驳论文高分模板

一 、强调分析第一、论证第二、语言第三(ADL法则)从13版GMAT官方指南(Official Guide，以下简称OG)中对于写作部分的论述及讲解出发，强调分析占最主导地位，论证其次，语言第三。简单地说，GMAT写作要求考生论证原文中的逻辑行文错误出在哪里并且进行分析，故而对于原文的分析Analyze是最为首要的一个步骤;分析出原文的错误之后考生需要进行论证，例如举出反例来证明原文确实出现了错误等。故而论证， 即demonstrate，是考生继分析之后所要下功夫的地方;最后，考生需要对于句子及用词进行推敲，起到锦上添花的作用，因而语言Language是第三需要注意的。基于Analyze-Demonstrate-Language法则，各位在准备过程中应强调分析第一、论证第二、分析第三，有的放矢地去准备GMAT写作。二 、拓展AA写作相关经济管理知识要点按真实考试的登场时间顺序，GMAT考试分为写作、推理、数学、语文(语法、逻辑、阅读)四大项内容，并未开设专门的管理类知识考查科目，而GMAT写作涉及到的经济管理相关知识较多，虽然OG上指出写作并不对考生的商科专业知识作考查，但商科知识依然重要。推荐各位考生几本专业的书籍，Grary Armstrong与Philip Kotler合著《市场营销学》，Robert B. Handfield 所著《采购及供应链管理》，Robert F. Lusch所著《零售学导论》，Efrain Turban所著《电子商务导论》，William G. Zikmund与Bary J. Babin合著《营销调研精要》，以及Luis M. B. Cabral所著《产业组织导论》等国外知名商学院御用教材，以上几本对于GMAT写作相关经济管理知识进行拓展有一定的帮助，可以帮助考生增强专业性。三、 以AA题库为核心统计数据为佐证对比12版OG与13版OG，推理、数学、语文三部分都有一些题目变动，而AA写作部分的题库未变，仍由经典135题组成。各位考生在备考时候可以选取题库中的重点篇目进行详解。GMAT写作的原文类型可按涉及内容划分为经济管理、日常生活、社会热点、广告宣传四类;也可依照文章结构划分为常规性文章(即文章通常在4句话及以上，一般能看出具体结构)和过简性文章(即文章在3句话及以下，结构模糊)。在OG题库135篇原文中，按涉及内容划分进行统计，经济管理类文章有85篇，占62.96%;日常生活类文章有8篇，占5.92%;社会热点类文章有39篇，占28.89%;广告宣传类文章有3篇，占2.22%，也即非经济管理类文章有50篇，占37.04%。按文章结构划分进行统计，常规性文章有124篇，占91.85%，过简性文章有11篇，占8.15%，具体情况在南京新东方GMAT课程中将进行详细阐述。四 、发散思维，联系实际由于GMAT写作的原文几乎离不开实际生活，因而建议考生在进行分析纠错时勤于思考，联系实际及案例，尤其在碰到经济管理类的问题时能够联想到相关的著名企业所采取过的措施的先例。全面的分析思考能够帮助大家更好地概括、归纳及总结，而概括、归纳、总结的能力也正是众多领导力中的重中之重。五 、勤于思考，创作模板中国考生写英语作文最喜欢套用模板，但很多考生并不清楚何谓好的模板，也不知道应该怎样使用模板才能避免与其他考生撞车而被判为抄袭。真正使用好模板需要做到以下两点：第一，用得不着痕迹;第二，用得原创不雷同。因而建议考生摒弃固有的模板思维，学会在学习的过程中创造属于自己的模板。六 、真实环境，提升速度GMAT考试实行的是全程机考模式，也即写作部分的考试不是用笔写而是用键盘敲打出来录入计算机。因而强烈建议考生进行写作练习时能够熟悉真实的考试环境，做到使用不开词典的计算机进行限时练习(30分钟内审题及写作完成)，并在练习的过程中训练自己的打字速度，最终达到至少半盲打的水平。

额， 其实我也在找这个

In any academic area or professional field, it is just as important to recognize the limits of our knowledge and understanding as it is to acquire new facts and information.“Personally, I hold that knowledge knows no bounds, therefore, on realizing this awkwardness, the only thing man should do is to absorb as much new knowledge as he can for the sake of not lagging behind the pacing steps of our world. 但是作者完全是从另外一个角度去论证，且看下文。Does recognizing the limits of our knowledge and understanding serve us equally well as acquiring new facts and information, as the speaker asserts?注意这一句经典的反问式开头了，这是最引人注目的。While our everyday experience might lend credence to this assertion, further reflection reveals its fundamental inconsistency with our Western view of how we acquire knowledge. Nevertheless,虽然是原则上不尽同意但还是提出妥协的办法，从而显出作者是critical thinking的，这一点很重要，也是拿分的重头戏也。a careful and thoughtful definition of knowledge can serve to reconcile the two.让我们记一记一些好词好句：lend credence to this assertion (有足够的证据)证明这一观点的正确性;further reflection reveals its fundamental inconsistency with…;Nevertheless, a careful and thoughtful definition of knowledge can serve to reconcile the two.On the one hand, the speaker"s assertion accords with the everyday experience of working professionals. For example, the sort of "book”knowledge that medical, law, and business students acquire, no matter how extensive, is of little use unless these students also learn to accept the uncertainties and risks inherent in professional practice and in the business world.Any successful doctor, lawyer, or entrepreneur would undoubtedly agree that new precedents and challenges in their fields compel them to acknowledge the limitations of their knowledge, and that learning to accommodate these limitations is just as important in their professional success as knowledge itself.在驳论的第一段，作者就举例子说明知识的有限性并不一定意味着各行各业的人就必须汲取其他方面的知识，恰恰相反，对于医生、律师或企业家来说意识到了自我知识的有限，并且寻求方法去适应调和这一有限性反而是必要的。Moreover, the additional knowledge we gain by collecting more information often diminishes-sometimes to the point where marginal gains turn to marginal losses. Consider, for instance, the collection of financial- investment information. No amount of knowledge can eliminate the uncertainty and risk inherent in financial investing. Also, information overload can result in confusion, which in turn can diminish one"s ability to assimilate information and apply it usefully. Thus, by recognizing the limits of their knowledge, and by accounting for those limits when making decisions, investment advisors can more effectively serve their clients.作者进一步通过金融投资业信息的赘余的危害性来驳斥原文的观点。On the other hand, the speaker"s assertion seems self-contradictory, for how can we know the limits of our knowledge until we"ve thoroughly tested those limits through exhaustive empirical observation--that is, by acquiring facts and information. For example, it would be tempting to concede that we can never understand the basic forces that govern all matter in the universe. Yet due to increasingly precise and extensive fact- finding efforts of scientists, we might now be within striking distance of understanding the key laws by which all physical matter behaves. Put another way, the speaker"s assertion flies in the face of悍然不顾，公然违抗the scientific method, whose fundamental tenet is that we humans can truly know only that which we observe. Thus Francis Bacon, who first formulated the method, might assert that the speaker is fundamentally incorrect.说实话，我觉得这一段里，作者玩了一个诡辩的小伎俩：先是指出原文观点的自相矛盾性，然后引出自己的看法——认识论远重要于获取新的事实和信息，也就是要“先认识知识和理解力的局限然后才是摄取新知。”How can we reconcile our experience in everyday endeavors with the basic assumption underlying the scientific method? Perhaps the answer lies in a distinction between two types of knowledge--one which amounts to a mere collection of observations (i.e., facts and information), the other which is deeper and includes a realization of principles and truths underlying those observations. At this deeper level "knowledge" equals "under- standing": how we interpret, make sense of, and find meaning in the information we collect by way of observation.作者就上一段提出的问题推出自己的解决方法，即认识到“知识”分成两种：纯观察行为所得的信息;萃取之后的经过自己消化后的“理解”。但我觉得这里还有待发挥，估计是时间不够了，仓促间收笔吧。没有很好的说明白。In the final analysis, evaluating the speaker"s assertion requires that we define "knowledge,"which in turn requires that we address complex epistemological issues best left to philosophers and theologians. Yet perhaps this is the speaker"s point: that we can never truly know either ourselves or the world, and that by recognizing this limitation we set ourselves free to accomplish what no amount of mere information could ever permit.最后一句玩了复杂句的构句技巧，想搏ets一笑。但我觉得还是总结的不够好，没有说到点子上。其实，我们平实的写作大可不必如此玩弄文字，因为如果当别人都不知道你在说什么的话，一味专心于难句，无异于“喧宾夺主”了。个人认为，作者写得有点不知所云了。