【Question No. 3】

　　The brief passage

　　The following appeared as a letter to the editor from a Central Plaza store owner.

　　"Over the past two years, the number of shoppers in Central Plaza has been steadilydecreasing while the popularity of skateboarding has increased dramatically. Many Central Plazastore owners believe that the decrease in their business is due to the number of skateboard usersin the plaza. There has also been a dramatic increase in the amount of litter and vandalismthroughout the plaza. Thus, we recommend that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza. fskateboarding is prohibited here, we predict that business in Central Plaza will return to itspreviously high levels."

　　Instruction:

　　Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered-指令核心in order to decide whether the recommendation is likely to have the predicted result. Be sure toexplain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the recommendation.

　　Your analytical essay should respond to the specific instruction.

　　Introduction)

　　01、完成两个目的即可:

　　目的一: 说明brief passage里的结论是什么。

　　。目的二: 应对指令的套话

　　It is recommended that the city prohibit skateboarding in Central Plaza, and it is predicted thatbusiness in Central Plaza will return to its previously high levels as a result of the prohibition.However, there are multiple logical flaws - a number of unclarified issues that are critical to theargument’s logic - in the line of reasoning leading to the recommendation and the prediction.一红色部分为套话

　　【Body】

　　02、起码分析四个逻辑疑点(当然，全文中可能不只四个逻辑疑点)。

　　般说来，分析一个逻辑疑点写一个独立段落

　　The immediate question is whether the causative relation between the decreased business andthe increased number of skateboard users is as true as the store owners believe it. In fact, thealleged relation may be negated, because what the store owners believe may be pure perceptionandspeculation, which are rather subjective and thus may be unreliable.

　　At this point, the author should also consider other probable factors behind the decrease inthe business of the plaza. Unless those factors are ruled out, those factors may refute the causativelogic between the number of shoppers and the popularity of skateboarding. Those factors mayinclude whether Central Plaza no longer offers competitive prices or attractive products or services.andwhether there have been rivaling malls. lf the answers are affirmative, the decreased number ofshoppers may not be attributed to the increased popularity of skateboarding or at least may notbe solely attributed to it.

　　Another point of doubt is whether skateboard users are responsible for the dramatic increasein the amount of litter and vandalism. ln the argument, there is little information responding to theuncertainty, and as a likely result, it is not the skateboard users but others who litter or vandalizethe plaza. lf this is the case, prohibiting skateboard cannot achieve the desired reduction in thelitter or vandalism.

　　At this point, even though the litter or vandalism can be reduced, the plaza' s business maynot be restored. This is because the argument provides no information regarding whether the lostshoppers are discouraged by the litter or vandalism. As a matter of fact, shoppers may have otherconcerns or reasons why they no longer patronize the plaza.

　　Last, the final major uncertainty is whether shoppers the plaza has lost will be aware of theprohibition of skateboarding or have confidence in the plaza' s efforts in prohibitingskateboarding. lf the answers are negative, those shoppers will not return, and consequently,business in Central Plaza may not return to its previously high levels.

　　【Conclusion】

　　Another point of doubt is whether skateboard users are responsible for the dramatic increasein the amount of litter and vandalism. ln the argument, there is little information responding to theuncertainty, and as a likely result, it is not the skateboard users but others who litter or vandalizethe plaza. lf this is the case, prohibiting skateboard cannot achieve the desired reduction in thelitter or vandalism.

　　03、完成两个目的即可:

　　目的一: 应对指令的套话

　　目的二: 依据套话讨论brief passage里的结论

　　Because of the multiple unclarified issues - questions the author omits to answer, theproposal of prohibiting skateboarding may be unadoptable, and the desired effect that theplaza' s business will be restored may not be achieved. 红色部分为套话