剛開始學寫Argument時，總是先學習常見邏輯錯誤，什么hasty/over generalization, false analogy, unwarranted assumption等等,久而久之,我們一看到argument,就將邏輯錯誤套用相應的上述語句.再看下面的模板(源自上海新東方付順賢講義,孫遠一書中也有相似處),你會發(fā)覺中國人幾乎每篇習作或多或少都有其影子.

　　The author concludes that…To support the conclusion, the author reasons that…The author also points out that…However, the argument is flawed for several reasons.

　　In the first place, the author unfairly assumes that…however, the author fails to substantiate this crucial assumption. Absent such evidence, it is just likely that…

　　…

　　In conclusion, this argument is unacceptable as it stands. To better evaluate thee argument, the author must…to strengthen the argument, the author would have to demonstrate that…

　　初學的人(包括我自己)都會驚嘆多好的句子啊,可當我真正將這些運用到文章這種去時卻發(fā)現(xiàn),所有人都這么寫,這不成了八股了嗎?

　　再看看ETS的范文,真是大開眼界,他們的開頭與結(jié)尾也都很有創(chuàng)意。想想也是每個人看到題目的反應都是不同的，最想說的話也不可能都用一種模式表達。此外，其論述也令人心服口服.然而與付順賢或?qū)O遠的模板恰恰相反的是，大多5，6分的文章都沒有在文章中具體指明是何種邏輯錯誤(見上文)，而是以平實的口吻并且站在決策者(或是CEO或是university president)的角度，剖析，假設(shè)，批駁。這種寫法的好處在于能激起閱卷人的共鳴。別說他們了，我在讀文章時也有同感。(我要是這家公司的頭也不會把錢丟在那個項目;我要是住在A鎮(zhèn)的話，也不會同意把這塊地作為B用;等)具體例子可下載滿分網(wǎng)的36篇ETS發(fā)布的范文，這里不再螯述。

　　有人會反對說，付順賢在所有寫作考試中都得6分，他的指導不會錯的。但是，要知道他們的整體寫作水平很高，不象我們用了漂亮的模板而其他內(nèi)容與模板的語氣用詞等格格不入，反而弄巧成拙，顯得有片斷抄襲傾向。而且與我們競爭的主要對手，美國及其他英語國家的學生，英語造詣更沒法比，我們再用字漂亮商在花功夫也無濟于事。還不如順應ETS的初衷，在邏輯錯誤上有獨到見解，提出心悅誠服的理由。這一點，要多學學6分范文。

　　下面的一篇習作，是我站在文章中決策者的角度，設(shè)身處地的尋找了幾個錯誤，不知有沒有達到預期目標。舉例說明：

　　191The following is a letter from a professor at Xanadu College to the college's president.

　　"The development of an extensive computer-based long-distance learning program will enhance the reputation of Xanadu College. This program would allow more students to enroll in our courses, thereby increasing our income from student tuition. Traditional courses could easily be adapted for distance learners, as was shown by the adaptation of two traditional courses for our distance learning trial project last year. Also, by using computer programs and taped lectures, faculty will have fewer classroom obligations and more time to engage in extensive research, thereby enhancing the reputation of Xanadu."

　　看完文章后，我相信大家也會列出以下幾點錯誤或更多：

　　1、建議帶有部門利益，各學科教學方法不同

　　2、試樣成功的部門不能代表全部

　　3、該項目本身有缺陷：增加成本，學費增加，學生負擔重，可能轉(zhuǎn)學

　　4、學校的聲譽有各個因素組成

　　然而怎樣把上述幾點歸類，有機結(jié)合，且看我的文章：

　　The letter to the president of Xanadu College is not sufficiently convincing in terms of the evidence given. Considering that the suggestion was made by a professor from particular department, one may doubt the representativeness of his request. Is it merely a one-sided argument in the interest of his department instead of all or for the sake of the professor himself?

　　To corroborate his argument, the professor cites easy adaptation of students as evidence, but can the students in the trial project belong to the computer science department who is more adapted in software operating.

　　Given that his tryout is well represented, there are many other factors to determine the necessity of its extension to the whole campus. The decision makers should takesintosaccount the disparity among departments in teaching method. Some disciplines require timely instruction of teachers who might impart techniques of sketching for fine art students or rectify the pronunciation of freshmen studying foreign language, for example. For the students in these departments that address a lot of view-exchange between faculty and students, the long-distance learning program might inhibit their progress.

　　What makes the conclusion far from cogent lies in the lack of feedbacks from students, the ultimate user of the program. The professor provides no concrete figures indicating the causal relation between the implementation of the program and higher enrollments together with ensuing more income. It's common sense that new facilities inevitably increase expenditure. This cost raising shown in the school's balance sheet would be transferred to nowhere but to the students' account, thereby intensifying their burden of tuition. What makes mater worse; the remote study project often regards personal desktop or laptop as prerequisite. What if some less affluent students could not afford such a "luxury"? Will they continue to stay rather than move to a cheaper schoolswheresthey could acquire no less knowledge?

　　Another point that the professor stresses is that the more engagement in extensive research seems rationalizes the program. He contends that research could enhance the reputation of Xanadu. However, things could well goes against him. Fore one thing, whether the extra time would really be utilized to conduct research is open to question; for another, the actual study quality under the no-responding teaching mode has yet been proved to be superior to previous methods. Since all courses might routinely be pre- recorded after installing the program, teachers could be less responsive to justify his teaching rate of process according to students' performance. Likewise, students might find their professors less accessible as the office hours in proportion to classroom obligation decrease. All these consequences considered, the suggested program would offset its positive effect, if any, and even debase the school's reputation.

　　The argument for launching the new program could provide more information concerning the student's attitudes. Before assessing its impact on school' s reputation, wider survey and investigation should be conducted in all departments and among students from varied families to ensure its feasibility. After all, it's no small sum for the president to allocate.