【真题做法讲解】GMAT语法题中关于逻辑推理方面的比较题
- 2016年05月24日14:53 来源:小站教育作者:orangejojo
- 参与(2) 阅读(4702)
GMAT语法SC题虽然主要考察的是语法,但作为GMAT考试的一部分,也贯彻了考试对于考生逻辑推理能力测试的主题,不少语法难题同样需要考生具备一定的逻辑推理分析能力才能顺利完成解答。比如语法题中比较常见的比较题就常常要用到一些逻辑推理。下面小编就通过一些实例讲解来为大家做具体分析。GMAT5大实用语法高分技巧介绍
为何GMAT语法比较题需要逻辑推理?
为什么说GMAT语法中的比较题会需要逻辑推理呢?这是因为比较题的比较对象最容易因为一些故意而为的句子而出现模棱两可的含义。以下面两个句子为例:
1. Chris runs faster than Mike, but Mike walks as fast as Chris.
2. Mike likes opera more than Chris.
第一句比较的对象从头到尾都是Chris和Mike,虽然比较的分别是跑步和走路这两个动作,但比较对象并没有发生变化。
而在第二句中,比较对象就出现了歧义。这句话既可以看成Mike比起喜欢Chris来更喜欢歌剧(比较对象是Chris和歌剧),又可以看成Mike比Chris更喜欢歌剧(比较对象是Mike和Chris)。这种模糊的句式,其本身在语法上是不存在任何错误的,如果出现在了GMAT语法题目中,考生就需要根据上下文其它内容来进行逻辑推理,才能确定正确的比较对象并找出正确选项。所以,GMAT语法比较题对于考生的逻辑推理能力是有一定要求的。秒解GMAT语法难题这些技巧要掌握
真题实例讲解比较题逻辑推理思路
实例1:
For parts of his life, Burroughs, a writer in self-imposed exile, and in a similar way, Joyce lived a generation earlier, leaving Ireland and choosing to write about his homeland from a distance.
(A) Burroughs, a writer in self-imposed exile, and in a similar way, Joyce lived a generation earlier, leaving Ireland and choosing
(B) Burroughs was a writer in self-imposed exile, close to the way that Joyce lived a generation earlier, leaving Ireland and choosing
(C) Burroughs was a writer in self-imposed exile, somewhat as Joyce, who lived a generation earlier, left Ireland and chose
(D) Burroughs was a writer in self-imposed exile; a generation earlier, Joyce was a similar writer in self-imposed exile, leaving Ireland to choose
(E) a writer in self-imposed exile, Burroughs was similar to Joyce a generation earlier, leaving Ireland and choosing
分析:
选项A存在比较上的逻辑错误。主要是比较先后的错误,从句意上应该是Burroughs像Joyce,而不是Joyce像Burroughs,就好比是你像你爸爸,而不是你爸爸像你的错误。
选项B同样存在对比逻辑错误。比较对象变成了Burroughs和the way that Joycy lived a generation earlier,前者是人,后者是生活方式,用人和生活方式做比较不符合逻辑,所以错误。
选项C为正确选项,无论从语法还是逻辑上都没有问题。把Burroughs和Joyce两位流亡作家相比较,意思明确清晰。
选项D整个改变了句子的原意。句子本来是要比较两位作家,原句中并没有提到或者暗示两者在写作风格上存在相似之处。而D却通过similar writer把这种意思表达了出来。两位作家相似在他们都是流亡作家,并不是写作风格。所以选项D错误。
选项E给人的感觉是Burroughs想Joyce那样离开了爱尔兰,这并不符合原句本身的含义,所以也是错误的。
实例2:
Many acids corrode many metals, such as iron and copper, and oxygen does the same thing to them.
(A) Many acids corrode many metals, such as iron and copper, and oxygen itself does the same thing to them.
(B) Like many acids, oxygen itself has a corrosive effect on many metals, such as iron and copper
(C) Oxygen is like many acids in its ability to generate corrosive effect on many metals, such as and copper.
(D) Many metals, such as iron and copper, are corroded by oxygen itself; similarly, they are corroded by many acids.
(E) Corroding many metals, such as iron and copper, is a property of many acids, and, like these acids, of oxygen itself.
分析:
选项A即原句本身语意不清,特别是does the same thing to them,可以说是非常口语化且不严谨的表达方式,在GMAT考试中这样的表达方式往往直接就代表了不正确。
选项B比较非常清晰,把氧气和许多种酸做对比,句子逻辑结构合理,语法也不存在错误。所以是正确选项。
选项C虽然语法上不存在问题,但在语义表达和逻辑上却过于累赘,in its ability to generate corrosive effects,那么啰嗦的一段话完全可以用can corrode来直接代替。所以选项C错误。
选项D使用了被动结构,首先,被动在GMAT考试中是需要慎用的一种结构,许多语法改错题的选项如果涉及到被动那么十有八九是错误的。其次,在这句话中,修辞方面也存在一定问题。从原句意思来看,句子想要表达出的潜台词应该是酸能腐蚀金属众所周知,而氧气能腐蚀金属可就有点出乎意料了。一般正常的表达类似概念的语序都是先把众所周知的事实放在前面,然后转折讲没想到的部分。而D的语序却是把出乎意料的部分放在了前面,所以修辞上是有瑕疵的。
选项E在句意表达和语序上简直一塌糊涂。把动作强行变成动名词来做主语,让整个句子都变得生硬牵强,无论从语法结构角度还是阅读舒适度来说都是非常糟糕的做法。所以选项E错误。
通过上面两个例子,相信大家都可以看出,学会逻辑推理对于解读GMAT语法比较题来说有多么重要。考生需要始终明确的一点是,无论GMAT考试中不同题型考察的考点和能力是什么,作为GMAT考试主旨的逻辑推理能力,才是真正贯穿整个考试的核心所在。大家不管解答什么题目,都必须学会通过逻辑推理来分析解题。
(小站GMAT频道gmat.zhan.com,转载请以超链接形式标注本文出处,并附上此申明,否则将追究法律责任。)