[范文分析] 有关模版：对模版（和字数）感兴趣的看过来 [复制链接]

imong
UID：140258

永久会员

Rank: 16

声望: 266
寄托币: 22475
注册时间: 2003-7-14
精华: 88
帖子: 188

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2004-3-16 19:15:22 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

有关模版：对模版（和字数）感兴趣的看过来

关于模版的争论一直以来都是热点，其激烈程度不亚于对机经的争论——毕竟机经还是两次笔考之后的产物。作为逻辑变分析性写作之后为了迎合考生心理需求而应运而生的概念，模版的用处到底在哪里，到底有多大？

从argument开始看看——最泛滥的地方。

关于argument开头段落是否需要restate原题目，我在另一个帖子（https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=134092）里面已经做过分析了——结论是完全没必要。但是每每看到很多人似乎不如此开篇就六神无主如坐针毡，难道明知道这样写没什么positive effect还仍然保持上瘾？打住，这个问题已经谈过，继续下面。

然后就是关于术语的使用。从false analogy到hasty generalization然后什么red herring甚至post hoc, ergo propter hoc全出来了。诚然，我并不是说要禁用掉例如conclusion analogy assumption alternative之类的任何词汇，但是各位不妨考虑考虑：到底论证的到位和深入体现在写出“hasty generalization”上面还是体现在你把这个“hasty generalization”给完完整整来龙去脉说清楚上？看个例子：孙远新书后面给的argument参考范文：

First, this argument is based on a false analogy. The arguer simply assumes that airplane mechanics and automobile maintenance crews perform many similar functions, but he does not provide any evidence that their functions are indeed comparable. As we know, the structure, operation and function of airplanes and those of automobiles differ conspicuously. It is true that both the airplane and the automobile need refueling engine maintenance, but even here there exist fundamental differences: the structure and the building materials of each other’s engines are different, so is the oil they use. Therefore, even though the two-week Quality-Care Seminar proved effective in improving the performance of the maintenance crews in the automobile racing industry, there is no guarantee that it will work just as well for airplane mechanics.

现在请各位仔细考虑了：如果我把“this argument is based on a false analogy”完全拿掉，变成First, the arguer simply assumes…，整个段落的论证分析受到影响了吗？再请各位考虑：如果我把这个段落除了false analogy这句话之外的所有内容都拿掉，还有论证剩下吗？

孙远给出的argument文章段落开头大多用这种模式。而一个不争的事实是论证的深入细致不好学，这个false analogy倒是可以立刻照搬——再也没有比这更好的“舍本逐末”的例子了。于是乎，我们一篇又一篇的堆砌false analogy，论证和组织不管水平如何都有一个共同feature：几乎一模一样的TS！

现实的例子：
The first and foremost, the arguer commits a false analogy in the argument above. The arguer possibly ignores, if not purposely, many differences between the two buildings. Whatsmore, the argument provides insufficient evidence concerning the detailed situation of the two buildings erected by the two construction companies. Given the fact that the two buildings are located in two different regions, the cost of the buildings may vary heavily from the other, which depends on the cost of purchasing or renting the land, the fees spent on buying construction materials. There are even no satistical evidence concerning the exact area and usage of the buildings, which may influence their consumption on maintainence and energy. For example, granted that the building in Zeta is a sales department, involving high expenditure of maintainance than the other, which used as a office building.

姑且不说整个段落的组织和分析有多混乱，拿false analogy这个迷糊不清的字眼开路然后后面来一句the arguer possibly ignores, if not purposely, many differences between the two buildings直接了事——这体现出了什么思辨呢？空空洞洞，了然无物。从去年到现在我看到的文章：不少人（尤其是新手刚开始的时候）argument的段落也基本就是这两句话后面再加一个therefore或者without一句收尾。论证展开和深入在哪里？

再一个例子：
In the second place, the argument is seriously undermined for the reason of false analogy. The author fails to convince us that the number of attendants in the jazz festival this year would at least, reach that of last year, if not less. Moreover, we cannot make a complete comparison unless the author provides the overall population in Monroe and how many of them would be jazz fans. Additionally, we have every reason to believe that the situation of this year would differ from that of last year: what if economic depression set in? What if the jazz fans in Monroe turned their interests into other types of music, for example, rock and roll?

这回谁compare谁都没说清楚就来一个false analogy，整个段落零零散散，找不到主线，深入更是无从谈起。

写False analogy好学，解释清楚到底如何false analogy不容易学——问题在于it is后者，not前者，是你拿到分数的关键，不要以为会写前者了argument就拿到5分了。希望大家明白这一点，认识这个问题的时候不要有意无意的错位了，到最后注意力都放到了模仿没用的东西上面。

再说说issue

最古典的一套开头模版莫过于：
Recently there is a debate over whether …..Some people assert that.., while other people believe that…As a matter of fact, the issue of whether ….. is a complex and controversial one. Different people hold different views due to their distinct backgrounds. Therefore, there is not a universal answer to this question, and whether one choice takes precedence over the other may quite depend on the specific situation. The decision, nevertheless, is not an easy one to make. Actually, the final judgment should rely on a case-by-case analysis. As far as I am concerned, however, I agree that …. , and do not agree that….. My view can be greatly substantiated by the following discussions.

全是废话。

道理和上面是一样的：拿到好分数是因为你的文章对题目的response做得出色，不是因为你在开头能够啰嗦。写这么长一堆废话，有意义吗？

刚才两个argument段落TS虚张声势后面立刻露怯的例子就在眼前，类似的露怯issue，我想我们也造得足够多了。My views能不能be greatly substantiated不是靠在这里说出来的，是靠body里面一点一点写出来的。

说到这里，估计肯定会有人想到这种垃圾开头的“凑字数”价值。没办法，孙远早在红皮作文书里面就提到了“issue想拿到高分必须字数上500”的权威言论，但是遗憾的是首先没能给“高分”下一个确切的定义给大家造成误解不少，同时又（也许是无心之失）忽略掉了ETS官方范文里面给出的433字的6分，379字的5分，390字的4分issue各一篇，最要命的是这个“字数”本身的界定不清造成了无穷的混乱。我不清楚是不是有统计数据指明5分文章字数底线500之类的（当然，刚刚上面就是个完美反例），不过请问：这个字数指的是在body里面纵横驰骋的挥洒文字呢，还是开头这种磨磨蹭蹭的唐僧文字呢？再一次，凑够500唐僧字就能拿到“高分”？

我想这里恐怕有个严重的偷换概念吧。实在是很遗憾。

应该说错误的概念和错位的理解就是这样产生的。希望大家再自己考虑考虑，至少是用逻辑和实证的方法。

不推荐使用模版，没必要担心字数。Over.

Rien de réel ne peut être menacé.
Rien d'irréel n'existe.

回应
0

[范文分析] 有关模版：对模版（和字数）感兴趣的看过来 [复制链接]

荣誉版主

Sub luck

GRE斩浪之魂

Golden Apple