1. 关于准备顺序
我想初次接触GRE写作的考生往往对这类问题最感兴趣,这也是情理之中的。作为一个很不怎么样的考生,我想谈谈自己的体会。我认为,不管干什么事,首先一点就是弄清楚这件事的实质是什么,这点我会在“关于ETS和评分标准”中再详细阐述。我认为比较可取的准备顺序应该是:
a. 捉摸透ETS出题的思路以及评分标准;
b. 先从Argument入手,先总结逻辑错误再列写提纲(20篇左右);
c. 然后开始不限时的写作(10篇左右),在其中总结自己喜爱的transition words和常见连接和批驳语句;
d. 参照本月机经,重点放在高频 Top60以内,列写提纲;
e. 开始argument限时写作(20篇左右);
f. 重点修改自己认为写得不太好的文章,并利用GTER这个大平台和网友互相交流;
g. 逐渐将重心转移到Issue,有时间的话先把Issue的题库全部看一遍;
h. 如果时间紧张,可以参看网友总结的分类题库;
i. 把题目分类,并分成各个类型准备,准备内容包括:有代表性的文章的提纲列写并思考例子和警句;
j. 开始不限时分类写作Issue各类中较有代表性的题目(一遍归纳下来你肯定会发现);
k. 修改你的作文(不止一遍)并和网友互批;
l. 参照本月的机经,重点放在TOP50上,提纲全部列写,并有条件的选择写作经可能多的文章;
m. 再回到修改上来,Issue20篇下来我认为基本也就了解了大致你喜爱的写作逻辑和思路,这时候要多思考,求文章的质量而不要一味的求数量;反复修改你的作文直到满意;
n. 这些基本完成以后可以暂时不要太紧张,如果你不求5.5以上的分数,可以稍微调节一下紧张的气氛,不要老是把自己笼罩在紧张而功利的状态下,这样极不利于Issue思路的开阔;
o. 在这段时间中可以摘抄一些自己认为写得精彩的文章的段落背诵和朗读。如果时间还是充裕,最好能泛泛的看一些Issue分类中自己不熟悉的类别的书籍,不过只是泛泛的看,因为这很浪费时间;
p. 求个RP,睡个好觉,上考场吧
除了这些,我还极力推荐Google这本参考书。特别是Issue,有很多类别和你的背景不一定相同,还有的情况是由于我们对英语单词理解很模糊,不完整,比如我在网上就曾经看过网友问Cognitive的精确含义,当然你可以借助MW字典,但是有的时候Google一下会得到更多的线索,甚至是好的思路。比如说你想了解历史在互联网上的定义有哪些,你可以输入”define: history”,这样,Google就会列出互联网上有关历史的定义,同时会有一些例子和文章可供进一步搜索。另外,参看大家手笔也是一个很好的方法,比如在教育专题,你可以看Martin Luther King Jr.的名篇 ”The purpose of education”,这同样可以从Google中找到。总是一句话,不要模式化的说我要哪些书,很多东西都是一种积累,资料也是很灵活的,并不是一本书非要从头看到尾不可,有选择性的选择参考书,甚至是别人没有用过的会使你的写作更加灵活,也有自己的个性。
4. 关于Argument
有人说Argument好写,说Argument 是拉分的关键,更有甚者过度的模式化Argument的写作模式,受到这种风气的影响,很多中国考生写出的Argument更像是应用文,而不是辨析性很强的论述文。一味的强调那种规律性的东西会毁掉我们的思维,argument也不例外,总结的逻辑错误只是给我们一个路标式的引导,而不是一个停止前进的休止符。其实,我认为,argument更能体现一个考生的思辨能力,也确实能拉开文章的档次。有时看一些文章真的是哭笑不得,碰到什么东西都是The author failed to rule out other possibilities… Lacking such evidences, it is entirely possible that… 一个逻辑错误能在文章中讲两三段,翻来覆去的说也讲不出什么新东西,这样的文章更像是在强词夺理。所以,我认为argument最重要的是一定要想清楚这篇argument中最重要的错误是什么,有的时候这些错误不是在字面上能看出来的,需要读者仔细思考,由于写作的时候,手头并没有题库,这样的例子我没法列举出来,不过我想再列提纲的时候多思考,不要拘泥于网络和任何参考书上的提纲。实际上我认为任何argument的提纲都不会帮助太大。
在谈谈例子的问题。其实例子不一定要pervasive到大家都知道的,不要说到科学就是Einstein, Michelangelo, Newton;谈到Scandal就是Clinton, Nixon…太多人使用的例子就要当心,更有可能会被判为雷同。Issue我是主张多看范文,但是绝对不要照抄里面的例子。可以看看ETS给出的6分作文,例子也是简单到不能再简单,自己身边的例子有时比那种很general的例子更能说明问题。如果想到一个好的观点,而苦于找不到例子时完全可以大胆的使用a friend of mine,a professor in my department,不用太拘泥于形式,例子是为论述服务的,关键还是论述本身的严密性和条理性。
题目:
Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument.
A recent survey of dental patients showed that people who use Smile-Bright too
thpaste are most likely to have capped teeth---artificial but natural-looking
protective coverings placed by dentists on individual teeth. Those people who
had begun using Smile-Bright toothpaste early in life were more likely to have
capped teeth than were people who had begun using Smile-Bright later in life.
In addition, those who reported brushing their teeth more than twice a day wi
th Smile-Bright toothpaste were more likely to have caps on their teeth than w
ere those who reported brushing with Smile-Bright less frequently. Therefore,
people wishing to avoid having their teeth capped should not use Smile-Bright
toothpaste.
文章:
In this argument, the author concludes that people should not use Smile-Bright
(SB) toothpaste if they wish to avoid capped teeth. A survey is first cited t
o substantiate the conclusion and based on this, the author also pointed out t
wo facts which thought to be further support the conclusion. But after serious
analysis and considerations, we discover this argument unfounded within sever
al aspects below.
To begin with, a survey on dental patients may be problematic. Since they are
all dental patients, it can be inferred that their dental condition is worse t
han the average. They might have various kinds of dental disease and capped te
eth are only a single kind among them. Therefore, survey responded by them mig
ht be too narrowly concentrated and lack of representativeness and therefore l
ess-convincing.
Furthermore, the argument relies on vague concepts of “early in life” and “
later in life”. As the author mentioned, those people who begun to use SB too
thpaste in their “early life” are more likely to have capped teeth, perhaps
it is because that SB toothpaste is just not suitable for children to use. Lac
king clarification of these concepts we can not judge the real factor that cau
ses the capped teeth. Moreover, even if SB toothpaste is equally suitable for
children and adults, it is still possible that it is not the SB causes the cap
ped teeth; rather, it is some kind of ingredient in other kind of toothpastes
that decrease the risk of having capped teeth.
As the line of reasoning goes down, the author implies a misleading guidance t
hat brushing teeth once or even not brushing is better than brushing twice a d
ay while common sense informs me that brushing teeth twice a day is most suita
ble for people. Perhaps it is the method of brushing or the toothbrush itself
- rather than the SB toothpaste – cause the higher possibility of capped teet
h.
Finally, besides the SB toothpaste, there exists large amount of possibilities
that can also leading to dental disease like capped teeth, for example the ea
ting preference – eating too many chocolate or sweet candies – and bad livin
g habit such as not brushing teeth after meal. The author concludes that only
SB has something to do with capped teeth which might be too risky and hasty.
In sum, the argument is logically faulted as it stands. To bolster it, the aut
hor should rely on a more convincing survey whose respondents are randomly sel
ected and in large number. Also, the author should need to clarify the concept
s of “early in life” and “later in life” as well. After this, to better as
sess the argument, I would need more evidences which can reasonably indicate t
hat SB toothpaste is the chief factor leads to capped teeth.作者: Stephenine 时间: 2006-4-12 11:33:25