[1010G]决战2010备考日志 by maggie-jiang---天行健，君子以自强不息！

maggie-jiangUID: 2666877

基本情况：
  今年开始准备G的。报了暑假的XDF。AW时间:7月20号（暂定）
  目标：11fall
  单词背了2遍了，效果不太好，现在在看第3遍。
  作文题库翻过一遍，没列过提纲，目前在大量阅读收集资料，读物为The Economist
  英语专业，专四水平，每天备G时间不少于6小时，周六周日不少于8小时。
  没有任何影响考G的活动，全心全意潜心学习，目标：650+800+5
  愿意担任组里职务，希望可以加入复习团队，一起努力！


曾经的我是迷茫的，不知道自己前方的路是什么。身边的人都有自己的梦想，我却不知道自己的梦想的是什么。
只是觉得出国是一条路而已。但是自从我接触了寄托，看见大家为了自己的梦想是这么的努力，我也慢慢的在学习寻找自己的梦，虽然现在还有些迷茫，不知道自己的选择是否正确，但是真的真的很想加入到这个team，一个有共同目标，有团结一致征服GRE的team中来。
虽然我不太会表达自己的feeling，还是希望斑竹看到我的诚意，批准我加入1010G的备考组，和一起有梦的同学一起奋斗！
我一直都相信努力是解决一切问题的正确之路，所以我希望在考G的这条路上能和大家一起努力。
最后放上我的人生格言-天行健，君子以自强不息！

toywangUID: 2700880

我来支持你啦啦。。。。。

maggie-jiangUID: 2666877

Apirl 8th

今天终于开始坐下来写我的备考日志了。。。
早上背了3个LIST
下午有课，晚上看了一篇ARGUMENT 写的超有感觉的。。。
以前觉得argument是批评作者观点中的逻辑错误的，可是好像也不尽是批评，也有正面可定作者观点的，要辨证的看待，先正反两面的评价一下，然后指出其合理性，在挑出逻辑不合理的地方用自己的观点来解决一下错误的地方。。。。
呵呵，今天的这篇ARGUMENT完全颠覆的我原来对ARGU的认识。。。
看来这东西博大精深，值得在深入研究一下。。。
还看了一篇TIMES上的文章，觉得完全体现了老美的质疑精神，科学精神。有好多的例子，而且很新鲜，只是我还不知道这些例子的出处，等有时间了在查查看。
that's all...
貌似我还不太会写日志这样的东西，好像流水账哦。。。不忍看啊
tomorrow will be a nice day!

maggie-jiangUID: 2666877

Apirl 9th
今天是亚麻P的生日。。。祝生日快乐！
虽然是一天的课，但都是些没有营养的课，所以拿来背单词了，早上复习了昨天的3list，下午看了两个list。。。
自己觉得效率有点低。。。
晚上做了一篇阅读，有点不知主题，明天再看看吧。
今天到此结束，去觉觉了。。。

哦。。。我查到MMR了。。。
是麻疹疫苗，1998年被爆会引起孤独症，然后这篇论文就被撤销了，理由是这篇论文导致英国的MMR接种率下降，麻疹的发病率上涨。。。
The MMR vaccine is an immunization shot against measles, mumps and rubella (also called German measles).


Claims about autism孤独症
Main article: MMR vaccine controversy
In the UK, the MMR vaccine was the subject of controversy after publication of a 1998 paper by Andrew Wakefield et al. reporting a study of twelve children who had bowel symptoms along with autism or other disorders, including cases where onset was considered to be soon after administration of MMR vaccine.[27] During a 1998 press conference, Wakefield suggested that giving children the vaccines in three separate doses would be safer than a single injection. This suggestion was not supported by the paper, and several subsequent peer-reviewed studies have failed to show any association between the vaccine and autism.[28] Administering the vaccines in three separate doses does not reduce the chance of adverse effects, and it increases the opportunity for infection by the two diseases not immunized against first.[28][29] Health experts have criticized media reporting of the MMR-autism controversy for triggering a decline in vaccination rates.[30] Before publication of Wakefield's findings, the inoculation rate for MMR in the UK was 92%; after publication, the rate dropped to below 80%. In 1998, there were 56 measles cases in the UK; by 2008, there were 1348 cases, with 2 confirmed deaths.[31]
In 2004, after an investigation by The Sunday Times,[32] the interpretation section of the study, which identified a general association in time between the vaccine and autism, was formally retracted by ten of Wakefield's twelve coauthors.[33] The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,[34] the Institute of Medicine of the National Academy of Sciences,[35] the UK National Health Service[36] and the Cochrane Library review[12] have all concluded that there is no evidence of a link between the MMR vaccine and autism.
In 2007 Wakefield became the subject of a General Medical Council disciplinary hearing over allegations that his research had received funding related to litigation against MMR-vaccine manufacturers, and had concealed this fact from the editors of The Lancet.[37] It was later revealed that Wakefield received £435,643 [about $780,000] plus expenses for consulting work related to the lawsuit. This funding came from the UK legal aid fund, a fund intended to provide legal services to the poor.[32] In 2009 The Sunday Times reported that Wakefield had manipulated patient data and misreported results in his 1998 paper, creating the appearance of a link with autism.[38] In 2010, Wakefield was found by the GMC to have acted "irresponsibly",[39] and The Lancet fully retracted the original paper.[40]

maggie-jiangUID: 2666877

Apirl 10th
今天看到几个红包上的词，释义上有点问题。
abnegation
红包：放弃权利
巴朗：renunciation self-sacrifice 放弃，自我克制
decimate
红包: 毁掉大部分，大量杀死 to destory or kill a large part of
巴朗：kill, usually one out of ten 杀死毁掉，通常在10%
defeatist
红包：名词。失败主义者person who shows defeatism
巴朗：形容词，resigned to defeat, accepting defeat as a natural outcome 安于失败的
deference
红包：敬意，尊重courteous regard or respect
巴朗：courteous regard for another's wish遵从别人的意愿

在我看来，我觉的可能巴朗的释义更准确一些。。。。
看来也不能尽信红包啊。。。

海边拾贝UID: 2790847

相信大家，一起加油！

maggie-jiangUID: 2666877

Apirl 12
25天表的第7天
list 13-14 list7-8
list 11-12

ETS范文 ARGUMENT
SMILE-BRIGHT toothpaste
开头：点明论点型
The argument contains several facets that are questionable.
First, the reliability and generalizability of the survey are open to quesiton. In addition, the argument assumes a correlation amounts to a causal relationship.
The argument also fails to examine alternative explanations.
I will discuss each of these facets in turn.
BODY部分：开头均为topic sentence
In evaluating the evidence of the survey, one must consider how the survey was conducted. If the questions were leading or if the survey relied on self reports, the results might be unreliable -- people might just respond with the expected answer.
One must also consider how broad the survey was.
If the survey was limited to a few patients of a certain dentist, the results might be attributable to those particular individuals and that particular dentist.
Hence, the generalization drawn might not apply to most people.
In addition, even if the survey was broader, one must consider whether it was limited in certain ways.
For example, were the survey respondents old people?
Was the survey limited to a certain city or geographic region?
Factors such as these could explain the survey results and could undermine the generalizability of the survey results.

Even if one accepts the survey results, the argument remains questionable.
The argument assumes that the correlation between the use of SMILEBRIGHT and capped teeth means that SMILE BRIGHT causes the need for capped teeth.
But the argument fails to provide sufficient evidence to support the conclusion.
In addition, the argument fails to consider the possibility that people who already have capped teeth might prefer SMILEBRIGHT as a toothpaste because it works better on capped teeth.

Finally, the argument's author fails to rule out alternative explanations. For instance, people who brush their teeth more than twice a day might be those who are prone to the need to have their teeth capped.
It might also be the case that starting with SMILEBRIGHT early in life damages the teeth so that capped teeth will be needed later.
It also might be the case that SMILEBRIGHT users tend to be the kind of people who are excessively concerned with the appearance of their teeth, perhaps theyre actors, and so are the kind of people who might, sooner or later, want to have their teeth capped anyway.
结尾，辨证的看待分析+解决方法
In conclusion, the argument, while it seems logocal at first, has several flaws as discussed above. The argument could be improved by providing evidence that the correlation is indeed a causal relationship -- that using the toothpaste actually causes the need for capped teeth. It could be further improved by ruling out alternative explanations for the supposed causal relationship.解决方法

maggie-jiangUID: 2666877

Apirl 19th
好几天没有更新了
今天开始做精华帖的阅读笔记
追星剑1.1
https://bbs.gter.net/showthread.php?s=&threadid=200638
关于关键字的问题，昨天小组BS了issue130提到了社会化socialized我觉的这是这个题目的关键词了
在这篇issue里应该要先解释一下这个词的含义，然后再展开观点论述
不过，我个人觉的定义的话是可以自己定义的。
因为这样你可以朝着自己想展开的方向定义，然后引出下文。当然pooh的用MW来查自己不确定的关键词也是可以学习的，毕竟自己的定义不能和原意偏的太厉害，不然就是错误的定义了。
学习“关于issue17里面说的just law 和unjust law, 是出自Martin Luther King 之口；issue 176也是一句名言，”
这些是要积累的。。。


今天先这些。。。最近作业掉的厉害。。。
从明天开始狂补
2篇commentary
1.2-1.4的追星剑。。。

maggie-jiangUID: 2666877

https://bbs.gter.net/thread-920961-1-1.html
66版主的“争取高分，从第一印象开始---被人忽视的argument开头”
学习

如何开头？如何在短的时间内吸引到阅卷人的良好印象?曾经当我在对如何下笔开始argument一筹莫展之际，翻遍了AW精华区，也没有找到答案，当时一度令我很沮丧：大家都不屑于讨论的一个东西，居然就把我给难倒了，我也别去考什么GRE了，回家去农妇山泉有点田吧。直到最近当我回头，总结掉我所写过的所有argument以后，我才发现了一个草率的开头可能是绝大多数XDF型同学们忽略掉的一个最大的扣分点。

一个开头对于行文有什么帮助？Argument的开头到底要表达一些什么信息？开头，类似于每一段话的TS一样，应当是全文的TS,一个好的开头不仅能够让ETS老师迅速的抓住你的思维结构和逻辑论证过程，而且能够使自己的下文论述更加充分。很多同学都会在不知不觉当中发现自己的论证开始偏离题目的要求，尤其是在举出可能性的时候，经常有的可能性让人一头雾水，或者让人感觉到过于极端，这就是没有一开始就理顺文章的逻辑的结果。如果我说：argument开头是最不能忽视的，我想，经过了XDF洗脑的同学们第一时间就会呸我两口：开头结尾一共写5分钟，照着模板套套写完就行了，哪里用去想？然而，大错特错。 先不要着急扔鸡蛋，为了弄清楚这个问题的实质，我最近拾起了让我最反胃的模板，仔仔细细的研究了一番它们的开头。给我的结论是：一无是处。

我已经写了两篇Argument了A53和A51....我感觉66版主说的很对，因为我每次写的时候都是用的万能开头，没什么创新，也没什么自己的想法，就是简单的概括一下然后第二段开始论述。。。

我就是66说的第二种类型。。。恐慌中
继续学习

In this argument, the arguer concludes that daily use of lchthaid will help people to prevent colds and lower absenteeism. To support this conclusion, the arguer cites the evidence that in East Meria, people seldom to the hospital for the treatment of colds because of the high consumption of fish in that place. Carefully examination of this supporting evidence, however, reveals that it lends little credible support to the arguer’s suggestion.

我想，很多童鞋当写完这么一个开头的时候，下了考场自我感觉都会非常的良好，觉得4分在手了，内容写的稍微全面一点的话，5分也不在话下，那么我现在告诉大家，这样的开头，其实是彻底的失败，从内容表达上来说，这个开头只值3分或者更低。不信？看我接下来的说法。

我们先来分析一下文章的结构：(à表示推出)
A study reports that in nearby East Meria, where fish consumption is very high, people visit the doctor only once or twice per year for the treatment of colds
通过这句话，我们能够发现作者的第一步推理：study reports(已知) à EM的人为感冒而看医生较少是 indeed exist.（推理1） à EM的人感冒少（推理2）
Clearly, eating a substantial amount of fish can prevent colds.
这句话可以得出第二部推理：这种现象（推理2）+ 鱼类消费高（事实1） à 鱼类对这种现象有帮助（推理3） à 鱼类的某种物质对抑制感冒有帮助（推理4）
Since colds are the reason most frequently given for absences from school and work, we recommend the daily use of Ichthaid, a nutritional supplement derived from fish oil, as a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism."
然后下一个推论：感冒是主要的旷工借口（事实2） à 感冒是主要的旷工原因（推论5）+ 推论4 à 鱼类的某种物质可以抑制感冒，减少旷工。（推论6）à 鱼油中提炼的营养品可以抑制感冒，减少旷工（推论7）
最后是结论：推论7 à 吃这种营养品可以预防感冒，减少旷工（结论）

实际上，是这么多步奏的推论和隐含前提的共同作用，才得出这么个荒谬的结果，而上面那位童鞋仅仅把得出结论的原因归咎为：the evidence that in East Meria, people seldom to the hospital for the treatment of colds because of the high consumption of fish in that place. 当ETS老师看到这样的开头的时候，第一个反应估计就是：这个人题都没读懂就开始瞎写。自然后面的评价不会高到哪儿去

常见的模板开头一般是两种类型：

1直截了当，这种模板通常的方式就是 In this argument, the author concludes that… however, it suffers from several logical flaws. 简单实用吧，然而，除了告诉阅卷人：我开始行文了！以外，这种开头还有别的用处么？当ETS的老师批的头晕脑胀四肢发慌的时候，流水线一般出现在他面前的居然是几百几千份这种工厂里面出来的开头，看着就倒胃口的压缩食品，他会怎么想？“你说的东西没错，但是除了几个单词以外，实在是看不出什么内容，真TM恶心。”估计当时给你的文章档次就压了一级。更何况，ETS提倡的是思维的展现，不是你打字的速度，更不是你抄写的能力，这种开头如何能够配得上高分？可笑的是新东方的老师们，一遍一遍的强调着：开头要简洁，一句话足矣，时间用的越少越好。来给广大的中国考生洗脑，被洗脑的考生们又把这种思想开始淳淳善诱师弟师妹们，造成了现在的普遍的错觉：开头不重要。时代在变化，ETS 的胃口也在变化，然而这种理念持续了足足有8年之久或者更长，却从来没有变过。无怪乎最近两年的AW成绩普遍的开始下降，细小之处就能看出端倪来。

2固定逻辑式，这种模板的表述一般来说是：In this argument, the author concludes that… To support the conclusion, the arguer points out that … and provides the evidence that … A careful examination of this argument would reveal how groundless the conclusion is.
对于这类型的开头，从本意来看，比第一种强多了，但也会是最大的败笔之处。因为令人遗憾的是，绝大多数的同学们使用这种开头的目的，不是为了理清楚题目的逻辑关系，而是为了凑字数，他们忘记了思考，一种务必要贯穿整个写作过程的speculation.

66的分析真的很精辟。。。

那么，一个好的开头究竟应当有些什么内容？

正如我上文提到的，开头的最大的作用应该在于帮助写作的时候理清文章的脉络，一个好的开头应该就是一个文章的缩影，应该给阅卷的老师三个直观的印象：1. 这些逻辑点确实是来自于文章的抽象2. 这个学生抓的逻辑点都是正确的。3.从这些逻辑点的顺序当中可以猜测到该生的正文论证顺序。

仍然举上面那篇argument为例子，当最开始看到题一步步阅读的时候，脑子里面就应该开始抽象出一些作者的推论了，或许大家都不能第一遍看完就列出我上面写的那么详细的多步推论，（就连我自己也不行…）然而，大概的推论过程应该在你的脑子里面很清醒的展现出来，比如类似这样的缩略版：

Study à 感冒的人少
感冒的人少+吃鱼多 à鱼里面有物质对感冒有效
鱼对感冒有效+感冒是第一请假理由 à 吃鱼油可以避免请假

我想，在短短的1分钟内，能够理论这么一个思路，就足够了，ETS的老师也明白你不可能再30分钟的时间里面面俱到，但是你有了这样的思维，至少就和其他的上来就开始套模板的开头不一样了，接下来我们可以这样开头：

Grounding on the study in East Meria, supposing that eating a substantial amount of fish can prevent colds, and then synthesizing the two hypothesizes and another factor that colds are the reason most frequently given for absences from school and work, the author accordingly suggests that the daily use of Ichthaid is a good way to prevent colds and lower absenteeism. However …

类似这样的开头，首先并不花时间，因为除了一些连词和动词以外，大部分都是照抄原文，经过简单的练习以后，绝对能够在3分钟之内搞定，然而，它的价值却比模板高的多。当ETS拿到这么一个开头的时候，首先他必然会对你的综合能力感到满意，因为这些逻辑关系，的确是文章当中提到的，也是顺理成章的关系；其次你在这样一个开头里面传达了一个信息：我接下来要批的东西，已经都在这个开头里面啦。老师们都是很有经验的，很容易就能看出你这篇A，主要批的是三个东西：1.study的真实性，代表性或者全面性, 2. 那个supposing的合理性, 3.综合结论的谬误。接下来他们在读你的正文的时候，自然而然会有一种感觉：这个学生的逻辑性不错，至少段落之间，是绝对没有问题的，因为他的开头已经告诉了我，他的批判是按照逻辑来的。

我没有想过提供更多可借鉴的东西，更不希望大家把我给的那个开头的例子总结成某个新的模板，我更希望通过这篇不算太长的文章传递一种新的，有别于XDF的思想，模板是我一直痛恨的东西，机缘巧合之下我也没有去成XDF，算是我的不幸，因为我必须用比别人更长的时间来入门，也算我的幸运，因为我的内心深处的思想是自由的，没有受到任何拘束。当我写的文章多了，我自己也有了固定的表达方式，我不知道这算不算是我的模板，会不会阻碍我的进步，但我知道自己在不停的思考，不停的试图从每一微小的方面提高，满足ETS那变态的要求。常言道：“授人以鱼不如授人以渔”，不可否认，新东方和一些其他的陈旧思维在速成和入门方面，的确是做出了不可磨灭的贡献。然而，写作是一门艺术，端正写作的态度更是一种财富，当大家都开始蜂拥的追求更快更方便的途径的时候，ETS关闭了高分的大门，唯有不停的思考，不停的总结，才能够返璞归真，真正懂得：考试的目的不是折磨人，而是一种化蝶前的蜕变。

其实自从听过66版主的Argument的逻辑分析之后，我就对怎样攻击到逻辑错误的点有了很好的理解，要攻击的是逻辑链中有论据推到论点和结论的这个过程，指出其不合理的地方。。。
看来还要好好的研究下开头

maggie-jiangUID: 2666877

Apirl 23rd
今天开始看花儿的阅读了
单词背了2个list
追星剑在继续中

weaselUID: 2739489

支持一下，看到标题进来啦，天行健。。。。。

tracywlzUID: 2522388

继续加油~