GRE寫作官方題庫高頻ARGUMENT題目滿分范文分享：endangered animal species

　　The following appeared in a newsletter distributed at a recent political rally:

　　"Over the past year, the Consolidated Copper Company (CCC) has purchased over one million square miles of land in the tropical nation of West Fredonia. Mining copper on this land will inevitably result in pollution and environmental disaster, since West Fredonia is home to several endangered animal species. But such disaster can be prevented if consumers simply refuse to purchase products that are made with CCC's copper until the company abandons its mining plans."

　　滿分范文賞析

　　The author of this excerpt concludes that if consumers refuse to buy products made with Consolidated Copper Company (CCC) copper the company will abandon its mining plans in the nation of West Fredonia. No other evidence or assumptions are presented in this argument but let us examine it further.

　　【此段結(jié)構(gòu)】

　　本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument開頭段結(jié)構(gòu)，即：C- F的開頭結(jié)構(gòu)，首句概括原文的C(Conclusion)。最后尾句中給出開頭段到正文段的過渡句，指出原文在邏輯上存在F(Flaw)。

　　【此段功能】

　　本段作為Argument開頭段，具體功能就在發(fā)起攻擊。首先，概括原文的結(jié)論：West Fredonia的居民可以通過抵制CCC商品來使其放棄在當(dāng)?shù)氐牟傻V業(yè)務(wù)。接下來，作者提出，原文并沒有其他的Evidence。最后點出原文需要further examine，引出后面的分析。

　　Essentially, the author provides no evidence in this argument. For example, there is no proof indicating that the West Fredonia land that CCC has acquired the land for the purpose of mining or investing. In consideration of the amount of total land purchased, it is not clear if the land is relatively significant. There is no clear evidence indicating that the land is inhabited by endangered animal species. Barring the presentation of evidence, the author of the excerpt above doesn’t have a leg to stand on.

　　【此段結(jié)構(gòu)】

　　本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument正文段結(jié)構(gòu)，即：概括第一個邏輯錯誤的錯誤類型和原文犯錯位置，接下來給出合理的理由和他因來反駁原文。

　　【此段功能】

　　本段作為正文第一段，攻擊文章犯的主要邏輯錯誤：因果類錯誤(無原因)。作者認(rèn)為原問沒有提供支撐論點的Evidence，例如CCC會在這里mining和investing的證據(jù)，purchased land是否relatively significant以及這片土地endangered animal的情況。缺乏論據(jù)是的文章的結(jié)論站不住腳。

　　For the sake of the argument, let’s assume CCC does plan mining activities in West Fredonia and that these activities will result in a “disaster.” Regarding a definition of terms, the author fails to illustrate the meaning of the work. For example, disaster, to some, could mean any disruption to the natural habit whereas other people characterize disaster as the complete and total ruin of an area. Without a clear definition, the argument itself is too vague to work with.

　　【此段結(jié)構(gòu)】

　　本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument正文段結(jié)構(gòu)，即：概括第二個邏輯錯誤的錯誤類型和原文犯錯位置，接下來給出合理的理由和他因來反駁原文。

　　【此段功能】

　　本段作為正文第二段，攻擊文章犯的主要邏輯錯誤：因果錯誤(論據(jù)模糊)。作者認(rèn)為，原文并沒有說明CCC的行為會在該地區(qū)造成怎樣的后果，例如disaster, disruption to habit或者total ruin of the area。作者提出，在缺乏詳細(xì)論據(jù)的前提下結(jié)論不可靠。

　　Thirdly, the author's position that environmental disaster is "inevitable" absent the prescribed boycott precludes the possibility that other measures can be taken to prevent CCC from carrying out its plans, or to offset any harm that CCC causes should it carry out its plans. However, the author fails to provide assurances that no other means of preventing the predicted disaster are available. Lacking such evidence the author cannot reasonably conclude that the proposed boycott is the best way to move forward on the matter.

　　【此段結(jié)構(gòu)】

　　本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument結(jié)尾段結(jié)構(gòu)，即：C – S的結(jié)尾結(jié)構(gòu)，首先再次重申原文的站不住腳的Conclusion，接下來給出給合理建議Suggestion。

　　【此段功能】

　　本段作為Argument結(jié)尾段，具體功能就總結(jié)歸納+建議措施，首先再次重申：“newletter上的political rally”是沒有說服力的。接下來作者給出使原文更有說服力幾條合理化建議：先要說明CCC的mining plan存在性已經(jīng)可能造成的后果，然后說明進(jìn)行cost-benefit anaysis。這幾條建議含蓄的隱射前面的錯誤，前后呼應(yīng)，文章有力結(jié)尾，渾然一體。