gre寫作范例有用嗎?今天小編給大家?guī)鞧RE寫作范例有用嗎，希望能夠幫助到大家，下面小編就和大家分享，來欣賞一下吧。

GRE寫作：寫作范例有用嗎

對于寫作，不一定是你例子背得多、反復地用例子來舉證論點就能寫出一篇好文章，最好還是要找一本國外的寫作教材來進行參考，弄清楚國外寫作的具體要求，像《經(jīng)濟學人》、《時代周刊》這上面的評述類的文章都可以拿來進行借鑒，多進行模仿和學習。

在這里像各位同學推薦一本國外教材，北大引進進來的，叫做《分析性寫作》，這本書在書店都是可以買到的，大家可以從里面學習如何論證自己的分論點，這些都寫得比較詳細。

中國學生寫作時喜歡寫一些大詞和長句，覺得句子長了文章也就會寫得好，但GRE作文卻不是這么回事，有可能你自以為自己寫的很好，但是邏輯性是不嚴密的， 可能外國人就會覺得很啰嗦，沒有什么實質(zhì)性的內(nèi)容，結(jié)果就會導致分數(shù)比較低。

GRE作文關(guān)鍵是要反復多練，要仔細地反復地研究OG上面的范文，因為只有OG上面的文章是經(jīng)過ETS認證的，所以一定要把這些范文研究得分成透徹，達到滾瓜爛熟的程度，掌握它每一個評分標準的要求，研究好為什么會給這篇范文6分而給另一篇3分;另外，學生在做GRE閱讀時可以通過模仿這些閱讀文章來提高自己的寫作水平。

GRE寫作滿分范文賞析

Hospital?statistics?regarding?people?who?go?to?the?emergency?room?after?roller-skating?accidents?indicate?the?need?for?more?protective?equipment.??Within?this?group?of?people,?75?percent?of?those?who?had?accidents?in?streets?or?parking?lots?were?not?wearing?any?protective?clothing?(helmets,?knee?pads,?etc.)?or?any?light-reflecting?material?(clip-on?lights,?glow-in-the-dark?wrist?pads,?etc.).??Clearly,?these?statistics?indicate?that?by?investing?in?high-quality?protective?gear?and?reflective?equipment,?roller?skaters?will?greatly?reduce?their?risk?of?being?severely?injured?in?an?accident.??

Although?the?argument?stated?above?discusses?the?importance?of?safety?equipment?as?significant?part?of?avoiding?injury,?the?statistics?quoted?are?vague?and?inconclusive.??Simply?because?75?percent?of?the?people?involved?in?roller-skating?accidents?are?not?wearing?the?stated?equipment?does?not?automatically?implicate?the?lack?of?equipment?as?the?cause?of?injury.??The?term?"accidents"?may?imply?a?great?variety?of?injuries.??The?types?of?injuries?one?could?incur?by?not?wearing?the?types?of?equipment?stated?above?are?minor?head?injuries;?skin?abrasions?or?possibly?bone?fracture?of?a?select?few?areas?such?as?knees,?elbows,?hands,?etc.?(which?are?in?fact?most?vulnerable?to?this?sport);?and/or?injuries?due?to?practising?the?sport?during?low?light?times?of?the?day.??During?any?physically?demanding?activity?or?sport?people?are?subjected?to?a?wide?variety?of?injuries?which?cannot?be?avoided?with?protective?clothing?or light-reflective?materials.??These?injuries?include?inner?trauma?(e.g.,?heart-attack);?exhaustion;?strained?muscles,?ligaments,?or?tendons;?etc.??Perhaps?the?numbers?and?percentages?of?people?injured?during?roller-skating,?even?without?protective?equipment,?would?decrease?greatly?if?people?participating?in?the?sport?had?proper?training,?good?physical?health,?warm-up?properly?before?beginning?(stretching),?as?well?as?take?other?measures?to?prevent?possible?injury,?such?as?common-sense,?by?refraining?from?performing?the?activity?after?proper?lighting?has?ceased?and?knowing?your?personal?limitations?as?an?individual?and?athlete.??The?statistics?used?in?the?above?reasoning?are?lacking?in?proper?direction?considering?their?assertions?and?therefore?must?be?further?examined?and?modified?so?that?proper?conclusions?can?be?reached.??

Commentary??

This?adequate?response?targets?the?argument's?vague?and?inconclusive?"statistics."??The?essay?identifies?and?critiques?the?illogical?reasoning?that?results?from?the?misguided?use?of?the?argument's?statistics:??

--?that?non-use?of?equipment?may?be?"automatically"?assumed?to?be?the????cause?of?injury?

--?that?"accidents"?may?refer?to?minor?injuries?

--?that?injuries?may?result?from?other?causes?--?skating?in?the?dark,????failure?to?train?or?warm-up?properly,?failure?to?recognize?one's????physical?limitations??

The?writer?competently?grasps?the?weaknesses?of?the?argument.??The?ideas?are?clear?and?connected,?but?the?response?lacks?transitional?phrases.??Development,?too,?is?only?adequate.??

Control?of?language?is?better?than?adequate.??The?writer?achieves?both?control?and?clarity?and?ably?conforms?to?the?conventions?of?written?English.??Overall,?though,?this?4?response?lacks?the?more?thorough?development?that?would?warrant?a?score?of?5.

GRE寫作滿分范文賞析

Hospital?statistics?regarding?people?who?go?to?the?emergency?room?after?roller-skating?accidents?indicate?the?need?for?more?protective?equipment.??Within?this?group?of?people,?75?percent?of?those?who?had?accidents?in?streets?or?parking?lots?were?not?wearing?any?protective?clothing?(helmets,?knee?pads,?etc.)?or?any?light-reflecting?material?(clip-on?lights,?glow-in-the-dark?wrist?pads,?etc.).??Clearly,?these?statistics?indicate?that?by?investing?in?high-quality?protective?gear?and?reflective?equipment,?roller?skaters?will?greatly?reduce?their?risk?of?being?severely?injured?in?an?accident.??

The?arguement?is?well?presented?and?supported,?but?not?completely?well?reasoned.??It?is?clear?and?concisely?written.??The?content?is?logically?and?smoothly?presented.??Statistics?cited?are?used?to?develop?support?for?the?recommendation,?that?roller?skaters?who?invest?in?protective?gear?and?reflective?equipment?can?reduce?their?risk?of?severe,?accidental?injuries.??Examples?of?the?types?of?protective?equipment?are?described?for?the?reader.??Unfortunately,?the?author?of?the?argement?fails?to?note?that?merely?by?purchasing?gear?and?reflective?equipment?that?the?skater?will?be?protected.??This?is,?of?course,?falacious?if?the?skater?fails?to?use?the?equipment,?or?uses?it?incorrectly?or?inappropriately.??It?is?also?an?unnecessary?assumption?that?a?skater?need?purchase?high-quality?gear?for?the?same?degree?of? effectiveness?to?be?achieved.??The?argument?could?be?improved?by?taking?these?issues?into?consideration,?and?making?recommendations?for?education?and?safety?awareness?to?skaters.??

Commentary??

The?first?half?of?this?generally?well-written?but?limited?response?merely?describes?the?argument.??The?second?half?of?the?paper?identifies?two?assumptions?of?the?argument:??

--?that?people?who?purchase?protective?gear?will?use?the?gear?--?that?high-quality?gear?is?more?effective?than?other?gear??

These?points?are?sufficient?to?constitute?some?analysis?and?thus?warrant?a?score?of?3.??However,?neither?of?these?analytic?points?is?developed?sufficiently?to?merit?a?score?of?4.?