In summary, the conclusion reached in this argument is in valid and misleading. To make the argument more convincing, the arguer would have to prove that college-bound students are most concerned about the promise of jobs after graduation and the F College can keep its promise in the end. Moreover, I would suspend my judgment about the credibility of the recommendation until the arguer can provide concrete evidence that promising students jobs can actually encourage them to work harder in their study. Otherwise, the arguer is simply begging the question throughout the argument.
To conclude, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. Before we accept the conclusion, the arguer must present more facts that GT has indeed to meet the requirements of C Corporation. To solidify the argument, the arguer would have to produce more evidence concerning the foods and service of D and how they can better meet the needs of Cs employees.
As it stands, the argument is not well reasoned. To make it logically acceptable, the arguer would have to demonstrate that an offer of employment to the spouse is the only condition that new professors consider on accepting Ps offer. Additionally, the arguer must provide evidence to rule out other possible causes of the low staff morale at the university.
To sum up, the conclusion lacks credibility because the evidence cited in the analysis does not lend strong support to what the arguer maintains. To strengthen the argument the arguer would have to provide more evidence concerning the percentage of the affected families and their geographical distribution. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information regarding the electric expense relevant to the actual amount of time for cooling among, respectively, the three groups of households and the amount of electricity used for other purposes in all three groups of families under survey.
In conclusion, the arguer fails to establish a causal relationship between sending Get-Aways mechanics to the Quality-Care Seminar and improved maintenance, greater customer satisfaction and greater profits for the airline. To strengthen the argument, the argument, the arguer would have to provide evidence that automobile maintenance and airplane maintenance are similar in every aspect. To better evaluate the argument, we would need more information about the relationship between improved maintenance and greater customer satisfaction along with greater profits.
谈谈“疑问代词+ever”的用法
名词性从句的三个基本要素
if, whether引导的名词从句
名词性that-从句
of whom / which引导的定语从句
否定转移
这个in what 应如何理解
关系代词as与which的用法区别
省略关系词的几种情形
whatever与no matter what
什么是名词性从句的三要素
引导宾语从句that的省略问题
如何区别引导名词从句的whether与that
英语基础语法——定语从句
是that is why还是which is why
whoever与no matter who有哪些区别
不要在定语从句使用与关系代词同义的人称代词
表示部分与整体of which/whom
名词性wh-从句
what与that引导名词性从句时有何区别
限制性与非限制性定语从句的区别
这道题是考查定语从句吗
如何理解引导名词性从句的what
连词和从句配套练习及答案
that与which的用法区别
备考定语从句的七个错点
whoever与no matter who有何区别
as与which引导非限制性定语从句的区别
两组关系代词的用法辨析
英语关系副词用法说明
| 不限 |
| 英语教案 |
| 英语课件 |
| 英语试题 |
| 不限 |
| 不限 |
| 上册 |
| 下册 |
| 不限 |