投递简历是有注意的要点

如何提高GRE写作审题的技巧呢?一起来看看吧，下面小编就和大家分享，来欣赏一下吧。

GRE写作审题的技巧

一些学生在完成书面表达题时，习惯提笔就写，用母语思维，结果错误百出，写出许多汉语式的句子。因此在新GRE写作的训练中，学生要严格按照一定的模式或者写作步骤来进行。严格按步进行训练，养成良好的写作习惯，才能保证学生写出规范的短文。

步骤一：审题

GRE考试中，审题最基本，最关键，也是最重要的。

一审新GRE写作文章的文体和格式，如书信有求职信、推荐信、回复信等，还有人物介绍、看图说明等等不同要求的写作题材，弄清文章的文体和格式是重要前提。

二审新GRE写作文章内容，先对题中的信息进行筛选，哪些是有用信息，哪些是无用信息，然后把有用信息按一定顺序分小点列出来。

步骤二：遣词造句

1. 根据审题步骤所列出的内容要点，列出文章中可能要用到的关键词语(如动词、短语等)

2. 列出文章中可能用到的句型

3. 列出文章中可能用到的语句间的连接词

4. 按内容要点顺序和所列词语、句型写出单句

步骤三：串句成文

这是新GRE作文完成的关键步骤。不能只是简单翻译内容要点，要作一些适当发挥，使整篇文章既有“骨架”，又有“血肉”。同时应注意以下几点：

1. 注意新GRE作文整体的时态运用，整篇文章的时态应该保持一致性。

2. 注意短文的布局谋篇。恰当的段落划分，前后语句的连贯，句型的选择，连接词的运用，使文章层次分明，语言畅通，连接恰当，最终为文章增色出彩。

步骤四：通读检查

这是完善新GRE写作任务的最后步骤。通读文章的同时，检查前后内容是否连贯，语言是否畅通，段落划分是否分明，句型及连接词的运用是否恰当，时态运用是否一致，标点符号是否规范等等。完成了这些检查并作出修改订正，一定会使全文更加规范、更加自然流畅。

重视新GRE写作训练的多样化

“听、说、读、写”四种技能是相互依赖的，因而应该在GRE考试的复习阶段同时进行训练。学生只有进行大量听和读的训练，才能达到足够的规范的语言材料的输入，才能保证学生进行较好的说和写的语言输出。同时训练的多样化能够让学生更加有信心、有趣味地完成各项训练任务。例如，听过一段对话后，让学生用短文的形式记录下对话的主要内容，学过一篇较长的课文后，让学生对课文进行缩写或口头进行复述等等。进行各种训练的同时，要求学生注意人称、语态、时态、前后逻辑关系等的正确运用。这样既能锻炼学生语言的口头、书面表达能力，又能提高学生篇章结构的组织能力，从而提高写作能力。

以上就是小编整理的关于新GRE写作中审题的重要性。GRE考试的第一步就是审题，同时也是最关键的一步。就像新GRE作文，如果审题出现问题，比如意思理解错误，写作方向理解错误，那考生写出的文章就会跑题，也不可能拿到分数。这一点小编希望大家都能谨记。

GRE issue写作优秀实例：技术进步

题目：

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 naïve 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写作优秀实例：研究经费

题目：

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写作审题的技巧相关文章：

1.BEC商务英语写作考试经验分享