今天，新航道上海學校小編帶來了關于GRE寫作Argument部分精選真題范文權威解析(六)，希望對各位備考的考生們有所幫助。

  GRE真題范文精選推薦

  【GRE寫作】Argument精選真題范文

  【GRE寫作】Argument精選真題范文(一)

  【GRE寫作】Argument精選真題范文(二)

  【GRE寫作】Argument精選真題范文(三)

  【GRE寫作】Argument精選真題范文(四)

  【GRE寫作】Argument精選真題范文(五)

  The Analyzing an Argument Task is the second task of the writing section, which is the first part of the GRE General Test.

  官方福利：

  http://www.ets.org/gre/revised_general/prepare/analytical_writing/argument/pool

  The Analyzing an Argument Task is a 30-minute task. There is no required length.

  「Question No. 41」

  The following appeared in a health newsletter.

  Argument:

  “A ten-year nationwide study of the effectiveness of wearing a helmet while bicycling indicates that ten years ago, approximately 35 percent of all bicyclists reported wearing helmets, whereas today that number is nearly 80 percent. Another study, however, suggests that during the same ten-year period, the number of bicycle-related accidents has increased 200 percent. These results demonstrate that bicyclists feel safer because they are wearing helmets, and they take more risks as a result. Thus, to reduce the number of serious injuries from bicycle accidents, the government should concentrate more on educating people about bicycle safety and less on encouraging or requiring bicyclists to wear helmets.”

  * A writer should read the argument and find out logical flaws – where the logic does not add up or make sense.

  Instructions:

  Write a response in which you examine the stated and/or unstated assumptions of the argument. Be sure to explain how the argument depends on these assumptions and what the implications are for the argument if the assumptions prove unwarranted.

  * A writer should write an analytical essay in response to the specific requirement of the instructions – assumptions.

  Introduction

  略

  Body

  邏輯點思路1(質疑統計數據/研究方法)：10年前的35%和如今的80% 是否反映真實情況。

  First of all, the 35 percent and the 80 percent are dubious, and the author cannot safely assume that the two percentages respectively indicate the true situations. As a matter of fact, bicyclists may not tell the truth about whether they wear helmets: bicyclists who wear helmets may not report wearing helmets, and those who do not wear helmets may just say that they do. In this case, bicyclists wearing helmets might have been more than 35 percent ten years ago, and at present, the actual figure may be below 80 percent. In fact, the past figure may be higher than the present one, in which case, there may be no growth in wearing helmets.

  注意：不要用概念性的語言去陳述。邏輯的解釋部分要白話。

  邏輯點思路2(質疑數學邏輯)：事故數量翻倍的同時可能事故率降低。

  Second, although there have been twice the accidents, the author cannot assume that the bicycling safety has decreased. If the total traffic volume has increased and when it increases to more than twice of the previous level, the doubled number of accidents may however represent decreased likelihood of accidents, which indicates improved safety of bicycling. 注意：必要的時候可以舉例去 解釋： For example, ten accidents out of a total traffic volume of 100 vehicles represent a greater chance of accidents than twenty accidents out of a total of 300 vehicles. This math also applies to the likely situation that there have been more than twice of the total journeys.

  邏輯點思路3(質疑統計數據/研究方法)：過往的事故數量的統計可能存在遺漏，于是如今的事故數量并沒有翻倍甚至沒有增長。

  略

  邏輯點思路4(質疑原因的唯一性)：道路情況的變化，而不一定是戴頭盔或者安全教育，也可能影響事故發生的數量。

  略

  邏輯點思路5(質疑概念的一致性)：accidents不一定等于serious injuries。

  It is not a fair assumption that an accident will necessarily result in a serious injury. The reduction in the number of accidents does not guarantee the decrease in the number of serious injuries. 干脆就用舉例的方法去解釋：For example, there may be 100 accidents, and none of them cause serious injuries, and, meanwhile, there may be 20 accidents and all of them cause serious injuries. 沒有用概念性的語言去陳述，而是用白話把邏輯解釋清楚就好。

  Conclusion

  略

請加sunny老師（微信號：shnc_2018）

百人留學備考群，名師答疑，助教監督，分享最新資訊，領取獨家資料。掃碼免費加入