刘文勇GRE写作Argument题库 Day 170

Day 170 The surface of a section of Route 101, paved just two years ago by Good Intentions Roadways, is now badly cracked with a number of dangerous potholes

The following appeared in a memo from the vice president of a company that builds shopping malls around the country.

“The surface of a section of Route 101, paved just two years ago by Good Intentions Roadways, is now badly cracked with a number of dangerous potholes. In another part of the state, a section of Route 40, paved by Appian Roadways more than four years ago, is still in good condition. In a demonstration of their continuing commitment to quality, Appian Roadways recently purchased state-of-the-art paving machinery and hired a new quality-control manager. Therefore, I recommend hiring Appian Roadways to construct the access roads for all our new shopping malls. I predict that our Appian access roads will not have to be repaired for at least four years.”

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

五问：

（1）“Therefore, I recommend hiring Appian Roadways to construct the access roads for all our new shopping malls”是结论，其余部分是事实，值得反驳吗？

（2）文中是否给出足够信息来证明 101号公路和40号公路的情况是一样的？如果事实是 101号公路特别繁忙、车辆很多而 40号公路车流量相对较小，将对原文结论产生什么影响？ 101号公路损坏得比较快一定是由于 Good Intentions Roadways 公司的施工质量不好吗？

（3）文中提及了 Appian Roadways 公司购买了最好的铺路机械，雇佣了一名新的质量监控经理，那么是否提及 Good Intentions Roadways公司有类似的举措？提到质量，除了 Appian Roadways公司的上述举措外，你能想出其他的措施吗？例如：使用最好的物料，选派最好的施工人员等。

（4）文中的结论是要把 shopping malls的 access roads 交给 Appian Roadways来建设，而原文中给的论据是关于普通公路的，两个对象不一致是否会影响结论？

（5）是否可能还有其他公司可供选择？这个决定是否非此即彼？工程是否可能以某种方式外包给两家公司共同承建？