南京朗閣GMAT作文機經

今天小編為大家帶來的是2015-12-23GMAT作文機經的內容，就讓GMAT寫作真題助你一臂之力!

　　1. 吸引畢業生發展biotechnology

　　>>> 本月原始

　　V1.： Z城市的MARTINTON鎮關了實驗室，要提供資金把大學生吸引過來的那篇。

　　V2. 作文是關于biotechnology，講的是現在開這個biotechnology公司 能對經濟有好處，這種企業對實驗器械和研究人員的要求其高，martinton 開了一個公司，里面都是大學生在做，但是后來被關閉了，since has closed ever since 這句話我沒看太懂，Zaneviles 看上了這個計劃，像實行，問你啥想法。 99%原題，各位練練手

　　>>> 考古

　　V1.： recommendation：zaneville city council to provide financial support to martinton university graduates， attract them to open bio-company in the town。

　　support: 1) biotechnology需要新技術新研發，能夠給當地帶來經濟效益;2) martinton univ graduates started a successful company in laboratories, BUT CLOSED afterwards.

　　V2. 一個創業家做演講游說 Z 市市政府,說 biotechnology company 對城市的經濟有很大幫助,但是biotechnology company 需要很好的 lab 的條件。隔壁的 M 市就資助了很好的 lab,吸引某某大學的 graduate 留下創業。曾經有一個 biotech company 創立的非常成功。但是后來 M 市取消了這個資助。這個創業家認為這是好機會 Z 市趕緊資助 lab, 來吸引 graduate 來創業。

　　V3. 這個是生化創業者給v地區政府的一個presentation. 一直以來bio-tech 的研究都有助于innovation 并可以促進經濟發展。martinton 的大學城就建立了這樣的lab. 不過一般來說lab需要耗費許多資金，并且需要高端人才。martinton 大學城在v的確的附近。 近martintin的lab關了。這些創業家認為這個是v的好機會并且指出martinton關這個實驗室是鼠目寸光。他們指出如果v政府投資扶持生化實驗室，可以推動當地經濟。并且吸引martinton大學城的學生來工作。

　　V4. : biotechnology is very important to enhance the economy, innovation should be encouraged. so the town paid for laboratories started by local university graduates， but later on the lab was shut. And the statement reckoned this shortsighted. 狗狗里的一篇。

　　V5. 作文考到了 biotechnology company 那篇，z 地要開公司，要 m 的畢業生來開。因為 m 之 前開過 lab 還成功了，雖然 后失敗

　　>>> 參考思路

　　V1：狗主找的理由有：1) zaneville 不一定適合發展biotechnology， 可能地理環境，經濟發展側重不一樣 blabla; 2) 投資biotechnology不一定帶來經濟效益， capital input in construction, R&D, operation maintenance有可能賠錢;3) martinton univ grads 開的公司 后關了除了經濟因素還有其他原因，比如無法商業化，application不好，mass production不好，management, business strategy不成熟等等

　　1.無關類比:別的城市成功不=本市會成功

　　2.以偏概全:一個 biotech company 成功不代表大部分 company 會成功

　　3.信息不足:沒有給出 evidence 為什么 M 市取消了這個資助

　　2. 健身器材和雜志 上月JJ 36

　　V1： 作文：因為the owner of Skyview Newsstand 說bodybuilders use the-state-of-art exercise machines而且這種先進的健身器材都賣光了，所有to maximize fitness levels of

　　residents，our community應該在健身中心增加這種健身器材

　　>>> 考古原題

　　The following appeared in the letters-to-the-editor section of a local newspaper.

　　“Muscle Monthly, a fitness magazine that regularly features pictures of bodybuilders using state-of-the-art exercise machines, frequently sells out, according to the owner of Skyview Newsstand. To help maximize fitness levels in our town’s residents, we should, therefore, equip our new community fitness center with such machines.”

　　>>> 參考思路

　　1. 無根據假設：

　　① 買雜志的人是因為這個報道上有such machine才買的

　　(雜志賣得好得原因不一定是因為刊登這個機器，很可能是價錢便宜，或其他的內容吸引讀者。)

　　②喜歡such machine的人一定會用這個machine。

　　2.信息不足： 購買者未知，可能是這個machine的廠家自己買的

　　>>> 參考范文

　　In this argument the author concludes that the new community fitness center should be equipped with the state-of-the-art exercise machines featured in Muscle Monthly magazine. In support of this recommendation two reasons are offered: (1) Muscle Monthly contains pictures of bodybuilders using such machines, and (2) Muscle Monthly is a popular magazine, as evidenced by the fact that it frequently sells out at the local newsstand. This argument is questionable on two counts.

　　First, a major implication of the argument is that the bodybuilders pictured using the machines in Muscle Monthly magazine reached their state of fitness as a result of using these machines. The only evidence offered to support this contention, however, is the pictures in the magazine. It is possible that the bodybuilders pictured use different equipment for their workouts and are merely posing with the machines for advertising purposes.

　　Second, the author assumes that machines that are suitable for bodybuilding will also be suitable to help maximize the fitness levels of the town’s residents. This assumption is highly questionable. Machines designed to increase muscle development are significantly different from those designed to increase cardiovascular fitness. Consequently, it is unlikely that the machines pictured in the magazine will be of much use to help maximize the fitness levels of the town’s residents.

　　In conclusion, this argument is unconvincing. To strengthen the argument the author would have to show that the bodybuilders pictured using the exercise machines actually used the machines to reach their level of muscle development. Additionally, the author would have to show that the machines were suitable for increasing the fitness levels of the persons using them.