ChaseDream
搜索
123下一页
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 3297|回复: 20
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[原始] 北美12月13号上午

[精华] [复制链接]
跳转到指定楼层
楼主
发表于 2012-12-14 02:40:37 | 只看该作者 回帖奖励 |倒序浏览 |阅读模式
写作:讲的是在Elm City开了一家shopping mall,但是这家mall开了以后为整个城市带来了很多负面影响,比如:number of local stores closed, parking shortage, arrests for crime等等,所以可以根据这些原因总结出政府不应再允许在Elm city开shopping mall。
数学:有机经讨论帖中第27题,36题,第1题,第2题,等等,挺多机经里面得,所以感觉特别有帮助,特别感谢之前提供机经得同学。
阅读:阅读前三篇都是短得,最后一篇较长,讲的是archeologist在near east和mesopetamia两个地方挖掘东西,第一段background,第二段主要讲mesopetamia,第三段讲near east,有好多细节题,一定要仔细读读。
语法:有rather than,instead of,原句是rather than,感觉很不确定,还考了prevent from,as/like的用法
IR;普遍较简单,但是第一道题问determine x要用到的最少的条件的数量,条件有 x大于等于400,小于等于700;x的prime factor有两个;x是perfect square;还有另外两个条件记不得了。。。

希望对大家能有一点点帮助,大家都好运!
收藏收藏1 收藏收藏1
沙发
发表于 2012-12-14 02:58:43 | 只看该作者
悦读考古来啦~~美索不达米亚那个是说雕塑的么??

Figurine

V1
首段是指在M美索不达米亚地区和NE中东地区都发现了female figurineNE这个地方的figuretypically质量差(plain),小,compared to that of M地区的figurineMfigurine更加精细一点(有题),可能和美索不达米亚的塑像与陶器技术(ceramic)同时兴起有关,这句的原话大概是Figurines from M are discovered to be at the advent of pottery techniques while figurines from Near East are found before pre-ceramic era.
第二段第一句提出中心句:The most important question is whether such figures represent female or Gods然后说M的雕像头上都有elaborate head decorate。主要是由于宗教原因,他们对deity,特别是goddness的崇拜导致的,美索不达米亚雕像往往具有标志社会等级等现实因素的特征。于是专家推测那些雕像是代表女神(goddess),但是又有专家认为不能只从雕像外表的单调性(simple)就推测其为女神,因为在M这个地区里,雕像的某个特质随着地域的不同也有所改变。这一段题比较多。
第三段最长, NEfigurine特点,说NEfigurine是否为某位女神:可能性甚小,其与神庙figurine相比,不同figurine间的特异性较小,如果是goddess的话应该是更generic的形象,但是这些陶人有很detail的地方,比如头饰啊,一些工具和动物,搭配在一起的 (有问题,问goddess应该是什么样的) ,所以该地的figurine可能是一个泛义的女神或者女性的形象。结论是ME对女性神袛的崇拜并不share


V2
第一段:中东地区的塑像一般偏小,而美索不达米亚雕像相对较好,可能和美索不达米亚的塑像与陶器技术同时兴起有关
第二段:美索不达米亚地区的塑像形象是否为某位女神:可能性已被研究者们排除,因为美索不达米亚雕像往往具有标志社会等级等现实因素的特征
第三段:中东地区塑像是否为某位女神:可能性甚小,其与神庙雕像相比,不同塑像间的特异性较小,可能是一个泛义的女神或者女性的形象
V3
就是第一段说科学家发现两种figurine,一个在M一个在E发现的。EM的朴素简单鲜有修饰,科学家推断是ME晚,然后说Mexistence of pottery之后才开始出现的(有考题,问从第一段能Infer出神马,我选的在E时期是木有M)。而Epre-ceramic时期就有了,在出现了pottery之后,E这种制作figurine的方法在有些地方还是在用。
第二段说科学家早就发现M的那种figurine不是某个godness或者deity。因为这些figurine的妇女们常带有各种ornaments,更像是实际的social lifefigure。并且这些figurine也不是deity,因为那时候的deity总是人和动物的结合体的样子,带着面具啥的。。。后来又说比起godness,这些figurine总是come in different figures这类意思,就是各种figurine长得不太一样(这里有题,说从文中可知godness的雕塑应该是啥样的,定位在这儿,我选的是有比较统一的形态)。
第三段说Efigurine也不是godness,它们比较原始,是women或者womenhood的直接象征。后来说它们也不是deity,具体怎么叙述的忘了,没考题。最后又说这些Efigurine也不是代表godness。。。
然后有道题说这整篇文章干嘛呢,我选的是讨论对比MEfigurine是不是godness


考题:
1.      prior to the pottery techniques之前M地的figurine author suggests了什么?/ They are not found before the advent of pottery techniques
我最后选了M地在pottery techniques之前没有figurine/没有found M地的fugurine prior to pottery(大致是)(760)/ They are not found before the advent of pottery techniques.
定位在文章第一段,文章中并没有直接给出,只有一句说M地的figurine corresponds with Mpottery techniques,N地的figurine则出现在pottery techniques之前
2.      问的是那些认为M(还是N地?真的记不清了。。)fugurine并不是deity的专家会觉得以下哪项是正确的?
我选的是:当时的工匠对deity有的统一的雕刻方法(大致是这个意思)(760)
3.      问如果雕像是deity的话会有什么特征?
我选的是有garb什么的 (710)
4.      如果雕像是deity(女神)/goddess的话会有什么特征?
A.    趋向一致
B.    Not womanhood
我选的是2740V38/ 确认该答案,有关women hood的那句可在文中找到原话(740 确认)
5.      中东娃娃有问女神像有什么特点
朴素,有许多装饰 (710)
6.      还一题女神像通常有什么装饰/问题:专家原先如何认定女神雕像的特质?
头顶的decoration, mask... (710) /我选的是会有个什么东西,就是文中讲mask那句前面那个单词(不好意思忘了)
7.      N地雕像不是女神像是由下面哪像说明的?
答案在最后,N地雕像different from one to another. (700+)
8.      还有一题问为什么说Me这个地方的雕像不是deity?
我选的是因为跟其他地方比较,各个地方不同,所以不是神像,落实到文章的最后一段,最后一句话。
9.      有考题,问从第一段能Infer出神马
我选的在E时期是木有M
然后有道题说这整篇文章干嘛呢,我选的是讨论对比MEfigurine是不是godness/我选的是确定这些小人是不是女神像

板凳
发表于 2012-12-14 03:00:50 | 只看该作者
请问悦读和逻辑还记得别的么~~提供一下关键字和话题即可,谢谢吖!!
地板
发表于 2012-12-14 03:04:36 | 只看该作者
LZ还遇见哪篇文章了呀
5#
发表于 2012-12-14 03:14:47 | 只看该作者
我也北美今天上午考的,虽然考的不怎样,但是接着回忆一些吧:
写作:讲成本会随着效率的提高而降低,一家肉食品加工厂Olympic要依靠这个经验最小化成本,最大化利润,因为在the color film processing这个行业里面洗照片的成本和效率就提高了很多。
IR: 做IR的时候,一片凌乱,但是我觉得阅读能力强的同学,做IR基本没什么问题,因为只要扛着压力读懂了题目,基本就没什么问题。
数学:没看寂静,其余记得的都是些简单的题,估计帮助也不大。
最后一道题:讲n是由4个质数组成的乘积,4个质数中有两个相等,问能被n整除的正整数有多少个,包括1与n.
有好几个选项4,5,9,12,16,我算出来是11个,但是没这个选项,所以选了12.
阅读:1、长的那篇是讲月球的形成原理的,第一个问题问有什么东西是反对同源说的。2、英国零售业的特色(与美国市场和西欧市场比较)。3、还有一篇讲T这个地方突然就不行了,为什么,第一段讲是干旱,然后引发的农作物减产,第二段讲其实干旱还不是唯一的原因,因为在多少年前T也干旱过,干旱只是诱发T崩溃的一个因素,在此之前T的经济和政治就不行了,因为一个正在修的大型综合体停建了,还有王室的房子和宫殿也被摧毁了,最后m也脱离了T的殖民统治独立了。4、居然悲催的忘记了。
语法与逻辑:回忆起来的都是片段,没有完整的。我也没有看过寂静,不知道是不是寂静里面的,估计帮助也不大。

CD是我gmat的老师,不管考试成绩怎样,我都很感谢它。
接着发一点狗狗,也希望对大家有帮助。
最后一句:good luck!
6#
发表于 2012-12-14 03:20:24 | 只看该作者
hnlytiantian 麻烦看看 这个和原文一样吗?有参考价值吗

During the last two centuries, astronomers developed three different hypotheses for the origin of Earth’s moon, but these traditional ideas have failed to survive comparison with the evidence. A relatively new theory proposed in the 1970s may hold the answer. You can begin by testing the three unsuccessful theories against the evidence to see why they failed.
The first of the three traditional theories, the fission hypothesis, supposes that the moon formed by the fission of Earth. If the young Earth spun fast enough, tides raised by the sun might break into two parts. If this separation occurred after Earth differentiated, the moon would have formed from crust material, which would explain the moon’s low density. But the fission theory has problems. No one knows why the young Earth should have spun so fast, nearly ten times faster than today, nor where all that angular momentum went after the fission. In addition, the moon’s orbit is not in the plane of Earth’s equator, as it would be if it had formed by fission.
The second traditional theory is the condensation (or double-planet) hypothesis. It supposes that Earth and the moon condensed as a double planet from the same cloud of material. However, if they formed form the same material, they should have the same chemical composition and density, which they don’t. The moon is very poor in certain heavy elements like iron and titanium, and in volatiles such as water vapor and sodium. Yet the moon contains almost exactly the same rations of oxygen isotopes as does Earth’s mantle. The condensation theory cannot explain these compositional differences.
The third theory is the capture hypothesis. It supposes that the moon formed somewhere else and was later captured by Earth. If the moon formed inside the orbit of Mercury, the heat would have prevented the condensation of solid metallic grains, and only high-melting-point metal oxides could have solidified. According to the theory, a later encounter with Mercury could have “kicked” the moon out to Earth. The capture theory was never popular because it requires highly unlikely events involving interactions with Mercury and Earth to move the moon from place to place. Scientists are always suspicious of explanations that require a chain of unlikely coincidences. Also, on encountering Earth, the moon would have been moving so rapidly that Earth’s gravity would have unable to capture it without ripping the moon to fragments through tidal forces.
Until recently, astronomers were left with no acceptable theory to explain the origin of the moon, and they occasionally joked that the moon could not exist. But during the 1970s, planetary astronomers developed a new theory that combines the best aspect of the fission hypothesis and the capture hypothesis.
The large-impact theory supposes that the moon formed from debris ejected into a disk around Earth by the impact of a large body. The impacting body may have been twice as large as Mars. In fact, instead of saying that Earth was hit by a large body, it may be more nearly correct to say that Earth and the moon resulted from the collision and merger of two very large planetesimals. The resulting large body became Earth, and the ejected debris formed the moon. Such an impact would have melted the proto-Earth, and the material falling together to form the moon would have been heated hot enough to melt. This theory fits well with the evidence from moon rocks that show the moon formed as a sea of magma.
This theory would explain other things. The collision must have occurred at a steep angle to eject enough matter to make the moon. The objects could not have collided head-on. A glancing collision would have spun the material rapidly enough to explain the observed angular momentum in the Earth-moon system. And if the two colliding planetesimals had already differentiated, the ejected material would be mostly iron-poor mantles and crust. Calculations show that the iron core of the impacting body could have fallen into the larger body that became Earth. This would explain why the moon is so poor in iron and why the abundances of other elements are so similar to those in Earth’s mantle. Finally, the material that eventually became the moon would have remained in a disk long enough for volatile elements, which the moon lacks, to be lost to space.
The moon may be the result of a giant impact. Until recently, astronomers have been reluctant to consider such catastrophic events, but a number of lines of evidence suggest that some planes may have been affected by giant impacts.

Question: Where did the Moon come from?
The Fission Theory: This theory proposes that the Moon was once part of the Earth and somehow separated from the Earth early in the history of the solar system. The present Pacific Ocean basin is the most popular site for the part of the Earth from which the Moon came. This theory was thought possible since the Moon's composition resembles that of the Earth's mantle and a rapidly spinning Earth could have cast off the Moon from its outer layers. However, the present-day Earth-Moon system should contain "fossil evidence" of this rapid spin and it does not. Also, this hypothesis does not have a natural explanation for the extra baking the lunar material has received.
The Capture Theory: This theory proposes that the Moon was formed somewhere else in the solar system, and was later captured by the gravitational field of the Earth. The Moon's different chemical composition could be explained if it formed elsewhere in the solar system, however, capture into the Moon's present orbit is very improbable. Something would have to slow it down by just the right amount at just the right time, and scientists are reluctant to believe in such "fine tuning". Also, this hypothesis does not have a natural explanation for the extra baking the lunar material has received.
The Condensation Theory: This theory proposes that the Moon and the Earth condensed individually from the nebula that formed the solar system, with the Moon formed in orbit around the Earth. However, if the Moon formed in the vicinity of the Earth it should have nearly the same composition. Specifically, it should possess a significant iron core, and it does not. Also, this hypothesis does not have a natural explanation for the extra baking the lunar material has received.
There is one theory which remains to be discussed, and it is widely accepted today.
The Giant Impactor Theory (sometimes called The Ejected Ring Theory): This theory proposes that a planetesimal (or small planet) the size of Mars struck the Earth just after the formation of the solar system, ejecting large volumes of heated material from the outer layers of both objects. A disk of orbiting material was formed, and this matter eventually stuck together to form the Moon in orbit around the Earth. This theory can explain why the Moon is made mostly of rock and how the rock was excessively heated. Furthermore, we see evidence in many places in the solar system that such collisions were common late in the formative stages of the solar system. This theory is discussed further below.
7#
发表于 2012-12-14 03:21:07 | 只看该作者
我也北美今天上午考的,虽然考的不怎样,但是接着回忆一些吧:
写作:讲成本会随着效率的提高而降低,一家肉食品加工厂Olympic要依靠这个经验最小化成本,最大化利润,因为在the color film processing这个行业里面洗照片的成本和效率就提高了很多。
IR: 做IR的时候,一片凌乱,但是我觉得阅读能力强的同学,做IR基本没什么问题,因为只要扛着压力读懂了题目,基本就没什么问题。
数学:没看寂静,其余记得的都是些简单的题,估计帮助也不大。
最后一道题:讲n是由4个质数组成的乘积,4个质数中有两个相等,问能被n整除的正整数有多少个,包括1与n.
有好几个选项4,5,9,12,16,我算出来是11个,但是没这个选项,所以选了12.
阅读:1、长的那篇是讲月球的形成原理的,第一个问题问有什么东西是反对同源说的。2、英国零售业的特色(与美国市场和西欧市场比较)。3、还有一篇讲T这个地方突然就不行了,为什么,第一段讲是干旱,然后引发的农作物减产,第二段讲其实干旱还不是唯一的原因,因为在多少年前T也干旱过,干旱只是诱发T崩溃的一个因素,在此之前T的经济和政治就不行了,因为一个正在修的大型综合体停建了,还有王室的房子和宫殿也被摧毁了,最后m也脱离了T的殖民统治独立了。4、居然悲催的忘记了。
语法与逻辑:回忆起来的都是片段,没有完整的。我也没有看过寂静,不知道是不是寂静里面的,估计帮助也不大。

CD是我gmat的老师,不管考试成绩怎样,我都很感谢它。
接着发一点狗狗,也希望对大家有帮助。
最后一句:good luck!
-- by 会员 hnlytiantian (2012/12/14 3:14:47)

谢谢放狗呀~~~麻烦看看英国零售业这篇呗~~谢啦!!

*37. 英国西欧 美国的市场策略


一、主旨
Britishretailing market 与美国和欧洲对比

二、文章大意
各个政府政策对retailer market有很大影响
美国市场开放的比较早retailer market发展比较好。进入壁垒小融资方便,retailer在美国竞争大,利润空间极小。
说英国零售业和美国的不一样,和欧洲其他国家也不一样。到了70年代,英国也开放了市场。人口增长,没有美国的有竞争大。retailer market发展迅速(boost),比欧洲其他国家赚钱多(利润率具欧洲最高)。以前原因:政府管制少,而且管理好(有效地管理和便宜的人力资源),人力成本低。进入壁垒比较大,所以边际收益margin profits大。,但是管理效率低。 西欧的管理效率高(德国最高)。最后说现在英国retailer market市场之所以这么好的原因是因为英国房租比较高,导致进入retailer market的门槛比较高。小商户付不起入市费用,新企业要进入这个行业有障碍了。

三、题目
Q1. 主旨题
比较英国和西欧美国的零售市场

Q2. 问英国市场为什么more like EURO than USA
政府政策的管理影响比较大。

Q3.
细节题:英国有啥不一样呢
我选的管理方式好。

Q4.
有一题说在1995年英国跟西欧的零售业有什么相似之处?
我选"法规严格"
定位点在说英国在80年代法规松绑后面有括号now reversed

Q5.
英国的retailer收益高的原因
因为英国很少retailer可以付得起高的房租

狗主解释:我的理解是竞争者少,在文中最后一段定位

Q6. 英国和西欧利润高的原因有一个不同点
雪菲觉得答案应该表明“管理效率”的不同

Q7. 文章里有括号的一句话出了题,意思是以前英国没有管制,不过现在有了。/有道题是关于文章年代的。文章里还有个括号说now 政府 regulation 恢复了,这里定位一个考题的,cder请留意
8#
发表于 2012-12-14 03:22:09 | 只看该作者
逻辑可以提供一些关键词啊话题什么的~~我们就可以考古啦!!
9#
发表于 2012-12-14 03:27:20 | 只看该作者
这篇麻烦 确认一下第二段最后的部分 谢谢啦~~~

*19. Tiwanaku的衰落

一、段落大意:

P1.这个Tiwanaku(部落/城市?求补充)尽管繁衍了400多年,还是在AD1100年的时候衰落(collapse)了,有砖家认为是1050年的一场drought造成的。这个drought导致了水平面下降,然后就影响了agriculture pattern,进而影响了raised land。因为该部落依赖raise lake来灌溉,而不是rain lake,干旱对该地的农业影响很大。且raising lake导致人口聚集,而干旱后人口开始分散了。有很多证据证明,如lake的水位下降,让raised land的农作物更难存活,发现一些人群分布的变化,还有AD1050的时候,出现了高纬度的husbandry(大概是证明农业衰退吧), 还有canalxx等的建设多了,证明了农业的衰退。



P2. 光是drought不能造成这么大影响,因为早在650-700年的时候,T城市也遇到过drought,之后不是好好的,还更繁荣了嘛。干旱只是诱发T崩溃的一个因素,在此之前T的经济和政治就不行了。真正的原因是当时的统治阶级的问题,使得T城市的经济和政治都非常不稳固。这个时候遇到drought一激发,就collapse了。所以,1100年以前城市的衰落还有别的原因,就是政治和经济的影响说是那个国家的领导人不会治理,政治上的问题,说那段时间当地的各种机构都在减少什么的,领导人Hold不住了,一个正在修的大型综合体停建了,还有王室的房子和宫殿也被摧毁了,最后m也脱离了T的殖民统治独立了。/最后说在那个国家灭亡之前,已经有一个什么小国家独立出来了/最后举了个例子说xx脱离在干旱开始之前就脱离了这个国家的统治(这里有题,问这个例子说明了什么)



二、题目:

Q1. 主旨题

就是question drought 说明political 是 real reason (本月V29 狗主)



Q2. 问了最后一句高亮问作用,就是有个国家独立出来了那一句。

我好像选了说明drought is not the direct reason for which T collapsed.(not 100% sure)(本月750 狗主)

就是否认drought是国家衰落的原因(本月V29 狗主)



Q3. 问AD1050的时候有什么现象证明了农业的衰退?



Q4. 最后举了个例子说xx脱离在干旱开始之前就脱离了这个国家的统治, 问这个例子说明了什么?



Q5.说作者INFER了AD1050,发生了什么?



Q6. 细节题:还有一个定位第一段 具体是啥我记不清楚但是选的是那边的居民去更高纬度放牧 很确定



三、备注

有狗主找到一个连接可以做背景资料好好阅读一下
http://faculty.washington.edu/stevehar/Williams%20Disaster.pdf


10#
发表于 2012-12-14 03:29:38 | 只看该作者
狗主狗主~~ 有没有逻辑狗呀~~ 如果回忆起来麻烦回复一下哟~~ 感激不尽~
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

Mark一下! 看一下! 顶楼主! 感谢分享! 快速回复:

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-6-7 11:29
京公网安备11010202008513号 京ICP证101109号 京ICP备12012021号

ChaseDream 论坛

© 2003-2025 ChaseDream.com. All Rights Reserved.

返回顶部