2018GRE作文ARGUMENT官方题库满分范文点评:Bay City restaurants…

通过admin

2018GRE作文ARGUMENT官方题库满分范文点评:Bay City restaurants…

2018GRE作文ARGUMENT官方题库满分范文点评:Bay City restaurants...图1

2018GRE作文官方题库ARGUMENT题目:

A recent sales study indicated that consumption of seafood dishes in Bay City restaurants has increased by 30 percent over the past five years. Yet there are no currently operating city restaurants that specialize in seafood. Moreover, the majority of families in Bay City are two-income families, and a nationwide study has shown that such families eat significantly fewer home-cooked meals than they did a decade ago but at the same time express more concern about eating healthily. Therefore, a new Bay City restaurant specializing in seafood will be quite popular and profitable.

【满分范文赏析】

This argument’s conclusion is that a new Bay City restaurant specializing in seafood would be both popular and profitable. To justify this conclusion the argument indicates that seafood consumption in Bay City’s restaurants has risen by 30% during the last five years. The argument also indicates that most Bay City families are two-income families. Citing a national survey, the argument indicates that two-income families eat out more often, express more concern about eating healthily than they did ten years ago and would therefore lead to a new Bay City restaurant becoming popular and profitable. That argument fails to be persuasive as the assumptions upon which it is based do not link with the author’s conclusion.

【本段结构】

本文采用了标准的Argument开头段结构,即C—A—F的开头结构。本段首先概括原文的Conclusion,之后简要提及原文为支持其结论所引用的一系列Assumption及细节,最后给出开头段到正文段的过渡句,指出原文的Flaw,即这些Assumption无法让原文的结论具有说服力。

【本段功能】

作为Argument开头段,本段具体功能就在于发起攻击并概括原文的结论,即在Bay城市专营海鲜的餐厅将会受到人们的欢迎并有利可图。本段接下来提到了原文中为支持之前的Conclusion所提供的证据,包括Bay城市的海鲜食物消费量上升了,在Bay城市最多的家庭类型是双收入家庭,而根据一项国家调查,这样的双收入家庭比以前更关心他们的饮食质量。文章提及这些信息,为是在正文段中对这些Assumption即将进行的具体攻击做铺垫。

Firstly, a 30% increase in the sales of seafood at Bay City restaurants does not adequately represent the demand necessary to justify the opening of a new restaurant. While a 30% is certainly significant, the actual volume might be too low to generate revenue. Lacking evidence that a significant number of the city’s restaurant patrons are ordering seafood, the argument’s conclusion that a new seafood restaurant would be popular and profitable is unfounded.

【本段结构】

本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构,即先是提及原文的第一个逻辑错误,之后分析该逻辑错误的原因,接下来,进一步分析这样的错误为什么让原文的Conclusion不成立。

【本段功能】

作为正文第二段,本段攻击原文所犯的第二个重要逻辑错误——因果类错误。原文假设因为人们爱吃海鲜食物,他们一定喜欢去海鲜专营餐厅进餐。但事实上这样的因果关系并不成立,因为可能存在其他的因素导致当地的人们不会选择海鲜专营餐厅。因此在没有考虑到这些额外因素的情况下,原文的这个假设也是不合理的。

Thirdly, the nationwide study indicating that two-income families exhibit the tendency towards dining out and eating healthily does not indicate that this trend will extend to a Bay City restaurant. This is to say that perhaps the two-income families polled may equate Bay City with dining out but not necessarily eating healthy. In this case, Bay City could not depend on their patronage.

【本段结构】

本段采用了标准的Argument正文段结构,即先是提及原文的第三个逻辑错误,之后分析该逻辑错误的原因,接下来,进一步分析这样的错误为什么让原文的Conclusion不成立。

【本段功能】

作为正文第三段,本段攻击原文所犯的第三个重要逻辑错误——因果类错误。原文假设如果当地人们的确喜欢这个海鲜专营餐厅,那么它一定能够盈利。但是,由于在商业竞争当中,盈利问题要涉及到很多因素,比如成本和收入,这样的因果关系并不一定能成立。所以,在没有考虑这些因素的情况下,原文的结论并不成立。

As it stands, the argument is unpersuasive. To bolster it the author must demonstrate that the demand among restaurant patrons for seafood is sufficient to justify the opening of a new seafood restaurant. The argument must also demonstrate that the restaurants would be a consideration of Bay City families. The author could also strengthen the argument by providing reliable evidence that Bay City reflects the nationwide trends cited, and that these trends will continue in the foreseeable future in Bay City.

关于作者

admin administrator