在GMAT中,因果关系考得比较多,结合了这几天的复习和看讨论帖,自己理了一下思路,还请大N指导。 一、单一的关系 原文说两件事物A和B,然后说是因为A导致B support:排除他因,无因无果(ETS喜欢的答案) weaken:另有他因 assumption:去除另有他因的可能 二、复合的因果关系 原文说了一长串东西(典型的是结果X由哪几个因素组成),然后说因为A变化导致X变化 做完OG和GWD后,发现很多题目在讨论中需要列出数学公式去解题 其实我认为GMAT逻辑一直考的是阅读能力,和严谨的逻辑辨析能力,而非数学 对于复合的因果关系,个人认为 1)辨析出结果X由哪几个因素组成,不要过分关心他们之间的运算关系 例如阅读原文,我们得出X=(A,B,C,D...) (括号内表示影响结果X的因素,但我们不需要具体指导如何运算) 2)看结论,例如结果说因为A变化导致X变化 3)解题 support:结论忽视的B,C,D变化会对结论起正面作用 weaken:结论忽视的B,C,D变化会对结论起负面作用 大胆推论:对于复合因果关系,原文列出影响X的诸多因素,结论只引用了其中某个因素的变化,从而导致X的变化。 则做题时,应该直奔主题,去找被原文列出,但是又被结论没有引用的因素,而不去关心其中的数学关系 例如 GWD-6-Q14: X 52.12 Political Advertisement: Mayor Delmont’s critics complain about the jobs that were lost in the city under Delmont’s leadership. Yet the fact is that not only were more jobs created than were eliminated, but the average pay for these new jobs has been higher than the average pay for jobs citywide every year since Delmont took office. So there can be no question that throughout Delmont’s tenure the average paycheck in this city has been getting steadily bigger. Which of the following, if true, most strengthens the argument in the advertisement? A. The average pay for jobs created in the city during the past three years was higher than the average pay for jobs created in the city earlier in Mayor Delmont’s tenure. B. Average pay in the city was at a ten-year low when Mayor Delmont took office. C. Some of the jobs created in the city during Mayor Delmont’s tenure have in the meantime been eliminated again. D. The average pay for jobs eliminated in the city during Mayor Delmont’s tenure has been roughly equal every year to the average pay for jobs citywide . E. The average pay for jobs in the city is currently higher than it is for jobs in the suburbs surrounding the city.
通过阅读原文,我们可以得出 逻辑关系:新的平均工资=(旧的平均工资,增加工作的平均工资,去除工作的平均工资)(不需关心数学关系) 结论,因为新增加的平均工资和旧的平均工资对比,得出新的平均工资变化 则结论忽视的因素是在原文中称述,但是没有引用的,即去除工作的平均工资 这因素的变化,直接会影响support还是weaken结论
个人心得,仅供参考,还请大N指点,其实想说的是介绍一种快捷的解题方法,因为在CAT中列出数学公式求解太浪费时间,也不符合GMAT要考我们逻辑的初衷。 PS:本人报了6月24日考试,没JJ看,郁闷中 |