1006G 备考日记 by ieyangj08——行胜于言

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

TOPIC: 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."
WORDS: 604          TIME: 00:45:00         

I partly disagree with the author's assertion that we haven't found the most appropriate way to socialize our tomorrow hope---children, for traditional education methods still have their values in nowadays, though they have certain limitations in modern society.

To begin with, children’s education, especially social education, is essential for our whole society. It is widely accepted that children are the future of the country. Even though a country is powerful and prosperous enough today, if their next generation is weak and ignorant, the country's future fate, its station in the world, is difficulty to declare. For children will be our future owners of the nation, their education is definitely significant for our whole nation. And children's education contains two main parts: teaching them scientific knowledge and teaching them social skills, between which the latter is more important than the former, because our human are social animals and communication is vital for us. What's more, a person's social approach is closely related to their childhood's education. Thus, social education in childhood is important for a person, and for our whole nation’ future.

Is traditional sociology of the childhood totally out of fashion in today's fast developing society as some people’s doubts recently? However, my answer is they still have their values in nowadays society. There are various useful viewpoints in traditional education, and I will give two of them below. In traditional children sociology, boys and girls are encouraged to contact with the beautiful nature, the various plants and the lovely animals, which is greatly beneficial for their psychical grow, thus better for their social manners. In traditional education manners, every spring primary schools will give students a several weeks holiday, and during this period children are encouraged to have a journey to the famous places with natural scenes, such as Snow Mountains, water falls and deserts. Through these travels, children can have a good contact with the nature and thus enhance their emotional intelligence which is fundamental in their social commutations. Another important viewpoint in traditional children's social education is parents should have enough time spent with their children. In this manner, children would feel they are being loved by others, so they can learn to love and concern the others, and this can promote their social communication.  

Nevertheless, the traditional sociology of the childhood is not the most appropriate way to socialize our children, which is challenged by nowadays new things and have meet their restrictions in some aspects. A case in point is that computers and Internet have affected the effectiveness of traditional education methods. The widespread use of computers and Internet has greatly changed our life; people like commuting with the virtual person than with the real one, our pupils are more intimate with the virtual society than their family and classmates, and the hot network games take more spare time of our children than the old storybooks, all of which can make children stay in the house long times and less contact with the outdoors and their family and friends. So it certainly will do harm to our children, however, at this circumstance, the traditional education manner will do little. Similar exceptions are numerous, and I will not give all of them for the limit of time, but we have already known the limitation of the traditional education manners, and farther researches are needed for solving this problem.

In conclusion, traditional social education still have their values in nowadays society, however they are meeting their restrictions for the challenge of new social phenomena. Finding the most appropriate way to socialize children is still a work need to be continued.

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

同主题

taft

In the era of rapid and technological change leading to complex society, we are always asked how the future of the world would be? To answer the question it usually leads to the discussion of that how children socialized today determines the destiny of society. As far as I concerned, I agree with this assertion and believe that in the process of raising children, they need to know two things: responsibility and cooperation.

To begin with, children should prepare them for the future with full awareness of responsibility to both themselves and societies. As children growing up, they become conscious of who they are and what they are going to do for themselves and the others. Responsibility, in this case, is a direct guidance for their actions. With responsibility, they know why they have to go to school; with responsibility, they know why they must work hard. On one hand, responsibility entitles them essential impulse to deal with issues around -- education, self-improvement, their future objective and etc; on the other hand, through constant concentrating on one's own responsibility, they are able to conquer whatever hardship they would meet in the long but limit paths of life. Moreover, responsibility teaches children to be a useful person in societies. In order to keep consistent social development, working force of tomorrow--our children of today-- ought to understand important roles as social member they are going to play. To enrich human knowledge, to maintain cultural identity, to build more advanced society, all they need to do is to form a sense of responsibility deeply in their heart, a flame that only they can kindle. So, responsibility secures both our children's health development and a better future of tomorrow.

Next, children must have to be aware of cooperation with others for problem solving and social advancements. There is no escaping fact that children when they touch our complex society by their first steps they have to keep firm connection with a variety of individuals-- not only their contemporaries but also old generations, not only people from their own societies but also from others with completely different culture and value systems. Along with the development of science and technology, our world are becoming a global village, but there are new things coming out through this procedure, posed to human beings. Global pollution, for example, requires not only a single nation to handle this serious problem but asks all nations in the world to work effectively together. Our children, the future leaders of the world, should have the essential sense of cooperation to cope with every problem-- no matter it has exist for a long time and unknown issues in the future. Besides solving problems through cooperation, they are also supposed to keep our society advancing by means of cooperation. Every one nowadays deeply believe that we are to usher in a new and more stirring episode of science and technology drama in no more than one hundred years. To carry out more challenge tasks children must realize that they first need to learn from others and then cooperate with others rather than acting for their own interest. Consequently, our children will inevitably grasp the powerful tools of development during the process of socialization.

In sum, We admit and believe that how children are socialized today determines the destiny of society. In addition, we have learned how to raise children in the background of complex society. That is, by instilling them senses of responsibility and cooperation, they will guide our society to a more intriguing future.

文章阐述了教育孩子的两个要点，责任和合作。很有新意，立意值得学习。唯一遗憾的是文中语法错误较多。

norman518

To socialize children, as a hot-point view, should be how to make children suit to and come into our society. As for the destiny of society, at least the speaker considering, largely depends on how children are socialized today, therefore the author draw a conclusion that it is unfortunate for us not to learn how to cultivate children who know how to create a better society. The point, in my eyes, is fundamentally irrational in taking more emphasis on the socializing children rather than cultivating them right views of moral, psychological and physical quality. To better illuminate my view, let me case-by-case analysis in detail. 道德、心理、身体教育比社交教育更重要。

Above all, the view of socialization is more of a subject issue that differs from time to time due to differently moral view and value system. It is unfair to judge the young or children with out-of-date standard and eyesight. Take a controversial issue for example to express this, abortion or homosexual, as the popular social problem occurring in our daily life, could be easily acceptable by the young or child rather than the formers alike the speaker just because of the diverse views of moral and value. To a certain extent, the young or children could be more socialized and tolerant than the former as well as the speaker, but why? Maybe the young are less influenced by the ingrained tradition with which have more or less been imprint by the past times, and more emotional and vigorous with naivety to deal with the novelties. 社会的观念可能会改变，例如堕胎和同性恋

Admittedly, the young generation, comparing with our parents and grandparents, is indeed devoid of ability to suit to and come into the society, insufficient of sympathy and senses of competing and cooperating, and then be unwilling to incumbent to certain social responsibilities. On the one hand, the children could not be instilled the right moral views and ideas by their parents and communities whose times and energies are spend on their daily routines. On the other hand, in the ear of admiring to personality and hero, the children have been assimilated by the social modes before cultivated by moral, belief and religion. Therefore, the urgent affairs in the face of educators are how to cultivate children right moral and belief rather than how to socialize them.

The destiny of society certainly more reckons on the young generation but rather fells back on the socialized children. Those who can sustain our social existence and development must be possessing of the ideas of freedom and equality on which all democratic societies depend, the virtues of tolerance and respect of which any harmonious societies is basis, the senses of inner insights and conviction for which any emergencies and crises be made, and the consciousness of competition and cooperation with which multinational economies thriving and global environments alleviating would be made through. All those important tasks could hardly be fulfilled only by socialization. The human history of civilization is full of this example to show this view, without strong religious upbringing, the Martin Luther King could not strive for the right of American blacks; without the courage of inner convictions, Mahatma Gandhi could not make contribution of Indian Independence. So, the destiny of society could mainly relay on freedom, democracy and tolerance rather than socialization.

Maybe it is no more wise than the speaker' assertion that it is unfortunate for them not to have learned to cultivate our children how to make a better society. To some extent, it is unfortunate in them alike the speaker as well as our parents and grandparents, not in our young generation. Looking around the recent society, the young have not only successfully accounted for those inveterately social problems about which the former could be worried, such as creating a more democratic and harmonious society as well as a more free and tolerant surroundings, but also been going in for more challenging difficulties with which the former could be confronted, such as global economy and unrestricted trade as well as multi-national cooperation to deal with AIDS (Acquires Immune Deficiency Syndrome) and SARS (Sever Acute Respiratory Syndrome) of which have been depriving millions lives of people. No one can deny the fact that all above achievements fulfilled by the young is not crating a better life and society. Had the formers failed to learn or deal with a better, why not the young must be. With this point in my observation, the society involving, the science and technology developing, but the speaker's eyesight is external forever. 现在的一代人未必不如前人

In sum, human society should be suited and created by the young rather than be designed by the former. It is unnecessary for the adult today to repeat the same as their parents' worrying about them. If they indeed want to do something for the young, please instill the young a set of right moral views, such as democracy, freedom, tolerance and respect but rather how to socialize.


最后的使徒

提纲:
部分同意
1, 论证社会化的必要性+
2, 社会化是天生的能力-
3, 我们的教育在发展,使孩子们更能适应社会-

People are never born into separated environment, while society will be their destiny to face and join no matter whether they are willed to do so. After being educated in greenhouses of campus, children will one day step into this destiny inevitably, therefore making socialization is an indispensable progress of their growth. However, it seems to me that socialization is a method of acclimating to the surroundings and such abilities are inborn. So it may be too extreme and pessimistic to say we have not yet learned how to raise children who can help bring about a better society, especially when the education and other related fields are keeping a high-speed development.  

Socialization, defined as converting and meeting the social needs, determines a society's future by making its members work as effective parts of it. Society is a huge constitution combined by different individuals and groups, who need cooperation with each other and gain the methods for living and developing. Modern development has made such cooperation spear into every corner of our daily life: industry, service, agriculture and academic fields provide the people living in a society what they need, and supported by each other's products. 社会的方方面面需要合作，因此社会化很重要

Education, as a way for us to raise children, gives them knowledge to take parts in this society and realize their personal values. When entering schools, children are living with other contemporaries for years, learning how to communicate with each other, gaining senses of cooperation, competition and understanding. After that, they graduate and face the practical issues, such as manufacturing, researching, designing and so forth. All these issues ask for cooperation during modern time, because they are all highly complicated with different products provided by different fields. An architecture design project, for instance, contains parts of architecture design, structure design, air-conditioner system, water supply system and so forth. During its designing progress, architects and other experts need communicate with each other, persuade or be persuaded to change their ideas and plans. If some one of them are not socialized and just keep on working individually, the outcomes will be not reasonable or even not feasible. 学习和工作都需要我们与人合作

Moreover, socialization is an indispensable part of social living, even people do not take parts in producing. We are living in a connected world, facing other peoples for information, products and so forth. After graduating, children will leave their greenhouses which are supported by their parents, teachers and society. They have to work and live directly with other social members. If they are not socialized, and just continue their greenhouse life, they will find the world as a vacuum, bogging them with complex relation of people. In Japan, a group of people are called OTAKUs, who are trapped by their childhood interests, including animation, video game, internet,  and the sense of security at home. Those people are a reverse example of those who are not well socialized. They have their own worlds, cut off with others, and they are afraid of communicating. As a result, certain social problems have long been reported among these OTAKUs, such as suicide, crime, psychic diseases and so forth. In this case we may know the importance of socialization. 生活也需要我们与人交往

Nevertheless, although modern society has provided us both necessity and risks of socializing, our society has kept on its progress of development, despite of some people who are dropped by it because of lacking of socialization. To illustrate this phenomenon, I think it is reasonable to believe that socialization is an inborn ability that can be developed during education and social work.

All creatures have abilities to acclimate to the environment, and because of such abilities they have evolved during the past myriad years to today. As the most intelligent and developed creature, human beings are tend to be even more capable when facing a new environment. So when they are in societies, they will learn how to live and success by their practice, not saying about the developed education system, which can help them gain more knowledge and experience before the social life. Considering a foreign student who seeks for further education in a new country, he may have difficulties in language, social relation and cultural background when facing the new life. But we know that there are myriad foreign students who graduate successfully from their schools, after overcoming these problems. Such successes are due to their efforts in learning and working, bringing them new abilities to meet the new environment's need. 人天生有社交的能力

Additionally, modern education has developed in a way for students gaining more chances to cooperate and get in touch with the society, making them more socialized. For instance, my university has provided its students chances of working with their teachers and for the social agencies, including enterprises, governments and so forth. During these works, students will know their abilities and disadvantages when they one day come into the society totally, and amass the knowledge and senses to cover such disadvantages. 学校给我们提供社交的机会，与企业社会接触。

To sum up, socialization is a determining issue for children who are changing our world in future. Despite of certain problems caused by current society, children are steady under the society's care. As long as we keep an open mind to the necessity of socialization, and as long as we learn the proper way to raise children, our offspring will come a long way toward bringing about a better society.

社交：与人交往、合作、应对新环境的能力

zclx

we don't know how children are socialized.

Undoubtedly, it is of extraordinary importance not only to teachers and parents but also to every member within the society, that how children are socialized today, which "determines the destiny of society". Yet, we have not found out a definite answer to this question.

I think, first of all, it is because we ourselves even cannot draw a clear picture of the perfect society in the future. All we know is several individual elements of the fundamental characters of the better future, such as democracy, justice, open etc. However, how to combine them together effectively? Will all those principles we think meaningful today will still work tomorrow? These questions are in a sence beyond our intellegence. Then how can we educate our children about something we do not thoroughly know? When your innocent son asks you :” Dad, how can we know polygamy is still kind of evil when someday in the future the number of men become twice as much as that of women?”, I think, the answer that “It never gotta happen” is not such an answer as to help  children socialized, while this is the unique answer.

In addition, unlike math, physics or literature, the course named socialization is not a course in which children can write down main principles on their notbook and take excercises backhome for further training, and then can improve themselves. Children should enter the real society to encounter all kinds of people and things, good or bad. Only in this way can children learn real lessons. But meanwhile, it is the way out the triditional education’s controll. So the special socialized chatacteristic of socialization education makes it a Gordian knot to us all.

Finally, every child has his or her own outlook of the value and the world. Even though not matural, it will lead to the diversification of the world, which is an important quality of a better siciety. However, there lies some possibility that our intentional socialization education will efface such kind of difference in children’s thought, because we tell every children what they can and cannot do, what society is a good society, you everyone should follow this way and construct that kind of society. Were this to happen, it would be a tragedy to society and to humanity. So each child need a individual course of socialization education which is specially designed for him or her, while it is neither feasible nor possible to force every couple of parents and every teacher to take the pain to do this. So it is another difficulty of the children-socialization problem.

Even though the task seems beyond our ability as presented above, it does not mean that we should just let it be. Still there is something we can do to help the children in socialize themselves. Help to set up a sense of social responsibility is to be first concered. Tell them to help the old man  who wants to cross the road, tell them not to destory the public property, these are basic things but not ignorable, because it is these little things that construct the social mind in children’s brain. Again, the skill to communicate with others and the ability to learn new things are equally important. Nevertheless, it is a painstaking process for everyone to grow sociallized. The children themselves are ought to be the main force to solve this task, while we should do the best to help them.

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

TOPIC: ISSUE131 - "The arts (painting, music, literature, etc.) reveal the otherwise hidden ideas and impulses of a society."
WORDS: 533          TIME: 00:45:00         

I disagree with the author's assertion that arts reveal the hidden ideas and impulses of a society form two perspectives, the arts' nature and its function.

To begin with, in its natural perspective, arts, no matter painting, music, or literature, are the abstraction of the real world. Although arts come from the real world, their contents are superior to the real objects. There are numerous examples which could support my above viewpoint, and I will only give two of them here. The first is the eminent oil painting sunflowers by Van Gogh, representative of the post-Impressionism, one of the most outstanding artists in 19th century. In the painting, he described the sunflower under the sun in detail; however, it is not just only a potted of sunflowers. By clearly observing you will find the flowers are more exaggerated than the real ones in both color and shape, through which the author conveyed the theme of the picture, passion and vigor of the life. Another proper example is the original African music, which reveals the scenes of labor and life in their own world. However, listening clearly you will find they are not totally same with the actual scenes, and they often exaggerate the brave of the native people and the bright side of life, by which the music will encourage the native people.

Additionally, in arts functional perspective, they convey little ideas and impulses of a society but the authors' individual emotion and feelings. Ancient Chinese paintings are proper examples here, in which we can often see a docile cattle with a little boy on its back and several little sea birds on the wide sea level. In these paintings, the painters only show their easy feeling and pleasant mode rather than the others. Another appropriate instance is the grand musical compositions of Mozart, who is not only an outstanding master of classical music, but also musical very rare genius in human history. Almost all his masterpieces convey his original feelings of the world, such as courage and optimism, and contain little social factors. Thus his many compositions are considered most suitable for prenatal education.

Nevertheless, ‘arts come from the real life’ is a constant truth. In some extents, it is reasonable to say no life no arts. Whatever the forms are, most art objects are from real life, such as the scenes in the paintings, the emotions in the music, and the stories in the novels. Even the arts that reveal the virtual facts, the paintings of the idols and novels of imaginations, are also come from our real life. For instance, the idols of the religions are often similar with human beings, and the imaginary characters in the science novels are always with two legs and a long tail that is similar with the original form of our humans. That is because human's imagination scope is limited by the real life, and the inspiration of art creation only can be bred on the real soil.

In conclusion, although arts, no matter painting, music, or literature, are from real life, arts neither in its nature nor in its function reveal the hidden ideas and impulses of a society as the author declares.

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

同主题学习见169 170 171 173 177楼

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

最后的使徒斑竹的AW进阶手册

AW进阶手册——精确写作，完善逻辑

前言：有关英文写作，想必大家在经历了一定时间的AW磨砺后都会有所感觉，至少能写出成文的句子，并把自己的意思很明确地翻译出来了。但这仅仅是一个开始，英文写作与中文写作中巨大的鸿沟造成了很多考生在自认为发挥很不错的情况下还是只能拿到3分到4分，即使事例很充分、观点很鲜明、结构很完整。

其中一个重要的障碍就是中文的低文脉（low context）和英文的高文脉（high context）之间的隔阂。我们看自己写的文章， 觉得什么都说到了，而且之间似乎联系很紧密，但由于时态、指代和表达上的问题，加上思想的随意性，很容易造成文章在别人，特别是英语母语者看不懂，理解不清楚，只能靠猜，这样自然就大大降低了阅卷官对其AW的印象。

鉴于此，鄙人写此文以提出自己对写作中精确表达意思及联系逻辑的一些看法，希望对各位希望能进一步提高自己英文写作能力，特别是AW应试能力的板油有所帮助。


PART A. 名词指代

这里说的指代有两种，一种是用代词、特殊疑问词指代前文提过的事物，另一种是用名词直接指代客观事物。前者由于存在诸多语法规律而比较容易掌握，基本语法都会的同学应该不会有问题，所以这里不再累述。而后者因为需要根据语境进行把握，所以相对较难。我们主要说这个。

上过新东方戴云教主旧托语法课的同学应该对一句话特别熟悉：“单数可数名词不得单独存在。”也就是说可数名词单独出现的时候，需要用惯词、物主代词或形容词前置。其中用定惯词表示前文所提过的事物或者一类事物，用不定惯词表示单一事物。惯词在这里其实是起到一个定义的作用，以防止句中的名词来历不明，有点类似于在计算机语言开始前定义变量的语句。这也说明了英文对于文脉的严谨要求，所有的词都要经过初定义以显示其所指对象，而在文中出现的名词也必有所指。因此对待第一次提到的名词就要特别小心，切忌天马行空按意识蹦名词出来。

举个例子（从本版第一页随机抽取，感谢houyanchun版友）

It is well known that the history of human beings is like a abundant and precious mine including various achievements which our ancestors have attained and all kinds of lesson ranging from policies to art which are waiting later generations to search and research carefully.

这是文章的第一句话，提到的名词都标出来了。history没问题，题目讨论对象，直接点出。human beings没问题，泛指世界人民。mine为比喻，由于用了like也比较明确，指自然界中的矿藏。achievements，问题有了，前文用到了mine，那么这里的achievements应该是跟mine有关，但这俩没有直接的字面联系，所以achievements应该是用来解释矿藏中藏的某些东西，换言之是个双重比喻，history-mine, achievement-?。ancestor用来限定和解释achievement的现实含义，没问题。lesson，问题又来了，除了和achievements问题类似外，lesson有教训、课程两种意思，这里指的哪个？从语句中无法判断，后面限定了是policies to art，那么似乎该理解成课程，可是是谁教的课程？mine？ history？ 无论对应哪个在字面上还是没有直接关系。至于之后的politics(政治，policies是政策的复数)和arts则更没有参照，属于无中生有，在题目规定了以history为讨论的大前提下，如何过度到这两个领域没有依据，因此显得没有逻辑。之后的generations和ancestors并列，似乎没问题，但仔细推敲也会发现，ancestors其实跟跟we(our)对比的，所以later generations应该指we，但如果这样直接用代词不就好了。

如果对每个名词都加以推敲，原文要表达的意思应该如下：

History of human beings is like an abundant and precious mine. It maintained treasures our ancestors left us, their arhievements and lessons ranged in diverse fields, from politics to arts, from sceince to humanity. Such a great mine is worthy searching carefully.

可以看出修改的部分主要是让所有名词都能找到它的对应点，一方面对句中，一方面对现实世界中。

名词指代精确的目的是为了让读者知道你所写文章所讨论的对象是什么，属于哪个范畴，因此在下笔先想好自己要讨论的事物，在写作中看看自己的表达有没有说清楚是这种事物，用到的词是否精确，如果不精确，就用从句、同位语、分词结构等加以限定、解释，从而达到精确表达的目的。



PART B. 句子语境

中文和英文一大区别就是中文没有时态，想说是什么时候的事情直接加时间状语修饰就行了。而英语对于句子的语境有着严格的规定，所叙述的情况发生在哪里、何时发生都要有所明确。由于大部分情况下语境都可以根据上下文判断，所以我们对这种要求不会很敏感，但写出来英文就容易给英语母语者造成困惑。如果说PART A在说的事情是词不能无中生有，那么这里所说的就是句子不能无中生有，空中楼阁。

还是先举例说明（从本版第一页随机抽取，感谢hardaway版友）

The speaker asserts that the growing significance of the video camera for its speciality of accurating and convincing will take place of the written records to play a main role of writing records. In my view, in some cases ,this contention is worth trusting in. While, the enduring development of the science for recording will not completely take all the room of documenting  fields as long as the people's pursuit for contents of language wasn't vanish.

这里两个句子，一个在说在特定情况下如何如何，一个要说某样事如何如何，两句话并不属于同一语境，按照正常的逻辑规律，应该是in certain cases....while under other circumstances....而后面一句的主语在之前也没提过，发生在什么时候也没说，怎么发生的也没说，仅仅是以对应题目为要求的话又显得词义替换过大，所以会让人搞不清这句话在说的是什么意思。

整理上下文并定义语境后修改如下：

....In my view, this prediction may happen in some cases, like for vivid entertainment or surficial stimulation. But as long as our language does not disappear, the science of multi-media recording will only develop parallel to written methods, without taking away all their existence.

在这里把句子中的一项名词性动作换作一般动词，表示其一直发生，从而表达判断、陈述的意思。而some cases则经常重新定义，可以指向后文又不显得空洞。

说到这里就需要提一下各种语态的用法，也算是帮大家复习下：

现代时：包括现代进行时、一般现代时，主要用于叙述正在发生的事情、真理、判断等适用于任何语境的句子。
将来时：表示预测、计划等，同样可表示判断。
过去时：用于叙述过去发生的事情。

可以发现，使用过去时的时候都是要特指发生过的某件事情，所以这时对于时间的语境要特别注意，通常不加限定的话是指人类历史中的事情，而加了限定则特指某一段时间，这段时间需要靠之前提到的内容进行指定。

举个简单的例子（从本版第一页随机抽取，感谢ccbban版友）

At the very beginning, human did create machines to help us in some specific kinds of work.

这里的时态限定就不清楚，beginning of what? Modern history? Industrialization? Human history?

结语：

最后附上一份我的WRITING SAMPLE的修改，修改者是耶鲁大学建筑史教授，可以说他的修改很全面的解释了什么是英文的文脉，文章主题在讲估衣街的保护与历史建筑的话题，跟ISSUE26是同一个主题：

Preservation and restoration of historical buildings and urban spaceshas never been an easy issue. [This sentence is fine grammatically. It promises that you will explain how much more complex these issues arefor Guyi St.]  During the past half century, China’s academic field may trulyunderstand this point:[There is a problem with tense here: "During the past half century"locates the 'time' of the sentence in the past 50 years. but the verb"may understand" is oriented to the future. Are you making a claimabout the past or the future here? Also, what is so important about the"academic field" understanding, rather than, say, the government, or thepublic, or developers?] after the republic was established in 1949, the conflict betweenmodernization and history propelled it to erase myriad relics fromancient cities.[you presume a conflict between modernization and history but don'texplain what that is. These are enormous terms with complex meanings butyou use them casually] Although experts have not stopped devoting their efforts to protectingthese cultural treasures,[There's another problem with 'time', that is, when are these expertsdevoting their efforts? Now, 50 years ago? Before 1980?] it was only after the 1980s that the history issue awakened theauthorities and forced them to seek better solutions than destruction.[What is the "history issue"? You use it casually but, as a reader, Idon't know what you're referring to. And how is destruction a solution?And if there are better solutions, what exactly is the problem?Preservation?]  

修改后：

The preservation and restoration of historic buildings and urban spaceshas never been an easy issue. But in China, these matters areparticularly difficult. The founding of the republic in 1949 led to thedestruction of countless ancient monuments, as Maoist revolutionariestried to divert popular attention from the past to the future. Only inthe 1980s did architects in this country begin to address the loss of China's cultural heritage. However, many national treasures continue to be destroyed as a result not of culturalrevolution but record breaking population growth and industrial development.

最最后，想说的是，英文写作特别是AW和以后大部分留学生需要面对的学术写作，是一项严谨而科学的工作，在文章中推敲自己的表达完善自己的逻辑显得非常必要。希望这篇能唤起大家对这方面的注意，在实践中多想一个方面，并通过练习来提高，以适应未来所要面对的写作任务。

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

AW进阶手册——ISSUE破题策略

所谓破题，即分析题目，掌握题目的侧重点，进而做到发展自己的分论点，组织文章结构，最后写出一篇完整的文章。千里之行，始于足下，AW之行，始于破题。

相信大家不管上没上过新东方，只要稍微入门应该都对ISSUE的破题有一个大概的认识，即从某几个方面去说一道题目，然后加一两个让步，进而发展出3、4个分论点，组成文章。可以说这个通用法则十分好用，对于再恶心的题目也能生挤出几段来，如果论证功底到家的话写个600字还是没问题的。
以第一高频ISSUE51为例 "Education will be truly effective only when it is specifically designed to meet the individual needs and interests of each student." 。

一个典型的新东方式破题思路为：
观点：平衡论点，有保留反对
1、让步兴趣很重要，有了兴趣才能认真学
2、学生不知道兴趣在哪里，所以基础教育还是很必要
3、让个人都满足兴趣的教育制度效率低，不可行

相信不少人都写过这篇，而且思路也跟这个差不多——的确非常好用，一般看题目都能想出一个出发点，然后费劲点想出令一个出发点，接下来让步点几乎是自动生成的，所以一道题破起来10秒搞定。

那么我们就先对这种平衡结构进行讨论。

有优点就有缺点，这种破题思路的优点明显：简单易行。但缺点也很明显：结构脱节，点与点之间缺乏联系。很多人在按这篇文章写完以后让步点就废了——如果仅仅从这三点论证的话。
此话怎讲？打个比方：
你跟我说，咱们在清华东门口建个楼吧。
我说：
1，诚然，这地皮贵，值得建楼
2，但是，最近使徒来袭，地震频发，建了楼要塌
所以我们还是别建了。
这个谈话中，第一条就是让步——我们日常生活中很习惯用这种方法，想否定一个人先肯定他，这样做的目的是表示礼貌和对对方观点的尊重。

问题是，写ISSUE要你对题目表示尊重么？显然，ISSUE中的让步点有着完全不一样的作用：
1、如之前所说，对于难以破题的题目，让步点几乎自动生成，所以一大作用是充实文章内容；
2、显示你思维的全面性，对问题多方面考虑。

首先第一条，因为为了保持题目的公平性和辨证性，所有ISSUE题目都是正反都能说的，不会象高考作文一样你不和谐就和谐掉你，而一个题目从正或反去考虑肯定有一到两个出发点是非常好想的，所以此时让步点就是从反面去想的一个最好象的点，因此在破题时跟正面主论点几乎同时生成，因此对快速破题有好处。很明显，第一条好处对拿高分没有什么帮助。

主要说第二条，思考全面的用来干什么的？用来支持你的论点。Issue的出发点要求develops a position on the issue with insightful reasons and/or persuasive examples, 也就是说你的所有原因和例证是用来支持position的。很让步点从反面出发点，怎么能用来支持正面观点？当然可以，它是用来堵反面出发点的。还是刚才的例子，我在承认了建楼的优势出提出自己的论点，这时前者只是对提议者的尊重，但我如果接下来补充说：“建楼带来的经济效益相比起地震的风险实在太低了，我算了期待值差了30个百分点。”这个时候承认建楼优势等于是把对方的嘴提前封上了。写AW的时候没人跟你辩论，所以你不能在别人提出置疑后再反驳，此时就是“没有困难创造困难”，主动出击进行观点完善。

然而很多考生在写作时忽略了自己的reason都是要支持同一个position的目的，以完成写作为目的，提纲+模版+例子直接凑出一篇文章，没有发挥让步的作用，于是让步点就废了，再严重点还会出现跑题、自相矛盾、立意不明的致命伤。

举个板油的习作例子，首页随机选的，感谢PilotBear

TOPIC: ISSUE94 - "Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student's field of study because acquiring knowledge of various academic disciplines is the best way to become truly educated."

I agree with the speaker that universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the field of the student's major for comprehensive knowledge could make the education more effectiveness.

I concede that the major course of the college student is significant to the students.........

However, just study the major courses may not the best way of truly educated..........

What is more, more knowledge out of the major of the students could help the students to solve their major problems.........

这是一个典型的让步段无意义的错误，题目中只说Universities should require every student to take a variety of courses outside the student's field of study，没说学校不应该让学生学主课，即修专业以外的课程不等于修主课质量下降。因此作者在这里提出的让步和题目没有直接的逻辑关系。
但这个让步确实是反面观点的出发点之一，不能放弃主课——但这其中需要一种联系，即戴云教主所讲的“恶劣影响法”。诚然，修非专业课和不修主课没有关系，但如果前者做过头了，会产生“恶劣影响”，把这种影响说清楚了，就能连上让步点了，即“学生精力有限，修了太多专业课以外的课就不能认真修主课了，而主课很重要”，可能只是一句话，就能把跑题的让步点带回正确的道路，但考生往往会忽略这些关键句，进而变成靠幻觉破题。

再来看个例子，随机抽取，感谢liuyan20000308

ISSUE155 - "Contemporary society offers so many ways of learning that reading books is no longer very important."

Thanks to the development of the science and technology we are provided with many means of learning. No matter which way to use when we learn the world as well as ourselves, television, newspaper, internet, or radio, magazine, etc, we are introduced in the sea of the knowledge. However, as the maxim states, a good book is a light to the soul, reading books is still and will continue to be an important way of learning which can not be replaced.

Admittedly, other means of learning have many superiorities over the book. Internet is convenient in searching whatever you want to know, but the information will not be very profound and most of the time the valuable information is available only to certain group of people. Besides, the long time users always have trouble with their eye sight and the health conditions. Let alone we can not carry a computer to wherever we go, that is it can not be portable. As to newspaper and magazine, they are good at informing readers with latest information, but the information remains little and sometimes not very accurate enough. Moreover, most of the information they provide are something related to entertainment. The price of certain magazine is too high to reach everyone's consumption. Let's look at television now. It is undoubted that television do play an important role in our life and in our education. In recent years, it is common for many adults to further their education through by taking part in TV university or by means of television. But on the other hand, the information they provide can not be used more than once. If we want to watch or review the material again, it almost impossible.
..................


这里让步了书籍以外的学习方式的优势，作为对题目的回应。题目中提到由于大量其它媒体的出现使书籍不再重要，这道题其实就是一个其它媒体的优势和书籍优势的辨证分析，因此提出反题目观点时即承认书籍的重要性，因此让步应为承认其它媒体的重要性。那么来看看作者的论证——这个是让步么？通篇在说网络、电视、杂志的害处，忽略了题目中对其它媒体优势的辨证承认，这时让步段已经不是让步段了，而是自己的论点段。问题是作者偏巧又用了让步的关键词“Admittedly”和一个让步的主题句，于是这段的内容就成了相互矛盾的，而让步的优势又得不到体现。

以上内容是有关经典平衡结构的一点想法，初学者可以多加注意。这种结构最为出色的一篇文章，个人强烈推荐北美范文的ISSUE11，它很好的利用了让步论点对自己观点支持性，在结尾处用了两个"As long as"结构把让步点的优势变成了自己的优势，四两拨千斤，十分聪明。北美范文这里下：https://bbs.gter.net/viewthre ... 26amp%3Btypeid%3D41

作为平衡观点本身还有多种发展方向，可以根据题目变化，再掌握了基本的观点发展方式后可以考虑根据题目来组织自己的想法，由于这里涉及到每道题的特殊情况，在这样一个综述的帖子里难以说清楚，所以先略过去，大家可以参考IQ28斑竹的对于Issue的一些想法(暨平衡思路的结构组织分析)。

然而很多情况下，在我们对一个题目有了深刻的认识后，就会产生3、4点甚至更多讨论出发点，这种时候花宝贵的时间用来让步与自己对立的观点就显得得不偿失，往往想让步点例子的功夫就失去充分阐述自己论点的机会了。因此遇到这种情况可以把让步点在结尾或开头一笔代过，用一个长句子加一个比较分析概述，而把注意力集中到正面论点阐述上。

OK，我们现在来讨论正面论点的发展。

一般而言，ETS出的ISSUE题目都是以社会、教育、政治、哲学这些很抽象很社会化的学科为话题的，因此所有的题目都能找到它的社会归属，我们的讨论出发点就也就可以大致分为三个方向：1、话题的本质，或者说内在逻辑，比如产生的根源；2、话题的作用，即外在逻辑，比如对社会的影响；3、话题的定义，即逻辑基本点，比如话题中某个关键词的定义。这三点是ISSUE破题发展分论点的出发点，也是决定我们在面对ISSUE是选择POSITION的根本原因，如何合理地选取出发点，做到结构清晰连贯、观点便于论证、论证严密强大是ISSUE破题的重中之重。

举个例子，还是ISSUE150 "Education will be truly effective only when it is specifically designed to meet the individual needs and interests of each student."

1、话题本质：个人兴趣与教育制度的契合度问题，可以产生的分论点：教育如何满足个人兴趣？怎样实施？
2、话题作用：教育制度适合个人兴趣后对我们带来的影响，可以产生的分论点：能否提高学生的积极性？对社会带来什么负担？对学生带来什么负面影响？
3、话题定义：题目中具有可讨论性关键词的定义，比如effective，可以产生的分论点：什么是effective？社会总体进步？个人价值实现？和谐社会？

可以看到1和2产生观点很容易重复，因为本质上讲这二者是一体的，在破一些实用性比较强而且用意很直接的题目时这二者区别不大。但明显第3点的立意比前2者抽象很多，这是涉及到价值观、世界观讨论的问题。

这也是我为什么极力推崇第3方向出发点的原因：深刻、本质化。

近代哲学将重点从一些形而上的世界本源话题转移到了语言学话题，提出以语言为架构来研究知识系统，这不是因为哲学发展到了尽头，而是因为研究语言能最好的揭示思维结构，从而为我们的发展提供指导意见。在ISSUE写作中采取对题目关键词进行剖析的手法，正是一种近代哲学的做法，它可以让你的文章具有自己的基石，形成根本性的讨论层面，从而在本质上强化文章的论证。这些的ISSUE题目有很多，比如ISSUE185“Scandals—whether in politics, academia, or other areas—can be useful. They focus our attention on problems in ways that no speaker or reformer ever could. ”这里什么是useful就很值得讨论，而且之后一句的解释也是意在说明这个useful是怎么产生的，因此讨论useful的定义就显得很必要了。而对于这类关键词的讨论，则又是一个庞大的话题，我们一直所争论的“正义”“正确”“有用”“有利”“美好”“重要”这些带有主观判断的词汇都在其范畴之内，我会在以后的文章中针对这一话题进行细化的讨论。

采用话题定义出发点的破题，可以以讨论题目中某一关键词为BODY第一部分，进而展开全文写作。需要注意的是，关键词解释想要发挥作用，就一定要让它跟另外两点作为高同步率，即对关键词的解释可以直接对应到产生的影响和本质。以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."为例，讨论“just”的定义为符合人的天性”或者“保持人们的生活水平”就会对应到不同的影响，“人的天性”会自然想到违反不正义的法律即实现人的天性（自由友爱美德等），而后者则会联系到违反不正义的法律是为了社会发展生产力提高，因此得出的论证是不同的。

对于一些比较难的题目，1和2则容易产生很明确的区别，最典型的如ISSUE221 "The chief benefit of the study of history is to break down the illusion that people in one period of time are significantly different from people who lived at any other time in history."

很多人看到这道题第一眼连它说的是什么都不清楚，更别说破题了，此时就有必要从1话题本质来进行讨论——这个问题是如何产生的？这幻觉是哪来的？然后才能讨论这种幻觉带来的社会影响、作用、认识历史的目的等等问题。此时1和2的分工也比较明确，1解释题目，2说它对不对。之所以说难题才会有区别，是因为简单题根本不用解释，建个全球大学谁不知道怎么建、教育个性化谁不知道怎么弄……遇到这种题，问题的产生和它的影响是一致的。更准确的说，我这里说的“难题”和“简单题”也是以话题本质和话题影响是否容易分开为标准来划分的。

事实上我们大部分时候用的破题点都是属于影响范畴的，因为我们主要是为了讨论题目的说法对不对，而这个讨论的标准就是它的影响好不好，相比而言1和3更象是一种铺垫——把问题说明白了，再去判断它的对错就水到渠成。从这点而言，2是最必要的论证点，你可以不说题目的话题是怎么来的，也可以不解释题目中的关键词，但一定得讨论题目的话题有什么影响，否则就得不出一个position。但三者的区分也不是特别明确，因为在1和3中也可以贯穿选择position的理由。比如在论证illusion的时候，这个词本身就带有负评价，因此已经对立场有所判断了。

综上所述，我推荐在发展ISSUE分论点时适当考虑1和3的内容，即讨论话题产生的根源、社会原因和话题本身的定义，这样可以提高写作的立意，使之更具有深度。而社会影响方面则是ISSUE分论点的重点，适当的积累背景知识会对一块的提高有所帮助，比如ISSUE26 "Most people would agree that buildings represent a valuable record of any society's past, but controversy arises when old buildings stand on ground that modern planners feel could be better used for modern purposes. In such situations, modern development should be given precedence over the preservation of historic buildings so that contemporary needs can be served." 一般人知道历史建筑有审美价值、政治意义，而专业知识则能从建筑进化适应气候、环境陌生化带来社会成员心情变化、文脉缺失破坏文化个性等方面来解释问题。当然我是从我的专业背景来解释，大家都不是全能者，不可能哪道题都成专家，但对于高频题的背景知识适当了解是很必要的，因此推荐去看看同主题写作系列，平时多加关注社会新闻和社会评论也是有好处。

最后我还想提下另一种分论点破题思路，即分领域破题。这种思路旨在从不同的领域来关注一个话题的正确性，典型的如ISSUE4的北美范文。

"No field of study can advance significantly unless outsiders bring their knowledge and experience to that field of study."

I strongly agree with the assertion that significant advances in knowledge require expertise from various fields. The world around us presents a seamless web of physical and anthropogenic forces, which interact in ways that can be understood only in the context of a variety of disciplines. Two examples that aptly illustrate this point involve the fields of cultural anthropology and astronomy.

Consider how a cultural anthropologist's knowledge about an ancient civilization is enhanced not only by the expertise of the archeologist--who unearths the evidence--but ultimately by the expertise of biochemists, geologists, linguists, and even astronomers......

An even more striking example of how expertise in diverse fields is needed to advance knowledge involves the area of astronomy and space exploration......

这里作者从古文明学和天文学两个领域来讨论题目的有效性，进而支持题目观点。

分领域讨论的好处和让步类似，即简单快捷，由于在不同领域内你只需要考虑最基本的一到两个出发点，这样加在一起一个领域就一个，罗列起来便成了一篇完整的文章，可以很方便的发展出多个分论点，而且不愁论证内容重复、没有例子用。但这种分论点的缺点也很明显——不完全归纳。你可以说在两三个领域里这个立场成立，但不能以此为依据推出其它领域内立场也成立，由于不同领域要分析的背景又不一样，想要升华主题做到抽象化后便于推广到其它领域，等于又回到了之前的破题思路，难度反而变大，因此对于想拿高分特别是满分的考生我个人不是很推荐这种破题思路。

另一种类似的思路，也是以领域为依据，只不过将思路限于一个领域内，这样比起之前的抽象思考更加具象便于展开讨论，又可以集中火力分析一个领域的深层次问题，算是在前两种策略上进行了一个折中。典型的是一篇官方5分范文：

"The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things."

I can agree with the statement above that, "The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things. "  The statement  is an accurate description of how many people form great ideas from ordinary things in life. Sports are all great ideas that are made from commonplace things.  What makes sports some of the best ideas is not what they began as but what they evolved into.
....

这里作者把精力都放到体育上了，所以展开论点的时候很方便，另外作者在发展分论点的时候也分成棒球、篮球几个分领域，这样整体下来文章就象讲故事一样，十分好展开，要是个体育爱好者估计能写上几千字。

不过评语里也很明确地指出了这种破题思路的缺陷：

Instead of focusing solely on the universal appeal of sports, however, the essay introduces the idea that sports cross "international divides of religion, race, and politics."  This is a perceptive idea, but it is not effectively supported or sustained.

这里虽然作者想办法要说关注体育等于别的领域也都涉及了，但是却被说没有有效支持——其实根本没法有效支持，本来一个领域就无法代表其它领域，如果作者要论证体育能代表总体情况，估计又得花上几百字，够写另外一篇的了。

同第一种新东方式思路，分领域破题也具有简单易行的好处，对于难题、新手而言值得一用，但想拿6分不宜，因此最好充分准备提纲写作，熟悉ISSUE的深入破题思路。

总之，ISSUE破题是建立在对题目的充分理解基础之上的，虽然有些技巧和套路能帮助短时间写出文章，但这样却不利于发展有高度有深度的论证，因此思考在ISSUE破题中是最为重要的，我在这里只是提供一些破题的思路方向，帮助大家不至于遇到题目无话可说，但还是需要具体问题具体分析，大家不妨回去拿几道题练一下。而我个人的思路也有限，相信勤于思考的话大家也能找到更好的解决方案。

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

AW进阶手册—— ISSUE首段写作策略

首先说精确的ISSUE开头，最精确的ISSUE开头是什么？恩，"I agree with the speaker that (把题目抄一遍)"，这个开头绝对不跑题。问题是，除了"I agree"，这个开头还有什么信息量么？

类似的开头还有"Is (把题目抄一遍)? I agree.""Who (把题目谓宾成分抄一遍)? I think it's (把题目主语抄一遍)""The (题目抄一遍) has been widely discussed. I think it's 题目一部分"等等此类开头在我改过的作文里大概占20%左右，是最简单的开头方式，因为此易上手且没难度所以广受欢迎。

另外还有30%左右的ISSUE是这种开头的发展型，通常会在后面接个"However, under certain conditions..."于是成了经典的让步结构，或者直接否定题目观点，以However为转接后面讨论特别情况，这种用在题目叙述比较绝对的题中比较多，比如“Only xxx can make xxx”这种。

第一类开头的缺点很明显——没有信息量，其实写成"I don't agree with the speaker."就行了，这种开头对于题目内容比较简单的ISSUE用起来很合适，省下的时间可以用到BODY中去。然而由于信息量不足，它容易造成的影响是作者在之后的论点发展中缺乏方向，经常出现分论点重叠、车轱辘话来回说的问题。

第二类开头比第一类略好，至少让步段和主观点段不会观点重叠，但第一，certain conditions/specific situation/...这种“分情况讨论”的前提没有信息量，说到底还是废话，第二，由于让步条件不明，这样的文章写出来经常前后自相矛盾或者跑题。

这两种开头起码还能保证观点明确，如果BODY写的好也能拿到4.5甚至5分，但是可能是嫌这开头太模式化，或者不满意这种开头，自己写了些变体，结果使这种开头本来仅存的优势也失去了——即观点明确。请记住，ISSUE为立论，必有主论点，这个主论点可以立场中立，但一定要立场鲜明，这样才能使之后的BODY有效为论点服务。

怎样的让步式开头可以避免跑题/观点不明确？

首先说下让步观点的出发点，即辩证法，凡事都是双刃剑，其影响存在对立统一的两面，提出让步观点一是可以让自己的观点全面，从而封上被攻击的漏洞，二也可以在对付有些难题的时候不至于无话可说。也因此由于“对立”比“统一”更直观，所以很多人在写作时容易忽视了“统一”，于是自相矛盾。

其实达成统一并不难，只要在观点中有一个明确的态度，给出一个不含糊的解决方案就可以了。我们看看范文是怎么做的：

题目：

"In our time, specialists of all kinds are highly overrated.  We need more generalists -- people who can provide broad perspectives."

In this era of rapid social and technological change leading to increasing life complexity and psychological displacement, both positive and negative effects among persons in Western society call for a balance in which there are both specialists and generalists.

非常简短的开头，一个分句给出背景，然后给出观点：call for a balance。同样是题目说到more，作者用了非常直接的手段点明立场，平衡，没有什么more不more的，谁也不more，然后后文就从两个方面来阐述这个问题。有人可能说，这不是还是没有重点么？没错，作者在二选一的选择中没有做出选择，但是他的立场很明确：我就是不选择，因为我有这些理由……

同样道理，在遇到题目绝对叙述的时候，我们可以用平衡观点来说，Admittedly....However, we cannot neglect....或者I don't agree...since in some aspects...这种时候开头在两个不同情况存在的前提下为二者达成共识形成一个中心句，就能有效统领全文了。

以上两种开头可以说是最简洁有效的，通常不超过半分钟就能搞定，对于时间有限的同学而言很实用。但需要注意的是，这种开头不仅仅千篇一律破坏阅卷官对你的印象，而且由于缺乏对后文内容的暗示而使文章不能有效组织。我们知道写PAPER的时候前面会出现KEY WORDS和ABSTRACT两个部分，用以向读者介绍本文的结构和内容。GRE AW当然做不到这一点，但是开头却能起到同样的作用。有了对后文的暗示，读者会在过程中更有效的follow your ideas, 同时这种写法也强迫作者在文章开始之初就规划好全文，避免了一边想一边写搞得分论点混乱的问题。

还是看下范文：

题目

"It is unfortunate that today's educators place so much emphasis on finding out what students want to include in the curriculum and then giving it to them.  It is the educator's duty to determine the curriculum and the students' duty to study what is presented to them."

As an elementary educator, I believe this stance is extremist.  Educators and the public must come to a middle road.  The high road and the low road are intimated in this statement.  I believe the high road on this topic (from whence should curriculum come) represents a nouveau approach.  Ask the students what they want to learn and study for the year; then meander, research and branch off of their interests.  The low road on this topic (directly endorsed by this statement) is old fashioned and outdated.  The assumptions behind this view include a magical ability by teachers to infuse reams of information, data and knowledge into students' brains that then become internalized and applied by the students.

这里作者的开头有些长，不推荐，不过他很有效的把全文的观点归纳为两个方面，即一边不好，另一边也不好，从本质上讲这个开头和上一篇范文的开头很象，但提出了分论点并说明了理由，这样后文再写就能很好的照应。当然这个开头确实有些沉冗了，建议大家写的时候能再概括些，只是用一两个关键词表明自己分论点的出发点即可。

再来看篇5分范文：
题目：

"The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things."

I can agree with the statement above that, "The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things. "  The statement  is an accurate description of how many people form great ideas from ordinary things in life. Sports are all great ideas that are made from commonplace things.  What makes sports some of the best ideas is not what they began as but what they evolved into.

非常眼熟的开头呵呵，"I can agree with...抄题", 但之后作者用三句话把文章的大体意思介绍了下，说体育如何能证明这个观点，从而把一个很大的话题细化，方便了后文的展开。当然这篇的出发点不太好，只局限于一个领域，在评论中也认为这是此文无法拿到满分的原因。

总之，简单开头的结构比较单纯，相应的也比较好掌握，缺点也很明显，可以通过增加信息量的方式来进行弥补，希望大家根据自己的情况取舍。

OK接下来讨论我们更为常用，特别是写作文经过一定训练的老手比较喜欢的开头，背景引出话题式开头，或者叫复杂开头。

通常学术论文都会在开篇就自己提出的论题介绍相关背景，从而引出自己的论题，这种开头显得有来源有知识，而且在后文的论证中也可以用到背景，因此在时间允许的情况下进行ISSUE写作用这样的开头是个不错的选择。但由于结构相对比较复杂，有时候会出现介绍背景与文章无关、句子结构散漫的问题，如何让背景介绍发挥最大的作用就成了必须讨论的问题。

背景介绍也分成几种，比较常见的是社会背景介绍，即“With the development of society/technology/information”“Modern world is becoming so..."这种内容比较泛而且比较好写，一般遇到大部分题倒都能套上。但由于这个概念非常泛化，所以很容易就跟观点脱节，从而导致文章的开头逻辑不明确，背景介绍成为废话。

还是来看板油的习作（再次随机抽取，感谢strokes7）

150"Because of television and worldwide computer connections, people can now become familiar with a great many places that they have never visited. As a result, tourism will soon become obsolete."

Evolving with the development of technology, television and computer on internet supply human beings more and more information of the great world, such as pictures and literal introductions of many places. Should the information on television and computer take place of tourism? I do not think so. Even our visions are broadened by the information, television and computer would not prevent people from traveling, but stimulate people to do so.

红色为背景介绍，蓝色为主题句。
第一句能不能联系到第二句？可以，但并不直接。supply more information跟取代旅游有什么必然联系么？红字部分和蓝字部分的转折缺乏联系，这期间缺掉了一个环节，即问题的产生：由于电脑电视带来的信息越来越多，很多地方不去都可以知道，于是乎，有的人认为旅游过时了。然后再提问，水到渠成。

因此，背景式开头很重要的一点就是提供的背景与提出的观点光滑过度（smooth transition），存在必然逻辑联系，这样一来文章的开头就会显得比较有力度，而后文也可以有效利用介绍的背景来作为论证依据。在写作背景式开头的时候，考虑起始句如何引出观点，如何利用背景是关键，不要为了背景而写背景。

下面介绍几种其它的背景写作模式，希望能帮大家开拓思路。

引用式。开头引用名人名句，最俗的就是翟少成老骂的那个"a coin has two sides”，这种开头难度很高，想用好也很难，在不知道题目的情况下谁也不能直接找出一句跟题目对应很好能用于引出观点句子，所以只适用于写过的文章。如果撞大运撞上了自己找过句子的题目，那么无疑用这种开头会比较占便宜。

疑问式。这里说的疑问式不是把题目用问句写一遍然后自答，而是提出一些与题目相关的问题引起思考，从而引出文章观点，从某种意义上说，是间接复述题目，然后将中间的逻辑点用叙述方式加以连接，从而引出主题。比如上面说到的Issue150，开头说"Ever wanted to go somewhere far in universe? Ever complained about insufficience of money which keeps you from dream place? Now with the development of internet and television, such problems can be easily solved.“

叙事式。这种开头在长文章新闻中非常常见，似乎也是老美比较喜欢的一种开头，我看过的杂志里至少有一半文章是这么写的。但由于叙事对篇幅要求比较多而且不易掌握，所以在ISSUE实战中不是很常用。还是Issue150举个例子。"I sit down in front of my PC, turn on internet and login in a cyber world. Myriad images appear, as if I have got into the opposite side of the earth. How convenient it is! So you may wonder, is tourism in need any more?" 有时间的同学不妨尝试下。

无论什么形式的开头，为论点提供支持是最重要的，这种背景可以是对反面观点有利的，用于引出转折，也可以是对正面观点有利的，直接引出观点，或者是介绍题目背景，从而剖析题目的侧重点。

看下官方范文对开头背景的应用：
题目

"The best ideas arise from a passionate interest in commonplace things."

首先要说这是一个非常庞大的开头，对于非疯牛级人物不推荐。
尽管很长，但这段的内容非常精练，每句话都是必不可少的，和其它内容融为一体。具体见点评

Even the most brilliant thinkers, from Socrates to Satre, live lives in time.（用事实提出题目观点的发展背景：牛人生活在时代中） A childhood, an adolescence, an adulthood; these are common to me and you as well as the greatest writers.（解释事实，进一步连接题目“common"） Furthermore, many of the great thinkers we esteem in our Western culture lived somewhat unevetful lives.（再深入，将事实泛化为普遍情况，从而提供大背景） What distinguished their life from say a common laborer was their work. Therefore, what provided the grist for their work?（间接提问引出观点：grist of work） One might say that they were brilliant and this alone was sufficient to distinguish their lives from the masses.(提出一种回答，他人观点，用以做完善的底子) Intellect alone can not devise situations or thoughts from no where; there must be a basis and that basis is most common, if not always, observation of the common, of the quotidian.（批驳他人观点进而进行完善，引向自己的观点basis） Critics of this idea may argue that these thinkers were products of fine educations and were well schooled in the classics. This, they may point to, is the real basis for their knowledge.（再提出一个他人观点，将话题进一步引向自己观点） I would agrue （主题句先行词，阐明观点） that although it may be a benefit to study classics and be well schooled in diverse disciplines, these pursuits merely refine and hone an ability each and every person has, the ability to study human nature. Where best to study human nature than in the day to day routine each one of us can witness in him or herself or those around us.

先不提NB的语言，但是这段的结构就让人叹为观止，背景-》问题-》两个答案-》作者答案，层层递进连接紧密，一句废话也没有，所有的句子都有它的存在理由，在这里背景只是用于讨论的话题，而观点则自然成为了段落的重点，从而使文章态度鲜明，而否定的两个他人观点一方面使过度平滑，另一方面也否认了可能的反驳情况，从而令作者的观点更好更强大。当然这里略显得沉冗，个人认为一个他人观点足以。

回到开篇的话，背景式写作由于提供了更多样的可能性，所以能够令文章更具有个性，一个好的背景可以让文章开头就光彩十足，引出观点也更为舒服，因此在选择自己要讨论的背景时也需要斟酌，即使是最俗的development of technology/society...也要用细节来使其与自己的论题对应，避免出现空泛的背景，这样不但不能精确发挥作用，也不能突出个性。

当然，我在这里提供的想法只限于我对作文的理解，必然在多样性上受到局限，也会有不正确之处，望广大板油批评性吸收，写出只属于自己的ISSUE！

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

AW进阶手册——完善段落逻辑衔接，挑战ISSUE满分结构

PART01、ISSUE结构的定义

想突破一项，首先就得明白这项所指的是什么。我们这里讨论的结构（structure/frame）是指一篇文章大的思路主线，是撑起一篇文章的骨架。它包括总论点、分论点和结论。段落内的小结构不在此讨论范围。换句话说，结构就是我们平时写的提纲（outline）。因此练习结构写作只需要练习提纲写作即可。

举个例子，北美范文ISSUE17（此文是我个人认为北美ISSUE中的经典之作，因此本文大部分正面论证会以此文为例，故在此全文引用）：

"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."

According to this statement, each person has a duty to not only obey just laws but also disobey unjust ones. In my view this statement is too extreme, in two respects. First, it wrongly categorizes any law as either just or unjust; and secondly, it recommends an ineffective and potentially harmful means of legal reform.

First, whether a law is just or unjust is rarely a straightforward issue. The fairness of any law depends on one's personal value system. This is especially true when it comes to personal freedoms. Consider, for example, the controversial issue of abortion. Individuals with particular religious beliefs tend to view laws allowing mothers an abortion choice as unjust, while individuals with other value systems might view such laws as just. The fairness of a law also depends on one's personal interest, or stake, in the legal issue at hand. After all, in a democratic society the chief function of laws is to strike a balance among competing interests. Consider, for example, a law that regulates the toxic effluents a certain factory can emit into a nearby river. Such laws are designed chiefly to protect public health. But complying with the regulation might be costly for the company; the factory might be forced to lay off employees or shut down altogether, or increase the price of its products to compensate for the cost of compliance. At stake are the respective interests of the company's owners, employees, and customers, as well as the opposing interests of the region's residents whose health and safety are impacted. In short, the fairness of the law is subjective, depending largely on how one's personal interests are affected by it.

The second fundamental problem with the statement is that disobeying unjust laws often has the opposite affect of what was intended or hoped for. Most anyone would argue, for instance, that our federal system of income taxation is unfair in one respect or another. Yet the end result of widespread disobedience, in this case tax evasion, is to perpetuate the system. Free-riders only compel the government to maintain tax rates at high levels in order to ensure adequate revenue for the various programs in its budget.

Yet another fundamental problem with the statement is that by justifying a violation of one sort of law we find ourselves on a slippery slope toward sanctioning all types of illegal behavior, including egregious criminal conduct. Returning to the abortion example mentioned above, a person strongly opposed to the freedom-of-choice position might maintain that the illegal blocking of access to an abortion clinic amounts to justifiable disobedience. However, it is a precariously short leap from this sort of civil disobedience to physical confrontations with clinic workers, then to the infliction of property damage, then to the bombing of the clinic and potential murder.

In sum, because the inherent function of our laws is to balance competing interests, reasonable people with different priorities will always disagree about the fairness of specific laws. Accordingly, radical action such as resistance or disobedience is rarely justified merely by one's subjective viewpoint or personal interests. And in any event, disobedience is never justifiable when the legal rights or safety of innocent people are jeopardized as a result.

此文的结构比较简单：总论点，题目论点不正确。反驳理由：1、正义为主观因素；2、简单的不遵守非正义法律会造成适得其反；3、容易使社会秩序混乱。结论：无法做到判断法律是否正确，更容易产生恶劣影响，所以应该用别的标准去衡量对法律的态度。

再来看个官方范文，由于官方的高分范文大多结构严谨（似乎也验证了高分ISSUE的标准），所以就选取了大家最熟悉的专家和全才这篇：

In this era of rapid social and technological change leading to increasing life complexity and psychological displacement, both positive and negative effects among persons in Western society call for a balance in which there are both specialists and generalists.

Specialists are necessary in order to allow society as a whole to properly and usefully assimilate the masses of new information and knowledge that have come out of research and have been widely disseminated through mass global media. As the head of Pharmacology at my university once said (and I paraphrase):"I can only research what I do because there are so many who have come before me to whom I can turn for basic knowledge. It is only because of each of the narrowly focussed individuals at each step that a full and true understanding of the complexities of life can be had. Each person can only hold enough knowledge to add one small rung to the ladder, but together we can climb to the moon." This illustrates the point that our societies level of knowledge and technology is at a stage in which there simply must be specialists in order for our society to take advantage of the information available to us.

Simply put, without specialists, our society would find itself bogged down in the Sargasso sea of information overload. While it was fine for early physicists to learn and understand the few laws and ideas that existed during their times, now, no one individual can possibly digest and assimilate all of the knowledge in any given area.

On the other hand, Over specialization means narrow focii in which people can lose the larger picture. No one can hope to understand the human body by only inspecting one's own toe-nails. What we learn from a narrow focus may be internally logically coherent but may be irrelevant or fallacious within the framework of a broader perspective. Further, if we inspect only our toe-nails, we may conclude that the whole body is hard and white. Useful conclusions and thus perhaps useful inventions must come by sharing among specialists. Simply throwing out various discovieries means we have a pile of useless discoveries, it is only when one can make with them a mosaic that we can see that they may form a picture.

Not only may over-specialization be dangerous in terms of the truth, purity and cohesion of knowledge, but it can also serve to drown moral or universall issues. Generalists and only generalists can see a broad enough picture to realize and introduce to the world the problems of the environment. With specialization, each person focusses on their research and their goals. Thus, industrialization, expansion, and new technologies are driven ahead. Meanwhile no individual can see the wholisitc view of our global existence in which true advancement may mean stifling individual specialists for the greater good of all.

Finally, over-specialization in a people's daily lives and jobs has meant personal and psychological compartmentalization. People are forced into pigeon holes early in life (at least by university) and must conciously attempt to consume external forms of stimuli and information in order not to be lost in their small and isolated universe. Not only does this make for narrowly focussed and generally pooprly-educated individuals, but it guarantees a sense of loss of community, often followed by a feeling of psychological displacement and personal dissatisfaction.

Without generalists, society becomes inward-looking and eventually inefficient. Without a society that recongnizes the impotance of braod-mindedness and fora for sharing generalities, individuals become isolated. Thus, while our form of society necessitates specialists, generalists are equally important. Specialists drive us forward in a series of thrusts while generalists make sure we are still on the jousting field and know what the stakes are.

结构是很典型的平衡论点：主论点：专家全才都很重要。分论点：1、A专家很必要，要解决大量信息问题 B没有专家我们会很惨；2、全才也很重要 A 光专家容易局限学术视野 B 容易造成关联问题 C 容易产生个人问题 结论：二者都很重要。由于这里的言论都很接近，所以也给以前的不少考生以“ISSUE就是正反话来回说的问题”。

以下我将以这两篇为例来解释下对ISSUE完善结构的认识。


PART02、ISSUE结构的评判标准

还是让我们先来复习下ISSUE写作要求和评分标准：

You will be given a choice between two "Issue" topics.  Each states an opinion on an issue of broad interest and asks you to discuss the issue from any perspective(s) you wish, so long as you provide relevant reasons and examples to explain and support your views.

6  A 6 paper presents a cogent, well-articulated analysis of the complexities of the issue and demonstrates mastery of the elements of effective writing.

        A typical paper in this category

--develops a position on the issue with insightful reasons and/or persuasive examples
--sustains a well-focused, well-organized discussion
--expresses ideas clearly and precisely
--uses language fluently, with varied sentence structure and effective vocabulary
--demonstrates superior facility with the conventions (grammar, usage, and mechanics) of standard written English but may have minor flaws

5  A 5 paper presents a well-developed analysis of the complexities of the issue and demonstrates a strong control of the elements of effective writing.

        A typical paper in this category

--develops a position on the issue with well-chosen reasons and/or examples
--is focused and generally well organized
--expresses ideas clearly and well
--uses varied sentence structure and appropriate vocabulary
--demonstrates facility with the conventions of standard written English but may have minor flaws

有关结构的要求已经用红字标出，标准说得很笼统，只说是well-focused, well-organized，虽然说可以from any perspective you wish，显然这是忽悠人的话，写得天马行空用大腿想也是拿不了高分的。

那么well-focused和well-organized的具体要求呢？

讨论之前我们还是要明确ISSUE的写作目的，在6分范文的总要求里写的很清楚：cogent, well-articulated analysis of the complexities of the issue。简单来说，就是论证有力。

想作到论证有力自然就需要多个段落同时为一个论点服务，在一边倒的写法中，这个论点就是驳倒反面观点，在平衡写法中，就是说明倾向任何一方的错误性。这就是所谓的well-focused。做到这一点，就能避免段落上的跑题和文字的浪费。

而要达到这个目的话，各论点之间的组织就很必要。就象踢足球，11个人个人能力都很强但配合不足，很难拼得过整体配合强大的队伍。如果段落的各分论点相互没有联系，就等于文章由一个个小文章组合而成，虽然这样可以算是观点全面，满足分析的complexities，但即使是complex不同于complication，是存在相互联系的系统问题。因此让段落之间相互联系，可以让观点更为有力，这就是所谓的well-organized。

接下来用具体对两篇范文的分析来说明这种结构的完整性。

对于北美的ISSUE17：

虽然文章各段看上去象是并列关系，但其实它们内部的联系十分紧密，存在着层层深入的逻辑递进。
首先对just的讨论是从字面意思去批判题目，也就是前提论证法（参见AW进阶手册: ISSUE破题策略），以此来确定全文对题目的基调，简单明了，便于读者从浅入深去了解论题的荒谬性。
然后从这种策略应用本身的问题来批判题目。虽然表面上没有做让步或者其它与第一论点对应的讨论，但很明显这段的讨论前提是让步假设了存在不正义的法律，然后说明即使有这种法律，单纯的违反也不能达到目的。（这一段的论证并不充分，个人认为这是本范文最大的瑕疵，没有对一个分论点进行充分的展开，也因为这样导致它与第一论点的衔接看起来并不那么自然）
第三段将第二段的危险进一步深化，扩展到社会层面，以恶劣影响法来说明命题的荒谬性。
至此，全文形成了字面->抽象分析->具体社会效应的逻辑线，层层递进，相互咬合，缺一不可。

对于官方范文：

文章采用了正反结构，以专家的优缺点为视野展开论证。有点象我们很喜欢用的正反转折保留意见，但因为两者篇幅接近所以被算作正反平衡结构。（要补充的是，这里很明显后半部分篇幅更多，因此我们可以认为ISSUE中重要的放前面还是放后面并没有定论，哪一段更重要也没有定论，其实每一段都很重要，这样才是完整强力的结构）。

首先强调二者的平衡关系。
然后从专家的优点说明，信息爆炸造成单一领域的难度。
接着用否则假设法（没专家的会怎样），说明缺少专家会出现问题。
然后从专家缺点说明，三层，全部为否则假设法（没全才的话会怎样）。
这一论点由三个二级分论点组成：
A 学术层面
B 社会层面
C 个人层面
这三个层面是否为层层递进仁者见仁，我个人的观点是作者这么写的肯定是把个人层面作为最深层次的分论点来讨论的，因为社会影响的根源来自于个人的影响。这种递进思路似乎也能反映美国人的价值观和世界观。

由此形成了一个完成的辨证过程。由于是官方范文所以它的标准很高，我想即使是只写出后面三个二级分论点来组成一篇文章，也能拿到很高的分数。

分析了两篇文章的优点，接下来就说说我们从它们能学到什么，它们怎样来帮助我们拿高分。


PART03、ISSUE结构的组织手法

一、前提论证

这一点在ISSUE破题思路中有写过，即对题目中某个特殊的单词进行前提式讨论，作为全文展开讨论的基础。比如ISSUE17的“JUST”。
可以用作前提论证的素材单词往往包括：

A、带有主观感情色彩的判断词，比如JUST，CORRECT，EFFECTIVE，REASONABLE等等。
在讨论这些观点词时就必须确立一个标准，进而为全文的讨论确定标准，常见的比如“对社会中大部分人有利”“对社会稳定有利”“能使资源有效分配，最低投入最高产出”等等。

B、作用、意义、任务等值得讨论的名词关键词，比如EDUCATION，GOVERNMENT，LAW，TEACHER等等。
这些词其实在间接讨论A类判断词，即“B类词干什么才是A类词（教育干什么才是对的，法律干什么才是有效的……）”，由此确定判别一个事物该做什么的标准，才能在全文中讨论题目说的此事物做的东西是否正确。

在[0706G AW总结系列活动][高分考生访谈专题] 专访板油Loretta记录中Loretta同学就是用这种前提讨论，将政府的职能说明后作为文章前提加以展开。

前提论证的好处是从字面出发，确定主基调，可以防止全文的发展出现价值观的自我矛盾导致的中心论点混乱，从而将文章后面的各段拉到一起。换句话说，就是我们讨论什么问题时，需要先把什么别的一个小问题说清楚。前提论证法可以有效保证后文段落的逻辑有效联系。

二、层面升华

前提论证属于前提层面，其后自然有更高阶的层面，之前提到的学术、社会、个人就是这种层面层次。

其实我们写ISSUE在组织分论点时无外乎就两种，一种同层面展开，一种层面升华式展开。同层面展开可以有辨证法、分领域讨论，而不同层面的升华则包括了不同的哲学层次。这二者都属于ISSUE题目要求中的“perspectives”。

而大家最喜欢用的保留式同意/反对，那个保留论点通常就是站在不同的层面上来看待问题，从而得出的不同结论。

一方面，层面升华可以使你的论证涵盖不同的逻辑深度，从而保证对问题看法的全面性，另一方面，层面升华也能使文章的整体组织层层递进，做到结构严密。

具体来说，常见的层面包括：

A、字面意义。见前提论证

B、学术层面。学习知识的有效性、合理性等等。这个层面比较浅，原因在于我们还要追问学习的目的是什么？接下来可以引出社会层面和个人层面。

C、社会层面。戴云教主常讲的“恶劣影响法”就是属于这个层面的东西。一个论点可能本身没什么错误，但一旦承认它的正确性，就会导致种种不堪设想的后果，比如过分强调有的法律不公正而造成犯罪分子有自己的道理，或者过分强调社会秩序的重要性造成独裁当道民不聊生。

D、个人层面。之所以把这个放到最高层面是因为社会效应最终是作用于个人的。升华到最后往往是人类幸福、身心愉悦这种目的。个人层面的评论标准有很多，比如人本主义、弗洛伊德精神分析学说、唯物论、社会道德、先验主义等等。具体的可以查阅相关资料。

在[0706G AW总结系列活动][高分考生访谈专题] 专访板油Laurie记录中Laurie同学就提到了对这种手法的运用。

层面升华的好处是可以让文章环环相扣，步步深入，最后的论证深度恰倒好处，而结构也严密可靠。

三、正反论证

正反论证就是说先说明了一个事物的必要性，然后说明缺乏它以后的后果。表面上看这象是废话，但其实正反论证能让你说的问题更加明白有有力，而且由于逻辑转折简单，非常好把握。对于打字速度快的同学正反论证其实十分好用。

本文引用的官方范文就是非常典型的正反论证，它不但有“缺乏”的反，也有“过度”的反（所谓“物极必反”）。由于这种正反难以归到任何一个层面上，所以应该算另一种独立的手法。

正反论证的好处很明显，正反段相互依存，互为解释，因此两段之间的逻辑完全咬合。如果全文都以这种手法组织，结构组织就会变得的非常轻松。官方范文就是个很好的例子：说明专家的必要性后先说正“反”，再说反“反”，整个文章两头照顾，内容严谨。

在具体的操作上，正反论证往往是用反去证明正缺失（或过分）的后果，借以说明论证“正”的过程的合理性。

严格来讲对于过度的所生的“反”应该另立名词，我这里为了方便就把二者放到一起说了。因为没有正确性就没有过分的可能，这一点上过度所产生的“反”与“正”的“反”是相同的。物极必反也可以说是辩证法的一个角度，当然与层面升华后产生的反面评价是不同的。

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

AW进阶手册: 合理推断, 强化论证——挑战Argument完美逻辑

逻辑就是为了让你的文章更具有说服力，更能让人接受而存在的。GRE AW写作的本质目的，就是为了说服人（即说服阅卷官）。

让你的文章看起来合理，是AW写作最重要的原则。

虽说“一个好的考试要求有无背景知识都能做题，而且有背景优势不会占便宜”，但显然对于写作AW是不适用的，特别是ISSUE，相对而言ARGUMENT则跟背景知识不太靠谱，但去看下那篇高速公路的官方6分范文应该能感觉到道路专业的学生能写出更多的它因——这些它因正是这篇满分范文最大的亮点。而更重要的是，有些知识并非算专业背景知识，而可以算作“常识”，比如大气变暖会导致冰融化，不学热力学定律大家都知道。

因此严格来说，Argument的错误都是可以归纳为“缺乏常识”的，即使它最表面的错误不是这么明显：（以ARGUMENT2为例）比如房子涂漆不一定使房价上涨，这个不是常识，但是人们对于房子颜色喜好各有不同就是常识，喜好不同购买欲望也不同也是常识，变态点的可以把一些专业知识也说成常识，比如房屋投资不光要考虑外观还要考虑户型、精装修、升值空间、按揭政策、环境情况、国家经济发展指数、资金机会成本、资金时间成本……因此Argument的每个错误都可以被分解成一连串常识性错误，只要把它们一个一个理出来，它们如何错误就很有说服力了。

而另一方面，Argument的错误还可以归纳为“证据不足”，所有的Argument题目管你有没有提供证据，都可以说作者没有提供足够的证据证明……所以它不成立。张雷东教的“流氓大法”相信不少人都听过。

不过最普遍的是，Argument的错误还都可以归纳为“考虑不周全”，这个好象也是目前我看过的考生文章中最普遍的归纳方式，凡遇到错误就说，还有很多可能性作者忽略了。这个估计大家都有感觉我就不单独举例了，有疑问的私下PM我我再打，人懒没办法。

那么到底哪个才是Argument的根本错误呢？推理下吧。

一般我们什么时候说“还有其它可能”，是不是“证据不足”之后？无数模版都是"the author provides insufficient evidence/vague survey/sucking facts...leaving it entirely possible..."因此证据不足比它因优先。那么为什么证据不足？通常情况下套用模版和流氓大法最致命的缺陷就是不能解释这个问题，虽然它可以通过举出它因来进行支持，而且能有效论证观点，但并不能从根本上指出作者错误并解决问题。我这么说不是因为我多鄙视其它可能性例证（可能性/它因例证在论证中同样很重要，等下再说），而是来自于ETS对于观点“Well-developed"的定义。看下一篇5分范文的一个分论点（独立段）：

题目：

The following is taken from a memo from the advertising director of the Silver Screen Movie Production Company.
"According to a recent report from our marketing department, fewer people attended movies produced by Silver Screen during the past year than in any other year.  And yet the percentage of generally favorable comments by movie reviewers about specific Silver Screen movies actually increased during this period.  Clearly, the contents of these reviews are not reaching enough of our prospective viewers; so the problem lies not with the quality of our movies but with the public's lack of awareness that movies of good quality are available.  Silver Screen should therefore spend more of its budget next year on reaching the public through advertising and less on producing new movies."

The ad director mentions that reviewers liked specific films and gave more  favorable reviews than in the past.  But he neglects to mention the specific numbers- critics may have raved about 2 movies and turned their thumbs down the 10 others.  If thats' the case, it's no wonder that viewership has declined.

看看评论怎么说：

Although more points are made here than are made in sample 6, each of the points made in the 6 essay is developed.  That is not the case here.  In this essay, each point is supported (by perhaps an additional sentence), but it is not further developed.

说它没有further developed. 那么我们再看看6分范文对这个错误的论证：

Finally, it is important to remember that people rarely trust movie reviewers.  For that reason, it is important that the films appeal to the populus, and not critics alone.  The best advertisement in many cases is word of mouth.  No matter what critics say, people tend to take the opinions of friends more seriously.  This supports continual funding to produce quality movies that will appeal to the average person.

虽然出发点不同，但它们的逻辑结构是有可比性的。5分范文上来指出错误简洁明了——批评家不可信，然后给出可能性：可能虽然涨了但批评家还是大多不喜欢电影。是不是这个结构很眼熟？再看6分的：先给出错误原因：人们很少相信批评家。然后发展观点：电影要讨好大众。然后再解释下观点，说明人们与批评家的观点不一定一致。虽然句子结构有点混乱但比起5分范文，6分范文提出了一个更为合理和具有普遍性的事实作为前提“人们不相信批评家”，还解释了这种情况，相比起来5分范文却举出一个很Specific的可能性，即作者的统计数据不完全，前者作为我们熟悉的社会现象，可以被作为常识对待，而后者呢？没有支持。短短几行字，6分范文的立足点已经比5分范文强出一个档次。而接下来6分范文的发展也针对题目“电影要讨好大众”，接着再点到题目建议，提出要拍更适于普通人的影片。相反，5分范文建立在虚构可能性上，提出“受欢迎程度下降了”，这两个推断，哪个看起来更合理些？

没错，5分范文的论证内容已经足够说明作者的错误了，但比起6分范文，它缺乏了对于常识层面的关注，没有从人们对事实接受的常态出发，玩了个纯统计的游戏，的确这样做“够”了，但不“出色”。

跑题话，老有人抱怨自己字数不够，叫我改的时候给看看，但我也改不出什么问题来，因为我改的时候都是按照5分标准来的，指出错误并正确支持没有硬伤就行了，这种情况下不用去考虑常识推断，只要提出可能性推翻作者就行，于是字数自然不用多。上面这篇5分范文总共才301字，估计比很多第一次写AW的同学写的都少的多。

所以这样就回到我题目中提到的“完美逻辑”了。

所谓的“完美”，当然不可能是绝对严密无懈可击（想那样除非绑架阅卷官全家）而是在逻辑步骤上保持完整，从根本上把作者的错误揪出来，发展出强有力的论证。

这个步骤中很重要的一步就是“常识”，符合常识的，即为合理推断，无关常识的，为一般推断，不符合常识的，为脑残推断。所谓的“论据不足”，根本上讲就是因为这些论据不足以填满我们常识中需要形成固定结果的条件，因此它才不足。写ARGUMENT的时候怎么说明这种不足就成了很重要的话题。

这里举个直观的例子，你提出一个房地产开发方案，跟我说有市场有资金，要建在清华东门。

我说：“万一地震了把房子都震倒怎么办？别建了。”

你什么感想？是不是想抽我？

换个说法，我说：“根据最近统计，清华东门经常有使徒出没，由于AT力场扰动导致地壳不稳定，所以频发地震，因此建了会被震倒，还是别建了。”

这回你应该不会想抽我而是回头去造EVA了吧。

这个就是合理推断，即从常识层面出发，而不是凭空想象可能性对ARGUMENT的错误提出可能性推断。

带着这个观点再来看下实例，以下是ARGUMENT97的一篇牛人习作（个人认为有5分水平）的一段

题目：

Argument33
The following report appeared in an archaeology journal.
"The discovery of distinctively shaped ceramic pots at various prehistoric sites scattered over a wide area has led archaeologists to ask how the pots were spread. Some believe the pot makers migrated to the various sites and carried the pots along with them; others believe the pots were spread by trade and their makers remained in one place. Now, analysis of the bones of prehistoric human skeletons can settle the debate: high levels of a certain metallic element contained in various foods are strongly associated with people who migrated to a new place after childhood. Many of the bones found near the pots at a few sites showed high levels of the metallic element. Therefore, it must be that the pots were spread by migration, not trade."

To begin with, the arguer assumes that there are only two possible routes for the pots spreading. Yet no evidence is provided to support this assumption. Lacking such evidence, it is equally likely that aside from pot maker’s migration or trading, there are other alternative explanations of those scattered pots which are neglected here. For instance, the pots might act as tributes to show obeisance and were kept as art collections by the nobilities. Or they may be plundered as the trophy during wars and concealed as burial artifacts. It also might be the case that the pots are just one ordinary container of a nomadic tribe and exist wherever the tribe has been to. Either of the above scenarios, if true, would cause seriously doubt to how the pots are spread.

红色为主题句，蓝色为主题句分析，紫色为可能性推断。
紫色部分所叙述的内容如果存在，则作者观点不成立，分论点成立，因此蓝色部分成立，而题目没有排除紫色部分不存在的可能，因此作者观点不成立。
但是我们为什么要考虑紫色部分内容这种情况，而不是其它情况？

再来看篇官方范文（经典的比较型）

题目

Six months ago the region of Forestville increased the speed limit for vehicles traveling on the region's highways by ten miles per hour.  Since that change took effect, the number of automobile accidents in that region has increased by 15 percent.  But the speed limit in Elmsford, a region neighboring Forestville, remained unchanged, and automobile accidents declined slightly during the same six-month period.  Therefore, if the citizens of Forestville want to reduce the number of automobile accidents on the region's highways, they should campaign to reduce Forestville's speed limit to what it was before the increase.

In addition, the citizens have failed to consider the geographical and physical terrain of the two different areas.  Perhaps Forestville's highway is in an area of more dangerous curves, sharp turns, or has many intersections or merging points where accidents are more likely to occur.  It appears reasonable, therefore, for the citizens to focus on these trouble spots than to reduce the speed in the entire area.  Elmsford may be an area of easier driving conditions where accidents are less likely to occur regardless of the speed limit.

官方范文很实在，连蓝色部分的解释都没有。但分论点发展的恰倒好处。
虽然这段主题句很简单，但是这里出现了重要的关键词“physical terrain”， 在常识层面上，这个与公路的安全性是直接相关的，而地点差异则也在同一层面上对应地形差异。而它之后也用了大量的篇幅提出了多种physical terrain，从而强化了自己的可能性。

习作和范文的主要区别就是主题句或者引出可能性的句子上范文更加有针对性，而不是笼统的说evidence, explanation。

而范文另一段则跟习作作者的结构相似，但效率比较高：

the citizens of Forestville are failing to consider other possible alternatives to the increasing car accidents after the raise in speed limit.  Such alternatives may include the fact that there are less reliable cars traveling the roads in Forestville, or that the age bracket of those in Elmsford may be more conducive to driving safely.  It is possible that there are more younger, inexperienced, or more elderly, unsafe drivers in Forestville than there are in Elmsford.

把no evidence这一步给省去了，直接点出可能性。这个只是顺带提下，因为我个人不是很喜欢这种主题句+它因的结构，它的推断显得没什么道理，但效率确实非常高，比起用很笼统的词去说作者证据不足，这样能省下时间让文章变得更紧凑。

回到开篇的话，XDF的模式化教育加上思维的惰性，我们写ARGUMENT已经越来越机械化，甚至失去了思考的余地，因此写出来的文章越来越千人一面，这种趋势并不好，特别是对于争取高分甚至满分的同学。近年来由于考生作文的类雷同现象导致很多人写到写过的文章自我感觉不错的出来分数都很低。而强化ARGUMENT的推断则可以展示个人思维的全面性，不仅仅是面对因果想出几个别的原因，或者造几个可能性推翻作者，而是归纳错误，分析错误，批判错误，让文章的深度和连贯性都上一个台阶。

最后要说明的是，我的观点也只是个人感想，必定存在问题（用这个标准去看官方满分范文很多都有问题——因为范文也是找亮点而不是挑刺的），只是希望能以此开拓大家的思路，帮助大家更好的破解ARGUMENT。

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

满分作文

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.

Laws, body of official rules and regulations, found in constitutions, legislations, judicial opinions, and the like, are used to govern a society and control the behavior of its members. Concerning laws, the author asserts that since laws are categorized as just ones and unjust ones, every individual in a society is incumbent to obey just laws and to disobey unjust laws. This view, in my eyes, is fundamentally irrational in ignoring the significance of certain constancy in legal system. To better present my viewpoint let me illustrate it in details.

To begin with, whether a law is just or not is more of a subjective issue that differs according to personal interests, social class, as well as one's personal value system. Consider, for example, the controversial issue abortion. For people of certain religious belief, laws indulge abortion are unjust since they believe mothers do not have the freedom to deprive infants of their rights of life, while for people of other religions, right of life comes into being after birth, which render abortion not an infringement of human right and should be at the pregnant woman's will. Besides diverges generated due to personal value system, different, or even opposite, personal interests may also result in divarication. For instance, certain laws may prohibit factories from emitting toxic effluents into rivers for the well-being of local residents. In the eye of common populace, doubtlessly, this law is just and considerate to ensure public interests, however, as for the manager of a factory, this law, which causes it to curtail employees, increase manufacturing costs, and adopt related costly processing procedures, may be regarded as unjust. Consequently, it is arbitrary to lineate an explicit line between these two kinds of laws, to which type a law belongs should be determined on a case-by-case basis varying with changing social conditions.

Nevertheless, in most occasions, whether a law is justified or not is definite with just ones more often than not fall into a line with interests of the majority, and hence every individual should faithfully abide by just laws. For example, highway codes in most countries require drivers to drive automobiles on the right side of the street, the goal of which is to ensure smooth transportation and to avoid unnecessary traffic accidents, and the disobey of them would inevitably result in chaos that threaten human lives. Similarly, various criminal laws, civil laws and administrative laws, on which every democratic society is based, are enacted for the security and order of the society. Without people's compliance, anarchy would reign supreme, not to mention insurance of basic human rights.

In terms of unjust laws, often resulted from ill-awareness of legislators or changing social conditions, some people, the author included, suggest that since they are not likely to be dismissed or disappear automatically, every individual should be incumbent to take up responsibility to overthrow them to build up a more harmonious, democratic and human-oriented society. Ostensibly, this assertion is appealing, however, an in-depth review would reveal its naivety and vulnerability. As a matter of fact, more often than not, by justifying a violation of one sort of law we find ourselves on a slippery slope toward sanctioning all types of illegal behavior, for the same reason that there may not be definite division between justness and unjustness. Consider the abortion example again. A person opposing freedom of abortion would overthrow the law by way of blocking roads to the abortion clinic, which, in his/her visual angle, is justifiable because he is just showing his opposition to unjust laws. However, it is a precariously short leap from this sort of civil disobedience to physical confrontations with clinic workers, then to the infliction of property damage, then to the bombing of the clinic and potential murder! Evidently, every sort of action threatening public security could find a well established excuse if every individual is allowed to disobey and resist unjust laws in their discretion.

In summary, from all the discussions above, we can safely draw the conclusion that the author's assertion is essentially unreasonable in that it naively divides just laws with unjust laws and neglects the importance of constancy of legal system to ensure a democratic and harmonious society. However, with social conditions changing at a breathtaking speed and considering the limitation of human insights of the future, laws should be flexible to keep pace with changing reality insofar as this proposition is not overextended.

Issue190

As long as people in a society are hungry or out of work or lack the basic skills needed to survive, the use of public resources to support the arts is inappropriate—and, perhaps, even cruel—when one considers all the potential uses of such money.


Although nowadays the concept of art usually refers to visual art, the definition of art has changed over centuries. Perhaps the most concise definition of art is its broadest--art refers to all creative endeavors, excluding actions directly related to survival and reproduction. From a wide perspective, art is simply a generic term for various creations, out of which sprang all human pursuits and inspiration. Concerning the necessity of the arts, the speaker asserts that it is too luxurious and wasteful to use public resources to support art when people in a society are hungry or out of work or lack the basic skills needed to survive, which, in my eyes, is fundamentally unreasonable except its emphasis on social pressing problems. To better present my viewpoint let me illustrate it in details.

To begin with, the arts, though unable to afford us material luxury like technological advancement and other human progresses, enriches culture, enlightens our spirit, and broadens our horizon, in other words, presents us with what is eternal and universal; the abundance and civilization of spiritual life, unlike a popular idea that denies the significance of spiritual enjoyment, is insurance and premise for material wealth. As the famous scientist and philosopher Descartes once ardently proposed (and I paraphrased):" There are dual sides of a human: one is material, the other spiritual." True, Shakespeare, who achieved maturity and reached unparalleled success in literature by masterpieces such as <Romeo and Julia><Mac Beth>, etc, created the eternal and universal figure Hamlet, the moral dilemma of whom, as something inflicting all humans regardless of era, tells us the fate of all humans; the music genius Beethoven, brilliant, vigorous, and talented as he is, has been shocking audiences for centuries, international or domestic, professionals or amateurs, by his romantic style of creation after his death, with Pathetique and Moonlight being the most famous two. The two examples aptly show that the arts, with various incarnations such as music, painting, sculpture, literature, poem, drama, and architecture, etc, is a mirror as well as carrier for classic inspiration and innovations that provide pleasure.

In addition, besides merits directly related to our common lives, the arts is an indispensable component of culture, absent of which is a deteriorated sense of identity and a barbaric primitive state similar to other animals. In terms of biological structure, humans differ from other animals by our "second language system", which refers to human language, a unique capacity that other animals lack. Since art forms such as literature, music, drama, and the like, are its most significant carriers, it is not exaggerating to assert that the arts differ human from other animal and that humans without the enrichment of arts but material wealth, however abundant it may be, are no more than animals in low and simply stage. In short, that we are humans, but not other barbaric creatures, is, at least partly, due to our ability to create and innovate the spiritually noble form--the arts.

Admittedly, emphasis on social pressing problems, say, hunger, unemployment, diseases, war, etc, can never be understated, as the speaker holds. In order to understand this point, one only need to see how many Africa refugees are starving to death with every second passes, how many criminal actions and suicides are being committed due to the lose of job, how many people are being deprived of lives by AIDS (Acquired Immune Deficiency Symptom) and cancers, and how many innocent citizens are being killed or injured ruthlessly by nuclear bombs and suicide bombs throughout mid-east countries. Surely, government should allocate a sufficient amount of funds as well as human resource support to these pressing problems, without, however, the arts being neglected.

In summary, from the above discussion, we can safely draw the conclusion that the author is reasonable in pointing out the necessity to solve social pressing problems. However, he/she fails to take into account the benefits of the arts: one is the source of human pleasure, the other indispensable part of human civilization that differs from animals and barbaric state.

Argument48

The following appeared in a newspaper article published in the country of Corpora.
'Twenty years ago, one half of all citizens in Corpora met the standards for adequate physical fitness as then defined by the national advisory board on physical fitness. Today, the board says that only one quarter of all citizens are adequately fit and suggests that spending too much time using computers may be the reason. But since overall fitness levels are highest in regions of Corpora where levels of computer ownership are also highest, it is clear that using computers has not made citizens less physically fit. Instead, as shown by this year's unusually low expenditures on fitness-related products and services, the recent decline in the economy is most likely the cause, and fitness levels will improve when the economy does.'


Giving some facts and some analyses, the arguer alleges a connection between the economy and the fitness levels of Corpora. Although it is credible on the surface, closer examination will reveal the hidden flaws as follows in his/her reasoning.

Primarily, whether the fitness levels in Corpora has ebbed is kept unknown since that no evidence shows that the standard used by the board today equate that used twenty years ago. As a common sense, criteria always keep pace with the developments of relevant regions. A possibility cannot be excluded is that with rising of their living levels, the board may have enhanced the old standard for adequate physical fitness. As a result, just equal fitness levels of people in Corpora would probably be declaimed as dwindling despite the opposite reality. Without taking this case into consideration, the arguer misjudges a decline of fitness in Corpora recklessly.     

Next granted that there is no difference between the standard adopted twenty years ago and today and people in Corpora are not as healthy as before, to deny the linkage between using computer and the waning fitness levels given by the board seems to be too premature. The fact cannot be cited as evidence that where levels of computer ownership are also highest, there overall fitness levels are highest too, because that computer ownership is the very different concept from using computer. For instance, a school with computer labs can be a region with high computer ownership, but its students are not those using computer longest compared with people who have their own computers. Extremely, it is common for many companies to have idle computers, which makes the ownership of them are very high. But it represents nothing about the using time of their employees. So, it is too rashly to exclude using computer out of all causes.

Additionally, though expenditures on fitness-related products and services in Corpora is unusually low this year, the dwindled fitness levels cannot be attributed to the economic decline. People can do free exercises more than ever, such as jogging, hiking, climbing the mountains, and dancing, all of which benefit people's body conditions undoubtedly. There is no evidence to show that to be fit requires people to spend money on such products and services. And what is more, to claim that the fitness level will improve when the economy does is open to doubt. As mentioned above, people have many choices other than using the products and services to take part in exercises. Besides, even after the economy has woke up, there perhaps are many other matters requiring people to invest, so people may have no free money to enjoy fitness-related products and services. Therefore, not only economic decline cannot be the sole reason of the fitness levels decent, also probably, cannot its improvements contribute to the fitness levels' increase.

In sum, the reasoning of the arguer lack sufficient evidence and well-rounded consideration as discussed above. Far more detailed and scientific studies and scrutiny should be exerted to provide believable data showing the real situation about the fitness level and the factors effecting them in Corpora.

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

2.7
       表意的准确和破题是后续修改作文的重点。
     今天特殊，早些上来写日志。传说中的小年夜，陪父母一起过。

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

写作文和改作文的日子有些天了，今早起床后，突然有种强烈的想阅读的冲动。对了，Comment就是很好的选择。

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

2.7 & 2.8

Sentence

1) It's round two, and our distinguished debaters are once again politely slugging each other on the jaw.
2) If the measure of failure for President Obama is whether it looks like he is on the road to slowing the rise of the oceans, ending a war and restoring our image as the last, best hope on Earth, then he doesn't look so good. Elaine Kamarck proposes a stricter test: Has he encountered a swift and deadly drop in his personal reputation to Nixonian depths?
3) In a country where government is already larger than the voters would prefer, and trust in government is low, it is difficult to advance ambitious activist programmers, unless there's a crisis.
4) David Boaz begins his piece by quoting President Obama's soaring 2008 convention rhetorical opening that is not particularly relevant to the topic at hand.
5) The fact of the matter is that Americans are very angry about big government in the abstract but not government in the particular.
6) To the extent that Mr Obama has had problems in his first year it is because he fell for a style of legislation and a political strategy that called for doing everything at once.

Comment

Whether Mr. Obama deserves the Nobel Prize for peace is a problem difficulty to declare. On one aspect, he is only a one year American president who hasn’t done great contributions to the country and the world; however, on the other aspect, he is the first black president in the United States that is an inspiring example for the poor attacked black young men.

After reading the debates, I am totally absorbed by one sentence ‘Americans are very angry about big government in abstract but not government in the particular’, which conveys the arts of politics. Congress and the administration should stand in a balance place when determining the power range of the government if they still care about the popular support. If they service more, it will cause more people find their dissatisfactions within the government’s policies. Nevertheless, they can’t do nothing, for Americans can’t live in the area without the control of the government.

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

2.5 & 2.6

Sentence

1) Opinion pollsters around the world find that people are usually gloomy about the future, perhaps because it is inherently more uncertain than the past.
2) Families have certainly changed: most obviously, marriage has gone from being the norm to almost a minority pursuit, in line with most of Europe.
3) Figures for the first three quarters of 2008 confirm the broadly falling trend.
4) And years of binge-drinking have left a lasting health problem in the form of increasing cirrhosis of the liver and the like. But things do seem to be looking up.
5)  It seems that while the majority are sobering up, a dedicated minority are partying on.
6)  In America, too, voices of right-wing doom who once urged the righteous to set up firewalls against contagion from the Sodom and Gomorrah around them are now seeing heartening signs there of social “re-norming”.

Comment

Form the long article, we could get a roughly impression of youth crime in Britain: the majority are sobering up, while a dedicated minority are partying on. Binge-drinking, drug abuse, gun crime, and etc, the author has mentioned several youth crime with which people are deeply concerned. In my eyes, education, including family education, school education, and society education, is the best way to reduce these crimes, among which family education plays a major role. Stable and intimate family could have a significant impact on the young growth, for love and care form the parents is essential to the child’s emotional development. Thus we could always find form the surveys data that the youth crime rate is proportional to the divorce rate. Additionally, schools and society should do more and give more care on the single-parent families’ children, and more love will bring less crime.

ieyangj08UID: 2743219

2.8
      总结目前argument中存在的问题，找到适合自己的issue结构。