ChaseDream
搜索
返回列表 发新帖
查看: 1608|回复: 8
打印 上一主题 下一主题

[求助]对文章套路有点疑惑,大家帮忙看看

[复制链接]
#
匿名  发表于 1970-1-1 08:00:00
9#
发表于 2007-4-29 13:01:00 | 只看该作者
觉得还是注意文章的:主题,论点,作者态度,对解题更重要;有些套路不明显的就别管是什么套路了;
8#
发表于 2007-4-28 21:23:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用pangpangshin在2007-4-28 11:27:00的发言:

谢谢斑竹 可是我还是不明白结论解释 和特别套路的TS是什么

我的意思就是不用纠缠怎么称呼这些东西的

7#
 楼主| 发表于 2007-4-28 11:38:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用sunpaopao在2007-4-28 6:27:00的发言:

我也很困惑呢?下面这个我就不知道该算哪个套路?

Prior to 1975, union efforts to organize public-sector clerical workers, most of whom are women, were somewhat limited. The factors favoring unionization drives seem to have been either the presence of large numbers of workers, as in New York City, to make it worth the effort, or the concentration of small numbers in one or two locations, such as a hospital, to make it relatively easy. Receptivity to unionization on the workers’ part was also a consideration, but when there were large numbers involved or the clerical workers were the only unorganized group in a jurisdiction, the multi-occupational unions would often try to organize them regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity. The strategic reasoning was based, first, on the concern that politicians and administrators might play off (to set in opposition for one's own gain从中渔利;在…之间挑拨离间) unionized against non-unionized workers, and, second, on the conviction that a fully unionized public work force meant power, both at the bargaining table and in the legislature. In localities where clerical workers were few in number, were scattered in several workplaces, and expressed no interest in being organized, unions more often than not ignored them in the pre-1975 period.

But since the mid-1970’s, a different strategy has emerged. In 1977, 34 percent of government clerical workers were represented by a labor organization, compared with 46 percent of government professionals, 44 percent of government blue-collar workers, and 41 percent of government service workers. Since then, however, the biggest increases in public-sector unionization have been among clerical workers. Between 1977 and 1980, the number of unionized government workers in blue-collar and service occupations increased only about 1.5 percent, while in the white-collar occupations the increase was 20 percent and among clerical workers in particular, the increase was 22 percent.

What accounts for this upsurge in unionization among clerical workers? First, more women have entered the work force in the past few years, and more of them plan to remain working until retirement age. Consequently, they are probably more concerned than their predecessors were about job security and economic benefits. Also, the women’s movement has succeeded in legitimizing the economic and political activism of women on their own behalf, thereby producing a more positive attitude toward unions. The absence of any comparable increase in unionization among private-sector clerical workers, however, identifies the primary catalyst—the structural change in the multi-occupational public-sector unions themselves. Over the past twenty years, the occupational distribution in these unions has been steadily shifting from predominantly blue-collar to predominantly white-collar. Because there are far more women in white-collar jobs, an increase in the proportion of female members has accompanied the occupational shift and has altered union policy-making in favor of organizing women and addressing women’s issues.

这个是现象解释型的,解释this upsurge in unionization among clerical workers

6#
 楼主| 发表于 2007-4-28 11:29:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用will_kk在2007-4-27 23:28:00的发言:

Lz,我最近也在总结这个方面的

能不能请教请教,文章的套路有哪些呀,我没上过新东方,不知道怎么总结

新老观点对比,问题解决,现象解释,结论解释,特别套路

我感觉最容易的新老观点

5#
 楼主| 发表于 2007-4-28 11:27:00 | 只看该作者
以下是引用pumpkin在2007-4-28 7:37:00的发言:

1、GMAT文章套路没有GRE文章明显

2、总结套路只是为了更好的理解文章,而不是必须的东西。

谢谢斑竹 可是我还是不明白结论解释 和特别套路的TS是什么

地板
发表于 2007-4-28 07:37:00 | 只看该作者

1、GMAT文章套路没有GRE文章明显

2、总结套路只是为了更好的理解文章,而不是必须的东西。

板凳
发表于 2007-4-28 06:27:00 | 只看该作者

ME TOO

我也很困惑呢?下面这个我就不知道该算哪个套路?

Prior to 1975, union efforts to organize public-sector clerical workers, most of whom are women, were somewhat limited. The factors favoring unionization drives seem to have been either the presence of large numbers of workers, as in New York City, to make it worth the effort, or the concentration of small numbers in one or two locations, such as a hospital, to make it relatively easy. Receptivity to unionization on the workers’ part was also a consideration, but when there were large numbers involved or the clerical workers were the only unorganized group in a jurisdiction, the multi-occupational unions would often try to organize them regardless of the workers’ initial receptivity. The strategic reasoning was based, first, on the concern that politicians and administrators might play off (to set in opposition for one's own gain从中渔利;在…之间挑拨离间) unionized against non-unionized workers, and, second, on the conviction that a fully unionized public work force meant power, both at the bargaining table and in the legislature. In localities where clerical workers were few in number, were scattered in several workplaces, and expressed no interest in being organized, unions more often than not ignored them in the pre-1975 period.

But since the mid-1970’s, a different strategy has emerged. In 1977, 34 percent of government clerical workers were represented by a labor organization, compared with 46 percent of government professionals, 44 percent of government blue-collar workers, and 41 percent of government service workers. Since then, however, the biggest increases in public-sector unionization have been among clerical workers. Between 1977 and 1980, the number of unionized government workers in blue-collar and service occupations increased only about 1.5 percent, while in the white-collar occupations the increase was 20 percent and among clerical workers in particular, the increase was 22 percent.

What accounts for this upsurge in unionization among clerical workers? First, more women have entered the work force in the past few years, and more of them plan to remain working until retirement age. Consequently, they are probably more concerned than their predecessors were about job security and economic benefits. Also, the women’s movement has succeeded in legitimizing the economic and political activism of women on their own behalf, thereby producing a more positive attitude toward unions. The absence of any comparable increase in unionization among private-sector clerical workers, however, identifies the primary catalyst—the structural change in the multi-occupational public-sector unions themselves. Over the past twenty years, the occupational distribution in these unions has been steadily shifting from predominantly blue-collar to predominantly white-collar. Because there are far more women in white-collar jobs, an increase in the proportion of female members has accompanied the occupational shift and has altered union policy-making in favor of organizing women and addressing women’s issues.

沙发
发表于 2007-4-27 23:28:00 | 只看该作者

Lz,我最近也在总结这个方面的

能不能请教请教,文章的套路有哪些呀,我没上过新东方,不知道怎么总结

楼主
发表于 2007-4-27 19:46:00 | 只看该作者

[求助]对文章套路有点疑惑,大家帮忙看看

我现在做阅读新老关套路和问题解决都感觉还可以

但是有几个问题不太确定:

1。结论解释和现象解释套路的区别是什么呢?是不是现象解释有对解释的评价,而结论解释没有?

2。结论解释的TS是不是就是结论?

3。特别套路文章的TS什么呢?

困惑啊,不困惑的朋友们来帮帮忙吧!

您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

手机版|ChaseDream|GMT+8, 2025-9-1 13:22
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