北美范文的破题策略(完整下载版)
[size=6][color=blue][b]我也懒得续来续去的,一次放在附件里,是我总结的十一种破题策略,希望对大家有帮助。祝大家新春快乐哈~~[/b][/color][/size]T,c)Z:B%n Y4w#B
很多人都会问,《北美范文》该如何使用。我认为可以从两方面入手:一是重点看每篇范
文的第一段,学习范文的破题策略;二是对范文中精彩的句子和词汇进行模仿和使用。只
要坚持做这两项工作,半年内,写作能力必有显著提高。
破题策略方面,我自己总结出了15种,基本上囊括了所有的issue范文。考生可以在学习每5Q2R8g7pYPlP(c9` E%Ir
一种思路后,尝试将这种思路应用到手头的issue上,举一反三。
E$RX_ Dz5QO
现在先推出5种思路,如果大家觉得有用,再陆续推出余下的10种。
破题策略一:基本同意,细节有异议
原则上同意作者观点,但观点涉及到具体问题时有保留。结构上,先肯定大的原则,然后
具体讨论那些情况下会有问题。这种策略适合的问题往往有一个大的框架,又有一些特殊wSD+F F+C/D3])YV
的个案。这种策略就是很多参考书都提到的平衡观点,是最常见的一种策略。优点在于层#\#dR\w${L.hpz
次比较简单明了,缺点则是不容易写出特色。T'i0U{5hY
31 "Money spent on research is almost always a good investment, even when the 1u0@0Rh(K/dp
results of that research are controversial." 22
I agree with the speaker's broad assertion that money spent on research is gen
erally money well invested. However, the speaker unnecessarily extends this brX6xI(Z'I5[ E
oad assertion to embrace research whose results are "controversial," while ign
oring certain compelling reasons why some types of research might be unjustifi
able. My points of contention with the speaker involve the fundamental objecti4b3x9oO4J,t+C9O@4X
ves and nature of research, as discussed below.T#^AB:?
作者的立论思路是顺应原命题的结构形成的。首先肯定命题前半部分所提出的大前提,然
后对后半部分的特殊情况提出质疑。考生在构思的时候也应该注意观察原命题的结构,从
中获得启发,提出有说服力的观点。
&H9lU9s }R%M6]1D
8 It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold inf
ormation from the public. 37
I agree with the speaker that it is sometimes necessary, and even desirable, f
or political leaders to withhold information from the public. A contrary view
would reveal a naiveté about the inherent nature of public politics, and abou
t the sorts of compromises on the part of well-intentioned political leaders n%K'j:p2i2X#n:gi
ecessary in order to further the public's ultimate interests. Nevertheless, wex6bu@A*X^3Gj~8]b
must not allow our political leaders undue freedom to with-hold information,
otherwise, we risk sanctioning demagoguery and undermining the philosophical u JoR3R"e yN U\ [$M
nderpinnings of any democratic society.%| `;?*M{#oV.]|
在肯定命题的基础上,作者提出需要警惕的极端情况。一方面承认公共政治对适当隐瞒的l&@q4rFY
需求,另一方面又指出过度隐瞒可能对民主基石的威胁。这种对平衡与妥协的把握,恰好+S~ AvR^i
反映了GRE作文所要求的思想深度。
策略二:分拆命题
将一个命题分拆为几个分命题,然后逐个否定或肯定。分拆的过程往往需要相当的经验和
分析能力。一旦分拆成功,一个论证框架就浮现了。 v"E Z lu'i J%~ @
"Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support
they need in order to thrive, because it is primarily in cities that a nation
's cultural traditions are preserved and generated."4X5Cd GoR.Q
The speaker's claim is actually threefold: (1) ensuring the survival of large
cities and, in turn, that of cultural traditions, is a proper function of gove,sa zO;L!b4w
rnment; (2) government support is needed for our large dries and cultural trad@@H2p2x\
itions to survive and thrive; and (3) cultural traditions are preserved and ge
nerated primarily in our large cities. I strongly disagree with all three clai
ms.
这是作者一个颇具创新的开头方式,即对原命题进行分拆,并以序号列点的形式陈述。这
样做不仅能完成考试所要求的对问题复杂性的探索,而且能自然的搭建论证的框架。我们
可以想象,这篇范文的中间三段将分别批驳分拆后的三个分命题。当然,要做好分拆命题
的工作需要相当的功底和经验;由于这种分析方法十分有特色,因此很值得读者尝试。
*Jo5b7T6S4C
"The human mind will always be superior to machines because machines are only
tools of human minds."3Nv1n-r ?z2i*[
This statement actually consists of a series of three related claims: (1) machW.h-]g G#l
ines are tools of human minds; (2) human minds will always be superior to mach
ines; and (3) it is because machines are human tools that human minds will alwDgM*P{q+lY ~
ays be superior to machines. While I concede the fn:st claim, whether I agree
with the other two claims depends partly on how one defines "superiority," and0wyG4wd^#L
partly on how willing one is to humble oneself to the unknown future scenario
s.
b%Kk1GL1e I-vl/n ahY
这段开头的方式也是分拆命题,不同的是,作者并没有全部否定分命题,而是区别对待。"v X3vUQ"aG+s#g
但通过分拆主题而呈现的框架也很明显。另外,作者还用到另一个重要的策略“语理分析
”,我们再后面会提及。5w*V1Di-Jh
0H'M'phs(C9nH b
策略三 具体情况具体分析
指出命题在某些方面和个案上是成立的,而在另一些情况则不成立。这种策略的应用相当
广泛,有助于我们将一个抽象的问题具体化,并建构一个清晰的论证框架。