今天新航道上海学校小编继续分享关于GRE写作Argument部分精选真题范文权威解析(十六)，希望对各位备考的考生们有所帮助。

  「Question」

  The following appeared in an article in the Grandview Beacon.

  Argument:

  “For many years the city of Grandview has provided annual funding for the Grandview Symphony. Last year, however, private contributions to the symphony increased by 200 percent and attendance at the symphony's concerts-in-the-park series doubled. The symphony has also announced an increase in ticket prices for next year. Given such developments, some city commissioners argue that the symphony can now be fully self-supporting, and they recommend that funding for the symphony be eliminated from next year's budget.”

  Instructions:

  Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the recommendation and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

  Introduction

  It is argued that the symphony can now be fully self-supporting, and it is therefore recommended that funding for the symphony be eliminated from the city’s next year’s budget. However, this argument and recommendation based on it are highly questionable.

  Body

  The private contributions after the 200-percent increase may not have been a large sum. ← find the point of doubt in the argument】The crucial question at this point is the amount of those private contributions before the increase. ← ask the question】 If those contributions had been a small amount, the 200-percent increase may not have brought a significant increase in the monetary sum. ← give the answer that would refute the argument’s logic】In the case of the doubled attendance at the symphony’s concerts-in-the-park series, the principle and logic above apply. ← do not repeat, but write briefly in the context】In addition, the doubled attendance may have occurred to only one series of the symphony’s many performances. ← find the point of doubt in the argument】The critical question is whether the symphony’s other performances also had increases or even the two-fold increase. ← ask the question】As a matter of fact, there may have not been such increases. ← give the answer that would refute the argument’s logic】

  ← 逻辑靠近的点可以写在同一个段落里。→

  Although the symphony has announced an increase in ticket prices for next year, the announcement is not the action. ← find the point of doubt in the argument】The question is whether the symphony will take the action as it says it will. ← ask the question】 In fact, the ticket prices may not be raised. ← give the answer that would refute the argument’s logic】 In addition, even if the ticket prices will increase, the increase will not surely bring about an increase in the total money from the ticket sale. ← find the point of doubt in the argument】The question is about the number of attendants. ← ask the question】 If the number decreases to a certain level, for various reasons, such as that some of the audience are deferred by the increased prices, the total sales will decreases rather than increase as expected. ← give the answer that would refute the argument’s logic】

  Granted that the The increase in private contributions and attendance at the symphony had been largely increased may be in the last year’s case alone. ← find the point of doubt in the argument】 The question is whether it doesn’t mean such increases increased contributions and attendance can still be attained will remain in the future. ← ask the question】The question is whether the increases are sustainable or just evanescent. If As a matter of fact, the amount of attendance and personal donations contributions may, for a myriad of reasons, decrease to the original level or even a lower level. ← give the answer that would refute the argument’s logic】decline sharply in the next year, for a myriad of reasons, including economic depression, the total amount of sales will shrink rather than dilate.

  Even if the symphony enjoys a stable and steady increase, that symphony can be fully self-supporting and the funding for the it can be eliminated is a hasty and unjustified conclusion. the aforementioned increases, including those in private contributions, attendance, and ticket prices, are guaranteed, The threshold question is whether the increases of the total sales can compensate for the funding which is recommended to be eliminated. there remains a question about whether the symphony’s increased income will be adequate to cover its cost of operation. If not, since the funding may be a comparative significant number, there is no sufficient proof to conclude that the symphony is fully self-supporting. Without having an answer to the question, the proposed funding cut may be unadoptable since it will disable the symphony.

  Conclusion

  In light of the above, since the author omits to ask a number of critical questions at multiple places, the line of reasoning of the argument is unsound. If there were answers to those questions, the recommendation would be better evaluated.