Such as "some? People? Do you believe it? That? That? Charity? Organization? Should? Pay? Aid? Where to? Those? Are you online? The greatest? Need? No matter where. They? Live. ? Some? People? Do you believe it? That? That? Charity? Organization? Will it? Is it better? Focus? Open? Help? People? Who is it? Live broadcast? Are you online? Your own? Country? On the contrary ? Discuss? Both? Opinion? And then what? Pay? Yours Opinions. " ?
The background involves charity relief. Is it necessary to help those who need it most regardless of geographical restrictions? Or give priority to helping our own people? The instructor asked to write an argumentative essay. Only by making an accurate response to the two requirements of the topic and combining the content and style perfectly can we get the ideal score.
The official concern is "task? The nine-point rule of achievement points out that "sufficient? Satisfied All of them? That? Requirements? Yes? That? Task; ? Is that clear? A gift? Answer? Completely? Developed? Response "(completely meet the requirements of all questions and give a clear and sufficient response). According to this line of thinking, one obstacle on the road to full marks is the examination of questions, and one-sided understanding leads to deduction.
We can be divided into two types: 1. One-sided understanding of the background of the article leads to digression. Some candidates like to grasp some words to explain and describe the topic when they don't understand the meaning of the topic, ignoring the overall idea of the topic, which leads to digression.
①? I don't understand the meaning of the topic. Take the following real question as an example: "Today? There? Is it? Answer? Great? Increase? Are you online? Antisocial? Behavior? And then what? Lack? Yes? Respect? Where to? Others. ? What? Is it? That? Why? Yes? This what? Measures? Is it okay? Is it? Is anyone here? Where to? Reduce? This? Question? " ? Many candidates report that the topic is difficult to understand, mainly because of "antisocial? The definition of "behavior" is not clear, so the focus is on the second half of the sentence "lack? Yes? Respect? Where to? Others ",some people have written a great book about the fact that young people don't respect the elderly nowadays. Some people focus on extreme crimes such as theft and attribute the reasons to poverty and lack of money. Although there is a certain connection between the two, it can never be understood as "insulting others and not giving up their seats to the elderly" and "antisocial?" Behavior? Is it? Behavior? That? Lack? Consider? For what? Other? And then what? That? May? Why? Damage? Where to? Society,? Is it? On purpose? Or? Through? Negligence? As? Objection? Where to? Pro-social? Behavior? Behavior? That? Does it help? Or? Benefits? Society? (Berger? 2003,? p？ 302)."? This is the explanation given by Wikipedia, including school violence, public drunkenness, vandalism and so on. , all within this range. By analyzing the reasons and solutions, it is difficult to fully respond to the topic. In view of this, it is suggested that candidates should strengthen their understanding of the scope of IELTS topics when preparing for the exam, pay attention to social hot issues at ordinary times, and be familiar with their English vocabulary to avoid digression.
②? From the individual words of the topic to see a real question "air?" Travel? Is it okay? Only? Benefit? That? The richest? People? Are you online? That? The world. ? That? Ordinary? People? Is it okay? Get? No? Advantage? With what? That? Development? Yes? Air? Travel. ? Where to? What? Degree? Do what? What about you? Do you agree Or? Disagree? " ? Many candidates rushed to write the word air travel when they saw it, writing about the advantages and disadvantages of air travel, such as energy consumption and pollution. As we all know, this topic is about the benefits that air travel brings to the rich and ordinary people. When you have finished writing and read it carefully, it will be too late to regret it.
For this kind of "impatient" candidates, the advice is to "think twice before you act" and carefully understand the meaning of the topic. One-sided understanding of the background often stems from the impatience of candidates or their inability to master certain vocabulary and sentence patterns well. In order to avoid this kind of problem, it is suggested to strengthen the practice of writing real questions and memorize commonly used hot words. 2. One-sided understanding of the explanation that leads to digression often implies the questioner's expectations and requirements for the article. Candidates should think carefully and avoid digression.
①? Are there many explanations for one-sided understanding of individual words? People? Think? It? Is it? Very? Does it matter? Where to? Protection? Environment? But? They? Manufacturing? No? Work hard? Where to? Do what? It? By themselves. ? Why? Is it? It? What's going on? Where to? Solve? This? Questions Some candidates only pay attention to the "why" and environmental protection scenes in the background of the topic, without combining the background with the explanation. As a result, they only explained the reasons why people protect the environment, ignoring the requirements of the topic "Why people know that environmental protection is important but don't do it". In my opinion, as far as dozens of words are concerned, candidates would rather spend more time carefully understanding the meaning of the question. Only when the topic is accurate can they talk about the scores of vocabulary, sentence patterns and overall coherence.
②? Did not seriously grasp the connection between instructions, a lot? People? Is it? Optimism? About what? That? 2 1st？ Century? And then what? Do you see it? It? As? Ann? Opportunity? Where to? Manufacturing? Positive? Change? Where to? That? The world. ? Where to? What? Degree? Do what? What about you? Do you agree Or? Disagree? With what? Their? Optimistic about what? Change? Will it? What about you? Like what? Where to? Do you see it? Are you online? That? New? hundred years
The topic has two explanations, namely, "Do you agree with the optimistic attitude of the topic" and "What changes do you hope to see in the new century?" At first glance, candidates can agree with the attitude in the background and comment on some positive changes, but the second instruction actually implies that the questioner is required to analyze both sides, otherwise it is redundant. So the structure of bilateral or concession articles will be more suitable for this topic. The one-sidedness of instruction understanding often stems from the overconfidence of candidates, who are eager to write after reading it.