|
|
GRE写作考试走出老套创新另类思维
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
广告招租，e-mail:yesize@hotmail.com GRE写作走出老套重在创新与务实，附Argument191 刚开始学写Argument时，总是先学习常见逻辑错误，什么hasty/over generalization, false analogy, unwarranted assumption等等,久而久之,我们一看到argument,就将逻辑错误套用相应的上述语句.再看下面的模板(源自上海新东方付顺贤讲义,孙远一书中也有相似处),你会发觉中国人几乎每篇习作或多或少都有其影子. The author concludes that…To support the conclusion, the author reasons that…The author also points out that…However, the argument is flawed for several reasons. In the first place, the author unfairly assumes that…however, the author fails to substantiate this crucial assumption. Absent such evidence, it is just likely that… … In conclusion, this argument is unacceptable as it stands. To better evaluate thee argument, the author must…to strengthen the argument, the author would have to demonstrate that… 初学的人(包括我自己)都会惊叹多好的句子啊,可当我真正将这些运用到文章这种去时却发现,所有人都这么写,这不成了八股了吗? 再看看ETS的范文,真是大开眼界,他们的开头与结尾也都很有创意。想想也是每个人看到题目的反应都是不同的，最想说的话也不可能都用一种模式表达。此外，其论述也令人心服口服.然而与付顺贤或孙远的模板恰恰相反的是，大多5，6分的文章都没有在文章中具体指明是何种逻辑错误(见上文)，而是以平实的口吻并且站在决策者(或是CEO或是university president)的角度，剖析，假设，批驳。这种写法的好处在于能激起阅卷人的共鸣。别说他们了，我在读文章时也有同感。(我要是这家公司的头也不会把钱丢在那个项目；我要是住在A镇的话，也不会同意把这块地作为B用；等)具体例子可下载满分网的36篇ETS发布的范文，这里不再螯述。 有人会反对说，付顺贤在所有写作考试中都得6分，他的指导不会错的。但是，要知道他们的整体写作水平很高，不象我们用了漂亮的模板而其他内容与模板的语气用词等格格不入，反而弄巧成拙，显得有片断抄袭倾向。而且与我们竞争的主要对手，美国及其他英语国家的学生，英语造诣更没法比，我们再用字漂亮商在花功夫也无济于事。还不如顺应ETS的初衷，在逻辑错误上有独到见解，提出心悦诚服的理由。这一点，要多学学6分范文。 下面的一篇习作，是我站在文章中决策者的角度，设身处地的寻找了几个错误，不知有没有达到预期目标。举例说明： 191The following is a letter from a professor at Xanadu College to the college’s president. "The development of an extensive computer-based long-distance learning program will enhance the reputation of Xanadu College. This program would allow more students to enroll in our courses, thereby increasing our income from student tuition. Traditional courses could easily be adapted for distance learners, as was shown by the adaptation of two traditional courses for our distance learning trial project last year. Also, by using computer programs and taped lectures, faculty will have fewer classroom obligations and more time to engage in extensive research, thereby enhancing the reputation of Xanadu." 看完文章后，我相信大家也会列出以下几点错误或更多： 1、建议带有部门利益，各学科教学方法不同 2、试样成功的部门不能代表全部 3、该项目本身有缺陷：增加成本，学费增加，学生负担重，可能转学 4、学校的声誉有各个因素组成 然而怎样把上述几点归类，有机结合，且看我的文章： The letter to the president of Xanadu College is not sufficiently convincing in terms of the evidence given. Considering that the suggestion was made by a professor from particular department, one may doubt the representativeness of his request. Is it merely a one-sided argument in the interest of his department instead of all or for the sake of the professor himself? To corroborate his argument, the professor cites easy adaptation of students as evidence, but can the students in the trial project belong to the computer science department who is more adapted in software operating. Given that his tryout is well represented, there&nbs......
|
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
加入最爱
热门小游戏分类 
