ISSUE DIY四部曲（自己动手，高分无忧）－想明白

comorainUID：192455

一、想明白——题目是复杂的，提纲要别致的

Comorain 原创作品，未经许可，不得转载

看到Issue题目，第一类同学往往绞尽脑汁，还是写不出什么内容；第二类同学则洋洋洒洒，但文章不过千篇一律。归根到底，还是没有“想明白”，尤其是对Issue题目的“复杂性（complexity）”认识不够。

以下文字引自官方指南（awintro）：

Be sure to read the claim carefully and think about it from several points of view, considering the complexity of ideas associated with those perspectives.

Although it is important that you address the central issue, you are free to take any approach you wish. For example, you might

• agree absolutely with the claim, disagree completely, or agree with some parts and not others

首先，每一道Issue题目都经过ETS精心设计，目的是用来检验考生的批判性思维（critical thinking）能力和说服性写作（persuasive writing）能力。对每一道题目，考生既可以完全赞同，也可以完全反对，还可以部分赞同、部分反对。这就意味着它既不可能绝对正确——因而无法反驳原命题，也不可能绝对错误——因而无法支持原命题，这是所谓“复杂性”的表现之一。在这一点上，ETS一般是通过一些表示程度、大小等的限定词或解释性的插入结构、从句来实现的。

例1：Issue18 "Only by being forced to defend an idea against the doubts and contrasting views of others does one really discover the value of that idea."

试想，如果去掉only和really，变成一道没有多少倾向的事实型题目，恐怕很难反驳它。


例2：Issue106 "All students should be required to take at least one course in ethics, even if taking the course means a decreased emphasis on academic subjects."

如果没有后面那句，完全反驳它似乎是很难的。


其次，“复杂性”的表现之二在于，题目往往蕴含一些“言外之意”或“未尽之言”，隐藏着出题人的意图。也就是说，尽管每道题都有很多种回应方式，但某种方式却是出题人最愿意看到的。在这一点上，ETS一般是通过一些表达倾向的连词或副词来实现的。

例3：Issue17 "There are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws."

even more importantly暗示了出题人的倾向：题目重心在disobey and resist unjust laws。因此，将写作重心放在第一句或obey just laws尽管都是无可厚非的，但却并非出题人最喜欢的。

例4：Issue83 "Government should preserve publicly owned wilderness areas in their natural state, even though these areas are often extremely remote and thus accessible to only a few people."

even though也暗示了出题人的倾向：题目重点是后半句。如果你通篇都在大谈特谈前半句，而都后半句只字不提，那显然是跑题了。出题人希望你你回应的是：某些公有荒地极为偏远，因而只有极少数人才有机会进去（欣赏自然风光、呼吸新鲜空气等等），在这种情况下，政府是不是还应该将它们保护在自然状态？

此外，“复杂性”的表现之三是，有些题目暗示了一定的假定条件（assumption），需要找到它并理顺命题的逻辑链条。在这一点上，ETS的暗示很少，需要用心揣摩。

典型的例子是：

例5：Issue130 "How children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. Unfortunately, we have not yet learned how to raise children who can help bring about a better society."

孩子如何社会化（既可以理解为“适应社会”，也可以理解为“社会交往”）决定了社会的命运。然而，我们还不知道如何培养孩子，以使其有助于形成一个更好的社会。

这道题很绕，很多同学都理解成两句不怎么相干的话了，然后分别回应。这是错误的，unfortunately摆在那里放着，表明两句话之间有很强的逻辑关系。再看看“the destiny of society”和“a better society”，我们就会明白，实际上题目说的是：
孩子如何社会化决定了社会的命运，社会化好了社会就更好了。但是，我们还没有学会如何培养孩子让社会更好，即：我们还没有学会如何培养让孩子更好地社会化。（插一句，从上下文看，“社会化”的意思应该是“适应社会”：When people, especially children, are socialized, they are made to behave in a way which is acceptable in their culture or society.）

很明显，“社会化好了社会就更好了”就是假定条件。这个条件是否正确，完全是可以写的；如果你把它拎出来，然后评论一番，我想出题人会很兴奋。不过要注意，千万不要写成argument（例如：based on a false assumption that……）。

好了，“复杂性”就讲到这里了。下面说说如何破解“复杂性”，打造个性化的提纲。

按照ETS的建议，大家可以考虑下列问题：

Remember that this is a task in critical thinking and persuasive writing. Therefore, you might find it helpful to explore the complexity of a claim in one of the topics by asking yourself the following questions:

• What, precisely, is the central issue?

• Do I agree with all or with any part of the claim? Why or why not?

• Does the claim make certain assumptions? If so, are they reasonable?

• Is the claim valid only under certain conditions? If so, what are they?

• Do I need to explain how I interpret certain terms or concepts used in the claim?

• If I take a certain position on the issue, what reasons support my position?

• What examples—either real or hypothetical—could I use to illustrate those reasons and advance my point of view? Which examples are most compelling?

送大家“八字真言”：定义、本质、限定、反例。

呵呵，看起来似乎和imong的七个关键字（https://bbs.gter.net/forum.php?mod=viewthread&tid=130155&extra=page%3D1%26amp%3Bfilter%3Dtype%26amp%3Btypeid%3D53）差不多，但实际上相差甚远。容我解释一下。

1、定义（definition）。不是指需要在作文中定义概念，而是指你要保证完全理解题目中每一个单词的意思，不懂的就好好查一查英英词典，专业名词、学术词汇可以查wikipedia（当然是英文版的）。

例6：Issue87 "In any field of inquiry, the beginner is morelikely than the expert to make important discoveries."

我看相当多的版友将inquiry理解为“调研”。天哪，这是一个多么严重的错误！inquiry在这里的意思是“（对知识、资料和真理的）探索”(a quest for knowledge, data, or truth; official investigation），可以理解为“研究，探索”（research，investigation）。版友们可能觉得我说的没有根据，好吧，如果是调研的话，前面的any field of作何解释？难不成连在一起要解释成“田野调查”？大家在google上搜一搜，scientific inquiry用的非常广泛，几乎等同于scientific research了。

ETS出的另外一道题也可以证明我的解释是正确的：

Issue41 "Such nonmainstream areas of inquiry as astrology, fortune-telling, and psychic and paranormalpursuits play a vital role in society by satisfying human needs that are notaddressed by mainstream science."

显然，在这里解释为“调研”是不通的。

2、本质（central issue, essence or implications）。题目到底在讲什么？题目的各句子、分句或成分之间有什么逻辑关系？有什么明显的暗示吗？话题的本质问题是什么？出题人有什么目的和倾向？

3、限定（qualifications）。题目有哪些限定词？去掉这些限定词之后命题是否成立？命题的成立是否还依赖于某些假设？命题成立或不成立有何条件？

4、反例(counterexamples）。强调这一点是为了时刻提醒我们：不要简单地同意或反对，一定要想到命题有正反两个方面，对手也可以用反例来驳斥我们的立场。如果我持某一立场，反对我的人会提出什么反例？我如何承认或反驳这些反例？

这里我用Issue17举个例子：

"There are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws."

1、定义：What are unjust laws? Where are they from?

Martin Luther King, Jr.: An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. One has a moral responsibility to disobey unjust laws. An individual who breaks a law that conscience tells him is unjust, and who willingly accepts the penalty of imprisonment in order to arouse the conscience of the community over its injustice, is in reality expressing the highest respect for law.

“unjust laws”这一概念最早出自St. Augustine：An unjust law is no law at all. 马丁·路德·金在《从伯明翰市监狱发出的信 Letter from Birmingham City Jail》将其发扬光大，并给出了自己的判断标准。他认为，抵制不公正的法律，并自愿接受监禁的惩罚，以唤起民众对不公正的良心，本质上是在向法律表达最崇高的敬意。

怎么样，了解这段背景之后，你是否对题目的理解更深了？它并不是那么好反驳的！

So just or unjust is subjective and everyone may have his or her own opinion.

2、本质：Even so, are there “seemly unjust” laws? Where did they come from? How to react to these “seemly unjust” laws? Do nothing? Disobey and resist?

尽管“公正”、“不公正”非常主观，那现实生活中总有大多数人看起来都不公正的法律吧？在这种情况下，我们应该如何应对？

这里是“八字真言”的核心，也是出题人希望你去回答的：生活中总会遭遇不公，如果是你会怎么处理？所以这道题的本质是：如何在遵循法律和维护个人权利之间找到平衡。

所以，如果通篇都在谈just laws和unjust laws的标准问题，我觉得跑题了；如果通篇都在讲“应该遵守法律”，我觉得也跑题了，遵循法律是常识，没必要让你去证明；如果像北美那样写两点（法律不能这样划分、抵制是低效的方式），我觉得并没有回答核心问题：我们到底应该怎么做？

3、限制：every。如果第二点做好了，这一点是否认真地回应就无所谓了。

4、反例。如果支持这一观点，反例可以是无政府主义；如果反对这一观点，反例有美国、南非的种族隔离等。

提纲大家自己列吧，我考的就是这个，所以就不列了，免得雷同。其他5个例子，有兴趣的同学可以做做练习。

=============================================================================

Issue DIY四部曲系列 by comorain

一、想明白——Issue 思路

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-940385-1-1.html

二、写清楚——Issue 初稿（首段、段落结构、主题句、尾段）

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-941249-1-1.html

三、改漂亮——Issue 自改（语法、用词、句式变化、复杂句、举例、说理）

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-943741-1-1.html

编外：comorain的语法自查要点

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-943740-1-1.html

四、记准确——Issue 背诵＋修改铺＋珍藏资料

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-944004-1-1.html

五、谋周全——Issue 备考及写作建议＋习作一篇

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-944669-1-1.html

=============================================================================

archaeologyUID：2598252

沙发也！好贴

草木也知愁UID：2487572

板凳哦

米饭袜子UID：2532172

就算地板也要大力的顶，大力的学习

pingkoUID：2622837

地下室～～～先留名  再慢慢看

parisyUID：2622097

地下室沙发
研究下LZ心得
谢谢分享

i2000sUID：2108019

1# comorain
I appreciate with your penetrating 8 words conclusion of topic analysis: "definition, essence/implications, qualifications, counterexamples". When come to the direction of writing, however, I may not totally agree with your judgment that we should follow the "命题人"'s preference, which you have mentioned several times in your article.

Our writing goal is to get a high score, any stragedy leading to it might be nice. "北美范文" you mention to explain the importance of establishing the issue essence, for example, is actually a 6 assay,  while that you think it  "并没有回答核心问题" is arising a paradox. If you are right, that is the article do not touch the core, then why it is banded to 6? Or you are wrong, then there must be something else, rather only the analysis of essence, leading to a high score.

We may bear this phenomena to the fact that the "判卷人" is not the “出题人”, and the impressions of the "判卷人" to your assay ultimately determine the score. The "判卷人" skims voluminous of writing works everyday, he/she maybe know the essence of every issue better than any one else, but he/she concerns more with all kinds of logic analysises the writers have given. One writer shows an analysis, another one shows another. As the ETS advises, "you are free to take any approach you wish", the scores may distribute equally in every reasonable analysis under the "判卷人" ’s equitable judgment which should reflect the criteria of ETS.

Back to our tactics to get a high score, shall we analyse the essence of the subject? Yes, definitely yes. But we shouldn't stop there. To find a logical line linking the logic of the topic and the judgment of the referee who involves both a emotional man and a reflector of ETS. Only at the analysis stage, we may establish a logical stand, sometimes not neccesary the essential one, may be a rare one, may be the one reflects the nowaday's disputed points or something else. If only follow the essence and impplications can get a high score, why so many points of view exist?

To conclude, a good analysis of the topic should be well organized, not only get the essence, but further reach a wanderful starting point which can be persuited splendid.

Anyway, Thanks for your share, comorain! You give a wanderful method of analysing the topics!

comorainUID：192455

7# i2000s

终于有批评了，感谢！大家都写过argument，当然都可以挑我的错。

我回应几句。首先，“北美范文可以得6分”是北美作者自封的，ETS从来没说过。他的语言很好我不否认，但思想和内容层次不齐，很多文章我都可以挑出毛病，至少达不到6分的要求。

其次，我之所以强调“本质”，是官方指南给出的启发：

Although it is important that you address the central issue, you are free to take any approach you wish.

从这句话你就可以看出倾向：最重要的是你能讨论核心问题；如果做不到，你爱怎么写就怎么写吧。

在审题阶段，如果能识别“本质”当然更好，因为它往往能使我们构思出一个与众不同的提纲，从而避免千篇一律。如果大家都像北美范文那样写，恐怕判卷人早视觉疲劳了。我还要强调一句，识别本质并不意味着写成千篇一律的文章，一个本质可以通向很多个完全不同的提纲。我在“写清楚”开篇举了个Issue130的例子，识别本质后，思路很开阔，可以写出很多不同的提纲。

另外，你说的“判卷人”跟“出题人”不是一回事，这我承认，但我想判卷人肯定能领会出题人的意图，毕竟他们是native speaker，并且经过ETS培训。

i2000sUID：2108019

8# comorain
Thanks for your echo that definitely unmasks my ignorance about the "北美范文", and threngthens my believe in the offical materials!

As I have long argued that digging into the essence is important, however, expanding from the core ideal to a unique outline with a coherent logic worths even more. In fact, I find some abstract ISSUE TOPICs difficulte in extending the logical line when writing the outline. For example,
"ISSUE 136:
The absence of choice is a circumstance that is very, very rare."
The key word "choice" may reveal the essential relationship between individual and circumstance, so I can stand on the viewpoint that "everyone can create a choice in most occassions, so absence of choice is really rare", or that "any choice is confined by the circumstance where you are, in some occassion we have to do something even we don't want it". Here I only come to the place of DEFINITION of choice, and lead it to a stand point, but how can I make my point developed into an attracting outline?

As you mentioned in the first title "题目是复杂的，提纲要别致的", I think you should continue to give us a fully developed analysis about outline writing. Even in your next part of your tetralogy, your analysis about the struction between paragraphs is only confined in limited questions. More commons will be proposed there. By the way, could you like to show us the power of "qualification" and "counterexamples", which seems limitedly developed?

Issue 136 can be chose as an example to introduce more, if it's possible.

Focusing on the training method, further more, I think we should devle in some basic essential topics first, basing on the fact that all issues can be classified into different categories which reflect the limited number of essences, like relationships between individual and society, etc.. Then to study the basic writing structures and their application occassions. Do you agree with me? If yes, would you do me a favor to compose sth. in this aspect? I think training process worths writing too. Maybe you have included it in your tetralogy.

Thanks again(@_@)

comorainUID：192455

9# i2000s

我还是用中文回应吧，让更多的同学分享我们的讨论。

一、关于题目的“本质”问题，我还是那个观点，你多思考思考，对你写出一个别致的提纲会很有帮助。找本质的过程本身就是你深入思考的过程，每个人都能找到自己独特的思路！如果做不到，爱怎么写就怎么写吧。反正按照网上流行的提纲，写一个随大流的观点，语言还过得去，得4分是没问题的。

二、关于Issue136，我理解你的问题是觉得这个题目不好反驳。实际上你说的是我所强调的“本质”，而不是“定义”，我说的“定义”：不是指需要在作文中定义概念，而是指你要保证完全理解题目中每一个单词的意思，不懂的就好好查一查英英词典，专业名词、学术词汇可以查wikipedia（当然是英文版的）。
如果对其中的关键词给出自己独特的定义，本身可能是在探求题目的本质性问题。

下面我就用这个为例，再说说我的“八字真言”。

例14：Issue136 "The absence of choice is a circumstance thatis very, very rare."

没有选择（权）的情况非常罕见。

1、定义：什么是choice？

Definition: 1. act of choosing between two or more possibilities; 2. right or possibility of choosing

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Choice consists of the mental process of thinking involved with the process of judging the merits of multiple options and selecting one of them for action. Some simple examples include deciding whether to get up in the morning or go back to sleep, or selecting a given route for a journey. More complex examples (often decisions that affect what a person thinks or their core beliefs) include choosing a lifestyle, religious affiliation, or political position.

Most people regard having choices as a good thing, though a severely limited or artificially restricted choice can lead to discomfort with choosing and possibly, an unsatisfactory outcome. In contrast, unlimited choice may lead to confusion, regret of the alternatives not taken, and indifference in an unstructured existence; and the illusion that choosing an object or a course leads necessarily to control of that object or course can cause psychological problems.


你看看，能说的多了去了：

（1）最普通的理解：choice是在多种可能性中做挑选的行为；
（2）抽象一点的理解：choice是指选择的权利或可能性
（3）更复杂的理解：choice是指选择一种生活方式、宗教信仰或政治立场
（4）更具体的理解：severely limited choice可能导致选择过程中的不舒服和不满意的结果
（5）更具体的理解：unlimited choice可能导致困惑、对未选项的遗憾和漠不关心（在未系统化、杂乱无章的现实中）；还可能导致一种错觉，选择一件事物或过程必然导致对其的控制，这将导致心理问题。

到这里，definition的任务完成了。

2、本质：这道题到底想说啥？就那么简单吗？（生活中处处有选择，如果这么理解的话，这道题就不好反驳。）继续查查资料，才发现“absence of choice”在法律上是一个术语，其中也有好几个解释（Hobson's choice，即被迫做某事；necessity: 必需；not a pin to choose: 同等
）。从这些理解出发，我们可以揣摩出题人意图——如何理解人与环境的关系？由此可以构思自己的提纲，比如，其一将choice理解为free choice；其二将choice理解为“选择权”；其三……。

在这一点上，我是反复强调追问题目意思和出题人意图，这样可能更能找到题目的核心问题，从而可能使自己的提纲与众不同。

3、限制：very, very，absence of choice既不是没有，也不是少见，而是非常非常少见。这说明命题的反面是“没有选择（权）的情况非常常见”，因此，如果我们老拿那种极端例子（如自杀）来举例反驳原命题，那就不对了。另外，根据我们上面的分析，命题的绝对成立取决于一定的条件，即choice就是普普通通的在一堆可能中做选择，离开了这个条件，这个命题不必然成立。

这这一点上，我强调大家看清楚命题的限制条件，在反驳时要注意；想清楚命题的成立条件，从而有助于挖掘命题本质问题。

4、反例：首先，极端例子不足以反驳原命题；其次，很多同学望文生义，说什么“我们不能选择国家、民族、血统、家庭”、“我们不能选择客观规律”等等，这里中文的“选择”分别对应英文determine和violate。选择最基本的条件是：你得有两个或以上的选项，上面的情况都是先天注定的，你是被动的，没法做选择。

如果我们用“自由选择”来qualify选择，反例太多了，自己想。

对你而言，从思路到提纲似乎是一个坎，我想这还是因为没想明白。一般我想到这里，就已经思如泉涌了，提纲挥笔而就。你多想想，多动动笔，我想这个坎不是问题。

三、关于你建议的“本质性的主题”（比如人与社会的关系），我没有计划这样写。一来这些题目太大，我没有能力把握；二来这些问题每个人都有自己的看法。

开篇就说了，我的四部曲为两类同学量身定制：“想明白”是为“语言好但没话说”的第一类同学设计的；“写清楚”是为“很能写但语言差”的第二类同学设计的。至于有的同学说自己是“语言差又没话说”的第三类同学，“想明白”和“写清楚”都是为你们准备的！真正做到了“想明白”和“写清楚”，我想可以写出一篇4分左右的初稿。而下一部分“改漂亮”计划提供加工初稿的方法和技巧，使同学们能把自己的习作改成5分及以上。


就你个人而言，我觉得你的语言还可以，也有自己的想法，努力一下，应该有能力得高分！

luke1988UID：2605102

顶楼主！！！

i2000sUID：2108019

10# comorain

很抱歉，一直把回帖当练笔，影响了大家对lz精彩分析的理解……
我也改用中文了 呵呵。

lz对ISSUE 136的分析很有道理，我也感觉“想清楚‘这步做的非常不好！
我的习作先贴上来了，
https://bbs.gter.net/bbs/viewthread.php?tid=942348&extra=
容我再按照lz的建议好好改改。
lz如果有时间不妨到我的地盘批一批 。

上面的分析的诸多确是很好很强大……

fainting_robinUID：2336582

支持楼主的原创分享。

justdoit!UID：2533175

真的很不错哦，从题目的本质出发，发散到了第三层含义，的确很好很强大！

cgkyUID：2590490

非常喜欢LZ的分析~~也感谢晓东同学的讨论看法
LZ的好帖偶收藏了~(*^__^*) ~