GRE寫作高分需要避免哪些問題

GRE寫作高分需要避免哪些問題,我們一起來看看吧，下面小編就和大家分享，來欣賞一下吧。

GRE寫作高分需要避免哪些問題

新GRE寫作要避免的幾點(diǎn)：

.避免觀點(diǎn)重復(fù);不要講了幾遍其實(shí)都是一個理由。當(dāng)你一點(diǎn)就能說明的時候，非要講三遍就顯的有點(diǎn)STUPID了。你要從多個方面來講道理，而且要盡量把問題具體化。

.避免觀點(diǎn)的庸俗化，并考慮美國人能否接受的問題。比如說要避免對任何宗教詞批判太多。因?yàn)槟阌肋h(yuǎn)搞不懂給你判分的是信什么教的。不能批判任何政治理想。不能貶低自己所在的國家。美國人最討厭不愛自己國家的人。避免觀點(diǎn)的庸俗化，就是我們說的有些東西可以想，但是不能寫出來GRE考斯作文邏輯思路分為兩種。一種是問題發(fā)揮型，一種是argument/爭論型。

對于問題發(fā)揮型題目，你怎么發(fā)揮，怎么犯邏輯錯誤都沒有問題，只要你能保證你觀點(diǎn)的正確，并能用具體的事實(shí)證明你的觀點(diǎn)。而對于 argument/爭論　型題目就不同了。它的出題方式是給你一段話，這段話后再給出一個總結(jié)。然后讓你挑出它的邏輯錯誤。需要你作的是.它的結(jié)論或者對其加以補(bǔ)充。你只要拿出三點(diǎn)理由把它.就行了。這三點(diǎn)理由從哪里找呢，從文章里面找，從文章的周邊關(guān)系找，從文章的背后找。

下面舉一個例子：現(xiàn)在有一種計算機(jī)儀表設(shè)備，把它安在商用飛機(jī)上之后就必然能避免飛機(jī)在空中的碰撞。因?yàn)橐患茱w機(jī)發(fā)出碰撞信號后，另一架飛機(jī)就能接收這個信號并及時采取行動，從而避免飛機(jī)碰撞。

這里結(jié)論就是飛機(jī)必然能避免碰撞。你要做的就是.這個結(jié)論。它的因果關(guān)系是因?yàn)榘惭b了儀表所以能夠避免碰撞。你要說的是安裝了儀表不一定能避免碰撞?，F(xiàn)在你就要找出3點(diǎn)理由來。

1.　文章中沒有任何統(tǒng)計數(shù)據(jù)告訴我們飛機(jī)的碰撞百分之百是商用飛機(jī)，因此如果避免碰撞，就要在所有飛行物上安裝這種儀表。

2.　安裝了儀表后，是否需要人來操作。如果是，那么因?yàn)橛腥说脑颍筒荒鼙苊馀鲎病?/p>

3.　要是這個儀表系統(tǒng)壞了。

4.　也沒有談到氣候問題，衛(wèi)星干擾問題等干擾因素……

所以Argument文章不需要你有文采，也不需要你有多么好的句子結(jié)構(gòu)，它只是要求你的邏輯沒有漏洞。

大家有時間的話務(wù)必把AI的提綱都列掉，然后挑重復(fù)率高的寫。比如ISSUE里面有一道The GREatest indicator of a nation...。另外有一點(diǎn)很重要的是，特別是對于A大家在寫完幾篇文章以后，盡快歸納出針對每一個instruction的模板，question這種可以寫成一類，然后背出來。其實(shí)老G和新G的區(qū)別就在于，老G是一套模板走天下，新G準(zhǔn)備4個模板，就這么簡單。以后自己聯(lián)系的時候，就根據(jù)模板來套，寫到后來你會發(fā)現(xiàn)，你寫出來的文章，不管題目怎么換，寫出來的東西看起來都一樣，這樣Argument算基本練成了。模板最好自己寫，根據(jù)頭幾篇寫的文章來歸納。比如說我關(guān)于specific evidence這種題型，自己歸納的模板。

The argument is well presented and appears to be relatively sound at the first glance,the author concludes that__________. However, a close scrutiny about the argument will reveal that several specific evidences should be added in order to make the argument to be more cogent and convincing, for example:_________

Initially, the author must give evidence that_________. If we were to learn that _______, it would obviously weaken the conclusion. It may turn out to be that_____. To make his assurance eloquent, he must provide more specific evidences to consummate his argument.

Secondly, in order to______, we should also be informed that_______. In the argument, the author only said that__________. It may undermine the argument that if-_______. Without knowing_______, we can hardly accept the conclusion that______

Third, the author should eliminate the disturbance of other factors, for example, he should provide evidences that _______. Perhaps_____ or perhaps________. Either of these scenarios, if true, would cast serious doubt on the author’s claim. Without accounting for all other explanations, the arguer can't reasonably conclude that___________; U% z$ w' U$ r. f" x1 z" e; Q+ s

To sum up, the argument is far from powerful enough to substantiate that______________ Before any final decisions are made about_____________, much more specific evidences are to be put forward to make the author's argument more forceful and cogent.

真正寫的時候，先把第一段和最后一段都寫了，然后每段寫個第一句，列出框架。最好能在第一段把你要寫的內(nèi)容都先簡要概括一下：

話題還是回到準(zhǔn)備A的過程上，當(dāng)你歸納出模板以后，接下來要做的事情就很簡單了，找到新老題庫的對應(yīng)表，然后自己照著新題庫一題一題地把提綱列出來，不會的看一下老題是怎么寫的。這個時候不需要寫很多文章，只是歸納提綱就行，記住歸納的時候要把可能發(fā)生的情況寫出來，因?yàn)榈搅丝荚嚨臅r候想不出可以rival的情況那不是悲劇了，比如這個題中的一個evidence：

The reason why students choose Buckingham College.

Perhaps it has qualified teachers.

Perhaps tuition fee is lower than colleges at the same level.

等你把這兩件事情都做完，A的準(zhǔn)備就差不多了，以后就是每天花半個小時左右的時間一遍遍熟悉題庫。

按照這種方法，我真正準(zhǔn)備A的時間只有5天，后來的那段時間都只是每天花半個小時寫3篇作文的提綱寫的話不用太多，3-4天寫一篇保持手感就行了。

關(guān)于ISSUE，方法也差不多，主要的問題就是寫提綱一定要仔細(xì)，把你對這個問題的觀點(diǎn)，和引用的例子都寫出來，不要想著自己能套一些Roosevelt, King什么的，想想就可以了，沒有那么多例子讓你套，還是要老老實(shí)實(shí)準(zhǔn)備提綱。我寫過一套完整的issue和argument的提綱，寫的時候例子也放在提綱里，ISSUE跟A也一樣，寫完一遍提綱，自己重新看，到最后就是訓(xùn)練自己看到一個題，在2分鐘以內(nèi)迅速組織出一個比較詳細(xì)的提綱。這樣ISSUE的準(zhǔn)備也就差不多了。

GRE issue寫作優(yōu)秀實(shí)例：意見同與不同

issue1題目：

We can usually learn much more from people whose views we share than from people whose views contradict our own; disagreement can cause stress and inhibit learning.

通常，我們從與我們意見相同的人身上學(xué)到的要比從那些與我們意見相悖的人身上學(xué)的東西要多得多;(因?yàn)?意見不統(tǒng)一會帶來壓力并且阻礙學(xué)習(xí)。

正文：

From people whose views we share we get confidence, encouragement, and psychological satisfaction; from people whose views contradict our own we get new angles, fresh perspectives, and pertinent advices. But excessive agreements would lead us to the morass of self-complacence; and extreme contradictions would weaken our determination of learning. Thus we should fully recognize the potential danger of limiting our vision in one of the two sides. And only through the approach of paying equal attention to both sides could we make further achievements in the process of learning.

Views and ideas from people agree with us may raise our confidence, strengthen our courage, and enhance our psychological satisfaction. According to common sense and our everyday experience, the propensity to accept the ideas from people who agree with us rather than the opinions from people disagree with us associates strongly with the nature of human beings, for we are social animals and it is the inner instinct of us to seek for approval of others. Imagine, what would you react if the work accomplished by your arduous efforts receives fierce criticism or not even a glance? You would lose your strength to march in the long road of learning.

On the contrary, agreements may cause the feeling of being accepted and consented, thus we gain the psychological satisfaction which will impulse us to learn more. Moreover, customarily, we tend to imitate and share ideas and behaviors from our parents, friends, classmates and so forth, who are in the same group of ours. By this way we form knowledge of our own. Not under all circumstances we can learn from people whose views we share. Only base on the premises that all the views of our assenters are authentic and sincere, however, could we learn useful knowledge from them. On condition that people consent and even flatter us for certain purposes which have nothing to do with learning, our learning would be hindered instead of motivated. We would be possessed in the illusive pride and limited in a narrow bound of vision. Consequently, we can see that the speaker’s assertion is incomplete and oversimplified.

Contradicting views and ideas could aware us of the mistakes and flaws in our work which we can not discover by ourselves, bring us fresh angles and perspectives, and then make our work mature and complete. Thereby through the discussion and competition both we and the people disagree with us could make advancements in our learning. Debate on the same subject make it possible for human beings to make most of the achievements and advances on fields of science, technology, philosophy and the like. If we see only on the one side of the coin, we could get only a partial and distorted knowledge and view which might mislead our learning.

Also, contradiction may cause negative effects under certain conditions, especially when the debate becomes irrational denouncement or personal attack. Then our confidence would be impaired by the criticisms and our learning inhibited by the stress excessive contradictions brings us. Disagreements would be detrimental rather than beneficial to our learning under this circumstance.

Bias on each of the two sides is detrimental to our learning for that agreements and disagreements form a organic entity which can not be absolutely divided. Over reliance on one side is blind and unwise. Agreements base on no evidence are actually flatters; disagreements without rational reasons are reprimands. We would be enmeshed in the web of self-contention sewed by ourselves and could not go ahead if we and blinded by the flatters; we would be frozen in the chilly night of darkness created by reprimands and became helpless and hopeless. We must pay equal attentions on both sides to see the whole picture.

To sum up, ideas of people whose views we share and people whose views contradict our own play their respective role in our learning, and none of them should be neglected. Therefore, balance between both sides is needed. And only through this way could we achieve the further goal in our process of learning.

GRE issue寫作優(yōu)秀實(shí)例：審查的公正性

題目：

Censorship is rarely, if ever, justified.

審查很少能夠做到公正。

正文：

“Censorship” is a word which seems to be authoritative rather than democratic, which implies the will of the governors rather than the will of general people. Since the occurrence of the censorship, which could be traced back to the Ancient Rome, it has been playing an important part in the domestic affairs while arousing applause and condemnation as well. Here the our government faces a dilemma, is it fair to carry on the censorship at the cost of sacrificing part of democracy, or just open the gate letting flows of ideas and thoughts in, at the risk of losing its own rampart.

Since censorship suggest an act of changing or suppressing speech, writing or any other forms of expression that is condemned as subversive of the common good, it must have a close relationship with the one who applies such supervision, and the word “common good” should be redefined under different conditions. There is time when we were all under a powerful monarchy, and the “common good” is the “monarch good”, then the censorship itself is the instrument of the monarch which solely depended on the will of the monarch; in the Middle Ages, both the Roman Catholic and the Protestant Churches practiced censorship that seemed to be oppressive to any ideas challenging the doctrines of churches and the existence of God; even now, in some authoritative countries, the censorship is used to rule its people by restricting their minds, of course, for the stability of their governing over the people. With these regards, censorship itself is questioned at the rationality of existing, regardless of the practices made by the democratic government, while the justice of the democratic government is quite doubtable.

The matter concerning is not only who practices the censorship but also how it is practiced. Since different men make different comments on the same work of art, for example, it is hard to set up a measure by which we could decide whether one should be prohibited, especially to the work of arts, as its content always labeled as “subversive” and “revolutionary”, two words detested by the governors most. Such cases could be found in Ulysses by J. Joyce and Lady Chatterley’s Lover by D.H Lawrence, these two great novels were firstly considered to be guilty of obscenity and were put to prohibition by the American government, but turned out to be true masterpieces today. So any form of censorship, to some extent, lags behind the development of ideas and will put more or less a negative effect on their development.

Though the censorship is such a disgusting word embodying so much oppression and might, it is a compromise we made with the reality far from being perfect, to provide a comparative stable ground which we could stand on. At this point, I don’t agree with the institute like ACLU who oppose any censorship. The censorship, though rarely justified, should exist as long as a more ideal and practical form is found to replace it, or we could only expect our God to create a more ideal species instead of imperfect human beings.

GRE寫作高分需要避免哪些問題相關(guān)文章：