GRE網(wǎng)權(quán)威發(fā)布GRE寫(xiě)作模擬題（5）Argument，更多GRE寫(xiě)作模擬題（5）Argument相關(guān)信息請(qǐng)?jiān)L問(wèn)GRE留學(xué)外語(yǔ)考試網(wǎng)。

要求：

　　Task Direction

　　"You will have 30 minutes to plan and write a critique of an argument presented in the form of a short passage. A critique of any other argument will receive a score of zero.

　　Analyze the line of reasoning in the argument. Be sure to consider what, if any, questionable assumptions underlie the thinking and, if evidence is cited, how well it supports the conclusion.

　　You can also discuss what sort of evidence would strengthen or refute the argument, what changes in the argument would make it more logically sound, and what additional information might help you better evaluate its conclusion. Note that you are NOT being asked to present your views on the subject.

　　GRE® readers who are college and university faculty will read your critique and evaluate its overall quality, based on how well you identify and analyze important features of the argument organize, develop, and express your critique of the argument support your critique with relevant reasons and examples control the elements of standard written English.

　　Before you begin writing, you may want to take a few minutes to evaluate the argument and to plan a response. Be sure to develop your ideas fully and organize them coherently, but leave time to read what you have written and make any revisions that you think are necessary."

　　Section Direction

　　Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument.

　　Questiion

　　:

　　"The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Walnut Grove town newspaper.

　　""Walnut Grove"s town council has advocated switching from EZ Disposal (which has had the contract for trash collection services in Walnut Grove for the past ten years) to ABC Waste, because EZ recently raised its monthly fee from $2,000 to $2,500 a month, whereas ABC"s fee is still $2,000. But the town council is mistaken; we should continue using EZ. EZ collects trash twice a week, while ABC collects only once. Moreover, EZ-which, like ABC, currently has a fleet of 20 trucks-has ordered additional trucks. Finally, EZ provides exceptional service: 80 percent of respondents to last year"s town survey agreed that they were "satisfied" with EZ"s performance.

　　題目講解

　　本題要求從題目中找出主要的邏輯錯(cuò)誤，也就是Argument題目的提綱，同時(shí)每一個(gè)邏輯錯(cuò)誤準(zhǔn)備一套語(yǔ)言套路去反駁。

　　Walnut Grove的市委提議選擇ABC Waste，而不是EZ Disposal(它是過(guò)去十年中和Walnut Grove簽約提供垃圾收集服務(wù)的機(jī)構(gòu))，因?yàn)镋Z最近把他們每月的收費(fèi)從$2000提高到了$2500，而ABC仍然是$2000。但市委是錯(cuò)誤的，我們應(yīng)該繼續(xù)使用EZ。EZ每周收集兩次垃圾，而ABC只收集一次。而且，EZ當(dāng)前的卡車(chē)擁有量和ABC一樣都是20輛，但它已定購(gòu)了更多的車(chē)輛。最后，EZ還提供優(yōu)越的服務(wù)：去年市鎮(zhèn)調(diào)查中80%的回應(yīng)者同意他們對(duì)于EZ的表現(xiàn)是"滿意"的。

　　觀點(diǎn)提示

　　1、作者認(rèn)為EZ比ABC更值得，基于EZ一周收集兩次垃圾而ABC只有一次。但并沒(méi)有提出詳細(xì)的信息證明一個(gè)月清理兩次垃圾對(duì)于Walnut Grove是必要的。

　　2、此外，作者還指出EZ正在訂購(gòu)額外的卡車(chē)并提供許多額外服務(wù)，但并沒(méi)有提供ABC的情況。首先，沒(méi)必要，其次說(shuō)不準(zhǔn)ABC也有。

　　3、卡車(chē)作為固定資產(chǎn)的購(gòu)入可能會(huì)增加收費(fèi)。

　　范文：

　　The argument is not well reasoned at all, and it might be wise for Walnut Grove"s town council to turn to ABC Disposal.

　　To begin with, despite EZ"s weekly working frequency is as twice as ABC"s, yet no sign has been displayed to prove that the "advantage" is necessary and fictional. For instance, if the town"s garbage amount is under a particularly lower scale, which merely reaches the quantity of once disposal from ABC and hence the relatively once more from EZ is just a futile plethora. Also, even if twice disposal is applicable, it still deserves to doubt whether most citizens would like usual to choose EZ when taking into account the price of its service has been increased by $500 a month. Most citizens is highly possible to pick up a company that can offer best services while calling for relatively little money, for saving the extra $500, which to some extent is dispensable, I think, most citizens can cope with some easily handled trash with their own methods instead of singly relying on the disposal company.

　　And another crucial point I cast great discretion on is whether the survey made last year is the persuasive reflection of the whole citizen"s actual attitudes. The major deniable spot is the survey"s sampling size and accordingly the ultimate respondents echoing the questions. Visualize the citizens of Walnut town are no less than 500 thousands, but ironically only the 5 hundred ones have the fortune to be asked the question and in the end the real available records making some senses are less than the 10% of the interviewers, namely the upper limit is only 50 people. Let alone whether these answers have the widely applicable representative, just judging about the number of respondents we can have justifiable rights to disregard the validity of this survey.

　　Almost to forget to point out, that the freshly ordered 20 trucks of EZ cannot add another ponderous stake onto the balance, on the contrary, it might exacerbate the impressions of EZ in people"s mind. Buying new trucks would ineluctably consume the company"s property, and to take this disburse back the company must put some additional measures for compensation, thereby increasing the fees can lead the citizens to obtain the most strong conviction of loading the economic debt onto their shoulders, which finally ruins the tiny fantasy prone to the EZ.

　　So the arguer"s recommendation is just nothing but a cheap propaganda to throw to the vast residents a deceptive illusion. I believe, in general, any one having look through these vulgar tricks full of vague information and implicit causal claims like me would be likely to accept the town council"s decision, after all it is more sensible than the arguer suggests.

相關(guān)熱詞搜索：GRE寫(xiě)作模擬題（5）Argument gre argument寫(xiě)作模板 gre作文argument