11月3日 韩国首尔 2战 机经加经验

moonsook

终于考完GMAT了。成绩：730
首先，感谢CD！ 如果没有CDer的提供的复习材料和经验总结，以及狗，这次肯定又悲剧了！

其次，谈一下今天的考试题吧。
作文：

Argument: 本月jj里面的一个。
A recent survey of our customers shows that people are of interest in high level of eating healthy (大概是这样). One way to eat healthy is by eating organic food. 然后给了有机食品的定义。说根据这份调查，某城市很有可能要开一间organic grocery store. 有个gym老板说要在city设立第一间organic grocery store之前，在他们三家gym里分别设一个organic food section，这样能够提高他们的profit.

Issue: “Technology ultimately separates and alienates people more than it serves to bring them together.”　也是ｊｊ里的。


数学90%都是jj里的题。其余的题大部分也都是弱智题。所以，重点在于解决jj里面自己没有把握的或者没有思路的！
语文部分，只记得两篇阅读。
第一篇，是ｇｗｄ里阅读的变体。嗯！以下是找到的原文了！感谢ｃｈｉｎａｍｅｒｉｃａ！

Martin (1968, 1984, 1990) has summarized the evidence for the world-wide
extinction of late Pleistocene megafauna.

In Africa and Asia 15–20 percent of the genera disappeared 80–60,000 years B.P.; in Australia 94 percent were lost from 40–15,000 years B.P.; North and South America
experienced a 70–80 percent loss in the last 15,000 years, with an abrupt North American loss of mammoth, mastodon, ground sloth, and such dependent predators and scavengers as the saber toothed cat and (in much of its range) the condor 11,000 years ago. The horse and two subspecies of bison were gone by 9–8,000 years ago. This worldwide pattern correlates suspiciously with the chronology of human colonization leading to Paul Martin's hypothesis that extinction was directly or indirectly due to “overkill” by  exceptionally competent hunter cultures. This model explains the light extinctions in Africa and Asia where modern humankind “grew up,” allowing gradual adaptation to humankind's accumulating proficiency as a superpredator; it explains the abrupt massive losses in Australia and the Americas—the only habitable continents that
were colonized suddenly by advanced stone-aged humans. But the control cases for Martin's “experiment” are the large oceanic islands such as Madagascar and New
Zealand; both were colonized within the last 1000 years, and both suffered a wave of extinctions at this time.

One wonders, if extinction was due to climatic change, why Madagascar extinctions were not coincident with those of Africa 220 miles off its coast, and those of Australia were not coincident with New Zealand extinctions; and why European and Ukrainian mammoths became extinct 13,000 years B.P. while in North America they survived another 2000 years. Previous great extinction waves had affected plants and small animals as well as large animals, but the late Pleistocene extinctions are concentrated on the large gregarious herding, or slow moving, animals—the ideal prey of human hunters. Such large genera are also the animals that are slower growing, have longer gestation periods, require longer periods of maternal care, and live longer. Consequently they were more vulnerable to hunting pressure because reductions in biomass require more time to recover. The theory is bold—some say fanciful.

A counter argument is that there is little direct evidence of hunting; that Paleolithic peoples “probably” relied on plants. But if the fossil record of hunting is “small,” the fossil evidence of gathering is virtually non-existent.

A second counter argument is that there would not have been an incentive to overproduce in excess of immediate needs; that this occurs only in modern exchange
economies. But this argument fails to recognize that in the absence of private property rights, there is no intertemporal incentive to avoid the
kind of waste associated with large kills. What controls the slaughter of domestic cattle is the comparative value of dressed versus live beef. Since no one owned the mammoth, their harvest value (net of hunting cost) contrasted sharply with their zero live procreation value to the individual hunter.A third argument finds it incomprehensible that mere bands of men could have wiped out the great mammoth and two subspecies of bison. It takes a particularly skilled modern rifleman to stop a charging African elephant in time to prevent injury, and extant bison react quickly and violently when they sense danger.  


Such observations may simply tell us that these particular subspecies have survived because they were selected for their successful defensive characteristics. We
know nothing of the behavioral properties of extinct species which may have been far more approachable than their surviving relatives. While the African and Indian
elephants are both members of the same genus, their fossil similarities fail to inform us that the Indian elephant is docile and easily trained for circus display, while the
African elephant is not. No one has successfully domesticated the African zebra; in contrast, the Tarpan horse has been domesticated since ancient times (5000–2500
B.P.). Equus includes horses, asses and zebras—all behaviorally distinct animals.

第二篇，也是Gwd阅读的变体。下面的文章第一段和考试题一样，第二段有点忘记了，似乎有改变。大家只看第一段就好了。

The fields of antebellum (preCivilWar) political history and women’s history use separate sources and focuson separate issues.Political historians, examining sources such as votingrecords, newspapers, and politicians’writings, focus on the emergence in the1840’s of a new “American politicalnation,” and since women were neithervoters nor politicians, they receive littlediscussion.Women’s historians, mean-while, have shown little interest in thesubject of party politics, instead drawing on personal papers, legalrecordssuch as wills, and records offemaleassociations to illuminate women’sdomestic lives, their moral reformactivities, and the emergence of thewoman’s rights movement.
However, most historians haveunderestimated the extent and significance of women’s political allegiancein the antebellum period.For example,in the presidential election campaignsof the 1840’s, the Virginia Whig partystrove to win the allegiance of Virginia’swomen by inviting them to rallies andspeeches.According to Whig propaganda, women who turned out at theparty’s rallies gathered informationthat enabled them to mold party-loyalfamilies, reminded men of moral valuesthat transcended party loyalty, and conferred moral standing on the party.Virginia Democrats, in response,began to make similar appeals towomen as well.By the mid-1850’sthe inclusion of women in the rituals ofparty politics had become common-place, and the ideology that justifiedsuch inclusion had been assimilatedby the Democrats.

第三，经验。

先说一些本人背景吧。本科国内名校毕业，应与实力还算可以吧。６级６００，托福１０３（两年前成绩）。周围的朋友gmat平均成绩750。但是本人的英语能力距这些大牛们有一段距离，因此倍感压力。两年前，第一次杀鸡，只做了一遍og就去考了。成绩600。浪费了250刀啊～～～因此也放弃了申请，来到了韩国继续求学。

两年后的今天，再次准备杀鸡。　从今年３月份开始简单的背单词。每天大概看５０词左右。８月份开始正式准备。现在韩国上了一个补习班（ｃｒ＆ｒｃ），非常有用！老师讲的内容都特别有用，不仅提高了实力也提高了技巧和速度！说实话，比新东方讲得好很多，而且贵很多（两个课大概花了２４００人民币）。真想把课上讲的东西分享给大家阿。。。８月份一边上课，一边做ｏｇ。做了两遍ｏｇ后，个人感觉不错，于是，开始飘飘然了。后来在ｃｄ上知道了ｇｗｄ的存在，便开始作ｇｗｄ的题。错的一塌糊涂！这时才发现，自己真的是低估了ｇｍａｔ的难度。所以发奋学习，把ｇｗｄ都作了一遍，做到第２８套左右的时候，发现实力有所上升。ｇｗｄ做完之后，开始看ｐｒｅｐ。　

个人认为，ｇｗｄ和ｐｒｅｐ更接近真实考试难度，建议大家好好利用这两个资源。

整个准备过程的最大感触是，不要简单地练就一些技巧，而是要不提高自己的英语实力，尤其是词汇和阅读能力。在这两次考试之间，本人不断扩充单词量，而且定期阅读ｎｅｗｙｏｒｋｔｉｍｅｓ以及专业期刊，所以在接触Ｇｍａｔ阅读的时候，没有感到特别难。而且在阅读这些新闻和期刊的时候，也渐渐熟悉了标准英文写作的格式，对提高写作业非常有帮助。建议大家，每天开始学习之前先到ｎｙｔｉｍｅｓ．ｃｏｍ读一两片文章。

其次，要以谦虚的态度对待数学。本人曾经以为数学是不用准备的，但是第一次做ｇｗｄ的时候发现，ｅｔｓ真的是不断的套人，让我们在小细节上犯错误。所以定期看看ｊｊ讨论稿，认真地对待每一个题目，即使有些题看起来很弱智。　

最后，要提一提作文。我从正式准备考试时开始，每天大概写一篇ａｒｇｕ和ｉｓｓｕｅ。　到考试之前，所有的模板算得上倒背如流了，练习写作的时候，时间大概也能控制在２０分钟以内。所以真正到了考场上，心态很稳定。两片作文都是２０分钟以内完成的。　因此有充分的时间检查，纠错。一个开门红，让我更有信心去面对接下来的考试。所以大家要好好准备作文～～

chinamerica

thx 4 sharing~~ lz 可以确认下猛兽灭绝那篇象不象这个， 多谢！

Martin (1968, 1984, 1990) has summarized the evidence for the world-wide
extinction of late Pleistocene megafauna.

In Africa and Asia 15–20 percent of the genera disappeared 80–60,000 years B.P.; in Australia 94 percent were lost from 40–15,000 years B.P.; North and South America
experienced a 70–80 percent loss in the last 15,000 years, with an abrupt North American loss of mammoth, mastodon, ground sloth, and such dependent predators and scavengers as the saber toothed cat and (in much of its range) the condor 11,000 years ago. The horse and two subspecies of bison were gone by 9–8,000 years ago. This worldwide pattern correlates suspiciously with the chronology of human colonization leading to Paul Martin's hypothesis that extinction was directly or indirectly due to “overkill” by  exceptionally competent hunter cultures. This model explains the light extinctions in Africa and Asia where modern humankind “grew up,” allowing gradual adaptation to humankind's accumulating proficiency as a superpredator; it explains the abrupt massive losses in Australia and the Americas—the only habitable continents that
were colonized suddenly by advanced stone-aged humans. But the control cases for Martin's “experiment” are the large oceanic islands such as Madagascar and New
Zealand; both were colonized within the last 1000 years, and both suffered a wave of extinctions at this time.

One wonders, if extinction was due to climatic change, why Madagascar extinctions were not coincident with those of Africa 220 miles off its coast, and those of Australia were not coincident with New Zealand extinctions; and why European and Ukrainian mammoths became extinct 13,000 years B.P. while in North America they survived another 2000 years. Previous great extinction waves had affected plants and small animals as well as large animals, but the late Pleistocene extinctions are concentrated on the large gregarious herding, or slow moving, animals—the ideal prey of human hunters. Such large genera are also the animals that are slower growing, have longer gestation periods, require longer periods of maternal care, and live longer. Consequently they were more vulnerable to hunting pressure because reductions in biomass require more time to recover. The theory is bold—some say fanciful.

A counter argument is that there is little direct evidence of hunting; that Paleolithic peoples “probably” relied on plants. But if the fossil record of hunting is “small,” the fossil evidence of gathering is virtually non-existent.

A second counter argument is that there would not have been an incentive to overproduce in excess of immediate needs; that this occurs only in modern exchange
economies. But this argument fails to recognize that in the absence of private property rights, there is no intertemporal incentive to avoid the
kind of waste associated with large kills. What controls the slaughter of domestic cattle is the comparative value of dressed versus live beef. Since no one owned the mammoth, their harvest value (net of hunting cost) contrasted sharply with their zero live procreation value to the individual hunter.A third argument finds it incomprehensible that mere bands of men could have wiped out the great mammoth and two subspecies of bison. It takes a particularly skilled modern rifleman to stop a charging African elephant in time to prevent injury, and extant bison react quickly and violently when they sense danger.  


Such observations may simply tell us that these particular subspecies have survived because they were selected for their successful defensive characteristics. We
know nothing of the behavioral properties of extinct species which may have been far more approachable than their surviving relatives. While the African and Indian
elephants are both members of the same genus, their fossil similarities fail to inform us that the Indian elephant is docile and easily trained for circus display, while the
African elephant is not. No one has successfully domesticated the African zebra; in contrast, the Tarpan horse has been domesticated since ancient times (5000–2500
B.P.). Equus includes horses, asses and zebras—all behaviorally distinct animals.

moonsook

就是这个！马上更新！多谢！

chinamerica

谢谢ls哈
偶在google的， 全文在摘自 http://www.perc.org/pdf/vsmith_chp9.pdf  第8页下到第9页

2007njpany

1.    GWD-1-Q4 to Q6国内战后妇女参政现象研究的历史缺陷
     The fields of antebellum (pre-Civil    战前政治历史和妇女历史课题采用不
    War) political history and women’s his-        同资源专注不同事件。
    tory use separate sources and focus
Line on separate issues. Political histori-      政治历史家关注投票记录、报纸，
 (5)    ans, examining sources such as voting     政治家文章，及“美国政治之国”的
records, newspapers, and politicians’       出现。
writings, focus on the emergence in the
1840’s of a new “American political
nation,” and since women were neither      女性不是投票人或政治家，没被提及
(10)    voters nor politicians, they receive little
discussion.  Women’s historians, mean-    女性历史家对党派政治不感兴趣，而
while, have shown little interest in the       是利用私人文件、法律记载如遗嘱，
subject of party politics, instead draw-       和女性协会记录来说明妇女的家庭
ing on personal papers, legal records       生活、道德改革及女权运动的出现。
(15)    such as wills, and records of female
associations to illuminate women’s
domestic lives, their moral reform
activities, and the emergence of the
woman’s rights movement. 两种历史学家不同的观点
(20)          However, most historians have     但是大多数历史学家低估了妇女战前
underestimated the extent and signifi-       政治效忠的程度与重要性。
cance of women’s political allegiance
in the antebellum period.  For example,    例如VW党在1840’s的总统选举里
    in the presidential election campaigns         邀请妇女参加集会和演说，以赢得其
(25)    of the 1840’s, the Virginia Whig party      效忠。
strove to win the allegiance of Virginia’s
women by inviting them to rallies and
speeches.  According to Whig propa-      VW党宣传道在集会出现的妇女收集
ganda, women who turned out at the       信息，使党派塑造忠实的家庭，提醒
(30)    party’s rallies gathered information        男人道德价值观超越党派忠诚，树立
that enabled them to mold party-loyal       政党道德声誉。
families, reminded men of moral values
    that transcended party loyalty, and con-
ferred moral standing on the party.
(35)    Virginia Democrats, in response,          VD党相应地也开始吸引妇女加入。
    began to make similar appeals to
women as well.  By the mid-1850’s        到1850’s中期，妇女出席党派政
the inclusion of women in the rituals of      治仪式变得普遍，这种包含妇女
party politics had become common-        的意识形态被VD党吸收。
(40)    place, and the ideology that justified
such inclusion had been assimilated
by the Democrats.被忽略的妇女政治忠诚

XYXB

LZ的排版有点乱，我没有完全看懂，抱歉
第一篇所说的GWD变体就是google到的那个对吧？

第二篇是GWD的第一段

是这个意思嘛？

ameliewoo

感谢LZ还有找原文的同学啊~~~顺便沾喜气~~

moonsook

对的。
第一个文章就是考试原文，第二个文章只看第一段就好~
考完试有点精疲力尽，思绪有点乱～～～不好意思～～～

XYXB

谢谢确认，请问第二篇GWD中有考题重复吗？

moonsook

应该是没有的。
考题，尤其是阅读和逻辑，题干都很熟悉，但具体的问题都换了一个形式。