2012GRE作文范文：GRE作文范文大全（110）
GRE写作部分将重点考察考生有针对性地对具体考题做出反应的能力，而非要求考生堆砌泛泛的文字。具体说来，这些重点关注的能力包括：1、 清楚有效地阐明复杂观点；2、 用贴切的事理和事例支撑观点；3、考察/验证他人论点及其相关论证；4、支撑一个有针对性的连贯的讨论；5、控制标准书面英语的各个要素。写作部分将联合考察逻辑推理和分析写作两种技能，并且将加大力度引进那些需要考生做出有针对性的回应的考题，降低考生依赖事前准备（如背诵）的材料的可能性。
Thirdly', even if I were to concede that pollution caused Yosemite's amphibian decline, this
single sample is insufficient to draw any general conclusion about the reason for a worldwide
amphibian decline. It is entirely possible that the cause-and-effect relationships in Yosemite
are not typical of the world in general. Without additional samples from diverse geographic
locations, I cannot accept the author's sweeping generalization about the decline of
amphibians and global pollution.
In sum, the scant evidence the author cites proves nothing about the reason for the general
decline of amphibians worldwide; in fact, this evidence only serves to refute the author's own
argument. To strengthen the argument the author should examine all changes occurring in
Yosemite between 1915 and 1992 and show that air and water pollution have at least
contributed to the park's amphibian decline. In any event, the author must provide data about
amphibian population changes and pollution at diverse geographical locations; and this data
must show a strong inverse correlation between levels of air and water pollution and
amphibian populations worldwide.
Argument 39
The following is a letter to the editor of the Atticus City newspaper.
"Former Mayor Durant owes an apology to the city of Atticus. Both the damage to the River
Bridge, which connects Atticus to Hartley, and the traffic problems we have long experienced
on the bridge were actually caused 20 years ago by Durant. After all, he is the one who
approved the construction of the bridge. If he had approved a wider and better-designed
bridge, on which approximately the same amount of public money would have been spent,
none of the damage or problems would have occurred. Instead, the River Bridge has
deteriorated far more rapidly over the past 20 years than has the much longer Derby Bridge up
the river. Even though the winters have been severe in the past several years, this is no
excuse for the negligence and wastefulness of Durant."
This editorial concludes that Mayor Durant's approval of the River Bridge construction 20
years ago was the cause of current traffic and deterioration problems at the bridge. To support
this conclusion, the editorial points out that a nearby bridge is not experiencing similar
problems. However, the editorial relies on a number of doubtful assumptions and is therefore
unconvincing. 感谢您阅读《GRE作文范文大全（110） 》一文，查字典出国留学网()编辑部希望本文能帮助到您。GRE写作部分将重点考察考生有针对性地对具体考题做出反应的能力，而非要求考生堆砌泛泛的文字。具体说来，这些重点关注的能力包括：1、 清楚有效地阐明复杂观点；2、 用贴切的事理和事例支撑观点；3、考察/验证他人论点及其相关论证；4、支撑一个有针对性的连贯的讨论；5、控制标准书面英语的各个要素。写作部分将联合考察逻辑推理和分析写作两种技能，并且将加大力度引进那些需要考生做出有针对性的回应的考题，降低考生依赖事前准备（如背诵）的材料的可能性。
First of all, since the bridge is 20 years old it is unfair to assign blame for recent traffic
problems and deterioration to Durant or to anyone else involved in the initial bridgebuilding
project. Given this time span it seems reasonable that these problems are due to ordinary
wear and tear rather than to a design defect. Moreover, it is entirely possible that unforeseen
developments during the last 20 years are partly responsible for the deterioration and traffic
problems. For example, perhaps growth in the area's population, and therefore increased
bridge traffic, has been greater than could have been anticipated 20 years ago.
Secondly, the editorial concludes without adequate evidence that if Durant had approved a
184
wider and better-designed bridge none of the current problems would have occurred. This
amounts to fallacious reasoning. Just because a bridge that Durant approved has experienced
certain problems, one cannot reasonably conclude that without that particular bridge the same
problems would not have occurred.
Thirdly, the editorial relies primarily on an analogy between River Bridge and Derby Bridge,
yet provides no evidence that the two bridges are similar in ways that are relevant to the
argument. Even assuming weather conditions are generally the same at both locations, a
variety of other factors might explain why the River Bridge problems have not occurred at the
Derby Bridge. Perhaps relatively few people traverse the Derby Bridge; or perhaps the Derby
Bridge is relatively new; or perhaps the comparatively long span of the Derby Bridge places
less structural stress on any given point. In short, without ruling out other factors that might
explain why similar problems have not occurred at the Derby bridge this argument by analogy
is untenable.
Finally, the argument assumes that mere approval of the proposed bridge is tantamount to
causation of traffic and deterioration problems. But the editorial fails to indicate why Durant
approved the bridge in the first place. It is quite possible, for example, that it was the only
feasible plan, and that Durant had no choice. Moreover, common sense tells me that
deterioration and traffic problems are consequences of poor planning and engineering, and
therefore more likely caused by negligence of engineers and planners than by politicians.
In conclusion, the editorial is unconvincing as it stands. To strengthen the argument, the
editorial's author must provide evidence that conditions which might have contributed to the
bridge's deterioration and to traffic problems were reasonably foreseeable 20 years ago, and
that some other feasible bridge design would have avoided the current problems. In order to
better evaluate the argument, we would need more information about what choices Durant had
at the time, as well as more information about the age of the Derby bridge and about how
heavily that bridge is used compared to the River bridge. 感谢您阅读《GRE作文范文大全（110） 》一文，查字典出国留学网()编辑部希望本文能帮助到您。GRE写作部分将重点考察考生有针对性地对具体考题做出反应的能力，而非要求考生堆砌泛泛的文字。具体说来，这些重点关注的能力包括：1、 清楚有效地阐明复杂观点；2、 用贴切的事理和事例支撑观点；3、考察/验证他人论点及其相关论证；4、支撑一个有针对性的连贯的讨论；5、控制标准书面英语的各个要素。写作部分将联合考察逻辑推理和分析写作两种技能，并且将加大力度引进那些需要考生做出有针对性的回应的考题，降低考生依赖事前准备（如背诵）的材料的可能性。
Argument 40
The following is a letter to the head of the tourism bureau on the island of Tria.
"Erosion of beach sand along the shores of Tria Island is a serious threat to our island and our
tourist industry. In order to stop the erosion, we should charge people for using the beaches.
Although this solution may annoy a few tourists in the short term, it will reduce the number of
people using the beaches and will raise money for replenishing the sand. Replenishing the
sand, as was done to protect buildings on the nearby island of Batia, will help protect buildings
along our shores, thereby reducing these buildings' risk of additional damage from severe
storms. And since the areas along the shore will be more attractive as a result, the beaches
will be preserved and the area's tourist industry will improve over the long term."
This letter's author recommends charging fees for public access to Tria's beaches as an
effective means of raising funds for the purpose of saving Tria's tourist industry. The author
reasons that beach-access fees would reduce the number of beachgoers while providing
revenue for replenishing beach sand needed to protect nearby buildings, thereby enhancing
the area's attractiveness to tourists. To support this argument the author points out that beach
185
sand was replenished on the nearby island of Batia, thereby reducing the risk of storm damage
to bL~ldin~ there. I find the argument unconconvining for several reasons.
First of all, the author makes certain dubious assumptions about the impact of beach access
fees. On the one hand, the author ignores the possibility that charging fees might deter so
many tourists that Tria would be worse off overall. On the other hand, perhaps the vast
majority of Tria's tourists and residents alike would happily pay for beach access, in which
case Tria's beaches would continue to be no less crowded than they are now. Under either
scenario, adopting the author's proposal might harm, rather than benefit, Tria's tourist industry
in the long run.
Secondly, the mere fact that on nearby Batia replenishing beach sand has served to protect
shoreline buildings is scant evidence that Tria would achieve its goals by following Batia's
example. Perhaps the same course of action would be ineffective on Tria due to geological
differences between the two islands. Or perhaps Batia is in a far better position than Tria
financially to replenish its sand on a continual basis. In short, lacking evidence that conditions
on the two islands are relevantly similar, the author cannot convince me on the basis of Batia's
experience that the proposed course of action would be effective in attaining Tria's goals.
Thirdly, even if replenishing Tria's beach sand is financially feasible and would protect
nearby buildings, the author provides no evidence that Tria's tourist industry would be saved
thereby. Perhaps Tria's tourist appeal has little to do with the beach and nearby buildings; for
that matter, perhaps Tria's tourist appeal would be greater with fewer buildings along the coast. 感谢您阅读《GRE作文范文大全（110） 》一文，查字典出国留学网()编辑部希望本文能帮助到您。