托福寫作提升文章邏輯性重在展開
托福作文不僅重視考生的遣詞造句能力，對(duì)文章的邏輯性也有比較高的要求，考生只是堆砌華麗的詞句而沒(méi)有辦法寫出具有說(shuō)服力的文章就無(wú)法拿到作文高分。今天小編給大家?guī)?lái)了托福寫作提升文章邏輯性重在展開,希望能夠幫助到大家，一起來(lái)學(xué)習(xí)吧。
托福寫作提升文章邏輯性重在展開
托福官方指南對(duì)寫作展開的要求一覽
首先我們來(lái)看一下OG是如何要求well-developed的：
.ave I done my best to support and develop my ideas?
(有沒(méi)有支持立場(chǎng)的分論點(diǎn)?)
.o I include enough details in each paragraph so that the main idea and topic sentence are explained fully?
(每段是否有很充分的細(xì)節(jié)支持分論點(diǎn)?)
.o I use words and phrases that help the reader think about relationships between different ideas in the essay?
(句與句之間是否有用邏輯連接詞/短語(yǔ)?)
注意句子邏輯性是展開關(guān)鍵
每個(gè)段落要做到很好的展開，就要注意句與句之間的邏輯性。官方指南OGP中介紹了很多種展開的方法，包括講故事、舉例子、說(shuō)道理等等，同時(shí)補(bǔ)充了大量的邏輯連接詞。同學(xué)們習(xí)慣于把邏輯連接詞/短語(yǔ)事先準(zhǔn)備好，平時(shí)練習(xí)或者考試時(shí)都先打出來(lái)再往里面僵硬地填充內(nèi)容，以為可以騙過(guò)e-rater和考官。但在這些邏輯詞下，我們往往會(huì)看到同學(xué)寫出這樣的內(nèi)容：因?yàn)楠?dú)生子女，所以自私;因?yàn)榭萍己徒?jīng)濟(jì)發(fā)展，所以壓力大。
其實(shí)第二句和第一句之間并沒(méi)有直接的因果關(guān)系，第二句并不是對(duì)第一句的進(jìn)一步論述，所以即便有暗示邏輯關(guān)系的連接詞/短語(yǔ)，內(nèi)容上并非如此。也就是不符合評(píng)分標(biāo)準(zhǔn)中的漸進(jìn)性(progression)。
在“因?yàn)楠?dú)生子女，所以自私”的例子中，我們可以這樣推理：獨(dú)生子女(only-child)→得到更多家人的關(guān)注(limelight)→缺少付出的意識(shí)(less give, more take)→自私(egoism);此外，獨(dú)生子女→缺少和兄弟姐妹的相處(interact with siblings)→缺少分享的意識(shí)(share)→自私。
這樣的兩條簡(jiǎn)單邏輯鏈就可以推出“自私”的結(jié)果。
如何提升托福寫作展開鋪設(shè)邏輯鏈的能力?
對(duì)于提升托福寫作中展開邏輯鏈，小編建議大家結(jié)合托福寫作機(jī)經(jīng)中的主題句，在草稿紙上用中文關(guān)鍵詞羅列因果鏈，訓(xùn)練演繹推理的方法，反復(fù)追問(wèn)因果關(guān)系(causality)是否成立。通過(guò)這種方式來(lái)訓(xùn)練自己的邏輯思維能力，進(jìn)而逐步學(xué)會(huì)展開的寫作思路和方法。
托?？荚囎魑莫?dú)立寫作范文：經(jīng)濟(jì)危機(jī)時(shí)政府減少支出
In times of an economic crisis, in which area should governments reduce its spending? 1. Arts 2. Scientific research 3. Parks and public gardens.
托福寫作范文參考:
During an economic crisis, governments face difficult choices of monetary allocation with reduced budgets. In this challenging time, it is of vital importance for policy-makers to recognize the effectiveness of policy-making on certain social services or programs such as arts, scientific research and park and public gardens. If a choice has to be made, in my opinion, the government should reduce its spending on arts.
To begin with, in times of an economic crisis, it is significant for policy-makers to recognize the necessity of investing in scientific research because it exerts a far-reaching effect. If the financial crisis leads to substantial cuts in funding for scientific research by governments, it will be difficult to muster investment for a public good, like clean air, or for extremely risky initiatives, such as novel approaches to new antibiotic drugs, or in areas where the outcome is uncertain. As a matter of fact, technological innovation, biomedical breakthroughs, and tackling pressing environmental issues all require sustained scientific development, from basic discovery to final application. Investing in research is investing in the future, and it requires a long-term commitment to the accumulation of knowledge, the testing of basic principles, and the translation of these discoveries into practical applications that impact everyday life. Consequently, governments ought to attach more importance to the scientific studies so as to develop world class research base and conduct crucial scientific projects.
Furthermore, funding for parks and public gardens provides an opportunity for people to engage in physical activities, which is considerably beneficial to health. Nowadays, due to the sedentary lifestyle and unhealthy eating diet, overweight and obesity are epidemic problems across the world, and related conditions are on the rise. A primary focus of attention is providing environment where people can be physically active. Parks offer such an opportunity. In addition, health studies have shown that people who do regular exercise get a range of benefits when they are in natural settings, like parks and public gardens. These benefits include reduced risk of premature death; reduced risk of heart disease, hypertension, cancer; improved maintenance of muscle strength; weight loss and favorable redistribution of body fat; improved physical functioning. Therefore, when governments allocate fiscal spending on parks such as well-designed and well-maintained paths as well as attractive scenery, people can substantially improve their health and quality of life by doing moderate amounts of physical activity in their daily lives.
Undeniably, if governments pay more attention to investment in art, people can enrich inner world as a diverse and productive cultural environment can provide the spirit and important intangible values. However, in times of crisis, people usually lay emphasis on basic needs instead of spiritual needs. As a result, the importance of material comforts outweighs that of nourishment for the mind and it does not mean that people’s quality of life will be dramatically affected if governments cut budget on art and provide less financial support on art institutions. In a sense, it will not directly influence people’s life at least in a short term because people rarely need to satisfy their aesthetic needs everyday. Therefore, compared with scientific research and park and public gardens, art is least associated with people’s daily life and it needs less concern.
From what has been discussed above, scientific studies serve the common interest of the entire human race and doing exercise in parks and public gardens constitutes an indispensable part of daily life. It is more applicable and reasonable to cut down spending on art in the times of an economic crisis.
托福考試作文獨(dú)立寫作范文：學(xué)習(xí)有限的課程對(duì)身心發(fā)展有用嗎
In a word, studying only limited courses will be supportive for students’ physical and mental growth as well as their future careers.
2月27日: High school students are required to study many different subjects at same time or they should study only three or four subject at a time, which do you agree?
范文參考一:
As for me, studying only three or four subjects appears to be a better choice and the listed reasons and examples will support what I believe.
To begin with, current young students have been under enormous pressure, doing great harm to their growth, and there is no need to impose too much pressure on them. To be more specific, to strengthen students’ future competitiveness in the society, most schools have expected to forge students’ various capacities since they were young by arranging a huge number of curriculums. What an ordinary high school student has to experience in his one-day school life can demonstrate how depressed and exhausted present high school students are. Getting up as early as 6AM has become common in recent two decades. Afterwards, a whole-day study will include various compulsory and optional courses like Mathematics that leads to intellectual stimulation or History that demands students to attempt to memorize historic events and relative effects as many as possible. When class is over, it is still far away from ending one-day study since lots of assignments such as the short essays or scientific researches need to be finished. Evidently, students suffer from the huge pressure from study, leading many of them to wear glasses at a young age and to be drained physically and mentally everyday. Thus, students are not supposed to be ordered to study many courses at a time.
To be followed, the inadequacy of enough leisure time will contribute students to have no chances to engage in what they interested in. High school students are still involved in an age during which they should exploit their own interests to decide which area they will choose when going to college in their near future. However, like I mentioned in the previous statement, to meet the requirements set by school; students have no option but to immerse themselves in a number of assignments and the freedom to pursue their own hobbies has been deprived. It is known to all that interest plays a leading role in assisting people to choose their future career and a recent released statistic in a survey conducted by Beijing Human Resource General Bureau indicates that approximately 67 percent of college undergraduates switch their professions from their major-related areas to what they are truly interested in their third year after graduation. In addition, many of the respondents claim that they are not satisfied with the current educational system, requiring students to study a wide range of curriculums, because it entirely downplays the importance of cultivating students’ hobbies and they believe that the earlier students can discover their interest, the more setbacks they can avoid when choosing future majors in the university and upcoming professors after graduation. A friend I know named Andy refused to become a mechanical engineer since he was bored to stay in the office building and finally chose to become a teacher in a educational institute since he can apply his passion and extrovert personality into the profession. Accordingly, student should be given more opportunities to develop their own hobbies to explore what they love.
寫作參考二:
Do you agree or disagree high-school students are required to study many different subjects at same time or they should study only three or four subjects at a time.
Teenagers are in the prime time of their life. What they learn in this period is a huge factor in determining their whole life. To make better use of this valuable time, some educators advocate that students are supposed to study as many subjects as possible at a time. However, I don’t think it is a smart move. Instead, studying three or four subjects at a time would serve them better.
To begin with, only three or four subjects at a time ensure that students have enough time and energy to make further research in each of these fields. It allows them to bite deeply into these subjects, thus gaining the whole picture of a certain field in their mind rather than just a smattering of knowledge. It is not hard to imagine what they would suffer when they have too many things in their plate. They would find themselves wrestling with complex chemical formulas, intertwined history events and distinctions between invertebrates and amphibians on the same very day. In consequence, they would end up with spreading themselves too thin and cannot gain a deeper understanding in any of the fields.
Besides, when students are allowed to choose three or four subjects at a time based on their own interest, they would performer better without under a huge amount of mental pressure. As an old saying goes, interest is the best teacher. When what they learn really appeal to them, they are more keen on their school work. On the contrary, if they are forced to learn too many subjects at a time, chances are that they not only cannot be guaranteed with good grade but also get upset and frustrated. Things may get even worse when they find some of these subjects are extremely bothersome and annoying. I have experienced the suffering. When I was in high school, history was the most difficult one for me. Those intertwined history events, exact dates of those events, and various complex names of important figures involved in them just drove me crazy. When the finals were just around the corner, I always burnt mid-night oil to hit history books, feeling so tense and stressed up. So only when students spend their time on just three or four subjects that truly attractive to them can they get good grade on each subject and enjoy their high-school time happily.
What cannot be denied is that there are such versatile brainiacs who can handle with so many subjects at the same time without any difficulty. However, only a small fraction of students are in this line. For most of the students in high school, three or four subjects at a time are more acceptable and effective for their study.
To sum up, I am on the board with the idea that students will benefit more from taking just three or four subjects at a time.
英語(yǔ)寫作相關(guān)文章：
★ 高考英語(yǔ)寫作40個(gè)高級(jí)句型整理分享
★ 英語(yǔ)作文
托福寫作提升文章邏輯性重在展開
