GRE Argument Writing 之我见

cwzhnUID: 2865019

GRE Argument Writing 之我见

写在前面，本人既不是大牛也不是写作达人，因为3月就机考了，看了网络教程和许多牛人的帖子，写了一些Argument，可还是迷惘啊，我为什么要写成这样儿不写成那样，什么是insightful analysis，什么是well-develop，纠结啊，纠结了好几天。本文是我的纠结一个多星期的产物，本来打算是写给“道德败坏”同学借鉴的，想想对正在或即将纠结Argument的同学可能有所帮助故发到寄托与同学共享，欢迎牛牛指正。注意同学们若看完本文觉得有借鉴价值千万别照搬，千万不能轻易放弃自己习惯了的写作方式（尤其是即将考试的），一定要将其改编为能让自己接受的方式，要让自己的Argument写得自然，最自然的才是最好的，不是么？
我会把引用ETS的官方原文用红色字体标出。ETS说的是有指导意义的吧，就像大学老师上复习课时说的^_^。

cwzhnUID: 2865019

首先我们要全面了解Argument。（此处可略看）
分析一篇argument，ETS要求我们做到：
• what is offered as evidence, support, or proof
• what is explicitly stated, claimed, or concluded
• what is assumed or supposed, perhaps without justification or proof
• what is not stated, but necessarily follows from what is stated
In addition, you should consider the structure of the argument—the way in which these elements are linked together to form a line of reasoning; that is, you should recognize the separate, sometimes implicit steps in the thinking process and consider whether the movement from each one to the next is logically sound.
即论据，结论，假设和隐含的话（隐藏结论或假设等等）。还有Argument的结构-是怎样的一个推理过程，每一步是由什么推到什么，这么推有道理么。

Argument task要求我们做什么：
An important part of performing well on the Argument task is remembering what you are not being asked to do. You are not being asked to discuss whether the statements in the argument are true or accurate; instead, you are being asked whether conclusions and inferences are validly drawn from the statements. You are not being asked to agree or disagree with the position stated; instead, you are being asked to comment on the thinking that underlies the position stated. You are not being asked to express your own views on the subject being discussed (as you were in the Issue task); instead, you are being asked to evaluate the logical soundness of an argument of another writer and, in doing so, to demonstrate the critical thinking, perceptive reading, and analytical writing skills that university faculty consider important for success in graduate school.

The analytical skills displayed in your critique carry great weight in determining your score.
你的任务是对讨论文章中所陈述的（假设，论据）能否得出结论，而不是讨论这些陈述对不对；你要对文章中作者怎样得到结论的逻辑思维做出评价，而不是对某一问题提出自己的观点。
而你的评论中体现的分析能力才是得分大头，这是阅卷者最看重的。

ETS提供的重要概念：
• alternative explanation—a possible competing version of what might have caused the events in question; an alternative explanation undercuts or qualifies the original explanation because it too can account for the observed facts
• analysis—the process of breaking something (e.g., an argument) down into its component parts in order to understand how they work together to make up the whole; also a presentation, usually in writing, of the results of this process
• argument—a claim or a set of claims with reasons and evidence offered as support; a line of reasoning meant to demonstrate the truth or falsehood of something
• assumption—a belief, often unstated or unexamined, that someone must hold in order to maintain a particular position; something that is taken for granted but that must be true in order for the conclusion to be true
• conclusion—the end point reached by a line of reasoning, valid if the reasoning is sound; the resulting assertion
• counterexample—an example, real or hypothetical, that refutes or disproves a statement in the argument
此处不作过多的解释，谨以arguement51为例（非常感谢败坏道德的大作），若把糖片作为alternative explanation来解释第二组肌肉拉伤的病人恢复慢的原因感觉不太恰当。

ETS对我们读题的建议（无甚意义）：
• carefully read the argument—you might want to read it over more than once
• identify as many of its claims, conclusions, and underlying assumptions as possible
• think of as many alternative explanations and counterexamples as you can
• think of what additional evidence might weaken or lend support to the claims
• ask yourself what changes in the argument would make the reasoning more sound
最后一点比较有建设性，是发展观点的一种办法。

我们如何来看待统计中的数字和百分比：
It is important to remember that you are not being asked to do a mathematical task with the numbers, percentages, or statistics. Instead you should evaluate these as evidence that is intended to support the conclusion. Consider the claim that the drama club at a school deserves more funding because its membership has increased by 100 percent. This 100 percent increase could be significant if there had been 100 members and now there are 200 members, whereas the increase would be much less significant if there had been 5 members and now there are 10. Remember that any numbers, percentages, or statistics in Argument topics are used only as evidence in support of a conclusion, and you should always consider whether they actually support the conclusion.

显然这再次说明ETS主要考察的是第一逻辑层次（详见raccoon的《Argument就应该这样写》）的推理过程，即是此数据是否是用来直接支持结论的。

cwzhnUID: 2865019

ETS写作格式
Your response may, but need not, incorporate particular writing strategies learned in English composition or writing-intensive college courses. GRE readers will not be looking for a particular developmental strategy or mode of writing. In fact, when faculty are trained to be GRE readers, they review hundreds of Argument responses that, although highly diverse in content and form, display similar levels of critical thinking and analytical writing. Readers will see, for example, some essays at the 6 score level that begin by briefly summarizing the argument and then explicitly stating and developing the main points of the critique. The readers know that a writer can earn a high score by analyzing and developing several points in a critique or by identifying a central flaw in the argument and developing that 17 critique extensively.
You might want to organize your critique around the organization of the argument itself, discussing the argument line by line. Or you might want to first point out a central questionable assumption and then move on to discuss related flaws in the argument's line of reasoning. Similarly, you might want to use examples if they help illustrate an important point in your critique or move your discussion forward (remember, however, that, in terms of your ability to perform the Argument task effectively, it is your critical thinking and analytical writing, not your ability to come up with examples, that is being assessed). What matters is not the form the response takes, but how insightfully you analyze the argument and how articulately you communicate your analysis to academic readers within the context of the task.
最后一点指出，我们完全可以抛弃新东方的模版，因为ETS重视的是你的逻辑分析和是否能把你的分析清楚完整的表达出来。阅卷人的模版看得多了，而且在写作的时候那些模版非常限制我们的手脚，我们完全可以跟着自己的思路写下去。

我的观点（重点）：
这块部分是最重要的。我会讨论我对insightful、how to develop cogently and well的理解并举一些例子。仍然，再一次强调不能够轻易放弃自己已有的思维，要试着将有借鉴的地方吸收到自己的思维体系中。这个很重要，因为不学其内在本质的拿来主义会使自己更纠结，这一点我深有体会！！！

什么是insightful、how to develop cogently and well
Insightful什么叫深刻见解，不就是抓出主要逻辑错误并指出相当有说服力的其他Possibilities！！！要一针见血。以ETS范文Sample4为例：
题目推理过程：统计 直推 结论
critique提出的第一个point你没把保护gear和预防gear说清楚，这两个东西是不同的。在统计结果中没提到预防gear并且在统计数据中又没区分清楚，怎么在结论中就有了，直击要点。
第二个point你没区分清楚戴gear和不戴gear的人的内在本质，即不受重伤不一定是戴gear带来的。Critic提出了一个非常有说服力的possibility，人的nature，戴gear的人是因为更加小心才不会受重伤。
当然我们也能想到从统计结果推不到结论（即第一point我们都能分析出），然后就开始怀疑75这个数字了或者可能想到分组不合理的分组，继而或多或少会提出一些连自己都很难信服的possibilities来。

How to develop cogently and well这个是大家最头疼的了，难道每段的展开都应该像这一个模式，绞尽脑汁想出三个反例用It is possible that...或such as...来表达么。答案是否定的。
当然不一定说一定不能这样写，但可以保证通篇这样写很难拿到高分，除非是分析相当深刻，例子有说服力，语言很好。试想一下，干瘪瘪的举出三个例子能有说服力么！！！我们可以看ETS范文Sample 1：
锁定到经典的physical terrain。在干瘪瘪的提出physical terrain这个possibility之后，critic举出富有说服力的三个具体的terrain（看，这就是“我”说为什么可能是physical terrain引起的原因），并且没有立马停止，然后继续说It appears reasonable, therefore, for the citizens to focus on these trouble spots than to reduce the speed in the entire area.（所以“你们”也得考虑考虑这些危险地带吧） 看出来了吧，不能光举possibilities，好歹再说几句为什么或是怎样削弱或加强arguer的结论或假设这类解释和建议性的话。这里稍微说一下结构，以terrain这一段为例，稍微分析一下这是一个很典型的总分总构型，提出两个分的possibilities，每个possibility都有一个总分总结构。给人浑然一体的感觉。
总之可以用上述方法进行对possibility的develop。要强调的一点是develop well和develop cogently是很难割裂的，试想想干瘪瘪（not well）的possibilities而不进行适当的说明能说服别人么（cogently）！！！
文章和逻辑的组织 值得强调的是不管你是否用模版（ETS是不喜欢模版的），文章一定要自然，即你写的时候要感到舒服惬意自然！！！只有自然的才是最好的，才是一个读者想读的！！！
ETS没有过多的重视你是怎样布局的，只要你认为怎么写能更好的组织你的攻击点，能把你的意思表达清楚并给阅卷人一个逻辑思维体系，能更加自信自然，为什么不这样写呢？写你自己想说的难道比套模版来得难吗？？？哪怕你一上来只说The argument has many logical flaws.没问题，然后The most important flaw are... Beside this flaw... 巴拉巴拉一大堆，No problem！不用担心字数不够什么的，你把possibilities展开写了一个攻击点至少有100字吧，三个不就有300字了，这三百字都是精华啊，已经能让ETS阅卷者impressive了。而采用模版能有多少字是真正有用的？有多少时候你是为了凑字数而绞尽脑汁想possibilities呢？
虽然我不提倡模版，但行文思路还是必须的，每段该怎么写，写什么。有些是考试前可以定下来的，譬如说大的框架。有些是考试时才能定的，譬如我攻击那些点，举哪些possibilities，当然你有好的记忆力完全可以在考试前准备。
总结
在此用个例子进行形象的说明。这是我昨天完全用自己的思维方式写的一篇让自己非常自然的Critique，稍微做了下拼写修改，为了不污染大家的视力，呵呵。当然个人水平有些不能当范文来看，请大家就当一个例子来看，主要是体会一下我上面所说的。当然也希望大家指教一二，有牛牛肯评个分的，提个建议啥的，自然是非常愿意。
TOPIC: ARGUMENT186 - The following is a recommendation from the director of personnel to the president of Professional Printing Company.
"In a recent telephone survey of automobile factory workers, older employees were less likely to report that having a supervisor present increases their productivity. Among workers aged 18 to 29, 27 percent said that they are more productive in the presence of their immediate supervisor, compared to 12 percent for those aged 30 or over, and only 8 percent for those aged 50 or over. Clearly, if our printing company hires mainly older employees, we will increase productivity and save money because of the reduced need for supervisors."
By hiring older employees and reducing supervisors, the director predicts that the company will get productivity incensement and save money. However, he or she simply assumes that the survey of automobile factory workers could be applied to printing company, which the survey is easily questionable.
First of all, automobile factory is not just the same as printing company. Considering the two different industry, workers in automobile factory do things like combining parts into main bodies and painting automobiles are very different from workers in printing company who need to more challenging things like checking errs from drafts written by writers. Therefore, maybe automobile factory's older skillful workers would produce more but younger workers in printing company are more prior for their energy, quick-minded and creativity. Beside this, individuals are different from each other. It is very likely that an automobile factory has very advanced equipments and techniques which other one does not, thus older workers but younger ones are unable to master them. In this case, automobile factory can not be compared easily with printing company. In short, the recommendation would be strengthen if the director could provide convincing evidences to demonstrate the survey are advisable for the printing company.
Besides, the conclusion that hiring mostly older workers would increase the overall products is easily argued. Without how much workers of different groups can produce, we could not tell the working ability between older workers and the younger. As young workers are more energetic and ambiguous than the older ones, it is possibly that young workers produce more products for the company after a few days training. In this case, by hiring more young workers, the company would benefit more from the overall increase of products than that from cutting down supervisors and employing more the older ones. Therefore, the lack of the quantity of worker’s productivity strongly weakens the argument.
In addition, the survey itself lacks of credibility. It is very likely that the more workers in automobile factory are skillful, the more they can produce. Therefore, older workers there might have very familiar to the work and need no supervisor, while younger ones are new to it, who want somebody to inspect them. Also, is the number of workers investigated big enough? If not so, numbers from the survey are not representative and could not show the general information. Thus, it is wise for the director to strength the credibility of the survey with the number of workers investigated.
To sum, the conclusion has many logical flaws and in order to make it more convincing, the director should provide more important information which are needed to make the survey convincing and demonstrate the survey is worth being applied to the company.
裁员 cutback/ cut down / lay off / reduce the staff
可信度 credibility believability reliability authenticity dependability
不可信的 unfounded groundless baseless unsustainable without foundation ill-founded without basis unsupported
熟练 skillful masterful
It is ~ of you to be able to repair a television. = You are ~ to be able to repair a television.
推理过程猜测：调查+调查适用于该公司推出结论
所以我主攻1.调查适合该公司么？2.这个调查能支持结论么？
分析提纲（详细版）：
一、 印刷厂和汽车制造商无可比性
1. 不同行业间有差异
2. 即是同行业间的个体也有差异
3. 所以你怎么能说这个survey适用于印刷厂呢
二、 雇更多的老工人能使印刷厂增产是有争议的
1. 你没告诉我老工人和年轻人的生产基数
三、 这个调查不可信啊
1. 是不是越熟练产量越多呢？
2. 调查人数也不知道啊，你调查来的数字有代表性么。
分析题目的时候尽量把作者的逻辑链给理出来，这样我们才能弄明白要攻击哪些次链。需要指出的是，ETS并没有刻意叫你指出这是什么错误，要你在逻辑错误的层面上进行论述。就像Sample 4，范文没有从这点攻击，“像你这是故意在统计的结果里硬塞了个预防gear啊，这是的啊”，然后巴拉巴拉论证不能偷换概念。这样不是不行，只是这个论证语言非牛牛这些人，常人很难写出来的。所以critic直接就写“这两个gear是有区别的啊”，而且阅卷人也能知道这是在挑主逻辑链的错误。请想想换个方式写是不是自然了许多。
提纲一定要写在草稿纸上，用中文简洁，把你要攻击的点和举的possibility都列出来，一两分钟搞定它，省得写道一半一边看着表在走，一边急得没话写。
写文章结构虽然可以自定，但一定要有体系，先什么后什么，不然自己写写就乱了，而且阅卷人也会迷惑。最好抛开模版（你不理解模版的话，写的时候会纠结的），我们的逻辑和组织能力又不弱，凭什么不相信自己呢，况且一开始不适应，写多了自然而然也就有自己的模版了，考试的时候就手到捻来不是么？发展观点时务必不要干瘪瘪的possibilities，因为即使你用besides ,moreover之类的连接词也是干瘪瘪的（你老是一个possibility说一句话再跳到另一个，除非你举的possibilities之间本身就有某种关系）。一个人要有血有肉，一篇文章也一样！！！一篇文章只有硬骨头（可能还是零散的）的话也是很难打动人，使人信服的。下面是我一开始写的Argument套用了模版，（如有牛牛肯评分的话，自然欢迎）请比较：
TOPIC: ARGUMENT35 - The following appeared in the summary of a study on headaches suffered by the residents of Mentia.
"Salicylates are members of the same chemical family as aspirin, a medicine used to treat headaches. Although many foods are naturally rich in salicylates, for the past several decades food-processing companies have also been adding salicylates to foods as preservatives. This rise in the commercial use of salicylates has been found to correlate with a steady decline in the average number of headaches reported by participants in our twenty-year study. Recently, food-processing companies have found that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives for foods. With this new use for salicylates, we can expect a continued steady decline in the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia."
According to this argument, the arguer concludes that the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia may continue the steady decline with salicylates used for flavor additives. To support this conclusion, the arguer assumes that the rise in commercial use of salicylates could cause the number of headaches steadily decline and the found that salicylates can also be used as flavor additives could increase the commercial use of it. However, the argument has many flaws.
In the first place, even though we could accept the two assumptions talked above, the most important implicit production that more salicylates in foods could cure more people suffering from headaches still lacks of evidences. Whether salicylates could cure headaches remains unknown, as it is a medicine used to treat headaches but not a cure. Besides, many foods are naturally rich in salicylates and no evidence shows that people eating rich-salicylates foods have less possibility to get headaches that those who do not.
In the second place, the arguer failed to consider the causal relationship between the rise of the commercial use of salicylates and the steady decline in the average number of headaches. Clearly, according to the study, the relationship reveals a correlation not causal relationship. Besides, the local people may eat little food from the companies concerning that most of the foods processed by the local companies may be transport to other regions or countries or they do not like the tastes of the foods processed by their local companies. Moreover, the amount of salicylates used for preservatives is obviously far less than those foods rich in salicylates, the rise use of which may have little influence compared with the large amount of salicylates in natural foods.
Last but not the least, the assumption that the flavor additive use of salicylates may increase its commercial use is unfounded. Since salicylates can be used as both preservatives and flavor additives, the food-processing companies may combine with the two functions in order to decrease the extra use of it. Maybe, the local government have set a law to limit the commercial use of salicylates in foods or these companies may have found cheaper alternatives for it's preservative function.
In sum, the conclusion that with the new use for salicylates, the number of headaches suffered by the average citizen of Mentia would continued to steady decline is unfounded. In order to support the conclusion, the arguer should present more evidences to demonstrate his productions.
语言方面不需要多担心，你怎么表达自然就怎么表达，只要能让阅卷人看明白就行。每篇写完后把不会写的词记下来查，还有同义词，这样慢慢的就好了，因为每篇文章中要都要出现的一些同义词像assertion, conclusion, reference表示结论这类不是很多。
写在最后，我花了很多精力写了这篇文章目的是希望正在或将要纠结的同学能够在写Argument时有一个清晰的方向，不再纠结，同时希望同学们有了什么问题（譬如我该怎样发展观点）不妨动动脑筋想想，一定窑弄清楚，不然糊里糊涂地练题会相当纠结痛苦的，我深有体会！！！最后的最后，以上只是一人之言，同学们要借鉴一定要吸收过来，而不是照搬，把它改造成和自己的思维写作体系相符合的部分，这样才能自然的写作，一定要自然！！！
希望能与各位寄托勇士共勉！！！

songwei007UID: 2878972

By hiring older employees and subsequently reducing supervisors, the director predicts that the company will increase productivity and save money. However, he or she simply assumes that the survey of automobile factory workers could be applied to printing company, the survey is easily questionable though. First of all, Unlike automobile manufacturing, printing is a different industry. Workers in automobile factory do things such as combining parts into main bodies and painting automobiles. Nonetheless, workers in printing company need to do more challenging things such as checking errors, revising drafts. Therefore, maybe automobile factory's older, skillful workers would produce more but younger workers in printing company are more competitive for their energy, quick-mindedness and creativity. Besides, individuals are different from each other. It is very likely that an automobile factory has very advanced equipments and techniques which other one does not, thus older workers but younger ones are unable to master them. In this case, automobile factory can not be compared easily with printing company. In short, the recommendation would be strengthened if the director could provide convincing evidences to demonstrate the survey are advisable for the printing company.Moreover, the conclusion that hiring mostly older workers would increase the overall products is easily argueable. Without knowing how many??生产的东东，宾语 workers of different groups can produce, we could not tell the productivity between older workers and the younger. As young workers are more energetic and ambiguous than the older ones, it is possibly that young workers produce more products for the company after a few days' training. In this case, by hiring more young workers, the company would benefit more from the overall increase of products than that from cutting down supervisors and employing more the older ones. Therefore, the lack of the quantity of worker’s productivity strongly weakens the argument不明白这句话在讲什么啊，是说缺少数量影响效率吗？.In addition, the survey itself lacks of credibility. It is very likely that the more workers in automobile factory are skillful, the more products they can produce. Therefore, older workers there might be very familiar to the work and need no supervisor, while younger ones are new to it who want somebody to inspect them. Also, is the number of workers investigated large enough? If not so, numbers from the survey are not representative and could not show the general information. Thus, it is wise for the director to strengthen the credibility of the survey with the number of workers investigated.To sum, the conclusion has many logical flaws and in order to make it more convincing, the director should provide more important information which are needed to make the survey convincing and demonstrate the survey is worth being applied to the company.

songwei007UID: 2878972

恩，童鞋。感觉你的想法很充分，举出他因的解释也挺详细的。但是我觉得逻辑有点乱，可能是你没分段吧。还有你学理工科的吧，怎么感觉着句法和语法有待提炼啊。同样是新手上路，姐不太了解这回复的颜色怎嘛标。所以你凑合看看。我没仔细改，但是我刚写了篇同题的。我不是牛，恩，连羊也不算。你将就看看哈。O(∩_∩)O~

songwei007UID: 2878972

我刚写的，不太好，恩，你瞅瞅。呵呵加油，PS 情人节快乐
Although the argument is well-presented, it is not logically sound and thoroughly well-reasoned. By citing a recent telephone survey and quoting the words of workers, the author hastily drew the conclusion that the company can increase productivity and save money via hiring mainly older employees. However, the argument is based on several untenable grounds and I will analyze in order as follows.

First and foremost, the argument depends on one dubious and unreliable telephone survey. Neither does the author provide information with reference to how many workers responded to the survey and whether they can represent automobile factory workers as a whole, nor does s/he offer information regarding the gender, age, working experence, and income of the respondents. For example, it is highly possible that some workers dare not to tell the true feelings for the fear that their positions and salaries woul be influenced. Were the workers chosen from a specific geographical area or from nationwide? Maybe what applies to other places is not applicable to Professional Printing Company due to the local demographics. Perhaps the company is located in a newly established industrial city where many young people rush into there searching for jobs. If there are few elder, experienced workers and a large amount of young workforce, then the whole approach appears to be not suitable for this company. Without further evidence, the survey upon which the argument as a whole depends seems to be specious and invalid.

Moreover, the author fails to take other alternative explanations into consideration while simply refering to some workers' words. Although compared to older employees, yonger ones feel like more productive under supervision, it may have other factors triggering this phenomenon rather than age alone. Such alternatives may include the fact that younger, inexperienced workers are not used to working alone, they may need a supervisor to turn to when encountering a trouble or difficulty. While elder workers have more experience and get accustomed to their work, they can be self-disciplined and productive without a supervisor. However, once younger workers are aptly familiar with their work, they can obviously finish their work more productive due to energetic bodies and great passion. Thereby, the author fails to consider other factors leading to the correlation between productivity and age.

Last but not least, it is irrational to conclude that the reduction of supervisors would help the company increase productivity and save money. Even if the company reduces the number of supervisors by hiring mainly older employees, there are many other alternatives related to the productivity and profits. Consider, for example, usually the employment of elder, experienced workers would cost more than the recruitment of younger ones. Meanwhile, the company may have to pay for the health insurance, mortgage, and pension for them in the nearer future; Nevertheless, younger generations can be rather competitive in physical and energetic strength. Besides, if the company can bring in some high-tech apparatus not only can enhance the productivity but also supervise workers, it can both reduce the supervisors and eliminate the worry concerning workers' age.

To sum up, the reasoning that hiring mainly elder people contributes to the increase of productivity and the reduction of supervisors seems logical at first thought since elder and experienced workers are all too often assiduous and skillful. However, the author should evaluate the validity of the telephone survey and rule out other alternatives except age giving rise to final conclusion.

shufe21UID: 3007607

好多啊....谢谢分享