[主题活动] 【Argument 移山记】--- 步骤一：确定目标 [复制链接]

bernina
UID: 2503038

荣誉版主

Rank: 9 Rank: 9 Rank: 9

声望: 1041
寄托币: 17658
注册时间: 2008-6-10
精华: 10
帖子: 995

电梯直达

楼主

发表于 2009-8-9 01:36:59 |只看该作者 |倒序浏览

本帖最后由 bernina 于 2009-8-9 01:39 编辑

Argument is a mountain, let’s move it together

Step one: clarify your aim

面对argument, 我们的目的是什么？

有的同学说：你不是废话么，当然是找错误啦。。

对，那怎么找呢？

有的同学又说了：你怎么又废话，当然是在句子里找啦。。

怎么来确定哪句有问题，哪句没有问题呢？

这…….看哪句不顺眼！！
………………….

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

对于argument 我们的目的只有一个，推翻作者的结论/建议，作者想要证明什么，想要表达什么，在说了那么一大堆话之后想要说明什么问题，这才是我们需要真正把握住的东西。

也就是说，在看到一篇argument后，我们的首要目的就是找出作者的目的~！

有很多同学忽略了作者的目的，一上来就是一顿狂找，要不杂乱无章，要不找的东西无关痛痒，杂乱无章倒也罢了，无关痛痒可是致命伤，说了一大堆，却没有说道要害，岂不尴尬？

所以，我认为，在大家遇到一篇A，先粗略读一变，准确无误的揪出作者目的，这是最最重要的，接着，把作者目的深深记在脑子里，带着这个目的，再详细读一遍文章，这样你在边读的时候，就会有很多疑问产生，这些疑问，就是你要写的东西啦。。

有的同学说，找目的有什么困难的，不就是最后一句话么？

其实不然，有的文章的作者目的很隐晦，不好读出来，这就是造成了一些A被称为经典难题的原因之一，用范文给大家举个例子。

The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.

"Five years ago, we residents of Morganton voted to keep the publicly owned piece of land known as Scott Woods in a natural, undeveloped state.
Our thinking was that, if no shopping centers or houses were built there, Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as a natural parkland.
But now that our town planning committee wants to purchase the land and build a school there, we should reconsider this issue.
If the land becomes a school site, no shopping centers or houses can be built there, and substantial acreage would probably be devoted to athletic fields.
There would be no better use of land in our community than this, since a large majority of our children participate in sports, and Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as natural parkland."

这篇文章的作者目的就很隐晦，乍一看，貌似是要盖学校，如果你这么想，你写的文章很可能就偏掉了。。
你也许会写：
不要盖学校，学校对社区有blablabla不好
如果写成这样，就很危险了

仔细看，发现这篇argument的真实目的是证明：
学校和parkland对Morganton的居民的效果是一样的。
那我们要怎么回应这篇a 呢？
证明： school=/=parkland !

现在看看范文怎么写的：
Body4 （省去之前三段是因为这篇范文开头太罗嗦，前两段在介绍文章，第三段是个引子，第四段才真正是他有力论证的开始）
Using a piece of land to build a school is not the same thing as using it for a natural parkland.

直接说：学校和公园不一样。

Using a piece of land to build a school is not the same thing as using it for a natural parkland.
While all the members of the community could potentially benefit from a parkland, only a percentage of the population would realistically benefit from a new school.
The author fails to recognize people like the senior citizens of the community.
What interest do they have in a new school?
It only means higher taxes for them to pay.
They will likely never to and utilize the school for anything.
On the other hand, anyone can go to a park and enjoy the natural beauty and peacefulness.
The use of the land for a school would destroy the benefit of a park for everyone.
In turn, it would supply a school only to groups of people in exactly the right age range, not too young or too old, to reap the benefits.

之后这一整段的论述都是围绕公园为什么和学校不一样而展开的，而不是说学校有什么不好。

Body 5
Another point the author stresses is that the use of the land for things like athletic fields somehow rationalizes the destruction of the park.

换着法的说学校和公园不一样

Another point the author stresses is that the use of the land for things like athletic fields somehow rationalizes the destruction of the park.
What about children who don't play sports?
Without the school, they could enjoy the land for anything.
A playing field is a playing field.
Children are not going to go out there unless they are into sports.
There are many children in schools who are not interested in or are not able to play sports.
This is yet another group who will be left out of the grand benefits of a school that the author talks about.

也是在论证两者的差别

从这篇文章就可以看出，准确抓住作者的目的对整篇a的论证方向和思路具有决定性的作用。

今天是认识argument的第一步，大家先做到找准题目的论证目的，大家再看完后，如果对某些题目的目的不明确，就来跟帖，我们一起讨论。