滿分GRE寫作范文賞析分享（四）

GRE的寫作是中國(guó)考生最不容易得到滿分的部分，究其原因是因?yàn)榇蠹业乃悸泛湍刚Z(yǔ)學(xué)習(xí)者不同。留學(xué)監(jiān)理網(wǎng)的老師就給大家找到了一些文章來(lái)幫助大家進(jìn)行GRE考前的寫作訓(xùn)練。

【題目】

Twenty years ago, Dr. Field, a noted anthropologist, visited the island of Tertia. Using an observation-centered approach to studying Tertian culture, he concluded from his observations that children in Tertia were reared by an entire village rather than by their own biological parents. Recently another anthropologist, Dr. Karp, visited the group of islands that includes Tertia and used the interview-centered method to study child-rearing practices. In the interviews that Dr. Karp conducted with children living in this group of islands, the children spent much more time talking about their biological parents than about other adults in the village. Dr. Karp decided that Dr. Field's conclusion about Tertian village culture must be invalid. Some anthropologists recommend that to obtain accurate information on Tertian child-rearing practices, future research on the subject should be conducted via the interview-centered method.

【滿分范文賞析】

【第一段】

It might seem logical, at first glance, to agree with the argument in Dr. Karp’s article that children in Tertia are actually raised by their biological parents (and perhaps even, by implication, that an observation-centered approach to anthropological study is less valid than an interview-centered one). However, in order to fully evaluate this argument, an audience should be provided with additional evidence.

【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】

本段采用了簡(jiǎn)明的Argument開頭段結(jié)構(gòu)，即C—F的開頭結(jié)構(gòu)。段落首先概括原文的Conclusion，接下來(lái)給出開頭段到正文段的過(guò)渡句，指出原文的Flaw，即其應(yīng)提供額外的Evidence才能讓觀眾對(duì)該Argument進(jìn)行充分評(píng)價(jià)。

【本段功能】

本段作為Argument開頭段，具體功能就在于發(fā)起攻擊并概括原文的結(jié)論，即Tertia的孩子們的確是由他們的親生父母所撫養(yǎng)的，并且以觀察為中心的人類學(xué)研究方法不如以面試為中心的研究方法有效。本段對(duì)原文結(jié)論的歸納為正文段中即將進(jìn)行的具體攻擊作鋪墊。

【第二段】

The audience should know, before deciding conclusively about the appropriate methodology for further study, if Tertia has changed significantly in the past 20 years. Dr. Field conducted his observational study 20 years ago and it is possible that Tertia has changed significantly since then. For example, if we had evidence suggesting that, since the original study, foreigners had settled on the island and introduced a new element that affected child rearing in Tertia, it would certainly weaken Dr. Karp’s argument. In that case, the original study could have been accurate and Dr. Karp’s study could be correct.

【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】

本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument正文段結(jié)構(gòu)，即：概括第一個(gè)邏輯錯(cuò)誤的錯(cuò)誤類型和其在原文中出現(xiàn)的位置，接下來(lái)給出合理的理由和他因來(lái)反駁原文。

【本段功能】

本段作為正文第一段，攻擊原文中出現(xiàn)的第一個(gè)重要邏輯錯(cuò)誤——(時(shí)間上的)錯(cuò)誤類比。在對(duì)合適的研究方法做出決定性的判斷之前，觀眾應(yīng)當(dāng)被告知Tertia是否在過(guò)去的20年內(nèi)發(fā)生了顯著的變化。Field博士是在20年前開展了他的觀察性研究，而自那時(shí)起Tertia可能發(fā)生了顯著的變化。例如，我們?nèi)绻凶C據(jù)證明后來(lái)外國(guó)人在島上定居并引入了一種影響了Tertia的孩子撫養(yǎng)方式的新因素，Karp博士的論證無(wú)疑會(huì)被削弱。在這種情形下，F(xiàn)ield博士原先的研究可能是準(zhǔn)確的，Karp博士的研究也可能是正確的。

【第三段】

Another piece of evidence that might help us evaluate this claim involves the exact locations where Dr. Karp’s interviews took place. According to this article, Dr. Karp and his graduate students conducted interviews of “children living in the group of islands that includes Tertia”. If we were to learn that they never interviewed a single Tertian child, it would significantly weaken the conclusion.It could turn out to be the case, for example, that children on Tertia are raised communally, whereas their biological parents raise children on other islands nearby.

【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】

本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument正文段結(jié)構(gòu)，即：概括第二個(gè)邏輯錯(cuò)誤的錯(cuò)誤類型和其在原文中出現(xiàn)的位置，接下來(lái)給出合理的理由和他因來(lái)反駁原文。

【本段功能】

本段作為正文第二段，攻擊原文中出現(xiàn)的第二個(gè)重要邏輯錯(cuò)誤——調(diào)查類錯(cuò)誤。根據(jù)原文，Karp博士和他的研究生們對(duì)“居住于包括Tertia島在內(nèi)的一系列島嶼上的孩子們”開展了研究。如果他們從未采訪過(guò)一個(gè)Tertia的孩子，其結(jié)論將被顯著地削弱。例如，事實(shí)有可能是Tertia島上的孩子們被集體撫養(yǎng)，而附近其它島嶼上的孩子們均由他們的親生父母撫養(yǎng)。

【第四段】

Further, in order to fully evaluate this claim the audience needs to learn more about the interview questions that Dr. Karp’s team used—what exactly did they ask? We don’t know, nor do we know what the children’s responses actually were. What did they say about their biological parents? The mere fact that they speak more frequently about their biological parents than they do about other adults does not mean that their biological parents had a greater role than the community did in their rearing. It would significantly undermine Dr. Karp’s argument if it turned out that the children said things like how much they missed their parents or how their parents had left them in a communal environment. Without knowing what the children said, one cannot accept the argument above without reservations.

【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】

本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument正文段結(jié)構(gòu)，即：概括第三個(gè)邏輯錯(cuò)誤的錯(cuò)誤類型和其在原文中出現(xiàn)的位置，接下來(lái)給出合理的理由和他因來(lái)反駁原文。

【本段功能】

本段作為正文第三段，攻擊原文中出現(xiàn)的第三個(gè)重要邏輯錯(cuò)誤——調(diào)查類錯(cuò)誤。為充分評(píng)價(jià)原文中的論斷，觀眾需要就Karp博士所采用的面試問(wèn)題獲得更多的信息。我們既不知道他們所問(wèn)問(wèn)題的具體內(nèi)容，也不知道孩子們的具體答案。僅僅是孩子們更經(jīng)常談到他們的親生父母這一事實(shí)并不意味著他們的親生父母在撫養(yǎng)他們的過(guò)程中比社區(qū)占有更主要的角色。如果事實(shí)證明孩子們經(jīng)常說(shuō)一些諸如他們多么想念父母或者他們的父母是如何把他們留在了一個(gè)集體環(huán)境中的事情的話，Karp博士的論證將被顯著地削弱。在不知道孩子們究竟說(shuō)了些什么的情況下，我們不能無(wú)保留地接受原文的論證。

【第五段】

It is slightly more difficult to discuss the evidence we might need in order to evaluate the more interesting claims in Dr. Karp’s article, namely his extension of the results of his study to a conclusion that interview-centered methods are inherently more valid than observational-centered approaches in the case of study in the group of islands including Tertia. In order to fully evaluate this claim one would require more examples of interview-based and observation-based anthropological studies and we would also need to look into different study designs. Perhaps Dr. Field did not conduct an effective observational study, but other observational approaches could be effective. In order to make such grandiose claims, Dr. Karp really needs to provide a lot of additional evidence (ideally a meta-analysis of hundreds of anthropological studies).

【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】

本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument正文段結(jié)構(gòu)，即：概括第四個(gè)邏輯錯(cuò)誤的錯(cuò)誤類型和其在原文中出現(xiàn)的位置，接下來(lái)給出合理的理由和他因來(lái)反駁原文。

【本段功能】

本段作為正文第四段，攻擊原文中出現(xiàn)的第四個(gè)重要邏輯錯(cuò)誤——外推類錯(cuò)誤。在Karp博士的文章中，他將自己的研究結(jié)果推廣到了以面試為中心的研究方法比以觀察為中心的研究方法在研究包括Tertia在內(nèi)的一組島嶼時(shí)本質(zhì)上更有效這一結(jié)論。為充分評(píng)價(jià)這一論斷，我們需要更多的以面試為中心的人類學(xué)研究和以觀察為中心的人類學(xué)研究的例子，并且我們還需要考察不同的研究設(shè)計(jì)?；蛟SField博士并未開展一項(xiàng)有效的觀察式研究，而其它的觀察式研究均可能是有效的。為了做出如此宏大的論斷，Karp博士實(shí)在需要提供很多額外的證據(jù)。

【第六段】

Clearly, then, we need to have additional evidence in order to get a more complete understanding of the strengths and weaknesses of Dr. Karp’s article. We need to know about Tertia and the surrounding islands, and whether or not they have changed over the past 20 years. We also need to know about study design (Dr. Karp’s and Dr. Field’s). Finally, we need an abundance of information if we want to extend the results of a study about one island culture to all anthropological fieldwork.

【本段結(jié)構(gòu)】

本段采用了標(biāo)準(zhǔn)的Argument結(jié)尾段結(jié)構(gòu)，即C—S的結(jié)尾結(jié)構(gòu)。段落首先再次重申原文站不住腳的Conclusion，接下來(lái)給出可以增強(qiáng)原文說(shuō)服力的合理的Suggestion，包括原文作者需要進(jìn)一步提供的證據(jù)和信息等。

【本段功能】

本段作為Argument結(jié)尾段，具體功能即為總結(jié)歸納+提出建議。段落首先再次重申強(qiáng)調(diào)Argument缺乏額外的證據(jù)支持，接下來(lái)給出合理的建議。我們需要對(duì)Tertia及其周圍島嶼和它們?cè)?0年內(nèi)是否發(fā)生了變化進(jìn)行了解。我們還需要了解(Karp博士和Field博士的)研究設(shè)計(jì)。最后，如果我們想將對(duì)于一個(gè)島嶼文化的研究成果推廣到全部人類學(xué)研究工作的話，我們還需要大量的信息。不難發(fā)現(xiàn)，結(jié)尾段總結(jié)提出的建議非常規(guī)整地與正文各段中依次攻擊的錯(cuò)誤遙相呼應(yīng)，使全篇文章顯得渾然一體。

【滿分要素剖析】

【語(yǔ)言表達(dá)】

本文的語(yǔ)言使用規(guī)范、清晰，詞匯也用得準(zhǔn)確地道，并使用多變的句式讓考官讀起來(lái)津津有味，這些都是GRE寫作官方的語(yǔ)言要求。同時(shí)，文章的結(jié)構(gòu)型語(yǔ)言和內(nèi)容型語(yǔ)言相得益彰，結(jié)構(gòu)是骨架，內(nèi)容是血肉，二者完美結(jié)合。

1) It might seem logical, at first glance, to agree with the argument in Dr. Karp’s article that ….(標(biāo)志性的Argument開頭段引出原文結(jié)論的語(yǔ)言表達(dá)形式。)However, in order to fully evaluate this argument, an audience should be provided with additional evidence.(標(biāo)志性的指出文章錯(cuò)誤的語(yǔ)言表達(dá)。)

2) The audience should know, before deciding conclusively about …, if …. ...and it is possible that … has changed significantly since then. For example, if we had evidence suggesting that, …, it would certainly weaken Dr. Karp’s argument. In that case, the original study could have been accurate and Dr. Karp’s study could be correct.(標(biāo)志性的(時(shí)間上的)錯(cuò)誤類比的語(yǔ)言和邏輯模版體系。)

3) Another piece of evidence that might help us evaluate this claim involves …. According to this article, …. If we were to learn that …, it would significantly weaken the conclusion. It could turn out to be the case, for example, that …, whereas ….(標(biāo)志性的調(diào)查類錯(cuò)誤的語(yǔ)言和邏輯模版體系。)

4) Further, in order to fully evaluate this claim the audience needs to learn more about …—…? We don’t know, nor do we know …. The mere fact that … does not mean that …. It would significantly undermine Dr. Karp’s argument if it turned out that …. Without knowing …, one cannot accept the argument above without reservations.(標(biāo)志性的調(diào)查類錯(cuò)誤的語(yǔ)言和邏輯模版體系。)

5) It is slightly more difficult to discuss the evidence we might need in order to evaluate the more interesting claims in …. In order to fully evaluate this claim one would require …and we would also need to look into …. Perhaps …, but …. In order to make such grandiose claims, Dr. Karp really needs to provide a lot of additional evidence.(標(biāo)志性的外推類錯(cuò)誤的語(yǔ)言和邏輯模版體系。)

6) Clearly, then, we need to have additional evidence in order to get a more complete understanding of …. We need to know about …. We also need to know about …. Finally, we need an abundance of information if we want to ….(標(biāo)志性的Argument結(jié)尾段的Conclusion—Suggestion體系的語(yǔ)言和邏輯模版體系。)

【邏輯結(jié)構(gòu)】

本文的寫作體現(xiàn)出了非常嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)拈_頭段—正文段1、2、3、4—結(jié)尾段的邏輯體系：

(開頭段)It might seem logical, at first glance, to agree with the argument in Dr. Karp’s article that ….

(正文段1)The audience should know, before deciding conclusively about …, if ….

(正文段2)Another piece of evidence that might help us evaluate this claim involves ….

(正文段3)Further, in order to fully evaluate this claim the audience needs to learn more about …—…?

(正文段4)It is slightly more difficult to discuss the evidence we might need in order to evaluate the more interesting claims in ….

(結(jié)尾段)Clearly, then, we need to have additional evidence in order to get a more complete understanding of ….

特別值得一提的是本文正文第三段的寫作。該段首先通過(guò)Further, in order to fully evaluate this claim the audience needs to learn more about the interview questions that Dr. Karp’s team used—what exactly did they ask? We don’t know, nor do we know what the children’s responses actually were. What did they say about their biological parents?等一系列疑問(wèn)句指出原文中出現(xiàn)的調(diào)查類錯(cuò)誤，并緊接著通過(guò)The mere fact that they speak more frequently about their biological parents than they do about other adults does not mean that their biological parents had a greater role than the community did in their rearing. It would significantly undermine Dr. Karp’s argument if it turned out that the children said things like how much they missed their parents or how their parents had left them in a communal environment.兩句遞進(jìn)地對(duì)該邏輯錯(cuò)誤進(jìn)行有力的分析。最后，該段通過(guò)Without knowing what the children said, one cannot accept the argument above without reservations.一句對(duì)全段討論進(jìn)行總結(jié)，充分展現(xiàn)出了正文段嚴(yán)密的邏輯思路。

（注，本文內(nèi)容轉(zhuǎn)自網(wǎng)絡(luò)，如有侵權(quán)，請(qǐng)聯(lián)系刪除）

• 上一篇：滿分GRE寫作范文賞析分享（三）
• 下一篇：滿分GRE寫作范文賞析分享（五）

• 相關(guān)文章

  • 留學(xué)申請(qǐng) 要不要找留學(xué)中介
  • 出國(guó)留學(xué)費(fèi)用一般要多少
  • 選擇留學(xué)中介的十大誤區(qū)
  • 如何選擇英國(guó)留學(xué)中介
  • 最新！2020中國(guó)教育部承認(rèn)的英國(guó)大學(xué)名單完整版！
  • 2021年英國(guó)TOP10大學(xué)碩士留學(xué)申請(qǐng)條件匯總！

• 最新問(wèn)答

  查看更多>>
  • 香港留學(xué)一年的費(fèi)用需要多少錢
  • 應(yīng)屆高三學(xué)生申請(qǐng)出國(guó)留學(xué)讀本科的途徑有哪些？如何選擇？
  • 今年高考的文科生，二本線，讀什么專業(yè)好？
  • 高考成績(jī)剛過(guò)一本線，高考志愿填報(bào)和出國(guó)留學(xué)如何選擇？
  • 什么是CUG完全大學(xué)指南？
  • 什么是CWUR世界大學(xué)排名？