如何提高GRE寫作審題的技巧呢?一起來看看吧，下面小編就和大家分享，來欣賞一下吧。

GRE寫作審題的技巧

一些學生在完成書面表達題時，習慣提筆就寫，用母語思維，結(jié)果錯誤百出，寫出許多漢語式的句子。因此在新GRE寫作的訓練中，學生要嚴格按照一定的模式或者寫作步驟來進行。嚴格按步進行訓練，養(yǎng)成良好的寫作習慣，才能保證學生寫出規(guī)范的短文。

步驟一：審題

GRE考試中，審題最基本，最關鍵，也是最重要的。

一審新GRE寫作文章的文體和格式，如書信有求職信、推薦信、回復信等，還有人物介紹、看圖說明等等不同要求的寫作題材，弄清文章的文體和格式是重要前提。

二審新GRE寫作文章內(nèi)容，先對題中的信息進行篩選，哪些是有用信息，哪些是無用信息，然后把有用信息按一定順序分小點列出來。

步驟二：遣詞造句

1. 根據(jù)審題步驟所列出的內(nèi)容要點，列出文章中可能要用到的關鍵詞語(如動詞、短語等)

2. 列出文章中可能用到的句型

3. 列出文章中可能用到的語句間的連接詞

4. 按內(nèi)容要點順序和所列詞語、句型寫出單句

步驟三：串句成文

這是新GRE作文完成的關鍵步驟。不能只是簡單翻譯內(nèi)容要點，要作一些適當發(fā)揮，使整篇文章既有“骨架”，又有“血肉”。同時應注意以下幾點：

1. 注意新GRE作文整體的時態(tài)運用，整篇文章的時態(tài)應該保持一致性。

2. 注意短文的布局謀篇。恰當?shù)亩温鋭澐?，前后語句的連貫，句型的選擇，連接詞的運用，使文章層次分明，語言暢通，連接恰當，最終為文章增色出彩。

步驟四：通讀檢查

這是完善新GRE寫作任務的最后步驟。通讀文章的同時，檢查前后內(nèi)容是否連貫，語言是否暢通，段落劃分是否分明，句型及連接詞的運用是否恰當，時態(tài)運用是否一致，標點符號是否規(guī)范等等。完成了這些檢查并作出修改訂正，一定會使全文更加規(guī)范、更加自然流暢。

重視新GRE寫作訓練的多樣化

“聽、說、讀、寫”四種技能是相互依賴的，因而應該在GRE考試的復習階段同時進行訓練。學生只有進行大量聽和讀的訓練，才能達到足夠的規(guī)范的語言材料的輸入，才能保證學生進行較好的說和寫的語言輸出。同時訓練的多樣化能夠讓學生更加有信心、有趣味地完成各項訓練任務。例如，聽過一段對話后，讓學生用短文的形式記錄下對話的主要內(nèi)容，學過一篇較長的課文后，讓學生對課文進行縮寫或口頭進行復述等等。進行各種訓練的同時，要求學生注意人稱、語態(tài)、時態(tài)、前后邏輯關系等的正確運用。這樣既能鍛煉學生語言的口頭、書面表達能力，又能提高學生篇章結(jié)構(gòu)的組織能力，從而提高寫作能力。

以上就是小編整理的關于新GRE寫作中審題的重要性。GRE考試的第一步就是審題，同時也是最關鍵的一步。就像新GRE作文，如果審題出現(xiàn)問題，比如意思理解錯誤，寫作方向理解錯誤，那考生寫出的文章就會跑題，也不可能拿到分數(shù)。這一點小編希望大家都能謹記。

GRE issue寫作優(yōu)秀實例：技術進步

題目：

The primary goal of technological advancement should be to increase people's efficiency so that everyone has more leisure time.

正文：

Should the primary goal of technological advancement rested upon the improvement of people’s efficiency so that people has more leisure time? The speaker claims so. I concede that technological advancement do increase efficiency, but either should be this the primary goal or the result be that everyone has more leisure time.

I concede that technological innovation has increased people’s efficiency. Just consider the wide used computer technology. The designing tools and software installed help to short working time and facilitate working efficiency. The word-processing software makes paper work not as boring and time-consuming task as before while. The vast information available on the Internet cut our time spending on searching among thousands of books in the libraries. In our daily life, all the modern transportation means such as car, plane and subway act as efficient agents to carry us home or even places thousands miles away.

Agreeing on the revolution effects brought by these modern conveniences, I am still against the speaker’s claim in two aspects. For one thing, I consider that the primary role carried out by technological advancement far outweigh what the speaker defines as simple as increasing efficiency. The crucial mission of technology should be the tackling of the most urgent problem of modern society. Thousands of people in the world still suffer from hunger and insufficiency of medical care. Environmental problem such as greenhouse effect, deforestation, wild-animal extinction all deserve the effort of our human beings through the use of modern technology. In this sense, if we set the increasing of efficiency to be the primary role of technology, we face the danger of being obsessed in the sole ideology of pragmatism and neglecting those social problems.

On the other hand, the speaker’s claim that modern technologies render people more leisure time is just a fake and na?ve illusion. If we turn around to observe modern people, it is not hard to notice how tired expression the wear on their faces and how hectic lives they are living. The chief stimulus behind technology is that people crave for efficiency and this is a reflection of the increasing efficiency stuff placed on them by their bosses and customers. Returning to the example of program-designer. He may save some time today by resorting to some designing software but may spent more time in updating his professional knowledge in this field or choosing and adapting to new technological advancement. People may increase their traveling efficiency by using modern transportation tools, but end in realizing that traffic jam is ever annoying and this modern convenience is a trade-off to their health condition. Modern technology increases people’s expectation for each other. Our families expect more earning, our bosses expect for increasing deal-settling efficiency, our customers expect quick complain-dealing and timely thorough service. Yes, we first feel with confidence that modern technology will free us from the bondage of daily trivial work but end up in realizing that we again relegate to become the servants to high efficiency.

To sum up, I agree with the speaker to the extent that efficiency does constitute an important part of technological advancement. But I strongly feel that by overlooking the social function of technology, we neglect the most crucial aspect of what it can do for the mankind. What is more, I do not agree that modern efficiency can increase people’s leisure. On the contrary, I believe by increasing people’s expectation and standard for efficiency, we lose more leisure time in trading off for money-making, job security and so forth.

GRE issue寫作優(yōu)秀實例：研究經(jīng)費

題目：

Money spent on research is almost always a good investment, even when the results of that research are controversial.

正文：

I fundamentally agree that research is an area deserving long-term investment and this point should not be suspected by whether the results of that research are controversial. But by arguing that money spent on research is almost always a good investment, it seems to go to extreme: it ignores some critical factors that may cause the investment to become an inefficient and even completely failed one.

Research, especially research about fundamental theory, discriminates itself from other activities primarily by the uncertainty and controversy of its results. No one can boast that his/her research is certain to succeed. Also on one should expect that his research results would not be suspected or even violently defied by his/her fellows. However, this character of research does not inhibit its great utility to the whole society. Instead, to a great extent, it is just because this kind of suspecting and disputing each other that technology, science and society stride forward. Not only the society as a whole but also a competitive firm, primarily thrives on the breakthrough in these meaningful controversies. Undoubtedly, whether the results of research are controversial does not affect its becoming the most profitable and provident area deserving long-term investment at all.

But one must consciously aware that a deserved and provident investment does not necessarily mean a good one permanently. Any investment, as long as it concerns with uncertainty, must be accompanied with a certain amount of chance to fail. And our resources are far less enough to such an extent that we can investment without a deliberate calculation about the revenue and the cost. For the society as a whole, it may have enough capacity to stand up to the failure, but for individual people or individual organizations, any large-scale investment, once fails, would immediately endanger their survival, or at least impose a heavy burden on their future development.

Therefore, without giving consideration to the state of resources, and without any idea of the ratio of the revenue to the cost, the investment is bound to be blindfold and ill allocated such that it seems to be well utilized elsewhere, though profitable or provident as it may be in itself.

Money spent on research has a significant difference from that invested in stock, bond or factory, in that it has a stronger inclination to decreasing marginal revenue. That is to say, if you add a extra investment in stock or bond, you may expect a corresponding increase in revenue; however, no matter how much you invest additionally in research if only its normal expense can be ensured, the probability of success will not rise, the process will not step up, and the results will not be more meaningful. Science and technology has its own laws, which are beyond the influence of money. It was not because the amount of money spent on research that Einstein developed the theory of relativism. Therefore, in many cases we cannot simply argue that money spent on research is always a good investment because it has underlying meaning that the more investment, the better our society. In fact, too much investment certainly affects research little: neither does it bring us more scientists like Einstein, nor does it help current scientists research more efficiently in the condition of ensuring their normal expense.

In conclusion, any research has a risk more or less, and there is no unconditionally or absolutely good investment in the world. The society as a whole should carefully allocate its limited resources for various areas.

如何提高GRE寫作審題的技巧相關文章：

1.BEC商務英語寫作考試經(jīng)驗分享