First, sorry for the bug at the end of my JJ. "Where there is a will, there is a way!" (not "will") Second, as for the questions of Siebel, (I'm sorry that I have to answer your questions in English. I prefer Chinese but I can't, since I'm in library now.), I can tell you that I just clicked the answers whichever is closest to me. I hope that I could read even a little of it. But I understood much more the penalties of the questions left unanswered. And I don't think I can answer the rest of your questions to your satisfaction. When I was reading, no matter in the real test or just exercise, I seldom attempted to answer the questions according to the literal form of them. In fact, what I did was just reading the whole passage, trying to have a clue and understand it. Then you can figure out any form of the questions asked no matter how weird the form of them appears. I don't know whether my way of reading works well with you or not. Maybe have a try and then decide which way suits you best. I remembered that questions concerning both topic and details were asked in my test. For the critical reasoning, as I mentioned in my JJ, just follow the line of reasoning. There are items of strenthening, weakening and BFs in my tests. I'm sure there is no new form of CR questions. Just take it easy and do something constructive to nail down the point. In my opinion, or say, as far as I've concerned, I see no point in analyzing the forms of the questions by itself. At least, I'm not good at it. What I was trying to do in my preparation was just--really and surely understand every question I met, though it was far from enough to just answer them right. Oops! It seems that I didn't answer your questions, did I?  Anyway, to dig out what is under the question is much better than to merely study on the form of it. Anyone agrees with me? Last, good luck to everyone here in Chasedream! Really enjoy the days being here as a member of it! Thanks for all your greetings and encouragements.
[此贴子已经被作者于2003-7-15 4:51:13编辑过] |