解讀GRE寫作中唯一致命問(wèn)題

解讀GRE寫作中唯一致命問(wèn)題,我們一起來(lái)看看吧,下面小編就和大家分享，來(lái)欣賞一下吧。

解讀GRE寫作中唯一致命問(wèn)題

在GRE寫作中，對(duì)Argument文章結(jié)構(gòu)分析的正確性是Argument成功的基礎(chǔ)。如果Argument的文章分析發(fā)生錯(cuò)誤，將直接影響后續(xù)文章中攻擊點(diǎn)的正確性，這將導(dǎo)致整篇文章將有顛覆之險(xiǎn)。因此，同學(xué)們?cè)趯W(xué)習(xí)Argument寫作這一部分的時(shí)候，必須要固定對(duì)文章結(jié)構(gòu)的分析方法，來(lái)確保自己對(duì)文章邏輯結(jié)構(gòu)把控的正確性。

從最籠統(tǒng)的角度來(lái)說(shuō)，任何一個(gè)Argument的題目，都是由“客觀事實(shí)”來(lái)推導(dǎo)“主觀觀點(diǎn)”的過(guò)程。其中，由于并非所有客觀事實(shí)都用于支持結(jié)論的產(chǎn)生，因此又需要將“客觀事實(shí)”分成“背景”和“證據(jù)”兩個(gè)部分;同時(shí)，部分題目會(huì)出現(xiàn)“主觀觀點(diǎn)”并非一個(gè)的情況，因此就要區(qū)分出哪一個(gè)主觀觀點(diǎn)是文章的“最終結(jié)論”，而剩下的就是“中間結(jié)論”。

整個(gè)Argument題庫(kù)中的每道題，其每一句話基本就是這四個(gè)基本元素(背景、證據(jù)、中間結(jié)論、最終結(jié)論)中的一種。而基本的推導(dǎo)方式是，證據(jù)推出中間結(jié)論，再由中間結(jié)論推出最終結(jié)論。在題目中可能會(huì)出現(xiàn)多個(gè)證據(jù)，而中間結(jié)論則有可能不出現(xiàn)。

一般情況下，對(duì)以上四個(gè)基本元素的區(qū)分，需要?jiǎng)澐殖梢韵氯齻€(gè)基本步驟來(lái)進(jìn)行：

第一步：區(qū)分主觀觀點(diǎn)與客觀事實(shí)

區(qū)分主觀觀點(diǎn)和客觀事實(shí)的目的，就是為了在分析文章的邏輯結(jié)構(gòu)中，先聚焦到全文的結(jié)論，這是一篇Argument分析的重中之重。結(jié)論沒(méi)找到，后面所有的事情全都免談。而一旦找對(duì)了全文的結(jié)論，那么整篇Argument的邏輯就大體清楚了。在Argument考試中，結(jié)論的尋找可以基于以下兩個(gè)依據(jù)：

1) 結(jié)論是作者的主觀觀點(diǎn)，而證據(jù)是客觀事實(shí)信息。

這一定義來(lái)自于ETS的官方陳述：“The task consists of a brief passage in which the author makes a case for some course of action or interpretation of events by presenting claims backed by reasons and evidence.”(見(jiàn)3.1)可見(jiàn)，文章的結(jié)論必然是作者想要論證的目標(biāo)，而這個(gè)目標(biāo)必然是作者自己發(fā)表的。自然，結(jié)論是作者的主觀觀點(diǎn)。

2) 結(jié)論是整篇文章邏輯推導(dǎo)的終點(diǎn)。

同樣，這一定義也來(lái)自于ETS的官方解釋：“conclusion — the end point reached by a line of reasoning, valid if the reasoning is sound; the resulting assertion”。所以，結(jié)論一定是文章推導(dǎo)的終點(diǎn)。

在實(shí)戰(zhàn)中，分析Argument語(yǔ)篇邏輯時(shí)，如果先對(duì)主觀觀點(diǎn)和客觀事實(shí)進(jìn)行區(qū)分，將會(huì)對(duì)文章的整體推導(dǎo)方向起到有效的指導(dǎo)作用。

例1

The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor of a scientific journal.

"A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situations (such as an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey), firstborn infant monkeys produce up to twice as much of the hormone cortisol, which primes the body for increased activity levels, as do their younger siblings. Firstborn humans also produce relatively high levels of cortisol in stimulating situations (such as the return of a parent after an absence). The study also found that during pregnancy, first-time mother monkeys had higher levels of cortisol than did those who had had several offspring."

Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.

上題的結(jié)論對(duì)于不少同學(xué)來(lái)說(shuō)有點(diǎn)難找。其實(shí)，基于前面所講的兩個(gè)原則找結(jié)論并不困難：全文中唯一一句主觀觀點(diǎn)是：“A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation.”。1)由“provides clues”能夠看出這就是作者的主觀觀點(diǎn);2)整篇文章之后引用的全是實(shí)驗(yàn)結(jié)果，那么由這些實(shí)驗(yàn)結(jié)果推導(dǎo)出第一句話，邏輯就很自然。因此第一句話是整篇文章推導(dǎo)的終點(diǎn)。

GRE Argument寫作范文一

題目：

"Of the two leading real estate firms in our town---Adams Realty and Fitch Realty---Adams is clearly superior. Adams has 40 real estate agents. In contrast, Fitch has 25, many of whom work only part-time. Moreover, Adams' revenue last year was twice as high as that of Fitch, and included home sales that averaged $168,000, compared to Fitch's $144,000. Homes listed with Adams sell faster as well: ten years ago, I listed my home with Fitch and it took more than four months to sell; last year, when I sold another home, I listed it with Adams, and it took only one month. Thus, if you want to sell your home quickly and at a good price, you should use Adams."

范文：

The author argues that Adams Realty is superior to Fitch Realty. To support this claim the author cites statistics about the number and working hours of agents, and the number and sales prices of homes sold by the two farms. Further, the author cites anecdotal evidence involving personal experience with Fitch and Adams. A careful analysis reveals that this evidence it lends little credible support for argument.

The Claim is partially based on the fact that Adams has more agents than Fitch and that many of Fitch's agents work only part-time. There is no correlation between the number of employees, their working hours and the quality of their work. Without such a link, we could consider the possibility that a smaller firm could be more effective than a larger one and, likewise, that a part-time agent could be more effective than a full-time agent. Besides, the author does not provide any information about the specific number of Adams agents who work part-time.

The claim is also supported by the fact that Adams sold more properties than Fitch last year. One year of sales records is an insufficient sample. It is possible that in most other years Adams could have sold fewer properties than Fitch. Moreover, the disparity in sales volume could be explained by factors other than the comparative quality of the two firms. For example, perhaps Adams serves a denser geographic area or in an area where turnover in home-ownership is higher for reasons unrelated to Adams' effectiveness. It is even possible that the only reason sales volume is higher at Adams is because the company employs more agents but, perhaps, each Adams agent sells fewer homes on average than each Fitch agent does. Without ruling out such alternative explanations for the disparity in sales volume, the author cannot defend the conclusion based on such scant evidence.

Support for the claim is also drawn from the average sales price of homes. This evidence only illustrates that the homes that Adams sells are more valuable on average than the ones that Fitch sells, not that Adams is more effective in selling homes than Fitch. Moreover, it is possible that a few relatively high-priced or low-priced properties skewed these averages, rendering any conclusions about the comparative quality of the two firms based on these averages irrelevant.

The author of the argument indicates that Fitch Realty took a considerably longer time to sell one of the author's homes than it took Adams Realty to sell another one of her homes ten years earlier. However, this disparity can be explained by other plausible factor, for example, changing economic conditions during that ten-year period or a difference in the desirability of the two properties. Without establishing that all other factors affecting the speed of a sale were essentially the same for the two homes, the author should not expect an audience to make a decision on this limited anecdotal evidence.

GRE作文范文 Argument

The following appeared in a letter to the editor of the Parkville Daily Newspaper.

嘉文博譯Sample Essay

"Throughout the country last year, as more and more children below the age of nine participated in youth-league softball and soccer, over 80,000 of these young players suffered injuries. When interviewed for a recent study, youth-league softball players in several major cities also reported psychological pressure from coaches and parents to win games. Furthermore, education experts say that long practice sessions for these sports take away time that could be used for academic activities. Since the disadvantages apparently outweigh any advantages, we in Parkville should discontinue organized athletic competition for children under nine."

In this argument, the writer claims that more and more children below the age of nine were participating in youth league softball and soccer last year and that more than eighty thousand of those players suffered injuries. The writer also claims that youth league softball players in several major cities reported psychological pressure from coaches and parents to win games when interviewed for a study. Additionally, the writer cites educational experts as saying that long practice sessions for such sports take away time that could be used for academic activities. The writer then comes to the conclusion that the disadvantages outweigh any advantages; therefore the city of Parkville should discontinue organized athletic competition for children under the age of nine. This argument is based on problematic reasoning and it should therefore be rejected.

The first problem with this argument is that it does not define what types of injuries the eighty thousand youngsters suffered. Although any injury, no matter how slight, is undesirable, the argument is weakened by not discussing the relative severity of these injuries. This is necessary information when weighing the advantages or disadvantages of youth league sports for children under nine.

Secondly, the writer mentions that youth league softball players in several major cities reported psychological pressure from coaches and parents to win games. The problems with this information are obvious: the study was only for one sport, not all types of athletics; it was only conducted in the major cities, which may or may not be representative of what young athletes throughout the rest of the country would report; and the number of children reporting the psychological pressure as compared to those who did not report it is never mentioned. It is possible that only a few children reported such pressure. Moreover, the term “psychological pressure” is not defined and its meaning is unclear. A study that reports that an unknown number of children feel psychological pressure without defining what that term means, as well as covering only one type of sporting activity and only in the major cities is very weak evidence for discontinuing all athletic activities for children under nine years of age.

Furthermore, the writer mentions that long practice sessions take away time that could be used for academic activities. There is absolutely no evidence presented that Parkville youth league sports have long practice sessions, or that they have any practice sessions at all for that matter. In addition, too much time for academic activities is not healthy for children; they need time to exercise their bodies as well as their minds. Without evidence that long practice sessions are hurting the children’s studies, the argument is further weakened.

Finally, the writer jumps to the conclusion that the disadvantages apparently outweigh the advantages and that Parkville should discontinue organized athletic competition for children under nine. In this argument, the writer only mentions the disadvantages and none of the advantages. No evidence is presented that indicates that the disadvantages outweigh the advantages – some weak and ambiguous information is merely thrown into the argument. Furthermore, the writer ignores other changes that could be made short of discontinuing the program. Solutions such as shortening practice sessions, enforcing mandatory safety equipment rules and emphasizing sportsmanship rather than winning or losing are all ignored by the writer, which greatly weakens the argument.

In summary, the writer has done nothing more than state an opinion with some anecdotal information included that proves nothing. Without providing direct evidence that the children under the age of nine in Parkville are being hurt more than helped by organized athletic competition, the writer’s argument is unconvincing and should be rejected.

(613 words)

參考譯文

下述文字摘至一封致《 Parkville日?qǐng)?bào)》某編輯的信函:

“去年在我們整個(gè)國(guó)家，由于越來(lái)越多的9歲以下的孩子參加了青少年聯(lián)賽的壘球和足球運(yùn)動(dòng)，這些年輕球員中有不止80，000多人受傷。在接受某項(xiàng)近期的研究的訪談時(shí)，若干大城市中青少年聯(lián)賽的壘球運(yùn)動(dòng)員稱，他們承受著來(lái)自教練和家長(zhǎng)的贏球壓力。此外，教育專家稱，這些體育運(yùn)動(dòng)員所需的漫長(zhǎng)訓(xùn)練期耗費(fèi)了原本可用于學(xué)習(xí)活動(dòng)的時(shí)間。既然弊明顯大于利，我們?cè)赑arkille 市就應(yīng)該停止9歲以下的兒童進(jìn)行有組織的體育競(jìng)賽。”

在上述論述中，信函作者稱，越來(lái)越多的9歲以下的兒童去年參加了青少年聯(lián)賽的壘球和足球運(yùn)動(dòng)，而在這些運(yùn)動(dòng)員中，有80，000多名運(yùn)動(dòng)員受過(guò)傷。信函作者還宣稱，若干個(gè)大城市中的青少年聯(lián)賽壘球運(yùn)動(dòng)員在接受某項(xiàng)研究的訪談中說(shuō)，他們承受著來(lái)自教練和家長(zhǎng)們的贏球壓力。此外，信函作者援引了教育專家的話說(shuō)，這些體育項(xiàng)目所需的漫長(zhǎng)訓(xùn)練期浪費(fèi)了原本可用于學(xué)習(xí)活動(dòng)的時(shí)間。這位作者接下來(lái)得出結(jié)論認(rèn)為，弊顯然大于利，因此Parkville市應(yīng)該停止9歲以下的兒童進(jìn)行任何有組織的體育競(jìng)賽。上述論述完全基于漏洞百出的邏輯推理，故應(yīng)予擯棄。

上述論述的第一個(gè)問(wèn)題是，它沒(méi)有清楚地界定80，000多個(gè)小孩子所受的傷屬于哪些類型。雖然任何傷痛，無(wú)論多么的輕微，均是不可取的，但上述論述由于沒(méi)能討論這些傷痛的相對(duì)嚴(yán)重程度而受到削弱。有關(guān)傷痛類型的信息應(yīng)是必要的，因?yàn)樗兄谖覀兒饬?歲以下孩童從事青少年聯(lián)賽體育活動(dòng)的利與弊。

第二，信函作者提到，若干個(gè)大城市的青少年聯(lián)賽的壘球運(yùn)動(dòng)員稱，他們承受著來(lái)自教練和家長(zhǎng)們的贏球壓力。這一信息所存在的問(wèn)題是顯而易見(jiàn)的：該項(xiàng)研究?jī)H是針對(duì)一個(gè)體育項(xiàng)目的，而非針對(duì)所有類型的體育比賽;它僅僅是在大城市進(jìn)行的，它或許能夠也或許不能夠典型地代表全國(guó)其他地區(qū)青少年運(yùn)動(dòng)員的感受;與那些沒(méi)有說(shuō)承受著心理壓力的孩童相比，承認(rèn)承受著心理壓力的兒童的數(shù)量絕未被提到。情況有可能是，僅有很少一些兒童聲稱承受著這種壓力。另外，“心理壓力”這一術(shù)語(yǔ)未被定義，其含義模糊不清。一份調(diào)查研究，如果它僅報(bào)告說(shuō)一些數(shù)量不明的孩子感到承受著心理壓力，不對(duì)相關(guān)術(shù)語(yǔ)進(jìn)行定義，僅涵蓋一種類型的體育活動(dòng)，且僅在某幾座大城市進(jìn)行，它只能充當(dāng)極為微弱的證據(jù)，不足以來(lái)停止9歲以下兒童所有類別的體育活動(dòng)。再者，信函作者提到，漫長(zhǎng)的訓(xùn)練期會(huì)占用原本可用以學(xué)習(xí)活動(dòng)的珍貴時(shí)間。信函作者絕對(duì)沒(méi)有列舉任何證據(jù)來(lái)證明，Parkville市青少年聯(lián)賽的體育活動(dòng)需要漫長(zhǎng)的訓(xùn)練期，以及因?yàn)槟且辉蚨腥魏斡?xùn)練期。此外，太多的時(shí)間用在學(xué)習(xí)上對(duì)孩子也是不利于健康的;他們需要有時(shí)間來(lái)活動(dòng)他們的身體，而不僅僅是活動(dòng)他們的大腦。沒(méi)有拿出證據(jù)來(lái)證明漫長(zhǎng)的訓(xùn)練期正危及孩子們的學(xué)業(yè)，故該項(xiàng)論述受到進(jìn)一步的削弱。

最后，信函作者輕率地得出結(jié)論，稱弊顯然大于利，并且Parkville市應(yīng)該終止9歲以下的兒童進(jìn)行任何有組織的體育比賽。在此論述中，信函作者僅提及了弊而未提及利。根本沒(méi)有任何證據(jù)可顯示弊大于利。我們所看到的僅僅是被塞入到本項(xiàng)論述中的某些缺乏力度和模棱兩可的信息。此外，信函作者忽略了除終止體育項(xiàng)目之外所能采取的其他改善措施。像縮短訓(xùn)練周期，執(zhí)行強(qiáng)制性的安全設(shè)備規(guī)定，以及強(qiáng)調(diào)體育精神而不是單純的比賽輸贏。所有這些解決問(wèn)題的方法均被信函作者視而不見(jiàn)，由此而嚴(yán)重地削弱了其論據(jù)。

歸納而言，信函作者所做的，只是利用某些什么都證明不了的趣事軼聞性質(zhì)的信息來(lái)表達(dá)某種個(gè)人觀點(diǎn)。由于沒(méi)有提供直接的證據(jù)來(lái)證明Parkville 市9歲以下的孩童從事有組織的體育競(jìng)賽所蒙受的弊是否會(huì)大于所得到的利，故信函作者的論述不能令人信服，應(yīng)予擯棄。

解讀GRE寫作中唯一致命問(wèn)題相關(guān)文章：