GRE写作之Argument提分句式

　　The mere¹ fact thatticket sales in recent years for screenplay-based movies have exceeded those for book-based movies is insufficient² evidence to conclude that writing screenplays now provides greater financial opportunity for writers.

　　The fact that the nearby city has a weakening economy does not prove that (does not support the claim that/does not ensure that/lends no strong support to the conclusion that) the city will not contribute significantly to tax revenues.

　　The fact thatthe student performance improved after the application of interactive³ computer instruction does not necessarily imply that the new teaching method is responsible for the achievements.

　　The argument fails to rule out the possibility that a writer engage in both types of writing as well as other types.

　　The argument simply equatessuccess with movie ticket sales, which is unwarranted.

　　The author assumes thatphysical capabilities⁴ are the only attributes necessary to operate a motor vehicle.

　　The author provides no evidence that the realism of photography is the reason for its predominance.

　　This assumption presents a false dilemma⁵, since the two media are not necessarily mutually exclusive alternatives.

　　Common sense tells us that a photographer can succeed by working in both media.

　　While this may be true in some cases, but it is equally possible thatonly companies with products that are already best-sellers can afford the higher ad rates that popular shows demand.

　　Lacking some specific information abouthow these other employees responded, it is impossible to assess the reliability⁶ of the survey's results or to make an informed recommendation.

　　The editorial fails to take into account possible differences betweenEast and West Cambria that are relevant to how drivers react to speed-limit changes.

　　While it is true that many voters change their minds several times before voting, and that some remain undecided until entering the voting booth, this is not true of anyone.

　　Unless the author can demonstrate thatthe city will incur⁷ expenses that are not covered by the increased revenues from these projects, the author's concern about these issues is unfounded.

　　The author fails to consider and rule out other factors that might account for proportional decreases in spending on food.

　　The author ignores/fails to take into account (consider/explain) other likely benefits of agricultural technology that affect food pieces only indirectly⁸ or not at all.

　　Unlessthe original cast and production team are involved in making the sequel, there is a good chance it will not be financially successful.

　　The author is presenting a false dilemma by imposing⁹ an either-or choice between two courses of action that need not be mutually exclusive.

　　Comprehensive analysis is necessary to identify the actual cause(s) ofthe company's lowered profitability.

　　Therefore, any decision aimed at addressing the problem of falling circulation must be based on more thorough investigation¹⁰ to gather sufficient data in order to narrow down and locate the actual causes(s) of the problem.

　　From the survey quoted in the argument, however, we find no sign of such procedures for random¹¹ sampling, and have good reason to doubt if the sample is representative enough to reflect the general attitudes of all workers as a whole.

　　When samples are used to make general claims about a particular group, the samples should be close enough in time to the generalization¹² they are used to support, so that historical changes will not invalidate the generalization.

　　The problem is that the two situations are not similar enough to justify¹⁵ the analogical deduction¹⁶.

　　The argument rests on the gratuitous/unreasonable assumption thatApia's work and quality are more superior to Macadam.

　　The arguer fails to establish a causal relationship betweenthe homework frequency and the performance of students.

　　The arguer's conclusion depends on the questionable¹⁷ assumption thatBecton Pharmaceuticals¹⁸ will not be able to maintain its present position in the market.

　　The arguer fails to provide any information concerningthe performance of the new quality control manager.

　　The reasoning (assumption) thatall employees at Acme¹⁹ Publishing Company need to improve their reading speed is open to doubt/doubtful/suspicious/unreliable/problematic/questionable/unconvincing/unfounded/unwarrantec/groundless.

　　Another assumption in short of legitimacyis the causal relationship claimed between taking the Easy Read course and the reading ability of the first graduate.

　　The arguer oversimplifies the factors that would influence the overall quality of a game software.

　　The arguer overemphasizes the importance of carrying out the regulation.

　　The conclusion reached in this argument is invalid¹³ and probably misleading.

　　The evidence provided in this argument is not sufficient to validate¹⁴ the assumption that funding for education is not a priority for most people.

　　The statistical²⁰ evidence/the result of the survey upon which the argument relies is too vague to be informative²¹.

　　The result of the study is incomplete to be conclusive²².

　　The argument relies on figures that are too imprecise to support the conclusion drawn²³.

　　If the subjects for the study were randomly²⁴ chosen and represent a diverse cross section of the population of…, the results will be reliable regardless of …Since the arguer makes a claim about … in general, the sample for the survey should be able to represent all …Yet we are told nothing about the way the poll was conducted and how well it represented the public opinions.

　　The example cited, while suggestive of these trends, is insufficient to warrant their truth because there is no reason to believe that the data draw from…is representative of…The arguer assumes that what is true of a group as a whole is necessarily true of each member of that group.

　　The argument assumes that what is true of group of people taken collectively is also true of any individual within that group.

　　The argument attributes a characteristic of an individual member of a group to the group as a whole.

　　The arguer supports the conclusion by over-generalizing from a specific piece of evidence.

　　The arguer draws a hasty conclusion which is based on inadequate²⁵ evidence about…The arguer generalizes on the basis of a sample consisting of atypical cases.

　　The arguer uses a few exceptional cases as the basis for a claim about what is true in general.

　　The arguer draws a conclusion that is broader in scope than is warranted by the evidence advanced.

　　The arguer infers from what has been observed to be the case under exceptional conditions to what is principle true.

 

分享到：