gre考试写作失分点有哪些

gre考试中比较拿难分的当属gre写作考试，今天小编给大家带来gre考试写作失分点有哪些，希望能够帮助到大家，下面小编就和大家分享，来欣赏一下吧。

gre考试写作失分点有哪些?

gre写作失分点介绍

1。逻辑混乱。

2。过于主观。

3。中式思维/表达。

4。过分注重用词。

大体上来说，同学们的逻辑问题是最多的。gre考试逻辑问题有三种，通篇逻辑，段落之间，段落之中。

其实这可能和我们高中初中的英语教育有关系，大家都很喜欢一条一条摆原因。Firstly，secondly。。。然后后面至于这个ly后面是什么就不管了，一顿胡扯。也不管这段落与段落之间的衔接是否自然，反正都有什么ly给打头阵。

事实上，中西方的思维总是存在差异，很多时候看管老师们都不懂考生在说什么。考官很困惑，这个例子和这个有关系吗?为什么前面在说A，后面突然B了? 和结论什么关系?要记住一点，文章是一个整体，你的开篇结尾和中部内容都是应该有关联的。也就是说，在开头提到的，文中应该有展开，同时在结尾有总结。中文里不也要求行文流畅么，这至少得要求逻辑是通顺的。

很多同学都很喜欢写中立观点“A不错，但不够好”，这虽然看起来很客观，但实际上对逻辑的要求非常高，要怎样去组织语言，组织相应的论据论点，非常考验人。有同学想说A事件要瑕疵互见，但是写着写着就乱七八糟，东一块西一块，不知道在讲点什么了。更有厉害的索性冗长的2000来词，讲了个空话。所以建议刚上手的同学，还是选择一边倒，站定脚跟不放松。即便是真的要写中立观点，实际上也都在A和B之间有所偏好。

此外，现在很多人会要求练writing的时候先写提纲。于是同学们们就只写一个观点，然后后面的例子乱用，或者根本没有弄清楚什么是例子。事实上，这种展开，可以是实例，也可以是虚拟的假设。实例中往往分自己的经验和他人的经验。那么怎样的例子有说服力呢?一般来说是：名人名事(知名度大)> 众人众事(样本大)>自己经历(体会深)>他人经历。假设往往不够有说服力，因为很难涉及到每一个变量。但是假设在有的时候可以行得通，就是在很难说清楚步骤和因果关系的时候，用一个假设场景来推导会让文章变得浅显易懂。

所以建议，在刚开始上手写toefl作文的时候，先不要给自己30分钟的压力，先列出提纲(10分钟)，再用30分钟去写，看能写多少。

记住你的gre写作考试举例一定要死死扣住你的观点，不要是和观点打擦边球的。比如我改过之前一个小朋友的文章，她的大观点是电脑对学生来说是有益的，小观点是，可以查到很多资料，然后例子是可以用google查到很多资料，很快捷。ok，乍一看这个没有问题。但是实际上问题大了，用goole查到很多资料，是因为电脑还是internet?这很容易就偏题了，变成internet对学生来说是有益的。例子一定要从论点出发，再回到论点。不要将你的论点发散，后果很可能就是越写越跑题。所以每次写好一篇文章，都看看，论据里的keywords是不是和论点里的keywords一样，论点里的keywords又是不是和题目里的keywords一样。你的keywords可以比大题里的keywords更加narrow，但是千万不要更加广泛。

最后说的逻辑错误，是段落中逻辑比较容易错的。一般是对接续词的运用。如However，thus，therefore，他们决定了上下文之间的关系，但是很多读起来就很奇怪，两者完全不是转折的关系，用了however，就会让人觉得有些无厘头。或者就是上下文之间完全没有逻辑联系，就是两个单句凑在了一起。还是这句话，一篇文章和流水似的，不能断。中间断了那就不叫好文章了。即使前一句与有一句没有接续词，它们在逻辑上也是要能承接的。

GRE作文范文：过度专业化问题

GRE写作题目：

“Academic disciplines have become so specialized in recent years that scholars' ideas reach only a narrow audience. Until scholars can reach a wider audience，their ideas will have little use.”

近些年来，学科已经细化到了相当的程度以至于学者们的理念只影响小范围的人群。除非学者们能拥有影响等大范围的人群，否则他们的理念将几乎毫无用处。

GRE作文范文：

Although academic disciplines have become so specialized in recent years，scholars' ideas can still reach a wide audience by the advantage of the knowledge structure. We can simply put that it is the human beings' knowledge structure that makes it possible for a scholar's ideas in his specialized discipline to reach a much wider audiences who don't necessarily belong to his own discipline.

The reason why I draw this conclusion will be illustrated by recalling the process of social evolution.

During the passed centuries，the social economy has been greatly boosted by the revolutions in science and technology，which in turn increases the width and depth of academic disciplines to solve unencountered and more complex problems arising in the new situations. To solve new problems，we probably need new methods. That will undoubtedly calls for invention of new ideas，which will certainly adds to human beings' knowledge. Thus with the progress of science and technology，more and more knowledge will be added to the old system. A new problem will come： how the newly obtained knowledge is organized. This problem will be clear when we make classification of the new knowledge according to the old knowledge system. If there is content of the newly-get that doesn't properly belong to any sort of the old system，it means a

new discipline will emerge. But could we just assert that the newly formed discipline doesn't possess any relationship with any of the old ones? Certainly not. This is because the new knowledge is obtained through the old methods，which obviously means the new knowledge do have some connections with some old disciplines，otherwise I am quite sure we could not find it!

From the above，we can easily reach the conclusion that every academic discipline has certain relationships with some other ones. The structure of human's knowledge is just like the complexity of a net! And also it is a natural trend that academic disciplines become more and more specialized.

With the depositing and specializing process of knowledge，it causes humans to accommodate themselves to this situation. Because the God gives every person a limited time and energy，it is necessary for a person，who wants to make progress in his discipline，to adjust his knowledge structure to adapt to his research domain，that is to say，to be more devoted to his own research area. On the other hand，if he cares too much for unrelated or less related area，he will probably not be able to bring innovation to his main academic discipline. Simply put，we almost cannot find a man who constructs the Theory of Relativity and in the mean time composes symphony like Mozart's! So we can say every scholar must be more devoted to his own discipline than to others，but a wider knowledge of other disciplines sometimes involuntarily invokes sparks of new ideas.

GRE issue题目及写作思路：掌权者五年让位

题目

"In any profession--business, politics, education, government--those in power should step down after five years. The surest path to success for any enterprise is revitalization through new leadership."

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.

题干分析

在任何领域中----商业、政治、教育、政府----掌权者应该在五年后就让位。这是任何机构获得成功的最好的方式：通过更新领导者而保持活力。

OUTLINE

Limiting the term of leadership is an effective way to prevent corruption and lack of initiatives.

1. When leaders have no fear of losing their power, they tend to abuse their power.

2. A new leadership usually has greater initiative and would ring in new ideas.

3. However, in certain realms such as business it might not be o necessary to limit the term of leadership.

4. Furthermore, new leaders often lack the necessary skill and experience to cope with existing problems; therefore, they need a period of time for adaptation.

GRE作文范文：想法付诸行动的困难性

GRE写作题目：想法付诸行动的困难性

It is easy to welcome innovation and accept new ideas. What most people find difficult, however, is accepting the way these new ideas are put into practice.

拥护革新和接受新想法很简单。但是在大多数人们看来，最困难的是接受把这些新想法付诸实现的方式。

GRE写作范文：

The writer of the issue connotates an ironic phenomenon: though innovation is required in our era and eulogized by most people, application of it is clannished vehemently because of the fear of failure and the possibility of obtained possession and tradition impairing. The author grasps the paradox psychology of most people and pertinently reveals a universal mentality.

As is known that innovation may bring big progress and result in even a revolutionary transition of a society: the elevated efficiency of work, the ameliorated life, the enticing fruit of new technology and so on. Following with innovation of the second industrial revolution, great changes took place and immediately a renewed world unfolded before us with the application of its fruits. Seeing unimaginable profits and the magic power, who (including the society and government) can suppress their agitating desire to restrict development of innovation?

Unfortunately, innovation doesn't always follow the people's will and always acts like an uncontroled horse running in the plain. Worrying about the side-effect, people have to hold their desire back but admire those who are brave enough to taste crabs for the first time. Not everyone possesses the same courage as Biil Gate's, who dare invest on a fresh field and give up the chance of studying in Harvard University, which is the dream of most aggressive young people. Often, pondering what they have already possessed with what they might get from innovation, most people prefer the former to the latter, even content to sacrifice the latter to ensure the integer of the former. For example, a department may enroll those who are not very deft in the work but behave complaisant before higher-ups and deny to those who stick to their innovational opinion obstinately. After all, it is required more to cooperate with others harmoniously and conform to the traditional rules nowadays than to creat a new law according to individual penchant, in any company and corporation.

Maybe, some one argues that, how to cultivate innovation if personality should abdicate to interests of collective? Does the statement above alludes that employees should do nothing but keep silent and follow what the higher-ups dictated, strangling their inspiration to accord to the criterion today? No doubt, such supposition is rediculous. I mean that employees should try to approach their original though to tenet of the collective, not attempt to disobey the existed norm, respect suggestion and supposition of others and circumspect the innovation and then discuss with all the members in the company. That is, responsibility should be taken before the innovation is applied to practice.

Of course, many people don't have the ability that controling their compulsion of carrying their innovation into application. It doesn't lack of people who dare not apply innovation, and people who hold innovational thought are not scarc either, however,those who possess both of the two abilities and are lucky enough to encounter a proper opportunity to release their innovation is very few. The seperation of spirit of application and creation of innovation is the root of the the strange phenomenon, that innovation and new ideas are here and there while the acceptance and combination of them with application is too little to be heard.