托福寫作20分什么水平

　　曾經(jīng)一個針對中國幾所頂尖大學的作文的調查顯示，20 篇優(yōu)秀作文中名詞化的使用頻率為7%-8%，而普通習作的使用頻率僅為5%-6%。與此同時，選用了20 篇英語國家學生的英語作文，同樣的方法統(tǒng)計出其名詞化的使用頻率為10%-15%。

　　托福寫作輔導中提到老外眼中句子分為3個檔次，最差的是主動句，較好的是被動句，倒裝句等，最好的nominalization(名詞化)的句子，這樣的句子最學術最適合寫論文。那么面對這樣的差異，我們需要重新審視我們寫作中的思維方式，做到如何恰到好處又不“畫蛇添足”。

　　簡單說，名詞化即是動詞或形容詞被用作名詞的現(xiàn)象。

　　比如動詞轉成名詞：discovery->discovery， move->movement， refuse->refusal，又比如形容詞轉成名詞：careless->carelessness， difficult->difficulty， intense->intensity。那么什么情況下，我們需要進行名詞化呢?

　　A. 謂語動詞的賓語部分

　　原句：I do not know either what she meant or what he intends.

　　名詞化：I do not know either her meaning or his intentions.

　　B. 結合被動形式

　　原句：If people decide without enough persuasive information, ...

　　名詞化：If a decision is made without enough persuasive information, ...

　　打開托福寫作突破口

　　1.熟悉可能涉及的話題

　　可用official guide提供的185個topics，或去下載題庫，然后反復閱讀題目。

　　185個topics從托福獨立寫作模式上分可分為：

　　解釋現(xiàn)象類：(如解釋一下為什么現(xiàn)代人的壽命比以前的長)

　　對立觀點類：

　　給出兩個對立的事物或者一個事物對立的兩個方面，要求考生支持一方并進行說明或給出兩個對立事物或一個事物對立的兩個方面，要求考生說明二者為什么不同或比較它們的優(yōu)缺點，并給出理由(Some people like different friends. Other likes similar friends. Compare the advantages of these two kinds of friends. Which kind of friend do you prefer? Explain why.)

　　2.形成自己的答案資源庫　　熟悉了寫作題目之后，就要準備自己的答案資源庫了。

　　自己的資源庫要包括：同一類題目的通用觀點，有針對性的例證(不一定都要背名人典故，可以從自身取材，自給自足)。這些內(nèi)容都是要自己去深思，需要有人點撥，才能形成一個清晰的構架和寫作流程的。我的習慣就是羊毛出在羊身上，來源于彼，還原于彼。

　　3.線性思維，總——分——總

　　在新托福獨立寫作中，用這總分總種思維最容易獲得高分，所以你要在平時的練習中一定要注意寫作的結構。托福作文應該寫成三個層次，也就是我們確立了中心思想后應該找到三條理由來支持�！　⊥懈�寫作高分作文

　　題目：　　In modern life, it is no longer necessary to use animals as food and in other products like clothing and medicines. To what extent do you agree or disagree?　　現(xiàn)今已經(jīng)不再需要屠殺動物，并將其制成食品或者其他產(chǎn)品例如衣物或者醫(yī)藥。你是否同意這種觀點?　　范文：　　Trying to live without exploiting animals for food, clothing or medicine can be a healthy lifestyle, except that that would probably never become a fashion. People in the modern world seem to agree that it is not 100 percent justified to eat meat, clothe in leather, or use animals as medical research subjects; nevertheless, very few people would like to choose to live the vegan way for the benefits of animals, people and the planet. The case for animal rights is likely to go nowhere simply because people can have a choice but animals cannot.

　　It would be out of the question to imagine that non-human animals could voice their own opinions. As it is, the question whether animals have rights as humans do has never been considered seriously. More recently, however, pro-animal and vegan groups have joined forces in supporting one basic right for animals: the right not to be property. Roughly speaking, people take it for granted that they own the world which they actually do. Of course, the animal welfare movement is being promoted to illustrate no more than moral conscience, certainly with little, if any, cognitive knowledge of, or obvious understanding from animals themselves. As a result, amid various points of view, a parallel argument is that there is nothing inherently wrong with using animals as resources so long as there is no unnecessary suffering.

　　On the other hand, even today common sense seems to imply that humans are licensed to kill animals for food, clothing or medicine. As if authorized by Heaven, people also make animals suffer in other things, including hard labor in farms and transportation as well as entertainment in circus shows. Discussed as a whole, this is more an issue on habitual necessity, or religious, ethnic and health backgrounds, rather than on mere survival .

　　Although the vegan way of life is a healthy choice, most people cannot accept eating a plant-based diet, nor can they avoid using animal by-products for many purposes. Given that plants can theoretically feed, cover and cure, there is nothing like what comes from animals. In short, talking about sparing animals and leaving them alone is too cheap to carry weight since not every person is willing to be a vegan in the real sense of the word.

　　In all appearances, the animal debate attracts some attention but does not lead to enough action to reduce the pain of animals. Without wearing something like leather jackets and knowing to use medicines from animals, for instance, humans are in part similar to the omnivorous rats that eat anything . So, it is next to impossible for people to change the carnivorous habits and become entirely herbivorous because humans are not born vegans.

　　Trying to live without exploiting animals for food, clothing or medicine can be a healthy lifestyle, except that that would probably never become a fashion. People in the modern world seem to agree that it is not 100 percent justified to eat meat, clothe in leather, or use animals as medical research subjects; nevertheless, very few people would like to choose to live the vegan way for the benefits of animals, people and the planet. The case for animal rights is likely to go nowhere simply because people can have a choice but animals cannot.

　　It would be out of the question to imagine that non-human animals could voice their own opinions. As it is, the question whether animals have rights as humans do has never been considered seriously. More recently, however, pro-animal and vegan groups have joined forces in supporting one basic right for animals: the right not to be property. Roughly speaking, people take it for granted that they own the world which they actually do. Of course, the animal welfare movement is being promoted to illustrate no more than moral conscience, certainly with little, if any, cognitive knowledge of, or obvious understanding from animals themselves. As a result, amid various points of view, a parallel argument is that there is nothing inherently wrong with using animals as resources so long as there is no unnecessary suffering.

　　On the other hand, even today common sense seems to imply that humans are licensed to kill animals for food, clothing or medicine. As if authorized by Heaven, people also make animals suffer in other things, including hard labor in farms and transportation as well as entertainment in circus shows. Discussed as a whole, this is more an issue on habitual necessity, or religious, ethnic and health backgrounds, rather than on mere survival . Although the vegan way of life is a healthy choice, most people cannot accept eating a plant-based diet, nor can they avoid using animal by-products for many purposes. Given that plants can theoretically feed, cover and cure, there is nothing like what comes from animals. In short, talking about sparing animals and leaving them alone is too cheap to carry weight since not every person is willing to be a vegan in the real sense of the word.

　　In all appearances, the animal debate attracts some attention but does not lead to enough action to reduce the pain of animals. Without wearing something like leather jackets and knowing to use medicines from animals, for instance, humans are in part similar to the omnivorous rats that eat anything . So, it is next to impossible for people to change the carnivorous habits and become entirely herbivorous because humans are not born vegans.