GRE寫作官方題庫高頻ARGUMENT題目滿分范文分享：roller-skating accidents and protective equipment

　　GRE作文雖然有官方題庫，但題目總數(shù)太多讓考生難以做到全部練一遍，因此看完題目直接看對應的高分范文學習寫法思路就成為了更有效率的做法。下面小編就來為大家提供ARGUMENT題庫高頻作文題目的滿分范文賞析。

　　GRE作文官方題庫ARGUMENT題目：

　　Hospitals indicate that roller-skating accidents are high and that there is a clear need for more protective equipment. Within the group of people reported as having been injured in roller-skating accidents, 75 percent of those who had accidents in streets or parking lots had not been wearing any protective clothing (helmets, knee pads, etc.) or any light-reflecting material (clip-on lights, glow-in-the-dark wrist pads, etc.). Clearly, the statistics indicate that by investing in high-quality protective gear and reflective equipment, roller skaters will greatly reduce their risk of being severely injured in an accident.

　　滿分范文賞析

　　The argument above is well presented and appears to be relatively sound at first glance. Because of the hospital statistics regarding people who arrive after roller-skating accidents, the roller skaters should invest in high-quality protective gear and reflective equipment which will reduce their risk of being severely injured in an accident. Upon closer examination, it is easy to identify the unproven assumptions upon which the argument is based.

　　【此段結構】

　　本段采用了非標準的Argument開頭段結構。即：E– C - F的開頭結構，首句概括原文的概括了原文為了結論所引用的E(evidence)，接下來提出Evidence所支持的C(Conclusion)。。最后尾句中給出開頭段到正文段的過渡句，指出原文在邏輯上存在F(Flaw)。

　　【此段功能】

　　本段作為Argument開頭段，具體功能就在發(fā)起攻擊。首先，概括了原文中的證據(jù)：醫(yī)院關于roller skater受傷情況的統(tǒng)計，接下里提出原文的結論：roller skater應該用high-quality protective gear 和 reflective equipment來減少事故受傷。最后點出原文存在邏輯錯誤，引出后面的分析。

　　To begin with, as mentioned in the argument, there are two distinct kinds of gear—preventative gear, such as light reflecting material, and protective gear, such as helmets. Preventative gear warns others, presumably motorists, of the presence of the roller skater. It works only if the “other” is a responsible and caring individual who will afford the skater the necessary space and attention. Protective gear is intended to reduce the effect of any accident, whether or not it is caused by the skater or by an external force. Protective gear does little, if anything, to prevent accidents but is presumed to reduce the injuries that occur in an accident.

　　【此段結構】

　　本段采用了標準的Argument正文段結構，即：概括第一個邏輯錯誤的錯誤類型和原文犯錯位置，接下來給出合理的理由和他因來反駁原文。

　　【此段功能】

　　本段作為正文第一段，攻擊文章犯的主要邏輯錯誤：錯誤因果。作者提出原文中的結論的結論不夠準確。作者認為，protective gear可以不能阻止accident，但可以減少accident 造成的 injury。而preventive gear才能阻止accident.

　　In addition, the argument is weakened by the fact that it does not take into account the inherent differences between skaters who wear gear and those who do not. It is at least likely that those who wear gear may be generally more responsible and/or safety conscious individuals. The skaters who wear gear may be less likely to cause accidents through careless or dangerous behavior. It may, in fact, be their natural caution and responsibility that keeps them out of the emergency room rather than the gear itself. Also, the statistic above is based entirely on those who are skating in streets and parking lots—relatively dangerous places to skate. People who are generally more safety conscious may choose to skate in safer areas such as parks or back yards.

　　【此段結構】

　　本段采用了標準的Argument正文段結構，即：概括第二個邏輯錯誤的錯誤類型和原文犯錯位置，接下來給出合理的理由和他因來反駁原文。

　　【此段功能】

　　本段作為正文第二段，攻擊文章犯的主要邏輯錯誤：錯誤因果(忽略他因)+調(diào)查類錯誤。作者認為原文忽略了帶防護設備和不帶防護設備的skater內(nèi)在的區(qū)別。作者認為，帶gear的人要更小心謹慎，而且很少會因為careless或dangerous behavior而受傷。進一步，作者提出文章存在調(diào)查類錯誤。文中引用的調(diào)查中參與者是在street和parking lot這樣危險的地方上滑冰的人，而謹慎的人一般在parks或back yards滑冰。

　　Moreover, no evidence is presented to substantiate that safety gear prevents severe injuries. In the likeliest case scenario, if there were a severe accident, safety garments would only reduce the overall severity of the injury sustained. Also, given that skating is a recreational activity that may be primarily engaged in during evenings and weekends when doctors' offices are closed, skater with less severe injuries may be especially likely to come to the emergency room for treatment. So, actually, the number of accidents represented in the emergency room may be misleading.

　　【此段結構】

　　本段采用了標準的Argument正文段結構，即：概括第三個邏輯錯誤的錯誤類型和原文犯錯位置，接下來給出合理的理由和他因來反駁原文。

　　【此段功能】

　　本段作為正文第三段，攻擊文章犯的主要邏輯錯誤：錯誤因果(無理由推斷)+調(diào)查類錯誤。作者認為原文中關于“safety gear可以減少重傷的論斷”的論斷是不合理的。作者提出，safety gear只能減少傷害的嚴重程度。同時，作者認為skating通常在晚上或周末進行，受輕傷的人一般會去急診室，所以原文中引用的關于急診室數(shù)據(jù)的調(diào)查是靠不住的。