GRE写作议论文提炼观点

虽然对于GRE写作来说，评分标准往往更偏向于文章的逻辑思维和整体框架结构，但一篇词汇贫乏，语法单调的文章，很难给考官留下深刻的印象。下面小编就和大家分享　GRE写作词汇语法要点解读，来欣赏一下吧。

GRE写作词汇语法要点解读

首先是GRE写作词汇，写作词汇并不是那些看过脸熟记住意思就行的词汇，而是需要通过实际使用掌握了正确用法的词汇。GRE对于词汇在不同题型中有着不同的要求。数学词汇只要能知道各个专用名词的含义，能够读懂题目就算过关。而语文部分则要求考生具备一定的辨析能力，即深度理解。至于作文词汇的要求则是最高的，也就是正确而合理的使用。

除了学会使用以外，考生对于GRE写作词汇，还需要学会替换。词汇量不足最直接的表现之一就是一个词汇的反复使用，特别是一些形容词。用来用去都是同一个词很容易让人觉得厌烦。因此，对于常用词汇多准备一些可以替换的词就显得很重要了，因为这样做可以使得使得文章语言多样化。而准备替换词，平日积累是必不可少的。积累的最好方法就是阅读。而且要注意避免用词过于简单和通俗，尤其要避免口头语和俚语的使用，相应地增加正式用语，尤其是在逻辑论证中，可以适当使用较为学术的词汇。

GRE写作应避免语法问题

GRE写作中的语法问题同样是困扰许多考生的一大难题。大量使用简单句显然不行，但一些复杂的结构自己又没有把握写对写好，那么语法应该如何提升呢?大家不妨从GRE考试的其他题型中进行借鉴。比如GRE语文部分的填空和等价题就可以帮助考生学会实用、简洁、能够清楚地表达自己的意思的词汇和短语用法。而GRE阅读也可以让大家从中学习一些长难句，并学习作者立论和证明论点的过程，学习其中的过渡段落等等。当然，GRE写作考试的备考复习中，考生在充分利用阅读、逻辑、填空题目进行英语思维转换之后，还要多阅读一些范文，学习别人行文的方法，使之转化成自己的资源，并且多加练习，久而久之写作就不是一件难事了。

GRE写作高分范文：政治领袖

Unlike great thinkers and great artists, the most effective political leaders must often yield to public opinion and abandon principle for the sake of compromise.

不同于伟大的思想家和艺术家，最杰出的政治领袖通常都必须为了妥协而屈从于大众的意见并且放弃原则。

GRE写作范文：

With the respect of history, today’s democratic structure of politic roots deeply in ancient Greek philosophers’ advocation for the respect of public and individual beings,their admiration of the egalitarian, and the eagerness for justice as well as the electoral system specially devised to surpvise those in power. The Renaissance taking place in Europe and the democratic Revolution booted up by Napoleon in France both have produced great thinkers who demand the restriction of the politicians’ power and authority, labeling the end of an era in which politicians could lay their hands on almost every objects of demand. Driven by this trend, the contemporary politicians ostensibly deprived of certain freedom enjoyed by most artists and scientists could no longer behave in the way they would like to. These people, taking the responsibility of the democratic government, are restrained from several aspects. These restriction mainly comes from the public’s desire and different groups’ attitudes.

Although being neglected sometimes, the artists and the scientists still adhere to their own responsibilities, appear undisturbed and display astonishing indifference to the public. Such right is deserved as to artists and scientists, since their insightful thoughts and complicated feeling about life far go beyond what normal people may achieve.Frustrated and deterred by these maestros, publics turn to the other extreme―ignoring these great thinkers and even cursing them as heretics that destroy the current harmony. Again, scientists and artists enjoy the freedom to obliterate the influence laid on them by the mundane world since their interests are just focused on the exploration of the purity of the truth and reciprocating the perfect memory of the past or wonderful visions about future, rather than caring for the public’s benefits.

During such process, they just jump out of the world and objectively describe it, any scorns or restrictions are treated as part of the object they are proceeding, and this is just the hits of their successes. Sometimes, certain behavior that even force the community members away from communicating with these elites are taken as pride in that artists and scientists could employ their free time to continue their interest.

On the other hand, never would the politician own such comparatively broad freedom. As for a politician, the key to success in politics is to gain and maintain political power.Such power comes from certain identification of the public morality with the politician’s private one and the balance of different groups’ benefits and demands. Consequently,the politician’s attitudes, behavior and even the life style are tightly restricted for fear that any diversion from public’s taste may conduce to losing authority which is a real tragedy for a politician. To be an effective political leader excludes the opportunity that a politician may taste the freedom of the same merits as that enjoyed by artists and scientists, the freedom characterd by consciously seperating oneself from commentary and neglecting the demands made by majority. The successful leadership could be achieved by submerging oneself into the public and being sufficiently prepared for sacrificing some freedom for the majority’s benefits.

It is always funny to imagine what will happen to a special politician who could share a scientist or an artist’s freedom. When this politician is bored at the legitimate meeting that is being broadcast by media agencies, he escape to have a chess with his child.Subsequently, critics begin to accumulate the dissatisfaction of the public to attack this leader’s lacking responsibility of the public affairs. Moreover, he may again utilize the freedom to isolate himself from the public pressure by flying out to have a summer holiday. Then, only one thing can be assured, our special politician is deprived of the right to initiate his power which is a symbol of the end of his political life.

The development of technology and recognition of our society require both politicians and insightful thinkers. However, the democratic system of our contemporary world fixes two distinct sets of freedom that could enjoyed by them. While we agree that artists and scientists enjoy the comparatively broad one, we can not expect the political leaders to have opportunity to taste it.

GRE写作高分范文：新创意

GRE写作题目：

Truly innovative ideas do not arise from groups of people, but from individuals.When groups try to be creative, the members force each other to compromise and, as a result, creative ideas tend to be weakened and made more conventional. Most original ideas arise from individuals working alone.

真正有创意的想法并非来自于群体而是来自于个人。当群体试图创新的时候，它的成员之间会被迫相互妥协，结果就是新想法趋于弱化而更接近于传统。大部分新想法都是来自于独立工作的个人。

GRE写作正文：

I agree with the speaker on that truly innovative ideas arise from individuals.Nevertheless, it is unfair to claim unilaterally that the groups tend to weaken creative ideas without thinking of their positive effects on the ideas; it is equally important for groups to examine, modify, or even reject the ideas.

First of all, truly innovative ideas are destined to arise from individuals in that inter-personal thinking process is so far impossible. This is to say, when we sit still and have a cluster of phenomena, theories, statistics and so forth of a certain issue in our mind, we are thinking it over yet with no assistance at all. After all it is impossible for one to intrude into other's mind. Following this principle, innovative ideas spark off during the process of meditation, and they are the produced by one's own effort. It is equally possible, however, for people to be inspired by each other, yet this is by no means assistance in thinking. Clues, hints, inspirations are to remind people of things ignored or taken for granted, but have nothing to do with the process of thinking, that is, to sort out the whole vision and draw conclusion. In one word, innovative ideas arise from meditation, which is solely limited within one body, one brain. Therefore innovative ideas are always the product of individual's work.

Nevertheless, it does not suggest that innovative ideas then have nothing to do with group work, and actually it is just the opposite. When a novel thought is brought up, it is of great importance to fully evaluate its validity, feasibility, and consequences if carried out. This point need no further illustration if we think of a father who resolutely stops his 6-year-old son from playing matches. The kid might have intended to try something new, driven by an innovative idea, yet the whole house might have caught fire also since the boy is incapable of dealing with accidents. This is the same case in academic fields. In a chemistry lab for example, a novel route design of synthesizing a new compound is never carried out without further evaluation. Practical conditions such as equipments, reagents, and economic efficiency, namely yield per cost, are always taken into consideration and sometimes restrict the application of those ideas.

This is to say, innovation is usually good but not always practicable. This claim is fully demonstrated in the political field. Governors of all levels must take holistic views of the situation and make balanced decision in order to avoid mistakes; innovative ideas alone cannot justify their practicability and goodwill to others. For instance, when we look back, the development of plastic industry has resulted in great loss in the global ecosystem. Thus we see the disastrous consequences of carrying out such innovative yet premature ideas.

Hence, it is necessary for the groups to assess, remedy, and conclude the value and use of innovative ideas. All innovative ideas should be brought to discussions. With the clash of skeptical attitude of others to the advocating behavior of the thinker, fallacies made in a haste can be easily found and eliminated, which rectifies, sometimes supplements the idea. I don't agree with the speaker on his/her judgment of group work as compromising, weakening and conventionalizing innovation. Group work promotes those justified and useful innovative ideas and rejects those invalid, sometimes dangerous ones, as we see the case between father and son, in a chemistry lab, in all nations around the world. Only after the group censorship can the innovative ideas be carried out and benefit people, and this is the time when its innovativeness is fully appreciated.

In conclusion, I concede that most original ideas arise from individuals, yet I believe the group effort on these ideas should never be downplayed. It is the group that judge,reject or develop these ideas; this process is equally important with the innovative thinking.