gmat写作练习题解析和部分范文Q2

1、一个调查：在过去五年中,看电视的人增加了 15%,同期去博物馆的人增加了相似百分比 _看电视人数多少是导致去博物馆人数多少的直接原因（ or 两者是存在必然的因果关系 的）。 现在,支持电视的企业资金在减少 _所以看电视的人数就减少啦 _（又因为电视人 数多少会导致博物馆参观者人数变化） 所以博物馆人数会下降。（电视需要Y 而博物 馆不需要Y /电视的发展最重要） 因此，一部分财政资金应该分配给电视。 1 C 2 Our task 1 TV M 有没有因果关系没有 2 Y给少了一不会 一TV人数下降一一M人数下降 3 TV 重要性 if 不重要 别人说了什么他这么说有什么意思我怎么看 我为什么

2、这么 4 文化 TV Critique 评论 看” “他这么说有什么问题这个问题会给他的论证带来什么影响 开头段 Bg （原文的前提/结论/假设/论据） Critique “原文作者的结论有问题” 主体段落 x3 提出一个条件，使得原文结论不成立 “If X is true, then CONCLUSION is false.” 1 Critique 2 Advice 【老套路：结论是谁？公共资金拨款为啥公共资金拨款？因为私人资金减少了 私人资金减少了为啥公共资金就得补上因为导致了人数下降 人数下降和钱的关系和产 业发展的关系各位自行脑补 】 强加因果错误假设 M 15% I “同时发生性质相

3、同 =因果关系” Since the two situation took place at the same period and increased by a similar amount, therefore the TV industry might be the major cause of M visitor variability. P Actually this cause-effect relationship is unconvincing. E 【论据】 15% 基数削弱 TV 800 M 8000 7200 不是因为 TV 而去 M 电视的基础 作用就消失了，所以 PF

4、 不需要给 TV 【假设】 TV 人数变化的因素为 A ； M 人数变化因素为 B. M Y减少一一M人数下降。 I Y减少TV人数会减少一一【MIPE1】M人数会减少 P 无因果 /这样说是不对的 E Y减少一X TV人数会减少 3 M 增加 TV 财政资金 I 作者在假设 TV 拨款增加 不会影响其他文化部门 E TV 钱增加【 M MOVIE ART 拨款会减少， 维护费用减少 设施就烂了 人数还会下 降影响文化产业的长远发展】方案目光。 be is In the memorandum, the city council expressed concerns over the shrin

5、k on TV art program viewers and therefore declining culture industries and suggested that city funds should reallocated to TV programs. The advice was supported by two factors: 1. TV was the source of variability to other sectors such as museum, and 2. Corporate funding for TV program decreasing. Th

6、ough the article sounds persuasive, a few question need to be affirmed before the plan was taken out. The first question is the correlative variability between TV audiences and M visitors. of The author simply gave out a poll showing that during the past five years, the number of people who watch pu

7、blic art programs on TV increased by 15%, and at the same time, the number museum visitors boosted by a similar percentage. According to the inadequate information presented by the argument, we could only assume that the author has taken the increasing rate in TV audiences for granted as the cause o

8、f visitors. This cause-effect relationship is obviously disqualified. Since we do not have access to the real number of additional audiences or tourists, we can presume that if the number of increasing visitors to M was much bigger than that of TV viewers, say 8000 to 800, there would be numerous ne

9、w visitors not having watched TV programs before, therefore the core effect of TV programs can be damaged, and the fund raising plan would be further useless. M 15% 对 15% I 作者暗示“ TV 和 M 有因果关系” P 数据不充分 / 强加因果 E TV 和 M 没有因果关系【 800VS8000 】【影响看电视人数变化的因素是X 而影响去博 物馆的人数因素 Y】 $不需要给 TV The second concern wou

10、ld be whether a decreasing Corporate funding would reduce the number of TV audiences and therefore M visitors. Even we admit that public TV is the very significant sector of local cultural industry, we can still dig out a serious problem: if the number of TV viewers did not fall due to the shrinking

11、 corporate support, it would cause no negative effect over any other parts of the industry such as museums, therefore once again the city funds would be unnecessary to be devoted to TV. It is possible that the cut funding is essentially redundant for TV and the companies would like to put them into

12、better use since these funds was originally beyond the demand for TV art shows. The final and most important question would be the potential consequence of this reallocation plan. The author fail to clarify whether the portion of fund over other cultural sectors would be abased in accordance with th

13、e redistribution campaign on TV . P 作者忽略了新的拨款会造成的远期影响 Therefore we can consider the council took for granted that those sectors are definitely OK with the possible cut down on their own outlays. I 作者认为削减其他部门 不会有影响 However, if those sectors suffer from this possible shrink on public fundings and brin

14、g overall damage on local cultural industry, even the outstanding TV audience increase would not do any help to the situation. If the council members simply draw this conclusion without any backup plans on the issue, the blueprint would be sh ort-sighted. The author has concluded that The author has suggested that In conclusion, the memorandum still have to make further statement over the concerns we expressed above before it was implemented. If the a