2004年考研英语作文真题:终点又是起点

作者词汇表达较多样灵活，也能较准确地使用学术词汇；作者英语功底扎实，可适当调整文中从句数量；行文稍欠流畅，应适当增加连接词的使用。

The conclusion of this argument is that centralization of the company would improve profitability by cutting as well as helping the company maintain better supervise of all employees. To support it, the author cites that the Apogee Company which has all its operations in various places today is not so profitably than it was. However, this alone does not constitute a logical argument and is not sufficient enough to fulfill the conclusion mention above. The line of reasoning of this argument is questionable for three reasons. Most conspicuously of the flaw in this argument is that it omits several important factors that may influence the profit of the company, such as the economy circumstance of the whole country and the change of the official measure, when compares the profit today to that of the past. When the whole economic circumstance in the past is better for the company to develop than that of today, it would not be the case of separation that hurt the profit of the company. In short, some other important factors and data must be find out to analysis the real reason of the profit decline. Secondly, the author fail to consider the productivity of the company when close down its field offices and central in single location. The line of reasoning of the argument is that centralization will increase the company’s productivity. However, the argument above does not mention why centralization will improve the productivity of the company and how much the productivity will increase. If the cost of centralization is far more than the company benefits, it would not be a successful plan. Moreover, supervise all the employees in the company may not be an effective way to increase the company’s productivity as the author mentioned. The assumption of the argument is that supervision will be an effect way to improve the benefit of the company. But some other enterprises such as Google, which provides its employees a relax and comfortable working environment without supervise, are also success in their field. So, supervision may not be useful for the company to achieve its goal to improve profit unless the author can rule out other factors relevant to increase benefit. Because the argument leaves out several key issues, it is not sound so preservative. To strengthen the argument, the author must, at the very least, provide the factors other than the centralization that might be affecting current profits negatively. It would be better to provide some further items, such as the proof that centralization of the company is mostly better than separation and that employees will work harder under supervision, to make the argument more thorough and convincing.