[問題] 請問 Argument一題，謝謝 :)

看板GRE (GRE入學考試)作者seller (selling your soul)時間15年前 (2010/07/25 16:56)推噓1(1推 0噓 0→)

留言1則, 1人參與討論串1/1

請問一下，之前有爬文看到有版友問以下這一題，但我仍然有一點疑問... The following is a letter to the editor of an environmental magazine. "The decline in the numbers of amphibians worldwide clearly indicates the global pollution of water and air. Two studies of amphibians in Yosemite National Park in California confirms my conclusion. In 1915 there were seven species of amphibians in the park, and there were abundant numbers of each species. However, in 1992 there were only four species of amphibians observed in the park, and the numbers of each species were drastically reduced. The decline in Yosemite has been blamed on the introduction of trout into the park's waters, which began in 1920 (trout are known to eat amphibian eggs). But the introduction of trout cannot be the real reason for the Yosemite decline because it does not explain the worldwide decline." 全球兩棲動物數量的下降清楚地說明全球空氣和水質的污染。在加州Yosemite國家公園對於兩棲動物所進行的兩次研究證實了我的結論。1915年公園中有7中兩棲動物，每種的數量都很豐富。然而到了1992年在公園中只觀察到4種兩棲動物，並且每種動物的數量都顯著下降。Yosemite公園兩棲動物數量的下降曾被歸因於始於1920年的在公園水域引入鮭魚的行為（我們知道鮭魚捕食兩棲動物的卵）。但鮭魚的引入不會是Yosemite兩棲動物數量下降的真正原因應為它並不能解釋全球範圍的數量下降。這是第一次看到Argument有特別自己說，自己的"Introduction"並不是真的理由，總覺得大部分的題目不會說自己的論點有問題，有點疑惑，不知道為什麼會這樣。請問在寫的時候要特別為最後一句(如下)做反駁嗎? 總覺得題目的這句像是要同學自己寫的句子。謝謝大家 :) But the introduction of trout cannot be the real reason for the Yosemite decline because it does not explain the worldwide decline. -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 140.112.217.57