GRE寫作議論文提煉觀點
在GRE作文的評分標準中，文章觀點可以說是最為重要的一環(huán)。無論是ISSUE立論文還是ARGUMENT駁論文，對于考生的論點提煉和展開的能力都有很高要求。下面小編就和大家分享GRE寫作議論文提煉觀點，來欣賞一下吧。
GRE寫作議論文提煉觀點
GRE寫作提煉觀點應避免兩個問題
GRE寫作在論點上出問題的情況其實非常常見，其中最主要的情況有兩種，一種是論點過于寬泛，另外一種則是論點過于狹窄。對于缺乏議論文寫作經驗的考生來說，無論出現(xiàn)那種錯誤都需要引起警惕，否則作文成績很難有所提升。
1. 觀點要有具體內容不能空泛
在各類教導寫作的材料中，大家應該時常會發(fā)現(xiàn)關于強調GRE寫作論點一定要寫得具體，越細越好的指導建議。而考生經常出現(xiàn)的問題就是會出現(xiàn)一些很寬泛的論點句，以至于在較短的篇幅里并不能充分展開，甚至有時候會造成觀點重疊。
比如去年2月份的GRE考試中有一篇作文，題目要求探討關于移動電話對于現(xiàn)代人生活的影響。假如考生提煉出的觀點是“Mobile phones have changed our life greatly. ”這句只是說手機很大程度上改變了人們的生活，但是并未點明從哪些方面上帶來了改變，因此把這個觀點具化一下：“Mobile phones can serve as a connection to the Internet, which can be extremely convenient for obtaining information wherever you may be.”這樣一來大家既有具體內容可寫，也可以避免觀點過于寬泛大而無當的情況。
而同樣是在去年2月份，還有一篇作文的題目則討論了關于廣告泛濫對于社會輿論造成的干擾。如果考生只是簡單寫“Advertising has bad effects on all of society. ”廣告有不良影響顯然是不夠的。我們需要寫出具體的方面，比如“Advertisements which exaggerate the function of the products may mislead the consumers.”這樣具體的觀點才是GRE考官真正希望看到的內容，言之有物也需要從實際出發(fā)。
2. 觀點要有展開空間不能自縛手腳
與論點過于寬泛相對的，則是一些考生把論點定得太過狹窄，自己把自己逼近了死胡同以至于沒有展開的空間甚至沒有進一步支持的必要。這類句子與其說是觀點，倒不如說是事實的陳述或者只是舉了個例子而已。
去年4月GRE作文中曾出現(xiàn)過這樣一道題目，講的是某個地方當地人開展旅游業(yè)的看法。有的考生直接把觀點寫成“There are more local residents engaged in tourism industry. ”這其實并非觀點，只是陳述了一個事實就是在當地越來越多人開始從事旅游業(yè)，可改為：“Tourism brings huge economic benefits to local residents.”就比較容易展開了。
而今年1月份的GRE作文中也有一道討論不可再生燃料如何持續(xù)利用的題目，如果考生寫出“The consumption of fossil fuels increase in recent years. ”這樣一句看似結論的話既缺乏數據支持也毫無說服力可言，等于是自己把話說死了，后續(xù)要怎么展開?正確寫法是給出論述重點，假設原因，比如“The consumption of fossil fuels increasing in recent years results from two factors.”之后就會好寫很多。
綜上所述，GRE寫作中因為觀點論點錯誤所導致的扣分其實是很嚴重的問題，不僅會對大家的得分造成影響，本身也不利于考生寫作思路的拓展和文章的進一步展開。小編希望大家在重視訓練寫作技巧的同時，也能夠對如何樹立和提煉文章觀點做一些練習，避免在考試中出現(xiàn)觀點方面的問題和錯誤。
GRE寫作高分范文：生動剖析寫作
GRE寫作題目：
Too much time, money, and energy are spent developing new and more elaborate technology. Society should instead focus on maximizing the use of existing technology for the immediate benefit of its citizens.
GRE寫作范文：
I must say that I reject this statement. While it is true that we need to support society as much as possible with current technology, that does not in any way mean that we should stop progressing simply because our current technology cannot handle all the problems we have brought to it. Does that mean that we should simply accept the status quo and make do? No, I don’t think so. To do so would be tantamount to adopting a fatalistic approach; I think most people would reject that.
Technology has helped, and it has hurt. Without it, we would never have our standard of living, nor quality of nutrition, expectation of a long and productive life span, and the unshakable belief that our lives can be made even better. But it has also brought us universal pollution, weapons so powerful as to be capable of rendering us extinct, and the consequent fear for our survival as species and as a planet. Technology is indeed a double-edged sword. And yet, I still have to argue in its favor, because without it, we have no hope.
Some might argue that we would be better off without technology. They might say that a return to a less technologically driven approach to life would have the benefits of reducing stress and allowing us to live simpler, happier lives, like those of our forebears. Such an idea is seductive, so much so that much of art and all of nostalgia are devoted to it. But upon closer inspection, one realizes that such a move would only return us to a life of different kinds of stress, one of false simplicity, one fraught with danger. It would be a life without antibiotics where a minor cut could prove deadly. It would be a life where childbirth is the main killer of women, and where an emergency is dealt with in terms of hours and days instead of minutes and hours; a life where there are no phones or cars or planes or central heating, no proven drug therapies to treat mental illness, no computers. Would this world really make people happy?
What we already have, we have. And since the only way to move is forward, instead of allowing ourselves to be paralyzed by fear and worry, we need to learn how to clean up the pollution we have caused, and how to deal with a world that feeds on weapons and mass destruction. Doing these things means having to move away from technology into a more difficult realm, that of diplomacy and compromise: to move from the bully stance of “I am bigger and better and I have more toys and so I win” to a place where everyone wins.
Technology is the thing that will allow people to do that. But, advanced as it is, it is still in its infancy. We have to allow it to grow up and mature in order to reap the real rewards that it can bring. And there are even greater rewards ahead of us than what the world has already experienced. When technology is pushed to the outer edge, that is where serendipitous discoveries can occur. This has been seen throughout technological advancement, but the easiest example is probably the space program which made us think, really hard, about how to do things in a different environment. It gave us telecommunications, new fabrics and international cooperation. Paramedical devices, so that people can be treated even as they are being transported to the hosptal, are a direct development of that technology. None of this would have happened in the time frame that it did if we had not pushed for technological advancement. If we had decided to “focus on maximizing the use of existing technology” instead of foolishly reaching for the stars, we would not have made those discoveries which now are the bedrock of the 21st century.
GRE寫作分析：
字數：651
語言：平實的語句完全沒有網絡流行模板的痕跡，也是許多過了6級的考生通過練習可以達到的水平。
I must say that I reject this statement.
Does that mean that we should simply accept the status quo and make do? No, I don’t think so.
Technology has helped, and it has hurt.
Technology is indeed a double-edged sword. And yet, I still have to argue in its favor, because without it, we have no hope.
GRE寫作高分范文：避免偏激
題目：
Most people often look for similarities, even between very different things, and even when it it is unhelpful or harmful to do so. Instead, a thing should be considered on its own terms: we should avoid the tendency to compare it to something else.
人們總是在尋找相同點，即使是在非常不同的事物間也不例外，甚至有時候這樣做是無用乃至有害的。實際上，我們應該具體問題具體分析;我們應該盡量避免比較的傾向。
正文：
In the age of accelerating changes, the eagerness to understand things in an effective and equally efficient way is more than ever. Although all kinds of complex techniques, skills and equipments helpful for understanding and studying the objects are easily accessible to people, the basic strategies stay the same as before: one is starting from similarities and the other from distinction. From my personal point of view, only by using the two in proper proportion and order can one achieve his/her goal to understand a thing.
Looking for similarities is a proper starting point. When we first meet something new,we need to clarify its basic attributes, finding similarites with other familiar things and classify it according to those attributes. Classification according to similaties is of great assistance to provide us with an outline, basic knowledge which we can base further investigation upon. Although things in contemporary age represent themselves in various forms and styles, similarities exist in any pair as long as certain perspective can be found. For instance, Bookcase and window are so different that at first glance, one may not be able to find the similarities, or even such an effort seems to be meaningless. Yet, they are both part of a house, something that must be taken into consideration when decorating or refurnishing the house. Such a comparison would be helpful for us to realize that “buy” and “sell” are two basic operation we can have upon window even though we have no idea what window is made of, how it is produced or what its function is.What’s more, looking for
similarities not only refer to the object itself, but the relationship with others. Similar relationships helps people understand things in groups or pairs using the strategy: analogy. Analogy is especially useful when the charactertistics of a relationship rather than the objects themselves are the focus of understanding and when similar relationships are known and objects unknown. For example, if told that the relationship between window and ASVE is similar to that between book and read, one can safely guess that ASVE is the operation people can take on window although ASVE stays an unknown action.
Definitely, mere similarity usually exclude the distinctive characteristics of a thing. We need to investigate its own terms for deeper understanding. Within the rough outline sketched by similarity, a more detailed and well-articulated picture can be drawn by grasping own terms of a thing. Still take window as an example. From careful observation, we know that it is transparent, it consists of different chemical materials, it performs the function as to protect privacy, to preserve desirable temperature indoor, and sometimes to prevent rains and snows from going inside. Deeper and further understanding of window can only be gained when we take its own terms besides those it shares with bookcase into consideration.
GRE寫作相關文章：
★ 學習資料庫
上一篇：GRE寫作常見易錯扣分用詞情況
