學習筆記 | 西に入る 月を誘い 法をへて 今日ぞ火宅を逃れけるかな
西に入る 月を誘い 法をへて 今日ぞ火宅を逃れけるかな
Add more fire into your intimate relationship.
Advertisements
Like this:Like Loading...
Like this:Like Loading...
Like this:Like Loading...
Like this:Like Loading...
Like this:Like Loading...
GMAT语法笔记
一、解题步骤（前提：假设不知道任何的语法）
1. 读题：从头读到尾，但是要有大概的意思；(因为我们要从肯定对的里面判断哪个选项是错误的)
2 解题：竖看选项
A）句子完整性及其惯用语（现在的机考几乎没有）
B）并列原则（所有的比较都叫并列，重点是结构并列，and连接的两个纯并列句可以不考虑结构。）
◎谁和谁并列（看结构功能是否对应）
◎二重并列不能用逗号
◎N重并列只能在最后用逗号＋and
◎A，B，and C只能推出b＝c，但A不一定，因为有省略
◎只要不是自己和自己比就不能用it
P133.21 P162.21 P154.19.17
C）动词（包括谓语和非谓语- 分词）
只有当动词能与画线外的部分有清晰的连接时, 动词判断才有意义
◎看看发起者是谁，用意思来判断, 分词紧连
◎时间和地点状语修饰动词时, 不放在动词和发起者之间
◎只要没有明显表示时间概念的词或者时间概念就不要考虑时态，但如果有就立刻考虑，只有现在、过去、进行、将来和完成时
Section 18.15. People have discovered the principles of solar energy whenever fuel becomes scarce and expensive but will forget them every time a new source of cheap energy is developed.
(A) have discovered the principles of solar energy whenever fuel becomes scarce and expensive but will forget
(B) have discovered the principles of solar energy whenever fuel has become scarce and expensive but they forget
(C) discovered the principles of solar energy every time fuel becomes scarce and expensive,
forgetting
(D) discover the principles of solar energy every time fuel became scarce and expensive, but
they forget
(E)discover the principles of solar energy whenever fuel becomes scarce and expensive but forget
whenever, every time 一般现在时, E
◎如果划线部分的头尾是V，先做V。
◎ 2个选项比较意思相同：最好用动词形式，不用名词或形容词形式
to do自然结果, for doing 先有目的
P205.137 P138.13 P160.15
D）比较选项(一定要按照下面的优先级顺序)
◎ 意思合理（大概有4－5题用到意思，但是如果只剩两个选项几乎一样就不用看意思）
比较选项时:
分词修饰 (, 号隔开的)
修饰词的位置改变
从属或并列
◎小词的应用（但在现在的机考中几乎用不到）
although＋句子；despite和in spite of加简单名词
列举只能用such as
as接句子和词都行；like只能接简单名词
in order to后面的V和整句的逻辑主语对应；in order that无所谓; for the purpose of先有想法后做; so that 先做后达成, 因果顺序与其它三个不同.
similar（ly）to 不能放在句首
can be的意思是能不能做;be able to只能用在生命体上，表达有没有这个能力;capable of doing是指与生俱来的能力用在生命体上
反身代词尽量跟在被代替的后面
have to用在生命体上，但must泛指
地点用where；时间用when；其他用which
生命体用’s，非生命体用of结构
◎主动比被动优先
◎简洁原则（直接修饰&短语修饰&句子修饰）例外：宾语从句的修饰&to do的修饰
◎维持原意 （在多个选项语法正确时，对比“意思”）
◎尽量用动词原型, 意思无区别时
◎AD原则 （考察句子结构时的要点及顺序）
最常用的是：并列，动词，主被动，怪
◎几个怪词不爽（having, being, 逗号+which，代词多, there be, 分词短语做主语）
P155一套，18，19section
二、培养语法的感觉（以下针对牛人，根据是现代英语用法规则, 最优先）
重点在句子前面, 意图直接表达, 什么东西怎么样
1.并列：前后尽可能工整
2.平衡：头重脚轻不行但是反之可以，均匀最好
Section 19.3.
3.避免歧义 分词短语、从句的修饰关系
P152.10 P162.22
4.实意（巨难）
Section 19.3.
C 连续指代, 无实意名词
◎在出现具体内容之前，虚词只能出现一次；内容尽量在主句
实词:名词,动词,形容词,副词,,
实词，有实在意义，在句子中能独立承担，而且还有一个重要的特点，那就是，实词有词形的变化，尤其是动词，可谓变化多端；虚词没有词形的变化。
◎句子，介词短语，句子（对）
句子，介词短语。（错误，因为介词短语不能当实体）
句子介词短语。（对）
句子，分词短语。（对）
8.A majority of the international journalists surveyed view nuclear power stations as unsafe at present but think that they will be or could be made sufficiently safe in the future. (A-P1-8)
任何结构都应该有实际意义, will be 的be 不能省略
P142.3 P153.15
感觉的练习方法：每天读正确的句子加选项。
语法题做题顺序
1．必须通读全句不能先从某一些语法现象入手，机考中语法点变少，逻辑性加强。
2．先用惯用语排除选项，如ability to, attempt to等排除部分选项。但机考中基本不考惯用语。
3．其次，找并列，广义的并列包括并列，比较和有一些词引导的部分，如rather than, unlike等。一定要搞清谁与谁并列。并列成分要尽量工整。多重并列只有最后一重用and连接，如果多重并列中还有子并列，如 (A and B), and C, 可以用thus将原有并列断开， 如 A and B thus and C. 要注意并列中的省略现象。
4．再其次，看动词。如果画线部分有动词开头或者结尾，先找动词的发起者， 根据时态， 单复数等可以排除选项。时间，地点状语不可插在动词与动词发起者之间， 应放在之前或者之后。动词中的非100%原则：动词原型与动词的衍生名词；主动与被动；一般时态的优先原则。
5． 最后，逻辑判断
a) 通过意思判断，
i. 通过句子本身意思，如主被动，如Table is moved, not table is moving
ii. 通过形容词，副词修饰， 如seemingly & seeming
iii. 通过代词指代
b) ‘怪’： being, having been, there being
c) 介词， 注意正确使用介词，如debate over
At 接触点或线
with 类似东西–
to 不相似的东西 compare
of 直接可以体会的性质
from 内在的 be made of
above 静态
about 与其有一定关系, 只是涉及
on 仅就该问题讨论
over 至少二个问题以上
介词中只有of ,to 可以连续用
迷 which 什么的秘
迷 why 为什么–靠谓语动词判断
d) 维持句子原意
e) 简捷原则
f) 如果不会，猜A or D
increase/change in sth 什么东西怎么着了
increase/change of sth 什么东西的变化
修饰关系尽可能与被修饰者离得近
列举, 状语中少再次修饰a and b of c
并列和动词两个原则基本可以解决笔考中70%的问题， 但是在机考中明显没有如此好用。机考中语法点不明显，所以要通读全句，更多地用逻辑来判断。
GMAT 语法是有优先级的.
1. 并列. 所有的比较，e.g. replacement并列关系是重点，主要考并列结构，并列句不是重点．
3.逻辑意思.
4.小语法点.
7.维持原意,简洁
8.动词原型.
可见你把优先级7提前了.
1. 一遍看懂结构和意思
2. 解题过程是否完全记住并理解
3. 立刻能看出并列和动词的考点
4. 是否因为选项的不同干扰语法点的判断
5. 现有错题再无答案情况是否能判断出错误
6. 错误率最高在哪方面
7. 每天读句子? 有无感觉?
8. 是否因为没有见过语法点, 或应用其它方法解题?（如运用纯逻辑以及句子的完整性，句子结构的简洁原则与修饰的就近原则？）
e.g. 修饰的就近原则Section 18.13. Oberlin College in Ohio was a renegade institution at its 1833 founding for deciding to accept both men and women as students.
(A) at its 1833 founding for deciding to accept
(B) for the decision at its 1833 founding to accept
(C) when it was founded in 1833 for its decision to accept
(D) in deciding at its founding in 1833 to accept
(E) by deciding at its founding in 1833 on the acceptance of
(in deciding to accept…是此college was (regarded as) a renegade institution的原因，原因解释的就近原则)
Notes: in deciding/in estimating
一、解题步骤
第一步：读题：从头读到尾（包括划线部分以外的），要有大概的意思，把基本的结构读出来；（要根据看懂的内容判断排除最错的选项
第二步：句子完整性，惯用语，固定搭配（现在的机考几乎没有）
第三步：找并列
并列的含义：所有的有对应关系的都叫并列，包括同位语，独立主格，比较级，and，or连接的两个纯并列句不考虑，但是and,or连接的并列结构属于并列, but 连接的前后两部分要完全对应(but是取非的意思)–谁和谁并列（看结构功能是否对应）
–二重并列不能用逗号
–三重以上只能用and, or 引导，其他都不行，并列只能在最后用逗号＋and
–两个句子中间要用“and”连
–对于具体词，只要不是自己和自己比就不能用it（虚词除外，例如通货膨胀）
第四步：比选项
1．比较意思：现在的机考题这类题越来越多
2．现代英语的表达习惯
? 实意，尽快把实意说出，如果一上来说虚的，虚的之后要尽快说实的，在虚实之间尽量避免用逗号隔开的东西, 实的东西尽量在主句
l 句子，介词短语，句子（对）
l 句子，介词短语。（错误，因为介词短语不能当实体）
l 句子介词短语。（对）
l 句子，分词短语。（对）
l 分词短语，介词短语，主句（不错）
? 平衡，头重脚轻不允许，头轻脚重可以（谓语动词之前为头）
? 在出现具体内容之前，虚词只能出现一次；内容尽量在主句
? 避免歧义
（名词，代词.）,分词短语，（名词，代词….）, 这种肯定错，分词尽量只出现一个逗号，不要在中间出现
谓语动词象座山,不允许在谓语动词前找he，it，these等代词的具体指代物。现在分词也是谓语。
? 句子越符合英语习惯越好
? 自己与自己不能比较
3．动词（包括谓语和非谓语）
l 只要没有明显表示时间概念的词或者时间概念就不要考虑时态，但如果有就立刻考虑，只有现在、过去、进行、将来和完成时
l 2个选项比较：最好用动词形式，不用名词或形容词形式。有名词和动名词时，优先使用名词。除非没有名词形式，必须用动名词形式取代
l 用意思来判断发起者，对于动词的时间和地点状语不允许放在动词和发起者之间，要放在动词之后，插入语除外
l 划线的头尾是动词先考虑动词，看发起者
4主动比被动牛优先
5．几个怪词不爽（there be, having, being, 逗号which，代词多）
◎维持原意
6．简洁原则
直接修饰&短语修饰&从句修饰
7． AD原则
最常用的是：并列，动词，主被动，怪
小词的应用（但在现在的机考中几乎用不到）
Times 只能跟more than结构，不能跟as….as
as接句子和词都行；like只能接简单名词
although＋句子；despite和in spite of加简单名词
similar（ly）不能放在句首
can be只表示去做，但不一定有能力;be able to只能用在生命体上，表达有没有这个能力;have the capabal of doing是指与生俱来的能力用在生命体上
反身代词尽量跟在名词的后面
have to用在生命体上，但must没有此限制
地点用where；时间用when；其他用which
生命体用’s，非生命体用of结构
in order to后面的动词和整句的逻辑主语对应；in order that无所谓
but作为连词没有任何意义，作为副词代表取非
“，that”必然错
especially：特意地 表示与前面所指的事物同类，已经包含前面所指的事物
specially：专门地，特别地 可以与前面所指的事物不同类，不包含前面所指的事物
Like this:Like Loading...
During her presidency of the short-lived Woman’s State Temperance Society (), Elizabeth Cady Stanton, a staunch advocate of liberalized divorce laws, scandalized many of her most ardent supporters by suggesting that drunkenness be made sufficient cause for divorce.
By merging its two publishing divisions, the company will increase to 10 percent from 6 percent its share of the country’s $21 billion book market, which ranges from obscure textbooks to mass-market paperbacks.
A recent review of pay scales indicates that, on average, CEO’s now earn 419 times the pay of blue-collar workers, a ratio that compares to 42 times in 1980
The 32 species that make up the dolphin family are closely related to whales and in fact include the animal known as the killer whale, which can grow to be 30 feet long and is famous for its aggressive hunting pods.
Soaring television costs accounted for more than half the spending in the presidential campaign of 1992, a greater proportion than in any previous election. （为毛than 后面不能有it was?）.
Recently physicians have determined that stomach ulcers are caused not by stress, alcohol, or rich foods, but by a bacterium that dwells in the mucous lining of the stomach.
Rivaling the pyramids of Egypt or even the ancient cities of the Maya as an achievement, the army of terra-cotta warriors created to protect Qin Shi Huang, China’s first emperor, in his afterlife is more than 2,000 years old and took 700,000 artisans more than 36 years to complete.
The discovery of twenty-one ceramic dog figurines during the excavation of a 1,000-year-old Hohokam village in Tempe, Arizona, has nearly doubled the number of these artifacts known to exist.
Past assessments of the Brazilian rain forest have used satellite images to tally deforested areas, where farmers and ranchers have clear-cut and burned all the trees, but such work has not addressed either logging, which removes only selected trees, or surface fires that burn down individual trees but do not denude the forest.
By sucking sap from the young twigs of the hemlock tree, the woolly adelgid retards tree growth, causing needles to change color from deep green to grayish green and to drop prematurely
A new study of the 2000 United States presidential election, citing faulty voting equipment, confusing ballots, voter error, and problems at polling places, has estimated that 4 million to 6 million votes had not been counted of the 100 million votes cast.
Citing faulty voting equipment, confusing ballots, voter error, and problems at polling places, a new study of the 2000 United
States presidential election has estimated that 4 million to 6 million of the 100 million votes cast were not counted.
The ancient Anasazi harvested such native desert vegetation as the purple-flowered bee plant, now commonly called wild spinach in northern Arizona and other parts of the southwestern United
To develop more accurate population forecasts, demographers would have to know a great deal more than they do now about the social and economic determinants of fertility.
对比下面意思大相径庭的两句话，
Although people in France and the United States consume fatty foods at about the same rate, the death rates from heart disease are far lower in France.
Although the rate of people consuming fatty foods is about the same in France and the United States, the death rates from heart disease are far lower in France.
Leaching, the recovery of copper from the drainage water of mines, was a well-established method of mineral extraction as early as the eighteenth century, but until about 25 years ago miners did not realize that bacteria take an active part in the process.
would more than double 将超过两倍的
Retail sales rose 8/10 of 1 percent in August, intensifying expectations that personal spending in the July-September quarter would more than double the 1.4 percent growth rate in personal spending for the previous quarter.
Like this:Like Loading...
Introduction
There is a lot of debate on the net. Unfortunately, much of it is of very low quality. The aim of this document is to explain the basics of logical reasoning, and hopefully improve the overall quality of debate.
The Concise Oxford English Dictionary defines logic as “the science of reasoning, proof, thinking, or inference.” Logic will let you analyze an argument or a piece of reasoning, and work out whether it is likely to be correct or not. You don’t need to know logic to argue, but if you know even a little, you’ll find it easier to spot invalid arguments.
There are many kinds of logic, such as fuzzy logic an they have different rules, and different strengths and weaknesses. This document discusses simple Boolean logic, because it’s commonplace and relatively easy to understand. When people talk about something being “logical,” they usually mean the type of logic described here.
What logic isn’t
It’s worth mentioning a couple of things which logic is not.
First, logical reasoning is not an absolute law which governs the universe. Many times in the past, people have concluded that because something is logically impossible (given the science of the day), it must be impossible, period. It was also believed at one time that Euclidean geometry it is, after all, logically consistent. Again, we now know that the rules of Euclidean geometry are not universal.
Second, logic is not a set of rules which govern human behavior. Humans may have logically conflicting goals. For example:
John wishes to speak to whoever is in charge.
The person in charge is Steve.
Therefore John wishes to speak to Steve.
Unfortunately, John may have a conflicting goal of avoiding Steve, meaning that the reasoned answer may be inapplicable to real life.
This document only expla you must decide whether logic is the right tool for the job. There are other ways to communicate, discuss and debate.
An argument is, to quote the , “a connected series of statements to establish a definite proposition.”
Many typ we will discuss the deductive argument. Deductive arguments are generally viewed as the most precise and they provide conclusive proof of their conclusion, and are either valid or invalid.
Deductive arguments have three stages:
conclusion
However, before we can consider those stages in detail, we must discuss the building blocks of a deductive argument: propositions.
Propositions
A proposition is a statement which is either true or false. The proposition is the meaning of the statement, not the precise arrangement of words used to convey that meaning.
For example, “There exists an even prime number greater than two” is a proposition. (A false one, in this case.) “An even prime number greater than two exists” is the same proposition, reworded.
Unfortunately, it’s very easy to unintentionally change the meaning of a statement by rephrasing it. It’s generally safer to consider the wording of a proposition as significant.
It’s possible to use formal linguistics to analyze and rephrase a statement without
but how to do so is outside the scope of this document.
A deductive argument always requires a number of core assumptions. These are called premises, and are the assumptions the
or to look at it another way, the reasons for accepting the argument. Premises are only premises in the context of a they might be conclusions in other arguments, for example.
You should always state the premises of the this is the principle of audiatur et altera pars. Failing to state your assumptions is often viewed as suspicious, and will likely reduce the acceptance of your argument.
The premises of an argument are often introduced with words such as “Assume,” “Since,” “Obviously,” and “Because.” It’s a good idea to get your opponent to agree with the premises of your argument before proceeding any further.
The word “obviously” is also often viewed with suspicion. It occasionally gets used to persuade people to accept false statements, rather than admit that they don’t understand why something is “obvious.” So don’t be afraid to question statements which people tell you are “obvious”–when you’ve heard the explanation you can always say something like “You’re right, now that I think about it that way, it is obvious.”
Once the premises have been agreed, the argument proceeds via a step-by-step process called inference.
In inference, you start with one or more propositions whic you then use those propositions to arrive at a new proposition. If the inference is valid, that proposition should also be accepted. You can use the new proposition for inference later on.
So initially, you can only infer things from the premises of the argument. But as the argument proceeds, the number of statements available for inference increases.
There are various kinds of valid inference–and also some invalid kinds, which we’ll look at later on. Inference steps are often identified by phrases like “therefore …” or “… implies that …”
Conclusion
Hopefully you will arrive at a proposition which is the conclusion of the argument – the result you are trying to prove. The conclusion is the result of the final step of inference. It’s only a conclusion in the context of a it could be a premise or assumption in another argument.
The conclusion is said to be affirmed on the basis of the premises, and the inference from them. This is a subtle point which deserves further explanation.
Implication in detail
Clearly you can build a valid argument from true premises, and arrive at a true conclusion. You can also build a valid argument from false premises, and arrive at a false conclusion.
The tricky part is that you can start with false premises, proceed via valid inference, and reach a true conclusion. For example:
Premise: All fish live in the ocean
Premise: Sea otters are fish
Conclusion: Therefore sea otters live in the ocean
There’s one thing you can’t do, though: start from true premises, proceed via valid deductive inference, and reach a false conclusion.
We can summarize these results as a “” for implication. The symbol “=&” “A” is the premise, “B” the conclusion. “T” and “F” represent true and false respectively.
Truth Table for Implication
Conclusion
If the premises are false and the inference valid, the conclusion can be true or false. (Lines 1 and 2.)
If the premises are true and the conclusion false, the inference must be invalid. (Line 3.)
If the premises are true and the inference valid, the conclusion must be true. (Line 4.)
So the fact that an argument is valid doesn’t necessarily mean that its conclusion holds–it may have started from false premises.
If an argument is valid, and in addition it started from true premises, then it is called a sound argument. A sound argument must arrive at a true conclusion.
Example argument
Here’s an example of an argument which is valid, and which may or may not be sound:
Premise: Every event has a cause
Premise: The universe has a beginning
Premise: All beginnings involve an event
Inference: This implies that the beginning of the universe involved an event
Inference: Therefore the beginning of the universe had a cause
Conclusion: The universe had a cause
The proposition in line 4 is inferred from lines 2 and 3. Line 1 is then used, with the proposition derived in line 4, to infer a new proposition in line 5. The result of the inference in line 5 is then restated (in slightly simplified form) as the conclusion.
Spotting arguments
Spotting an argument is harder than spotting premises or a conclusion. Lots of people shower their writing with assertions, without ever producing anything you might reasonably call an argument.
Sometimes arguments don’t follow the pattern described above. For example, people may state their conclusions first, and then justify them afterwards. This is valid, but it can be a little confusing.
To make the situation worse, some statements look like arguments but aren’t. For example:
“If the Bible is accurate, Jesus must either have been insane, a liar, or the Son of God.”
That’ it’s a conditional statement. It doesn’t state the premises necessary to support its conclusion, and even if you add those assertions it suffers from a number of other flaws which are described in more detail in the
An argument is also not the same as an explanation. Suppose that you are trying to argue that Albert Einstein believed in God, and say:
“Einstein made his famous statement ‘God does not play dice’ because of his belief in God.”
That may look like a relevant argument, but it’ it’s an explanation of Einstein’s statement. To see this, remember that a statement of the form “X because Y” can be rephrased as an equivalent statement, of the form “Y therefore X.” Doing so gives us:
“Einstein believed in God, therefore he made his famous statement ‘God does not play dice.'”
Now it’s clear that the statement, which looked like an argument, is actually assuming the result which it is supposed to be proving, in order to explain the Einstein quote.
Furthermore, Einstein did not believe in a personal God concerned with human affairs–again, see the
We’ve outlined the structure of a sound deductive argument, from premises to conclusion. But ultimately, the conclusion of a valid logical argument is only as compelling as the premises you started from. Logic in itself doesn’t solve the problem of verifying the basic assertions whi for that, we need some other tool. The dominant means of verifying basic assertions is scientific enquiry. However, the philosophy of science and the scientific method are huge topics which are quite beyond the scope of this document.
There are a number of common pitfalls to avoid when constructing
they’re known as fallacies. In everyday English, we refer to many kinds of mistaken
but in logic, the term has a more specific meaning: a fallacy is a technical flaw which makes an argument unsound or invalid.
(Note that you can criticize more than just the soundness of an argument. Arguments are almost always presented with some specific purpose in mind–and the intent of the argument may also be worthy of criticism.)
Arguments which contain fallacies are described as fallacious. They often appear
sometimes only close inspection reveals the logical flaw.
Below is a list of some common fallacies, and also some rhetorical devices often used in debate. The list isn’t inten the hope is that if you learn to recognize some of the more common fallacies, you’ll be able to avoid being fooled by them.
has an excellent .
Summary of Common Fallacies
: two choices are given when in fact there are three options
: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false
: a series of increasingly unacceptable consequences is drawn
: two unrelated points are conjoined as a single proposition
: the reader is persuaded to agree by force
: the reader is persuaded to agree by sympathy
: the reader is warned of unacceptable consequences
: value or moral goodness is attached to believing the author
: a proposition is argued to be true because it is widely held to be true
the person’s character is attacked
the person’s circumstances are noted
the person does not practise what is preached
the authority is not an expert in the field
experts in the field disagree
the authority was joking, drunk, or in some other way not being serious
: the authority in question is not named
: the manner in which an argument (or arguer) is presented is felt to affect the truth of the conclusion
: the sample is too small to support an inductive generalization about a population
: the sample is unrepresentative of the sample as a whole
: the two objects or events being compared are relevantly dissimilar
: the conclusion of a strong inductive argument is denied despite the evidence to the contrary
: evidence which would change the outcome of an inductive argument is excluded from consideration
: a generalization is applied when circumstances suggest that there should be an exception
: an exception is applied in circumstances where a generalization should apply
: because one thing follows another, it is held to cause the other
: one thing is held to cause another when in fact they are both the joint effects of an underlying cause
: one thing is held to cause another, and it does, but it is insignificant compared to other causes of the effect
: the direction between cause and effect is reversed
: the cause identified is only a part of the entire cause of the effect
: the truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premises
: an argument in defense of one conclusion instead proves a different conclusion
: the author attacks an argument different from (and weaker than) the opposition’s best argument
: the same term is used with two different meanings
: the structure of a sentence allows two different interpretations
: the emphasis on a word or phrase suggests a meaning contrary to what the sentence actually says
: because the attributes of the parts of a whole have a certain property, it is argued that the whole has that property
: because the whole has a certain property, it is argued that the parts have that property
: any argument of the form: If A then B, B, therefore A
: any argument of the form: If A then B, Not A, thus Not B
: asserting that contrary or contradictory statements are both true
: a syllogism has four terms
: two separate categories are said to be connected because they share a common property
: the predicate of the conclusion talks about all of something, but the premises only mention some cases of the term in the predicate
: the subject of the conclusion talks about all of something, but the premises only mention some cases of the term in the subject
: a syllogism has two negative premises
: as the name implies
: a particular conclusion is drawn from universal premises
(The phenomenon being explained doesn’t exist)
(Evidence for the phenomenon being explained is biased)
(The theory which explains cannot be tested)
(The theory which explains can only explain one thing)
(The theory which explains does not appeal to underlying causes)
(The definition includes items which should not be included)
(The definition does not include all the items which shouls be included)
(The definition is more difficult to understand than the word or concept being defined)
(The definition includes the term being defined as a part of the definition)
(The definition is self-contradictory)
====================================================================================
GMAT/GRE 常考的11种Fallacies
1.Circular Reasoning
2.The Biased-Sample Fallacy
3.The Insufficient Sample Fallacy
4.Ad Hominen
5.The Fallacy of Faulty Analogy
6.Straw Man
7.Post hoc ergo propter hoc (The “After This, Therefore, Because of This” Fallacy)
8.The Either-or Thinking (The “Black-or-White” Fallacy)
9.The “All Things are Equal across time or places” Fallacy
10. The Fallacy of Equivocation
11. Non Sequitur
Like this:Like Loading...
China’s Jasmine revolution
The disappointment among some foreign observers was palpable when an
appeal to replicate the ‘’ in
fell flat on Sunday.
But what some have failed to notice is that the call did produce a mirror image in the real world of the phenomenon at the heart of China’s fledgling online public sphere: crowds of onlookers.
The rapid rise of the
in China over the past year has managed to shine a spotlight on many local incidents of unrest that in the past would have remained hidden.
Online activists have compared the act of ‘following’ a certain person or event on a microblog with the behaviour of onlookers who quickly form a crowd when a conflict happens in the street. And while for now most Chinese citizens are not ready to challenge the government openly, many are happy to be onlookers.
The protest call managed to briefly replicate this online phenomenon in the real world.
However, the event also mirrored the different digital flows of information reaching different parts of the
as a result of ’s heavy web censorship.
The call brought out mainly foreign journalists and police, plus a smaller number of government critics watching from the sidelines with great expectations.
All of them had got their information by ‘jumping the Wall’ – accessing foreign-registered websites which are blocked inside China, by circumventing internet controls commonly called the ‘’.
Chinese-language messaging volume on
jumped to record levels at the weekend as the appeal was passed on and dissidents discussed the government’s countermeasures. But many of those most active in leading this discourse live abroad, and the numbers of those in China are tiny compared with users of Twitter’s Chinese, censored, clones.
Many more onlookers at the Sunday protest identified themselves as users of the
microblog, China’s largest, but said they had no idea what the gathering was about. The explanation of a planned ‘Jasmine revolution’ in China drew a stare of disbelief on most of the young faces.
That is the government’s intended result. In the face of the call for revolution, Beijing has stepped up its net censorship. China must “further strengthen and improve controls on the information web, raising our level of control over virtual society, and perfecting our mechanisms for the channeling of public opinion online,” president
said on Saturday.
中国微博培育“围观力量”
英国《金融时报》
上周日在中国互联网上传递的复制“茉莉花革命”的呼吁以失败告终后，一些外国观察家的失望之情溢于言表。
但一些人忽略了一点，那就是这次呼吁，将中国正在成型的网上公共空间中的一个的核心现象——大量的围观群众——成功复制到了现实世界之中。
过去一年中，微博在中国的迅速成长，使得许多在地方上发生的、过去通常无法为外界知晓的群体事件得以曝光。
网上活动人士将在微博上“关注”某人或某一事件的举动，比作在大街上发生冲突时人群的迅速聚集和围观。眼下，尽管大部分中国网民还不打算公开挑战政府，许多却乐意做个围观者。
此次网上的号召，成功地将这一网络现象在现实世界中进行了短暂的复制。
然而，这次事件也反映出一个现实——由于北京采取的严厉的网络审查，不同的中国人群会接收到不同的信息。
此次网上呼吁引来的主要是外国记者和警察，还有少量政府批评人士满怀期待地在一旁观察。
所有这些人得到这一消息都是通过“翻墙”，即绕过通常被称为“长城防火墙”的互联网管控，登录那些在中国境内被屏蔽的、在境外注册的网站。
周末期间，随着这个号召在网上传递，加上一些异见人士纷纷加入讨论政府的应对措施，推特(Twitter)上的中文发帖量跃升至纪录高位。不过，这场讨论的主导者大部分都生活在国外。生活在中国国内的人数，与推特在中国的、被审查的克隆版本的用户数量相比，十分渺小。
周日的抗议活动中，更多的围观者承认自己是新浪微博——中国最大的微博平台——的用户，但他们表示自己对此次集会是为了什么一无所知。当有人解释这是一场有计划的中国版“茉莉花革命”时，大部分年轻人脸上露出难以置信的神色。
这正是政府想要的结果。面对民间对变革的吁求，北京已经加强了互联网审查。中国国家主席胡锦涛周六表示，中国必须“进一步加强和完善信息网络管理，提高对虚拟社会的管理水平，健全网上舆论引导机制。”
Like this:Like Loading...
Like this:Like Loading...
BBS & Exams
English Blog
English Literature
English Media
English Study
English Writing
Job Hunting}