GRE作文范文 Argument-22

The following is a recommendation from the personnel director to the president of Acme Publishing Company.

嘉文博译Sample Essay

"Many other companies have recently stated that having their employees take the Easy Read Speed-Reading Course has greatly improved productivity. One graduate of the course was able to read a five-hundred-page report in only two hours; another graduate rose from an assistant manager to vice president of the company in under a year. Obviously, the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a single workday. Moreover, Easy Read costs only $500 per employee---a small price to pay when you consider the benefits to Acme. Included in this fee is a three-week seminar in Spruce City and a lifelong subscription to the Easy Read newsletter. Clearly, Acme would benefit greatly by requiring all of our employees to take the Easy Read course."

In this argument, the personnel director has recommended to the president of Acme Publishing Company that all employees take a speed-reading course because other companies have reported that having their employees take the course has greatly improved their productivity. Additionally, the personnel director claims that one course graduate read a five-hundred page report in two hours while another course graduate was promoted from assistant manager to vice president in less than one year. He or she also states that the faster that one can read, the more information that one can absorb in one workday. This argument is based on problematic reasoning and it does not follow that the course will automatically bring the same results to Acme Publishing.

First of all, the personnel director claims that other companies have stated that having their employees take the speed-reading course has greatly improved their productivity. Even if this is true, it does not automatically mean that Acme would receive the same benefits from such employee training. It is possible that the speed-reading course is especially suitable for the employees of these other companies whereas it may be unhelpful for Acme employees. Different types of work can receive different types of benefits from such training, and it does not necessarily mean that Acme would benefit from this particular speed-reading course as well.

Secondly, the personnel director cites the examples of one course graduate who was able to read a five-hundred page report in two hours and one who was promoted from assistant manager to vice president in less than one year. In the first instance, simply reading a five hundred-page report in such a short time does not mean that the employee was actually able to comprehend the entire report. The personnel director states that the faster you can read, the more information you can absorb in a workday, but reading and comprehending are two different things entirely. In the second instance, there were likely other factors that contributed to the employee's movement from assistant manager to vice president, simply having taken the speed-reading course does not allow one to move up through the ranks so quickly. Without further evidence directly correlating the taking of the speed-reading course with the reading and comprehension of a five hundred-page report and with moving up quickly to the position of vice president, the argument fails to convince that the speed-reading course is in any way responsible for these events.

Thirdly, the personnel director says that the $500 per employee fee for the course is a small price to pay compared to the benefits that will accrue to Acme. There are some possible personal benefits cited in the argument, but no overall company benefits for Acme are identified. Here the personnel director attempts to draw a line between having all the employees take the speed-reading course and the benefits that Acme will receive, but there are no direct benefits listed for Acme. Other than a personal opinion statement, there is no evidence that Acme will benefit from having its employees take the course.

In summary, some anecdotal evidence is cited but there is no direct causal link demonstrated between the taking of the speed-reading course and any benefits for Acme or its employees. To strengthen the argument, the personnel director should show a cause and effect relationship between the skills that would be developed in the course and the benefits for both the employees and Acme Publishing Company. Without such support, the argument is stating a simple personal opinion.

(589 words)

参考译文

下文是人事部主任给阿克默出版公司总裁的建议信。

"其他许多公司最近声称，让雇员参加简易阅读快速阅读课程使他们大大地提高了工作效率。有一位本课程结业者可以在两小时内阅读一篇500页的报告;另一位结业者在不到一年内从经理助理晋升为公司副总裁。显然，一个人阅读得越快，他/她在一个工作日内所获取的信息量也越多。而且，简易阅读课程仅花费每位雇员500美元--一旦考虑到它会给阿克默公司带来的利润，这仅是一项微不足道的开支。包含在该费用内的尚有在Spruce城举行的三周研讨会以及终生赠阅的简易阅读快报。很清楚，阿克默公司如果要求其所有雇员参加简易阅读课程班学习，将会获益匪浅。"

在这段论证当中，人事部主任给阿克默出版公司总裁建议：公司全部雇员应参加一个快速阅读课程班的学习，其原因是其他公司声称让它们的雇员参加该课程学习已极大地改进了工作效率。此外，人事部主任还说，有一位该课程的结业者能在两小时内阅读500页的报告，而另一位则在不到一年的时间内从经理助理晋升为公司副总裁。他/她还声称，一个人阅读得越快，在一个工作日内所能获取的信息量就越多。这一论证基于错误的推理，而且它不能证明该课程会自然而然地给阿克默出版公司带来同样的效果。

首先，人事部主任说到，其他公司声称让它们的雇员参加这个快速阅读课程的学习已经大大地提高了工作效率。即便果真如此，这并不意味着阿克默公司会自然而然地从这类员工培训中获得同样的效益。很可能这一快速阅读课程仅仅适合于其他公司的雇员而对阿克默公司却无济于事。从这类培训中，不同类别的工作得到不同的效益，但这并不必然意味着阿克默公司也会从这一类专门的快速阅读课程中受益。

其次，人事部主任举例说，该课程的一位结业者能够在两小时内阅读一篇500页的报告而另一位结业者在一年内已经从经理助理升职至公司副总裁。在第一例中，在这么短的时间内阅读一篇500页的报告并不意味着这位雇员能够完全理解这篇报告。人事部主任声称，在一个工作日中你读得越快，你获得的信息就越多。然而，阅读和理解是完全不同的两码事。在第二例中，很可能有其他的因素有助于这位经理助理晋升为公司副总裁，单单参加快速阅读课程班学习并不会使人如此快地在获得职位晋升。因为这段论证没有提供进一步的证据来直接说明参加快速阅读课程与两小时内阅读和理解一篇500页的报告以及很快升到公司副总裁一职有关，所以它不能使人确信快速阅读课程与这些事件有何关系。第三，人事主任声称与阿克默公司将获得的效益相比，每位雇员500美元的学费只是一笔微不足道的花费。在论证中，引用了某些有可能产生的个人利益，但没有指明任何对阿克默公司总体上有益的证据。这里，人事部主任试图在让全部雇员参加快速阅读培训与阿克默公司将获得的利益之间划出一条分界线，但他却没有列举出对阿克默公司的直接利益为何。除了作为一个个人观点的陈述之外，这段论证并没有提供任何证据表明让其雇员参加快速阅读培训将会给阿克默公司带来益处。

总之，论证过程中引用了某些轶事趣闻式的证据，但它并没有说明参加快速阅读课程班与阿克默公司的利益或其雇员之间有任何因果关系。为了使他/她的论点更为有力，人事部主任应该说明，在该培训班所能帮助形成的技能与阿克默出版公司及其雇员的利益之间存在着因果关系。因为没有这一论点支持，这段论证仅仅是在陈述个人的观点。