寄托家园留学论坛 › 论坛 › 寄托学术类备考版 › GRE作文互动版 › 【新GRE】AW零散版友互改贴（Argument）

返回列表

查看: 2463|回复: 9

[主题活动] 【新GRE】AW零散版友互改贴（Argument） [复制链接]

蒲若苇
UID: 2669670

元老版主

Rank: 11

声望: 958
寄托币: 28216
注册时间: 2009-10-11
精华: 3
帖子: 107

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2011-5-13 16:13:40 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

本帖最后由蒲若苇于 2011-5-13 16:28 编辑

随着GRE改革，AW+V+Q都是机试，这就更考验大家的耐心及细心还有体力。
鉴于很多童鞋并没有参加作文互改小组，却仍想找其它童鞋互改文章，特开此贴，为这些零散版友提供一个改文提高的平台，希望每个参与者都能从中受益。

新GRE考试官方样题：
http://www.ets.org/gre/revised_general/about/content/analytical_writing

面向对象：全体版友（尤其是零散版友）
活动时间：即刻
活动内容：互改作文（Argument）题库见附件

活动规则：

1.接龙修改：按楼层由远及近的顺序选择最近一楼的未被修改且具备修改资格的版友习作进行修改，一般是你修改帖的上一楼。不允许随意挑选楼层修改。

2.互改操作：
（1）首先跟帖占一层楼写上“占位改**楼”的字样，但是不急着修改，以防被人占楼；
（2）然后立马将自己的一篇习作跟贴发上来；
（3）第三步才是返回编辑第一个帖子修改别人的文章。
（4）特殊情况：如果目前没有可供修改的文章，请等上一楼贴出来修改。

3.批改要求：认真，仔细，负责

将你要批改的习作粘贴到修改楼中，在原文中修改即可。最好用不同颜色的文字进行修改，从文章的行文结构，逻辑推理，立意正否等方面进行评论，当然，最后请提出你自己的看法和建议。

4.习作要求：

（1）提交前首先自己用Word检查语法及拼写错误，并进行至少一次的全文修改。
（2）为方便他人修改，理解你的立意及行文思路，推荐附上自己列的中文或英文提纲。

5.奖惩措施：

（1）奖：认真及时修改他人习作者，加3~5声望或10~20寄托币。
（2）惩：有以下行为之一者，扣1~2声望或10~15寄托币：

      a.占楼后未在24小时内修改者
      b.只发自己习作未改他人者
      c.不按接龙规则，随意挑选楼层修改者

请参加的童鞋们本着认真的态度改文及上传习作
你的认真会换回他人的认真！

附件: 你需要登录才可以下载或查看附件。没有帐号？立即注册

已有 1 人评分	声望	收起理由
银落	+ 4	顶！

总评分: 声望 + 4 查看全部投币

相关帖子 Updated by 2024.11.10

有关雷同（案例汇总及答疑）
一篇超长的G经验贴~~~
“Gter 十诫” —— 祈福贴

我们都是在一边受伤一边学坚强！

回应
0

使用道具举报

zhangwzhong
UID: 3153453

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 122
注册时间: 2011-8-17
精华: 0
帖子: 8

沙发

发表于 2011-9-18 23:03:55 |只看该作者

新手上路，第一次来，就是想找一个互改作文，互相提高的地方。顶一下~

白驹过隙

【2025FALL】全站祈福已开放~~来领祈福章，求offer得offer

使用道具举报

rowland321
UID: 3176236

中级会员

Rank: 4

声望: 157
寄托币: 764
注册时间: 2011-9-18
精华: 0
帖子: 100

板凳

发表于 2011-9-18 23:17:17 |只看该作者

新手上路~英语水平一般，希望能有个互助的小组一起努力，12.3 上海的新g~qq 34976573,请注明gre~

使用道具举报

suge007 UID: 3160355 suge007 当前离线最后登录 2017-10-11 在线时间 60 小时寄托币 195 声望 0 注册时间 2011-8-27 阅读权限 5 帖子 17 精华 0 积分 213 UID 3160355 禁止发言声望 0 寄托币 195 注册时间 2011-8-27 精华 0 帖子 17 主页发消息	地板发表于 2011-9-20 08:19:38 \|只看该作者提示: 作者被禁止或删除内容自动屏蔽

	使用道具举报

ymy_pku
UID: 3010944

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 14
寄托币: 301
注册时间: 2011-2-18
精华: 0
帖子: 6

5楼

发表于 2011-9-20 21:57:13 |只看该作者

占位改3楼

同新手，同写了Argument1，略激动。。

物含妙理总堪寻

使用道具举报

ymy_pku
UID: 3010944

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 14
寄托币: 301
注册时间: 2011-2-18
精华: 0
帖子: 6

6楼

发表于 2011-9-20 22:01:03 |只看该作者

Argument No. 1
Woven baskets characterized by a particular distinctive pattern have previously been found only in the immediate vicinity of the prehistoric village of Palea and therefore were believed to have been made only by the Palean people. Recently, however, archaeologists discovered such a “Palean” basket in Lithos, an ancient village across the Brim River from Palea. The Brim River is very deep and broad, and so the ancient Paleans could have crossed it only by boat, and no Palean boats have been found. Thus it follows that the so-called Palean baskets were not uniquely Palean.

Fallacy:
Wrong causal relation: B River is broad and deep->cannot cross unless by boat
B River may not have been broad and deep in ancient time.
Wrong causal relation: No boat in P->Wbs cannot be brought to L
Though there is no boat in P, there may be boats in L, and L can buy Wbs from P.
Basket itself can drift across the river.
正文：
In this argument, the writer concludes that the so-called Palean basket were not uniquely Palean based on the fact that a “Palean” basket was discovered in Lithos and the two villages are separated by Brim River which is wide and deep. In addition, the writer supports his argument by pointing out that no boat was found in Palean so the Palea people cannot cross Brim River. There are many fallacies in this argument and evidences are needed to further verify the argument.
In the first place, the arguer fails to realize that landscapes could change greatly over thousands of years from prehistoric ages to now. The Brim River is broad and deep now does not imply that it was deep and broad at the time when the Palean lived. Chances are that the Brim River was only a brook or even arable land and developed into a big river due to erosion or earthquakes, so that the Palean no difficulty trading with the Lithos people. Evidence can be found in riverbed soil, which can be used by geologists to determine whether the area was land or river in prehistoric ages.
In the second place, the arguer fails to show a clear causal relationship between the fact that no boat was found in Palea and the deduction that the Palean could not cross the river. On one hand, there was no boat found does not necessarily mean there was no boat, since boats are most likely to be wooden, which makes them easy to be corrupted then emerged by the river, so the remnant is hard to find and to be recognized. On the other hand, there may be boats in Lithos so the people in Lithos can buy baskets from the Palean. In order to find out whether the Palean or the Lithos can cross the river, the arguer may look for common artifacts in Palea and Lithos which can hardly be found in other nearby villages. If such artifacts could be found, it is more likely that the Palean and the Lithos could trade with each other.
Last but not the least, the arguer neglects the possibility that baskets can float on water thus can drift across the river to Lithos on itself. It is easy to check this possibility by putting the “Palean” basket on water in the laboratory. If the possibility is verified, then all the reasoning in this argument is tarnished and cannot lead to the arguer’s conclusion.
To conclude, the argument is not persuasive as it stands. Before we accept the conclusion, the arguer must provide more facts to prove that the Palean and the Lithos could not cross Brim River. To further solidify the argument, more evidence is needed to rule out the possibility that the “Palean” basket can drift across the river on its own.

物含妙理总堪寻

使用道具举报

ymy_pku
UID: 3010944

初级会员

Rank: 3 Rank: 3

声望: 14
寄托币: 301
注册时间: 2011-2-18
精华: 0
帖子: 6

7楼

发表于 2011-9-20 23:12:05 |只看该作者

In this argument, the arguer concludes that the so-called Palean baskets were not unique to Palea. To strengthen this conclusion, the arguer provides evidence about that the Woven baskets have had been found only in Palea ,however, the archaeologists discovered the basket in Lithos. The arguer also cites supporting evidence indicating that there is a very deep and broad river between Palea and Lithos which is impossible for Paleans to cross, meanwhile no Palean boats have been found. At first glance, the argument might be somewhat reasonable, but close scrutiny reveals that it contains several unconvincing assumptions and is therefore  unpersuadedunpersuasive.
  first of all, the argument claims that no Palean boats have been found, and automatically assumes that the Paleans were unable to cross the river between two villages. However this might not be the case. The arguer obviously overlooks other possible explanations for this phenomenon. For example perhaps the Paleans may arrive in Lithos through
by other means. Such as building a bridge to cross the river ，or making some tools like a planes or something else to fly across the river. Without ruling out such possibilities, I can't accept the arguer's point.
  Second, even I concede that
Paleans could not cross the river, the arguer entirely ignores some other possibilities that the baskets might be transmitted to Lithos, there may be some unpredictable factors for example there might be a huge flood that it washes away the whole Palea to Lithos. Consequentially the Woven basket has been found in Lithos, and, it's possible for Palean to throw the basket into the Brim river with the stream so that the Lithoans may get the special basket. Without considering these possibilities, it's difficult for me to agree with the point of the arguer.
third, even assuming that there
trully truly have not been found the boats of Pale, the arguer unfairly indicates a causal relation between the his this point and the uncrossible（查无此词） river. There could be many other factors, for example in palean times, the Brim River may not be as deep and broad an it is currently. Perhaps there may even not be such a river in ancient time, hence, it's convenient for Palean to travel ，or trade. Without accounting for all other explanations, the arguer can't reasonably conclude that the Brim river becoming the major factor is responsible for his point.
Finally, even the evidence above all is unimpeachable, the arguer fails to consider possible possibilities that The Palean basket could arrive reach other places through many possible methods such as trade or boat possessed by other cultures, which might achieve the same, even better, convincing. Without thinking about these alternatives, we cannot accept that the arguer's position to the conclusion that Woven baskets were not unique.
To sump up, the arguer's conclusion about the uniqueness of Woven Basket discovered in Palea is not well supported as it stands. To bolster it, the author must provide more evidence, for instance, there is no other culture near the two villages, the Brim river as deep and broad as it was in the Palean time. To better assess the problem, I would also need to know  weather whether there was another tools used for crossing the river.

用word修订格式粘贴不过来。。。橙色表示删除，蓝色表示增加。

文章first,second,third三段段首句给我的感觉都是同一个意思，即没有船就不能过河这一推理是错误的
Second段似乎意思是篮子可以在自然作用下过河，finally段意思是篮子可以通过其他贸易途径到达Lithos，两段攻击的是原文同一个问题，即paleans不能过河不能推出篮子不能到达lithos，个人觉得应该合并。
Third段攻击的是作者默认Brim river从前也是宽而深，不可渡过的。我没有读出作者在没有船和河流不能轻易渡过之间建立了什么因果关系。但也没有想出什么比较好的替代。个人把这一点放在了第一段，因为如果river本来很容易渡过boat什么的都没有意义了，只有当river宽而深才有讨论boat的必要。
楼上同学说例子写的不好，我看了精华区某位牛牛的文章之后认同他的观点，列举它因本身并没有很大的说服力，首先必须让人觉得你列举它因是有依据的，那些它因并不是你异想天开的小概率事件。
以及这篇argument如果没记错的话题目要求是写evidence的。。貌似没有体现，我也是初次尝试不知道该怎么切合题目要求，望高手指点啊~~
最后弱弱的说，不知楼上同学有没有用word做检查，很多逗号和句号后面没有空格，有几个拼写错误。

什么时候寄托回复可以支持word修订。。。期待中。。。

物含妙理总堪寻

使用道具举报

xllz49
UID: 2583976

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 183
注册时间: 2008-12-19
精华: 0
帖子: 9

8楼

发表于 2011-9-21 09:28:02 |只看该作者

额，好冷清，求拍。https://bbs.gter.net/frame.php?frameon=yes

愿岁月静好，有梦可寻！

使用道具举报

xllz49
UID: 2583976

寄托新兵

Rank: 2

声望: 0
寄托币: 183
注册时间: 2008-12-19
精华: 0
帖子: 9

9楼

发表于 2011-9-21 09:31:04 |只看该作者

错了，连不过去
Jazz club，写作指导：Write a response in which you discuss what questions would need to be answered in order to decide whether the prediction and the argument on which it is based are reasonable. Be sure to explain how the answers to these questions would help to evaluate the prediction.

我的argue：he prediction of the group of city developers of Monroe that a new jazz music club would be quite profitable seems to be convincing at the first glance, as Monroe possesses nearly all requirements such as location, customer base and musicians necessary to the success of a jazz club. However, after taking a close examination of all the facts and reasons, lack of some important information would determine the validity of the prediction.

At first, the developers assume that since the nearest jazz club is more than 60 miles away from Monroe, there will be a local market to the new one in Monroe. Nevertheless, the attraction of the nearest jazz club may lie in the various choices of the shopping malls, restaurants and cinemas nearby. Thus, most people attending the nearest Jazz club show less interests in itself than commercial conveniences around it. So do the developers ever choose a site in Monroe and consider about the relevant commercial services nearby?

Secondly, last summer's success of Monroe's jazz festival could not be accounted for prediction of the potential achievement of the new jazz club. As just according to only one year's condition, the time scale seems too short to foresee the same success would happen in the following years. Maybe the novelty of the first year's festival or the extremely fair weather is the real drive for people to come. However, no one could guarantee the following years' weather would be as suitable as last year. Moreover, since people have tasted the jazz festival already, they may be reluctant to waste time and money any more to go there twice. Besides, although the number of 100,000 seems to be huge, how much percentage of them would be willing to attend the jazz club? Is this fraction large enough to help the club to make profit?

Thirdly, the existence of famous jazz musicians and popularity of radio program named "Jazz Nightly" are still not the powerful causes leading to the prediction that jazz club would be profitable. On the one hand, it is possible that some musicians are so old that they can only stay in seniors' home without extra energy to perform on stage. And maybe others preferring to live in Monroe just want to enjoy the tranquility and escape any performances. On the other hand, many residents listen to "Jazz Nightly" may just because Monroe is a place with too many mountains which prevent them to receiving any other programs consequently. And others may have no choice but to listen to it because other programs are even more boring when compared with "Jazz Nightly". So the developers must figure out the answers to the questions that whether people are just expecting the performances of those famous musicians discussed above in the new jazz club instead of other musicians and how many of the listeners of the" Jazz Nightly" would be the loyalty adherents of Jazz to eventually join the new club.

Finally, the nationwide study could not represent the local condition. How many local residents are jazz fans and would attend the club regularly? And how much of the expenditure of the total jazz entertainment would be spent in jazz club? In order to better confirm the prediction, the developers need to consider about these questions.

Altogether, the developers must do more specific research about the factors affecting the jazz club's final profit such as the amount of potential customers, their planning expenditures on jazz club and their expectations of the showers in order to succeed.

愿岁月静好，有梦可寻！

使用道具举报

suge007 UID: 3160355 suge007 当前离线最后登录 2017-10-11 在线时间 60 小时寄托币 195 声望 0 注册时间 2011-8-27 阅读权限 5 帖子 17 精华 0 积分 213 UID 3160355 禁止发言声望 0 寄托币 195 注册时间 2011-8-27 精华 0 帖子 17 主页发消息	10楼发表于 2011-9-21 22:42:21 \|只看该作者提示: 作者被禁止或删除内容自动屏蔽

	使用道具举报