Arg-5
The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Ballmer Island Gazette: “On Balmer Island, where mopeds serve as a popular form of transportation, the population increases to 100,000 during the summer months. To reduce the number of accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, the town council of Balmer Island should limit the number of mopeds rented by the island’s moped rental companies from 50 per day to 25 per day during the summer season. By limiting the number of rentals, the town council will attain the 50 percent annual reduction in moped accidents that was achieved last year on the neighboring island of Seaville, when Seaville’s town council enforced similar limits on moped rentals.” Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.
The author of this editorial recommends that, to reduce accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians, Balmer Island’s city council should restrict moped rentals from 50 to 25 per day, at each of the island’s six rental outlets. To support this recommendation the author cites the fact that last year, when nearby Seaville Island’s town council enforced similar measures, Seaville’s rate of moped accidents decreased by 50%. There are several reasons why this evidence fails to substantiate the claim.
To begin with, the author assumes that all other conditions in Balmer that might affect the rate of moped-pedestrian accidents will remain unchanged after the restrictions are enacted. People often find ways to circumvent restrictions. For example, with a restricted supply of rental mopeds, people in Balmer who currently rent in the summer might purchase mopeds instead. Also, the number of pedestrians might increase in the future. With more pedestrians, especially tourists, the risk of moped-pedestrian accidents would probably increase. For that matter, the number of rental outlets might increase to make up for the artificial supply restriction per outlet, a likely scenario in consideration of the fact that moped rental demand will not likely decrease. Without considering and ruling out these and other possible changes that might contribute to a high incidence of moped-pedestrian accidents, the author cannot convince me that the proposed restrictions will necessarily have the desired effect.
Next, the author fails to consider other possible explanations for the 50% decline in Seaville’s moped accident rate last year. Perhaps last year Seaville experienced unusually fair weather, during which moped accidents are less likely. Perhaps fewer tourists visited Seaville last year than during most years, thereby reducing demand for rental mopeds to levels even below the allowed limits. Perhaps last year some of Seaville’s moped rental outlets purchased new mopeds that are safer to drive. Or perhaps the restrictions were already in effect but were not enforced until last year. In any event, a decline in Seaville’s moped accident rate during only one year is scarcely sufficient to draw any reliable conclusions about what might have caused the decline, or about what the accident rate will be in years ahead.
To further explore the link between the two locations and a reduction in number of accidents, the author relies on what could be an unfair comparison. Perhaps Balmer’s ability to enforce moped-rental restrictions does not meet Seaville’s ability. In that case, the mere enactment of similar restrictions in Balmer is no guarantee of a similar result. Or perhaps the demand for mopeds in Seaville is always greater than in Balmer. Specifically, if fewer than all available mopeds are currently rented per day from the average Balmer outlet, while in Seaville every available moped is rented each day, then the proposed restriction is likely to have less impact on the accident rate in Balmer than in Seaville.
Finally, the author provides no evidence that the same restrictions that served to reduce the incidence of all “moped accidents” by 50% would also serve to reduce the incidence of “accidents involving mopeds and pedestrians” by 50%. Lacking such evidence, it is entirely possible that the number of moped accidents not involving pedestrians decreased by a greater percentage, while the number of moped-pedestrian accidents decreased by a smaller percentage, or even increased. Since the author has not accounted for these possibilities, the recommendation requires further substantiation.
In conclusion, the recommendation is not well-supported. To convince an audience that the proposed restriction would achieve the desired outcome the author needs to establish that no changes serving to increase Balmer’s moped-pedestrian accident rate will occur in the foreseeable future. The author must also provide clear evidence that last year’s decline in moped accidents in Seaville was attributable primarily to its moped rental restrictions rather than to one or more other factors. In order to better evaluate the recommendation, an audience would need more information comparing the supply of and demand for moped rentals on the two islands. An audience would also need to know the rates of moped-pedestrian accidents in Seaville, both prior to and after the restrictions were enforced in Seaville.
- The author of this editorial recommends that, ….（标志性的Argument开头段引出原文结论的语言表达形式。）To support this recommendation the author cites the fact that ….（引出原文为支持其结论所引用的荒谬论据。）There are several reasons why this evidence fails to substantiate the claim.（标志性的指出文章错误的语言表达。整体开头段是标准的C—E—F的语言和逻辑模版体系。）
- To begin with, the author assumes that …. For example, …. Also, …. For that matter, …, a likely scenario in consideration of the fact that …. Without considering and ruling out these and other possible changes that might …, the author cannot convince me that the proposed … will necessarily have the desired effect.（标志性的忽略他因错误的语言和逻辑模版体系。）
- Next, the author fails to consider other possible explanations for …. Perhaps …. Perhaps …, thereby …. Perhaps …. Or perhaps …. In any event, … is scarcely sufficient to draw any reliable conclusions about ….（标志性的忽略他因错误的语言和逻辑模版体系。）
- To further explore the link between …, the author relies on what could be an unfair comparison. Perhaps …. In that case, …. Or perhaps …. Specifically, if …, while …, then the proposed … is likely to … than ….（标志性的错误类比的语言和逻辑模版体系。）
- Finally, the author provides no evidence that …. Lacking such evidence, it is entirely possible that …. Since the author has not accounted for these possibilities, the recommendation requires further substantiation. （标志性的错误假设的语言和逻辑模版体系。）
- In conclusion, the recommendation is not well-supported. To convince an audience that … the author needs to establish that …. The author must also provide clear evidence that … was attributable primarily to … rather than to one or more other factors. In order to better evaluate the recommendation, an audience would need more information comparing …. An audience would also need to know ….（标志性的Argument结尾段的Conclusion—Suggestion体系的语言和逻辑模版体系。）
本文的写作体现出了非常严谨的开头段—正文段1、2、3、4—结尾段的逻辑体系：（开头段）The author of this editorial recommends that, ….（正文段1）To begin with, the author assumes that ….（正文段2） Next, the author fails to consider other possible explanations for ….（正文段3）To further explore the link between …, the author relies on what could be an unfair comparison.（正文段4）Finally, the author provides no evidence that ….（结尾段）In conclusion, the recommendation is not well-supported.特别值得一提的是本文正文第一段的写作。该段首先通过To begin with, the author assumes that all other conditions in Balmer that might affect the rate of moped-pedestrian accidents will remain unchanged after the restrictions are enacted.一句说明原文中出现的忽略他因错误。接下来，该段使用People often find ways to circumvent restrictions.一句简短有力地过渡，然后通过For example, …. Also, …. For that matter, …, a likely scenario in consideration of the fact that….等句递进地提出其它的可能解释。最后，该段Without considering and ruling out these and other possible changes that might contribute to a high incidence of moped-pedestrian accidents, the author cannot convince me that the proposed restrictions will necessarily have the desired effect.一句对全段讨论进行总结，充分展现出了正文段严密的逻辑思路。