GRE作文是中国学生比较头痛的，经常准备很多时间最后还是只得到3.5。我之所以得到6分，个人认为我的文风比较淳朴扎实，有科学性，写的思路比较广(正、反、特)，字数也比较多(I800+、A700+)。
First of all, it is unfair to infer based solely on the comparison between the two stretches of
highway that Appian does better work than McAdam. The inference relies on the poor
assumption that the comparative qnality of two contractors' work, rather than some other
phenomenon, was responsible for the comparative condition of the two stretches of pavement.
Perhaps the stretch that McAdam repaved is located in an area whose extremes in climate or
high traffic volume serve to erode and damage pavement very quickly. For that matter, perhaps
soil or other geological conditions in that area were primarily responsible for deterioration of
the pavement along that stretch. In short, without showing that all other conditions in the two
areas have been essentially the same, the vice president cannot convince me that the quality
270
of McAdam's and Appian's repaying work was responsible for the difference in how well the
two stretches of pavement have held up.
Secondly, it is unfair to conclude based on Appian's recent equipment acquisition and
personnel decision that Appian will do a better job than McAdam. Perhaps McAdam has also
acquired the same type of equipment. Moreover, perhaps McAdam's quality-control manager
is far more experienced than Appian's new manager, and as a result McAdam's product is
likely to be better than Appian's. Besides, equipment and on-site management are only two of
many factors affecting the quality of a pavement job. Other such factors include the experience
and competence of other workers, and the paving material used. Without showing that the two
firms are similar in these and other respects, the vice president cannot justify his
recommendation of Appian over McAdam.
Finally, the vice president's recommendation rests on the unlikely assumption that the
company has only two altematives--McAdam and Appian. In all likelihood the company can
engage one of many other paving contractors instead. Thus to the extent the vice president
recommends Appian over not just McAdam but over any other contractor the recommendation
is unwarranted.
In sum, the vice president has not convinced me that the company should hire Appian. To
strengthen the argument the vice president must provide dear evidence that it was the quality
of McAdam's and Appian's work rather than one or more other factors--that resulted in the
difference between how well the two stretches of pavement have held up over time. The vice
president must also provide better evidence that Appian's new equipment and new manager
will enhance, or at least maintain, the quality of Appian's overall work at a higher level than
McAdam's overall work. Finally, to better assess the argument I would need to know what
other paving contractors the company could hire, and the quality of those contractors' work
compared to McAdam's and Appian's.
Argument 117
The following appeared in a newspaper feature story.
感谢您阅读《GRE作文范文大全（149） 》一文，出国留学网(liuxue86.com)编辑部希望本文能帮助到您。