北美范文的解题策略汇总.doc

北美范文的解题策略汇总基本同意，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，又有一些特殊的个案。 Money spent on research is almost always a good investment, even when the results of that research are controversial.I agree with the speakers broad assertion that money spent on research is generally money well invested. However, the speaker unnecessarily extends this broad assertion to embrace research whose results are controversial, while ignoring certain compelling reasons why some types of research might be unjustifiable. My points of contention with the speaker involve the fundamental objectives and nature of research, as discussed below.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。It is often necessary, even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public. I agree with the speaker that it is sometimes necessary, and even desirable, for political leaders to withhold information from the public. A contrary view would reveal a naivety about the inherent nature of public politics, and about the sorts of compromises on the part of well-intentioned political leaders necessary in order to further the publics ultimate interests. Nevertheless, we must not allow our political leaders undue freedom to with-hold information, otherwise, we risk sanctioning demagoguery and undermining the philosophical underpinnings of any democratic society.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，恰好反映了GRE作文所要求的思想深度。Humanity has made little real progress over the past century or so. Technological innovations have taken place, but the overall condition of humanity is no better. War, violence, and poverty are still with us. Technology cannot change the condition of humanity.Have technological innovations of the last century failed to bring about true progress for humanity, as the statement contends? Although I agree that technology cannot ultimately prevent us from harming one another, the statement fails to account for the significant positive impact that the modern-industrial and computer revolutions have had on the quality of life at least in the developed world.作者用一个问句综述了原命题的三个句子，这种语言的功力是我们所应该追求的。对原命题进行扼要的复述，可以说是练习GRE作文的第一课，读者一定要下功夫，因为这将是你参加机考写下的第一个句子，也是考官读到的第一句。作者的思路还是先肯定大的原则，然后提出一些异议。值得注意的是，作者具体的指出了后文将详述的两个例子现代工业革命和计算机信息革命，以及提示可能缩窄的讨论范围发达国家。这样就为中间段落具体的论述做好铺垫。换位思考与漏洞攻击：先分析原观点可能成立的理由，然后指出作者忽略的问题。结构上，采取先扬后抑的策略。这种策略很适合原命题有一定的道理，又有漏洞的问题。对于有字数焦虑的考生也特别有用。（2526）65As long as people in a society are hungry or out of work or lack the basic skills needed to survive, the use of public resources to support the arts is inappropriate-and, perhaps, even cruel-when one considers all the potential uses of such money. The speaker asserts that using public resources to support the arts is unjustifiable in a society where some people go without food, jobs, and basic survival skills. It might be tempting to agree with the speaker on the basis that art is not a fundamental human need, and that government is not entirely trustworthy when it comes to its motives and methods. However, the speaker overlooks certain economic and other societal benefits that accrue when government assumes an active role in supporting the arts.作者为了更好的攻击原命题，首先站在对方的立场上考虑，分析对方的理由，然后看到对方的破绽并指出对方忽略的问题。经过这样的分析和讨论，作者就可以对整个问题提出一个比较完整和全面的观点。It is a grave mistake to theorize before one has data.Is it a grave mistake to theorize without data, as the speaker contends? I agree insofar as to theorize before collecting sufficient data is to risk tainting the process of collecting and interpreting further data. However, in a sense the speaker begs the question, by overlooking the fact that every theory requires some data to begin with. Moreover, the claim unfairly ignores equally grave consequences of waiting to theorize until we obtain too much data.作者先讨论原命题可能成立的理由，然后指出对方逻辑上的失误（beg the question: check out informal fallacy）以及忽略的情况。值得注意的是作者提到beg the question是一种非正式的逻辑谬误（informal fallacy），在后面会有专项讨论。引入新概念：以特定的概念，引出几个可能的论证；并对命题正反面的论证进行分别论述，最后指出问题很复杂难有定论。使用这个策略，需能够对一个命题引发双面、多角度的思考和讨论。(2829)At various times in the geological past, many species have become extinct as a result of natural, rather than human, processes. Thus, there is no justification for society to make extraordinary efforts, especially at a great cost in money and jobs, to save endangered species. What are the limits of our duty to save endangered species from extinction? The statement raises a variety of issues about morality, conscience, self-preservation, and economics. On balance, however, I fundamentally agree with the notion that humans need not make extraordinary efforts-at the expense of money and jobs-to ensure the preservation of any endangered species.本段的开头颇有特色。作者没有复述原命题，而是以一个问句直指问题的要害，这里的limit用的非常妙，点出了讨论的关键。接下来的几个关键概念道德、良知、自我保存和经济则引出这个问题的不同层面，为下文的论证建立一个框架。这个框架的建立对于文章的结构和完整都至关重要。客观上，有了这样的框架，作者就不愁后面写什么而这正是很多考生所担心的问题。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。（3132）（4647）（5758） 61 72 90Practicality is now our great idol, which all powers and talents must serve. Anything that is not obviously practical has little value in todays world.In todays world is practicality our idol-one which all powers and talents must serve. While this claim has considerable merit with respect to most areas of human endeavor-including education, art, and politics-I take exception with the claim when it comes to the direction of scientific research today.作者指出命题在教育、艺术和政治等领域有一定道理，而在科研方面却不成立。这样在某些具体方面命题成立，另一些具体方面命题不成立的处理手法，在北美范文中十分常见。这样写可以体现出作者对命题的较深入的思考和对问题复杂性的认识，同时又能够构建一个清晰的框架，读者应该重点模仿学习。 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。（3536）（5354） 67 86Governments must ensure that their major cities receive the financial support they need in order to thrive, because it is primarily in cities that a nations cultural traditions are preserved and generated.The speakers claim is actually threefold: (1) ensuring the survival of large cities and, in turn, that of cultural traditions, is a proper function of government; (2) government support is needed for our large dries and cultural traditions to survive and thrive; and (3) cultural traditions are preserved and generated primarily in our large cities. I strongly disagree with all three claims.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。暴露问题，巩固命题1 首先肯定命题，然后主动暴露命题在某些情况下存在的缺陷，再进一步巩固命题。（3940）It is primarily through our identification with social groups that we define ourselves.I strongly agree that we define ourselves primarily through our identification with social groups, as the speaker asserts. Admittedly, at certain stages of life people often appear to define themselves in other terms. Yet, in my view, during these stages the fundamental need to define ones self through association with social groups is merely masked or suspended.作者首先表明自己肯定命题的立场，然后承认该命题存在的问题。但这只是一个以退为进的策略，最终作者还是要强化自己肯定的立场。这样一波三折的处理，不仅可以展示出作者对问题的深入理解，也从客观上丰富了文章的内容。建立价值参照系统：肯定命题并指出命题与一些真实、正确的事物相吻合（例如，常识、经验、科学）；然后指出否命题与我们的信念或价值观相违背。第二步是反证法。（4243）The absence of choice is a circumstance that is very, very rare.I strongly agree with the contention that absence of choice is a rare circumstance, primarily because this contention accords with common sense and our everyday experience as human beings. Besides, the reverse claim that we do not have free choice-serves to undermine the notions of moral accountability and human equality, which are critical to the survival of any democratic society.作者对命题进行判断时，明确提出了参照的标准或系统。作者同意原命题的观点是因为这个观点与常识和日常经验这个参照系统相吻合。反过来，作者又考察了原命题的否命题，并提出另一个参照系统即道德的责任归属与人格平等的原则。作者甚至指出这些原则正是民主社会的基石。应该说，在开头段提出价值判断的参照系统是一个十分明智的做法。这样便于理清自己的思路、建立论证的框架，以及最终自圆其说。我们在处理题库中比较复杂的道德伦理问题时，也不妨先搞清楚自己的价值参照系统，再来提出观点。 长线短线：将命题分作长线和短线来讨论，先讨论短线的各种可能，但最终强调长线的结果 58Creating an appealing image has become more important in contemporary society than is the reality or truth behind that image.Has creating an image become more important in our society than the reality or truth behind the image? I agree that image has become a more central concern, at least where short-term business or political success is at stake. Nevertheless, I think that in the longer term image ultimately yields to substance and fact.作者认为在短线的事务中，命题是成立的，而一旦考虑到长线，情况就不一样。严格来讲，这种分析也属于具体情况具体分析的策略。不过由于长线、短线是一个十分有用的概念，所以这里单独列出介绍。长、短线这个概念最早出自经济学（可作进一步解释）。语理分析先指出命题中某个概念有多种诠释的可能，并以此作为立论的框架 63Facts are stubborn things. They cannot be altered by our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions.Can we alter facts according to our wishes or inclinations? If by facts the speaker means such phenomena as political, economic, social, or legal status quo, then I concede that we can alter facts. The reason for this is that such systems are abstract constructs of our inclinations, wishes, and passions to begin with. Otherwise, I strongly agree with the speaker that we cannot alter facts. When it comes to certain aspect of our personal lives, and to historical events and scientific truths, no measure of desire or even passion can change external reality.作者在处理这道十分抽象的关于“fact”的问题时，并没有笼统的提出一个立场，而是首先澄清这里的“fact”到底是指什么。这里用到的技巧就是传说中的“语理分析”。当题目中出现fact这类抽象字眼时，我们可以先对它作出具体化的澄清，然后根据对“fact”的几种不同的理解，而形成一个论证框架。这是一个非常有效的解体方法，应该引起读者足够的重视。抽象问题具体化用例子将抽象问题具体化 选择一个或两个好的例子是成功的关键70 74The arts (painting, music, literature, etc.) reveal the otherwise hidden ideas and impulses of a society.The speaker asserts that the arts reveal societys hidden ideas and impulses. While this assertion has merit, I think it unfairly generalizes about art. Consider two particular art forms: architecture and painting. In more important architecture one consistently sees a refection of societys ideas and urges. However, in more important paintings of the most recent century one sees instead the artists personal and idiosyncratic visions of an aesthetic ideal.这道题是题库中闻名的难题，即使用汉语写，相信很多读者也会感到棘手。作者的处理方式可以说是十分巧妙。他避开了对艺术、社会、隐藏理念这类抽象概念的直接讨论，而是选择了艺术中的两个具体领域建筑和绘画，通过对它们的讨论来立论。这种利用一、两个熟悉的例子来将抽象问题具体化的方法，在北美范文中经常出现，也是读者应该学习掌握的一种策略。因为只有这样，读者才能在自己的生活和知识范围内寻找合适的例子来回答一些看起来无从下手的问题。2 指出命题过于泛化，并根据命题中的基本元素分别立论 76The function of science is to reassure; the purpose of art is to upset. Therein lies the value of each. The speaker maintains that the function of art is to upset while the function of science is to reassure, and that it is in these functions that the value of each lies. In my view, the speaker unfairly generalizes about the function and value of art, while completely missing the point about the function and value of science.3 指出并分别讨论和命题相关的几个互相独立的问题 这样写尽管要点之间的连续性不够强 但文章的结构还是比较好把握 82 84There are two types of laws: just and unjust. Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and, even more importantly, to disobey and resist unjust laws.According to this statement, each person has a duty to not only obey just laws but also disobey unjust ones. In my view thi