名师李建林点评10月23日新GRE作文

同9月3日那场G考比，昨天(10月23日)的考试带给我的是好心情。
 
    截止到发稿，共有12名考生通过电话或电邮向我反馈了他们抽到的作文题目以及临场写作的感受，这其中还包括三位没上过我在北京新航道的GRE写作课，但却是我的《GRE写作5.5》一书的读者，并在往来作文批改和电邮交流中结下信任的远在上海和南京的同学。
 
    他们整体感觉都不错。每人基本上都抽到了自己较为熟悉的题目，并且很好地控制了考场上的写作节奏，字数也大都在400～500之间。
 
    在我教过的每个GRE班上，每次我都会非常有信心地告诉我的学生们，在掌握了文章的分析切入点和论证方法后，只要英语语言表达能力上没有致命的不足，无论是Issue还是Argument，都完全可以拿到满意的分数。所以，这些同学的考试感受实际上是我预料之中的事情。但是，GRE是个“会让人产生濒死感的考试”。顺利完成这个考试本身就已非常不易，更何况还能期待不错的成绩？因此，我为他们感到特别的欣喜。
 
    但这些考生中最幸运的也许是一位来自复旦的同学：他抽到的Issue题目岂止是熟悉，在一个月前他还和我细细讨论过！
 
    以下就是那个曾令他不胜苦恼和困惑，而今却给他带来好运的题目：
 
“Every individual in a society has a responsibility to obey just laws and to disobey and resist unjust laws.
 
Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim. In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position.”
 
照理说，这道题目不算太难。旧版GRE作文题库中就有一道和它极其类似的题目：
 
"There 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."
 
    但当时在给我的电邮中，这位同学感到万般纠结的是如何理解这道新G作文的写作指引(Instruction)，也就是这句话：“In developing and supporting your position, be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position”，尤其是如何满足“be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position”的要求。
 
这的确是个问题。
 
    这句话最为明确的信息是：考生的这篇作文必须要采用两面兼顾的写法，也就是我一贯倡导的Issue作文的“两面写”的策略。
 
    这是因为，这条写作指引讲得非常明白：考生在对这道Issue题目提出自己的立场后，还必须(Be sure to)对可能被用来反驳(challenge)自己立场的最有说服力的理由和(或)例证做出回应。这实际是要求考生在作文中一定要论及反方立场，所以，必须两面写。
 
    如果考生这时在写作中采用俗称的“一边倒”的写法，就完全不符合该指引的要求了。在其官方网站上，ETS同样清楚地强调，写作指引是考题的一部分，考生必须要依照写作指引的要求完成写作。
 
    所以，对于“be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position”的要求，只能“两面写”。
 
    在新版GRE的Issue写作六条写作指引中，是不是只有这一条是必须要两面写的呢？
 
    ――不是的。
 
    除了上面提到的带有“be sure to address the most compelling reasons and/or examples that could be used to challenge your position”的这个写作指引外，其它五个写作指引分别如下：
 
A: Write a response in which you discuss which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should address both of the views presented.
 
B: Write a response in which you discuss your views on the policy and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy and explain how these consequences shape your position.
 
C: Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the recommendation and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous and explain how these examples shape your position.
 
D: Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the statement and explain your reasoning for the position you take. In developing and supporting your position, you should consider ways in which the statement might or might not hold true and explain how these considerations shape your position.
 
E: Write a response in which you discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the claim and the reason on which that claim is based.
 
    可以看出，这六个写作指引基本上每一个都由两句话组成。前一句实质意义都不大，都是在问考生在多大程度上同意或者不同意题目中的判断而后立场。关键的“指引”意图在后一句。
 
    首先看指引A，这个指引非常有特色。带有这个指引的Issue题目一般都会提到两个相互对立或矛盾的立场，比如类似这样的表述 － “Some people believe that government funding of the arts is necessary to ensure that the arts can flourish and be available to all people. Others believe that government funding of the arts threatens the integrity of the arts”。
 
    正是由于题目中这两个相互对立的立场，该指引的前一句话才会要求考生讨论“which view more closely aligns with your own position and explain your reasoning for the position you take”；然后，它的后一句便提出要求：“you should address both of the views presented”。
 
    显然，这已经是直白地要求考生一定要论及题目中两个彼此不同或矛盾的立场，即是说，必须要“两面写”。
 
    我们再来看指引B。
 
    这条指引一般出现在属于“建议类”的ISSUE题目中，比如这道Issue题库第72题：“Governments should not fund any scientific research whose consequences are unclear”。这个指引的后一句“consider the possible consequences of implementing the policy”是要求考生必须要考虑到题目中一项政策或建议的可能后果。
 
    常识告诉我们，当一项政策建议提了出来，然后众人被要求考虑该项政策建议的可能后果时，要考虑的内容的重点只能是实施那项政策建议所可能导致的不良后果。所以，这样的题如果只单纯地谈“implementing the policy”的好处或者弊端，从逻辑上就讲不通了。因此，又必须“两面写”。
 
    指引C所蕴含的要求同指引B是一样的。
 
    指引C也几乎总是出现在“建议类ISSUE题目”中，比如类似这道Issue题库第80题：“Nations should suspend government funding for the arts when significant numbers of their citizens are hungry or unemployed”。这个指引的后一句“describe specific circumstances in which adopting the recommendation would or would not be advantageous”要求考生在作文中一定要论及题目中的建议“会导致有利或不利的结果的具体情形”。初看上去，这条写作指引好像可以让我们在某项建议所导致的有利或不利的结果中选择一个进行讨论。但大家试想一下，如果别人给了你一个建议，你怎么可能只考虑该建议的一个方面呢？我们的理性以及本能都会要求我们“利•弊”权衡的。所以说，这本质上又要求我们只能采取一个“两面写”的行文思路。
 
    好了，至此，新版GRE考试的Issue作文六条写作指引中，四条已经直接或间接地要求我们必须要“两面写”了。
 
    最后再来看指引D和E。