辑补充，说“the writer probes each questionable assumption and offers alternative explanations, pointingout, for instance”注意这里，特别提出了作者的两点逻辑补充：“That invitations for faculty to teach elsewhere may have been purposely arranged in order to temporarily remove them from campus and that the employed students may be flipping burgers and emptying wastebaskets 这点告诉我们，当我们论证的时候也应该给出其他原因，并且举出例子使其更有说服力，还有作者给出的这两个他因，我们读下来感觉很合理，所以我们在写文章的时候，不要抓住细枝末节不放，而是要找出他的大的逻辑漏洞予以补充。2， 表扬了作者给出的他因，也就是短文忘记说的硬件设施的情况，“ideally one would also ask about reserach facilities, the universitys physical plant, availability of classes, even the parking arrangements!”最后一点还给了个感叹号，说明高度评价了作者的思维全面性，把所有应该考虑的问题都说到了，这个告诉我们，如果我们想的时候也要尽量想到更多的可能性，来展示我们的思维全面性。3， 表扬了几个用词：kudos,laudable, engineered, entice 现在大家就把这些记下来，还有文章中相应的句子，在我们写的时候，这些词就是我们的亮点了，我给大家两个解释： kudos: an expression of approval and commendation syn: praise,congratulation, extolment 当我们想表达praise的时候就请顺手打成kudos吧 engineer: () plan and direct=matermind, direct, organize, orchestrate 当我们想说organize的时候，想想能不能用engineer 呢？批评：就是那个75% ，放在那里太突兀我认为：我之前说文章很乱，就是在这里，觉得没有分好类，如果我写的话，我会在body1写软件设施，body2写硬件设施，我觉得这样的话就会清楚一些，大家觉得呢？第三集 school VS parklandThe following appeared as a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.? Five years ago, we residents of Morganton voted to keep the publicly owned piece of land known as Scott Woods in a natural, undeveloped state.-Our thinking was that, if no shopping centers or houses were built there, Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as a natural parkland.But now that our town planning committee wants to purchase the land and build a school there, we should reconsider this issue. If the land becomes a school site, no shopping centers or houses can be built there, and substantial acreage would probably be devoted to athletic fields. There would be no better use of land in our community than this, since a large majority of our children participate in sports, and Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as natural parkland. 先说说题目吧，说实话刚开始我读这个题目的时候很茫然，不知道他要说什么，不知道大家有没有同感，直到我读到第二遍我才有些摸清楚这篇文章到底是干什什么的，我们现在来分析一下题目吧：作者目的 ：这篇文章属于提建议型，他要给大家一个建议，就是把sw从parkland改成学校。因为 ： 在sw建立学校，那么这个地方就不会再建购物中心和房屋了，这个地方可以为学校提供运动场，那么sw还是可以造福大众的逻辑推理： 1，学校比shopping center 和house 造福的人多2，Sw地方足够大，可以提供学校和操场所需的全部用地3，很大一部分孩子都需要运动4，在这里建立学校和让这里和让这里保持natural parkland的效果一样，因为每个人都可以受益。所以 ： 在sw建立学校是是对这块地方最明智的使用。好了，这就是文章全部的逻辑思路，我们先来看看范文怎么说的：This letter to the editor begins by stating the reasons the residents of Morganton voted to keep Scott Woods in an undeveloped state.The letter states that the entire community could benefit from an undeveloped parkland.The residents of the town wanted to ensure that no shopping centers or houses would be built there.This, in turn, would provide everyone in the community with a valuable resource, a natural park.: 首段并没有将自己对文章的逻辑补充说出来，仅仅是将短文5年前大家为什么要保持sw为一个natural park 的原因，虽然并不符合范文开头的特点，但是大家发现没有，这个开头将一个中心点和一个基本点阐明了，就是我绿色标出来的，居民们仅仅考虑的是这块地方能不能让每个人受益，关于这个基本点我会在后文具体阐释，大家可以先自己想想 The letter then continues by addressing the issue of building a school on the land.The author reasons that this would also benefit the entire community as a natural parkland since much of the land would be devoted to athletic fields.The author of the letter comes to the conclusion that building a school on the land would be the best thing for everyone in the community. 作者还是没有说他要进行质疑的地方，不过，他已经把短文的一个逻辑推理指出来了，看到我标出的also没？这就是短文的推理，也就是上面说的第四点。大家注意这里，作者在第二段还是没有说他的补充，这让阅卷老师很着急，后果很严重，特别在comments 里把这点拉出来批评了一下，说你这个作者太磨蹭，怎么还不说你的观点么不过鉴于你吧文章的漏洞已经看出来了，我就判你个死缓，让我再看看好了，看下段 This letter is a one-sided argument about the best use of the land known as Scott Woods. author may be a parent whose child would benefit from a new school, a teacher who thinks a school would boost the community, or just a resident of Morganton. Regardless of who the author is, there are many aspects of this plan that he or she has overlooked or chosen to ignore . 哎真是千呼万唤始出来啊，作者的意思终于说出来了，大家看我用 绿色 标出来的这个，我觉得这个更像是首段，将自己的意见概括了一下下 精彩的是我用 浅橙色 标出来的，这句话直接质疑了短文最大的逻辑假设，也就是短文认为一个学校能造福整个社区，但是作者说的这两类人才是真正能受益的群体，也就是说一个学校根本不能让全部居民都享受到。这个下文我会详述。 蓝色 的是个好句子，因为短文是建议人他要让大家接受自己的建议，所以他一定是因此建议而受益的一方，所以他会忽略甚至故意躲避一些不利于他的因素，所以这句话非常之传神大家体会 Using a piece of land to build a school is not the same thing as using it for a natural parkland. While all the members of the community could potentially benefit from a parkland, only a percentage of the population would realistically benefit from a new school. The author fails to recognize people like the senior citizens of the community.What interest do they have in a new school? It only means higher taxes for them to pay. They will likely never to and utilize the school for anything. On the other hand, anyone can go to a park and enjoy the natural beauty and peacefulness. The use of the land for a school would destroy the benefit of a park for everyone. In turn, it would supply a school only to groups of people in exactly the right age range, not too young or too old , to reap the benefits . 开始详细论证了，这里还是在针对我上面写的第四点，也就是错误的认为school 和parkland效果一样，都能造福所有人， 绿色 的开头就直接把这点指出了。 浅橙 色是作者的观点，仅仅一小部分人才能因此而受益，给出了一个合理的他因，说建立学校要交税，而且最关键的是交税人都享受不到，而parkland 是每个人都能享受的而且不需要多交税。 最后两句话是作者的总结，看到 蓝色 的插入语，为什么要这么说？大家想想，学校啊，针对的是什么人？青少年吧，所以，蓝色的就是除了青少年外的人群，用这点来加强自己的观点，说学校只能造福一部分人。 Another point the author stresses is that the use of the land for things like athletic fields somehow rationalizes the destruction of the park. What about children who dont play sports ? Without the school, they could enjoy the land for anything.A playing field is a playing field.Children are not going to go out there unless they are into sports.There are many children in schools who are not int