留學(xué)加拿大標(biāo)化考試GRE寫作如何從3分提高到4分

GRE寫作的論證過程中，需要用嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)倪壿嬎季S推導(dǎo)出結(jié)論，如果邏輯存在以上論證錯(cuò)誤，文章就是不嚴(yán)謹(jǐn)?shù)?，肯定要被扣分?a href="http://llwuxin.cn/">GRE寫作

論證錯(cuò)誤

1)范圍方面：小范圍推大范圍、范圍誤用、錯(cuò)誤的類比、過去和將來(lái)時(shí)間混淆等;

2)因果關(guān)系方面：因果關(guān)系簡(jiǎn)單化、先后順序?qū)е乱蚬P(guān)系、同時(shí)發(fā)生判為因果關(guān)系、強(qiáng)加因果等;

3)必要性問題：非黑即白思想、片面性和單方性等。

缺乏論據(jù)

有足夠的論據(jù)支撐文章的觀點(diǎn)或結(jié)論，可以是文章很有說(shuō)服力，而且有條理。但是如果文章缺乏足夠的論據(jù)，這樣的文章會(huì)很空洞，也是分?jǐn)?shù)不高的一個(gè)原因。

邏輯混亂

使用表述不準(zhǔn)確的詞匯，或者以偏概全的表述，甚至一些極端的表達(dá)觀點(diǎn)，都會(huì)導(dǎo)致文章的邏輯混亂。

例如某類事物其中的A,B,C有一些共同的特性，從而推導(dǎo)出該類事物都具備這類特性，這就是以偏概全的論證方法。

低級(jí)錯(cuò)誤

1）語(yǔ)法出錯(cuò)：有時(shí)候往往會(huì)忽略一些小錯(cuò)誤，導(dǎo)致一些不必要的丟分。比如：主謂不一致，單復(fù)數(shù)，三單形式等等。

2）單詞拼寫錯(cuò)誤：有時(shí)候很可能著急打字，有一些簡(jiǎn)單單詞的拼寫錯(cuò)誤導(dǎo)致丟分。

3）詞性誤用：“詞性誤用”常表現(xiàn)為：介詞當(dāng)動(dòng)詞用;形容詞當(dāng)副詞用;名詞當(dāng)動(dòng)詞用等。比如：None can negative the importance of money.

分析：negative系形容詞，誤作動(dòng)詞。

應(yīng)該為：None can deny the importance of money.

以上就是作文中容易丟分的點(diǎn)。

然后對(duì)比自己寫的文章，進(jìn)行分析總結(jié)一下，如果文章中存在以上問題，可以吸取經(jīng)驗(yàn)進(jìn)行改正，避免這些丟分點(diǎn)。

最后附上一篇6分作文范文及文章分析，供各位參考。

The following appeared as a letter to the editor of a local newspaper.

"Five years ago,we residents of Morganton voted to keep the publicly owned piece of land known as Scott Woods in a natural,undeveloped state.Our thinking was that,if no shopping centers or houses were built there,Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as a natural parkland.But now that our town planning committee wants to purchase the land and build a school there,we should reconsider this issue.If the land becomes a school site,no shopping centers or houses can be built there,and substantial acreage（面積）would probably be devoted to athletic fields.There would be no better use of land in our community than this,since a large majority of our children participate in sports,and Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as natural parkland."

題目分析：

論據(jù)1：Five years ago,we residents of Morganton voted to keep the publicly owned piece of land known as Scott Woods in a natural,undeveloped state

論據(jù)2：if no shopping centers or houses were built there,Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as a natural parkland

論據(jù)3：If the land becomes a school site,no shopping centers or houses can be built there,and substantial acreage（面積）would probably be devoted to athletic fields

論據(jù)4：a large majority of our children participate in sports

結(jié)論：Scott Woods would continue to benefit our community as natural parkland

分析：

1．從論據(jù)1，2到論據(jù)3的推理本身就可以質(zhì)疑，既然５年前決定了不開發(fā)，那么必須有充足的理由確定現(xiàn)在的情況發(fā)生了改變．否則，不能說(shuō)現(xiàn)在就必須reconsider this issue

2．論據(jù)3的本身推理有錯(cuò)誤，沒有證據(jù)表明學(xué)校建成了就no shopping centers or houses can be built there，剩余的能夠興建體育場(chǎng)的面積完全能夠保證建立起shopping centers and houses.相反，也許是學(xué)校內(nèi)的建成促進(jìn)了購(gòu)物和住房的發(fā)展（許多家庭為了孩子上學(xué)會(huì)在附近阻房子住，刺激兩者發(fā)展）同時(shí)，我們是否有足夠的經(jīng)費(fèi)建立體育場(chǎng)也是一個(gè)疑問．

3．a(chǎn) large majority of our children participate in sports不能說(shuō)明大家參加的運(yùn)動(dòng)都必須在田徑[運(yùn)動(dòng)]場(chǎng)上進(jìn)行．也就是說(shuō)田徑場(chǎng)不能適合所有孩子的需要，同樣，相對(duì)于park,school也不是適合所有市民的需要的．

正文：

This letter to the editor begins by stating the reasons the residents of Morganton voted to keep Scott Woods in an undeveloped state.The letter states that the entire community could benefit from an undeveloped parkland.The residents of the town wanted to ensure that no shopping centers or houses would be built there.This,in turn,would provide everyone in the community with a valuable resource,a natural park.

The letter then continues by addressing the issue of building a school on the land.The author reasons that this would also benefit the entire community as a natural parkland since much of the land would be devoted to athletic fields.The author of the letter comes to the conclusion that building a school on the land would be the best thing for everyone in the community.（這種開頭可以說(shuō)是非常詳細(xì)的復(fù)述了原文的內(nèi)容，并且可以通過黑體的短語(yǔ)看出作者復(fù)述的順序，寫了13７詞，這里還沒有進(jìn)入正式的批駁，這是不是可以作為＂開頭就要開門見山點(diǎn)題＂這樣一個(gè)觀點(diǎn)的反例呢？）學(xué)在加拿大

This letter is a one-sided argument about the best use of the land known as Scott Woods.The author may be a parent whose child would benefit from a new school,（學(xué)生家長(zhǎng)方面）a teacher who thinks a school would boost the community,（教師方面）or just a resident of Morganton.（中立方面）Regardless of who the author is,there are many aspects of this plan that he or she has overlooked or chosen to ignore.（這個(gè)并列寫的非常的妙，大家一定能體會(huì)出來(lái)overlook和choose to ignore用在這里有怎么樣的含義）作者本段其實(shí)在質(zhì)疑原文作者的立場(chǎng)是否中立，如果不是中立的立場(chǎng)，而是利益涉及的一方，那么以后的論斷就很難說(shuō)服別人．

Using a piece of land to build a school is not the same thing as using it for a natural parkland.（首先就很明確的把build a school和a natural parkland完全分離開，使后面原文作者的說(shuō)法完全被推翻，這可以說(shuō)是一個(gè)核心的問題）While all the members of the community could potentially benefit from a parkland,only a percentage of the population would realistically benefit from a new school.（兩者的主要區(qū)別）The author fails to recognize people like the senior citizens of the community.What interest do they have in a new school?It only means higher taxes for them to pay.They will likely never to and utilize the school for anything.On the other hand,anyone can go to a park and enjoy the natural beauty and peacefulness.The use of the land for a school would destroy the benefit of a park for everyone.In turn,it would supply a school only to groups of people in exactly the right age range,not too young or too old,to reap the benefits.

本段質(zhì)疑核心的問題！

Another point（自然的過度，沒有用first,secondly……）the author stresses is that the use of the land for things like athletic fields somehow rationalizes(使．．．．．．合理化)the destruction of the park.What about children who don't play sports?（首先考慮到不是所有的children都會(huì)使用運(yùn)動(dòng)場(chǎng)）Without the school,they could enjoy the land for anything.A playing field is a playing field.Children are not going to go out there unless they are into sports.（park和運(yùn)動(dòng)場(chǎng)的第二個(gè)區(qū)別）There are many children in schools who are not interested in or are not able to play sports.This is yet another group who will be left out of the grand benefits of a school that the author talks about.

The author's conclusion that"there would be no better use of land in our community than this...""is easily arguable.The destruction of Scott Woods for the purpose of building a school would not only affect the ambience of Morganton,it would affect who would and would not be able to utilize the space.If the residents as a whole voted to keep Scott Woods in an undeveloped state,this argument will not sway their decision.The use of the land for a school will probably benefit even less people than a shopping center would.The whole purpose of the vote was to keep the land as an asset for everyone.The only way to do this is to keep it in an undeveloped state.Using the land for a school does not accomplish this.（總結(jié)，重述，可以發(fā)現(xiàn)作者的總結(jié)沒有絲毫和前面重復(fù)的說(shuō)法，雖然說(shuō)的是一樣的意思！這一個(gè)總結(jié)段是總結(jié)全文的經(jīng)典！）GRE寫作技巧

COMMENTARY

This outstanding response begins somewhat hesitantly;the opening paragraphs summarize but do not immediately engage the argument.However,the subsequent paragraphs target the central flaws in the argument and analyze them in almost microscopic detail.

（從這句評(píng)論我們可以明顯感知到評(píng)分的核心在后面的分析，關(guān)鍵不是如何開頭，關(guān)鍵是如何分析！）

The writer's main rebuttal points out that"using a piece of land to build a school is not the same thing as using it for natural parkland."Several subpoints develop this critique,offering perceptive reasons to counter the argument's unsubstantiated assumptions.This is linked to a related discussion that pointedly exposes another piece of faulty reasoning:that using land for athletic fields"rationalizes the destruction of the park."

The extensively developed and organically organized analysis continues into a final paragraph that takes issue with the argument's conclusion that"there would be no better use of land in our community than this."

Diction and syntax are varied and sophisticated,and the writer is fully in control of the standard conventions.While there may be stronger papers that merit a score of 6,this essay demonstrates insightful analysis,cogent development,and mastery of writing.It clearly earns a 6.

更多留學(xué)干貨內(nèi)容，歡迎繼續(xù)關(guān)注學(xué)在加拿大官網(wǎng)及美國(guó)留學(xué)網(wǎng)。