返学费网 > 培训机构 > 武汉新航道英语

17320526308

全国统一学习专线 8:30-21:00

今天(9月3日)的GRE考试一结束,便收到考生的电话。

“李老师,砸了,考砸了……”电话那头略带沙哑的声音万般沮丧地说。

这个结果让我很意外,因为给我打电话的男生算是位老练的“G考份子”。他虽说并非新航道学校的学员,但是经朋友介绍,我之前给他批改过多篇GRE作文,知道他的英文实力当在中上。而且,两年前他原本考过一次旧版GRE,只是后来自我感觉成绩不够理想,才决定重考。

我安慰他慢慢说。他稍稍平静后,道出了原委。他这次考试本来总体感觉相当不错,问题就出在他挑中了一道特别没想到、也特别不希望遇到的作文题。

凭记忆,他确信他抽中的两道作文题是这样的:

Issue题目:
“In order for any work of art—for example, a film, a novel, a poem, or a song—to have merit, it must be understandable to most people.

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. ”

Argument题目:
The following appeared as part of a letter to the editor of a scientific journal.

"A recent study of eighteen rhesus monkeys provides clues as to the effects of birth order on an individual's levels of stimulation. The study showed that in stimulating situations (such as an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey), firstborn infant monkeys produce up to twice as much of the hormone cortisol, which primes the body for increased activity levels, as do their younger siblings. Firstborn humans also produce relatively high levels of cortisol in stimulating situations (such as the return of a parent after an absence). The study also found that during pregnancy, first-time mother monkeys had higher levels of cortisol than did those who had had several offspring."

Write a response in which you discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation and explain how your explanation(s) can plausibly account for the facts presented in the argument.

一听到是这两道题目,我马上明白,肯定是那道Argument(也就是传说中的“恒河猴命题”)让他遇到了麻烦。

“这道Argu我肯定是读懂了题目要求,但我无论如何就是找不到题目中特别有说服力的逻辑漏洞,后来勉强写出的诸如统计样本不够、仓促概括、不当类比等反驳要点连我自己都不大相信,郁闷死了!唉……”他说当时几次都想取消成绩,但后来还是决定留下,想看看这次作文到底成绩如何。

坦率地说,这位考生的运气还算不错。至少他抽到的这道Issue题是很容易对付的。这道Issue是GRE写作新题库的第55题。它基本不算是新题,因为老版GRE写作题库中有这么一道Issue题:

"In order for any work of art—whether film, literature, sculpture, or a song—to have merit, it must be understandable to most people."

显然,这两道Issue题除了个别单词外基本是完全一样的。作为已经考过一次GRE的考生,以他的实力,驾驭这道Issue应能得心应手。

但那道Argument题目就完全不同了。

首先,在新G写作Argument八大写作指引中,其它七个写作指引都是要求考生从不同角度对题目中的论证和逻辑推理过程展开评估和分析的,唯有这道题所附的写作指引要求考生提供“one or more alternative explanations”,来对题目中的逻辑和现象做出自己的替代性解释。所以,这是一个迥异于旧版GRE写作、也完全不同于其它新Argu写作要求的、全新的写作指引。并且,这位考生挑上的这一道Argu是所有新G写作题库有此项写作指引的Argument题目中最令考生感到棘手的。许多考生面对这道题目觉得简直无从下手。

讲到这里,笔者要强调的是:这一道Argument题目的出现充分说明了,新版GRE写作和旧版比,在写作要求、题目范式、分析方法和备考策略上其实已经有了很大的变化。广大考生万万不可掉以轻心,听信所谓“新G写作和老G差别不大”的信口之辞,踏入本可以绕开的雷区,付出不必要的代价。

单就给我打电话的这位考生而言,他就是自信已经“烤”过一次“鸡”,且英语写作功底也还不错,于是就在几乎对写作没做认真准备的情况下轻率上阵,结果遭遇意外。

在笔者看来,此次新G写作虽然Issue部分变化也比较多,但变化最大的恰恰在Argument。这位考生所挑中的这道Argu题目,如果按照旧G的解题思路,也就是从寻找题目中的逻辑漏洞入手,其实是无解的。

没错,就是简单的无解。这是因为,他的这道Argu题目本来就没有任何逻辑漏洞!

新版GRE写作实际逼迫我们必须要放弃通过找寻逻辑漏洞来求解Argument的思路,转而从每个Argument中所运用的论证方法入手;否则,部分Argu题目的分析必然陷入死胡同。

让我们来对这道Argument做个较为详细的解读。

这道题目的论点是:
The birth order can affect an individual's levels of stimulation.
论者采用了三个论据:
(1) In stimulating situations (such as an encounter with an unfamiliar monkey), firstborn infant monkeys produce up to twice as much of the hormone cortisol, which primes the body for increased activity levels, as do their younger siblings;
(2) Firstborn humans also produce relatively high levels of cortisol in stimulating situations (such as the return of a parent after an absence).
(3) The study also found that during pregnancy, first-time mother monkeys had higher levels of cortisol than did those who had had several offspring."

大家仔细看,题目中由论据到论点的推论到底有什么逻辑漏洞呢?我恐怕你就是看一天,也找不到一条有说服力的所谓“逻辑漏洞”。但是,如果我提醒大家,看一看题目中运用的是什么样的论证方法呢?

没错,就是一个归纳论证!

题目中的论者分别列举了first born infant monkeys、firstborn humans和first-time mother monkeys三种情形,来论证每一组研究对象其出生顺序同荷尔蒙cortisol的分泌似乎都有某种正相关关系,并据以得出“出生顺序影响了个体应激水平”的结论。对,论者的推论就这么简单。

在明晰了论者所采用的论证方法后,我们的解题办法自然而然就非常清楚了。题目中的写作指引不是要我们“discuss one or more alternative explanations that could rival the proposed explanation”,也就是提供不同于论者、但同样有说服力的若干个解释吗?那么,我们只要同样按照归纳推理的思路,给出几个不同于题目中论者的归纳结论不就行了吗?

也就是说,大家都是在作归纳推理,只不过所抓住的三组研究对象(first born infant monkeys、firstborn humans和first-time mother monkeys)的共同点不同而已。是的,就这么简单。

如此一来,我们就可以给出至少下列三个替代性解释(alternative explanations):

首先,很可能不是所谓的birth order,而是这三个生命形态的共同特点影响了hormone cortisol的分泌水平。因为无论是first born infant monkeys还是first-time mother monkeys,或者是firstborn humans,它们都属于灵长类(primates)。作为一种较为高级的生命形态,受到一定程度的刺激后,它们为了迅捷地做出反应而分泌较高的hormone cortisol这是很正常的现象;并且,越是这种刺激意味着对生命安全的更大威胁(比如to encounter with unfamiliar circumstances, strangers or preyers),hormone cortisol的分泌水平越高;反之,就较低。如果是这样的话,题目中论者的推论说法也就未必成立了。
第二,是否hormone cortisol的分泌水平与特定的年龄阶段有关的呢?因为我们看到,first born infant monkeys、firstborn humans和first-time mother monkeys都是在同较年幼的siblings或者生育过多仔的mother monkeys来比较,并且在相同或相似的刺激环境下才分泌出较多的cortisol的。如果较幼小的rhesus monkeys和人类,以及生过多胎的mother monkeys总体上都不分泌或者分泌较少的hormone cortisol的话,那么题目中论者的推论也不成立。即是说,first born infant monkeys、firstborn humans和first-time mother monkeys三者的特定年龄导致了差别,而不是所谓的birth order。
第三,是否是某种情绪或者情感影响了hormone cortisol的分泌水平呢?因为first born infant monkeys、firstborn humans和first-time mother monkeys都是在强烈情绪和情感的刺激下(比如meeting with an unfamiliar monkey, reunion with a parent after an absence, and first-time birth of baby monkeys这些恐惧、愉悦和焦虑等)才表现出较高的hormone cortisol的。如此的话,hormone cortisol的分泌水平也同birth order无关了。

怎么样,是否是很简单、很轻松呢?

实际上,不仅仅是这道关于恒河猴的Argument题目用传统的寻找逻辑漏洞的办法解决不了,还有一些其他的Argument新题目如果采用“逻辑漏洞法”的话,同样会遭遇无

温馨提示:为不影响您的学业,来校区前请先电话咨询,方便我校安排相关的专业老师为您解答
  • 热门课程
姓名不能为空
手机号格式错误