GRE作文各部分寫(xiě)作_第1頁(yè)
GRE作文各部分寫(xiě)作_第2頁(yè)
GRE作文各部分寫(xiě)作_第3頁(yè)
GRE作文各部分寫(xiě)作_第4頁(yè)
GRE作文各部分寫(xiě)作_第5頁(yè)
全文預(yù)覽已結(jié)束

下載本文檔

版權(quán)說(shuō)明:本文檔由用戶(hù)提供并上傳,收益歸屬內(nèi)容提供方,若內(nèi)容存在侵權(quán),請(qǐng)進(jìn)行舉報(bào)或認(rèn)領(lǐng)

文檔簡(jiǎn)介

1、GRE作文各部分寫(xiě)作 xxGRE作文各部分寫(xiě)作模板 考試寫(xiě)作每個(gè)段落都有不一樣的技巧,要如何提高的每個(gè)段落的水平呢?下面由為大家搜集的xxGRE作文各部分寫(xiě)作模板,歡迎閱讀本文! In the argument, the (主題對(duì)象) remends that (對(duì)結(jié)論做論述,基本上可以抄原文,用另外一種方式表達(dá)即可). To support this remendation the argument point out that (說(shuō)明文章用了什么論據(jù)去證明觀點(diǎn)了,同上抄襲即可) however This argument is logically flawed in several cri

2、tical respects (說(shuō)明這篇文章邏輯上是有缺陷的)。 To begin with, the argument depends on the assumption that (闡述說(shuō)出了一個(gè)沒(méi)有根據(jù)的申明,并說(shuō)出文中的原因) rather than for some other reasons. Yet it is entirely possible that (說(shuō)明這種猜測(cè)可能的原因) or some other factor. Without ruling out all other reasons why (重述這個(gè)申明)(說(shuō)出反方向的結(jié)論)。 Firstly, the aut

3、hor provides no eviden _ that the survey is statistically reliable. Perhaps the surveys sample is not sufficient in size or representative of the quality of (說(shuō)明對(duì)象的數(shù)量和質(zhì)量不夠) For that _tter, this survey is not strong enough to establish causation between (在這里列出原因和結(jié)果,做比較) However, the other reasons of t

4、he survey which (敘述其他原因下的情況). As a result, without the eviden _ that the survey is statistically reliable the author cannot justifiably draw any conclusion by relying on this survey。 Thirdly, the argument assumes that (闡述文中的猜測(cè)) However, the letter provides no eviden _ to substantiate this assumption

5、. In fact, the letter suggests that this might be the case. By admitting that , the letter implies that 說(shuō)明影響他們happy的因素還有其他的方面,不光是研究中所列舉 To begin with,(陳述某個(gè)數(shù)據(jù)) _y not a reliable date of that rate would be now(和現(xiàn)在相比較是不可信的). Perhaps the (反例), For that _tter, perhaps (說(shuō)出反例的情況下會(huì)導(dǎo)致何種結(jié)果). In short, without

6、 ruling out other possible reasons for (假設(shè)說(shuō)出針對(duì)反例應(yīng)該怎么做)the memos author cannot convin _ me on the basis of (說(shuō)出應(yīng)該有的結(jié)論) Even if(讓步,即使某個(gè)條件成立) the argument unfairly assumes that(說(shuō)明錯(cuò)誤的類(lèi)比的情況). It is entirely possible that the (比較對(duì)象) own different situations. Perhaps (具體說(shuō)出反例) Without aounting for such diffe

7、ren _s between the two pla _s is unreliable。 Even if (讓步,即使某個(gè)條件成立)the argument relied on the future assumption that (說(shuō)出要讓步的是事實(shí)). Yet the only eviden _ the argument offer to substantiate this assumption (說(shuō)出文中的根據(jù)). Perhaps (說(shuō)出有可能出現(xiàn)的其他情況導(dǎo)致這個(gè)事實(shí))if so, (說(shuō)出不一樣的結(jié)果,與上面事實(shí)相矛盾). Or(其他的情況) In short, without mor

8、e infor _tion about(對(duì)上面的可能情況總結(jié)) were established it is impossible to assess (回到上面的結(jié)論)。 Finally, the argument fails to consider (有更好的辦法實(shí)現(xiàn)目標(biāo)). Perhaps by(辦法一), or by (辦法二), (對(duì)目標(biāo)進(jìn)行展望) In short, without weighing the suggestion against alternatives, it is unconvincing that (說(shuō)明提供的方案不好)。 Finally, even if t

9、he families support to build the new seafood restaurant, the restaurant would not ne _ssarily be profitable as a result. Profitability is a function of both revenue and expense. Thus, it is quite possible that the restaurants costs of obtaining high-quality and healthy seafood or of new promoting re

10、staurant might render it unprofitable despite its popularity. Without weighing revenue against expenses the arguments conclusion is pre _ture at best。 The memo also _kes two hasty assumptions about (說(shuō)明兩個(gè)猜想相關(guān)的內(nèi)容). One such assumption is that (第一個(gè)猜想的情況說(shuō)明). It is entirely possible that (反例). Another as

11、sumption is that(另外一個(gè)錯(cuò)誤的猜想) Common sense informs me that (反例) Furthermore, the differen _ in the two firms overall pla _ment time last year does not ne _ssarily indicate that Delany would be the better choi _ to serve XYZs laid-off employees. These employees might have particular skills or needs that are not representative of the two firms clients in general. Besides, one years pla _ment statistics hardly sufficient to draw any firm conclusions。 In sum, the argument seems logical, but is based on nothing more than pure speculation and perhaps wishful thinking, yet lack of some warrant

溫馨提示

  • 1. 本站所有資源如無(wú)特殊說(shuō)明,都需要本地電腦安裝OFFICE2007和PDF閱讀器。圖紙軟件為CAD,CAXA,PROE,UG,SolidWorks等.壓縮文件請(qǐng)下載最新的WinRAR軟件解壓。
  • 2. 本站的文檔不包含任何第三方提供的附件圖紙等,如果需要附件,請(qǐng)聯(lián)系上傳者。文件的所有權(quán)益歸上傳用戶(hù)所有。
  • 3. 本站RAR壓縮包中若帶圖紙,網(wǎng)頁(yè)內(nèi)容里面會(huì)有圖紙預(yù)覽,若沒(méi)有圖紙預(yù)覽就沒(méi)有圖紙。
  • 4. 未經(jīng)權(quán)益所有人同意不得將文件中的內(nèi)容挪作商業(yè)或盈利用途。
  • 5. 人人文庫(kù)網(wǎng)僅提供信息存儲(chǔ)空間,僅對(duì)用戶(hù)上傳內(nèi)容的表現(xiàn)方式做保護(hù)處理,對(duì)用戶(hù)上傳分享的文檔內(nèi)容本身不做任何修改或編輯,并不能對(duì)任何下載內(nèi)容負(fù)責(zé)。
  • 6. 下載文件中如有侵權(quán)或不適當(dāng)內(nèi)容,請(qǐng)與我們聯(lián)系,我們立即糾正。
  • 7. 本站不保證下載資源的準(zhǔn)確性、安全性和完整性, 同時(shí)也不承擔(dān)用戶(hù)因使用這些下載資源對(duì)自己和他人造成任何形式的傷害或損失。

評(píng)論

0/150

提交評(píng)論