在托福独立写作中最重要的一环是什么，辞藻华丽，语句丰富，大量高逼格词汇？而行文逻辑，语言连贯这些和组织结构相关的思考则没有很被重视。本篇托福培训，朗阁小编就给大家来简述一下托福写作中考生常会碰到的雷区。

朗阁海外考试研究中心  吴瑾

在托福独立写作中最重要的一环是什么，辞藻华丽，语句丰富，大量高逼格词汇？而行文逻辑，语言连贯这些和组织结构相关的思考则没有很被重视。本篇托福培训，朗阁小编就给大家来简述一下托福写作中考生常会碰到的雷区。

往往听到的答案都会是诸如“辞藻华丽”、“句式丰富”或“大词难词高逼格词”等答案，偶有一些声音可能会提到“文章逻辑”、“行文连贯”等跟文章组织结构相关的思考。当然这个问题的答案，其实并不能简单地一言蔽之。

参看过独立写作的评分标准之后，我们其实能清晰明确地理解，考官想要的绝不只是单方面的一个点。那么，如果非要选一个“最重要”来当作答案的话，笔者认为，真正在考场上写独立写作时，最最重要的一环，应归属审题二字。而这一环，恰恰是很多考生在平时练习，甚至考场上不太重视的一环。

朗阁老师将审题的雷区大致归结为两个方面，一是宏观层面踩到了大雷，即题目回答角度完全跑偏，非但“fail to address the task and the topic effectively”，更是“fail to address the task and the topic”；二是微观层面被散弹击中，即题目虽然没有理解错，但在论述过程中因为审题不仔细或论述不严谨，亦或是论述过程中思路出现偏差而带来的论述跑偏。

首先我们先来看一下所谓宏观层面的审题雷区，这样的审题错误往往是由于考生错误地理解考题的本意，而给出了可谓“驴唇不对马嘴”的答案，以TPO 25为例：

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?

Young people nowadays do not give enough time to helping their communities.

以下是一个学生给出的一个主体段：

The main reason for my disagreement is that community service could help students gain knowledge and abilities that cannot be acquired in school. They can get acquainted with people in different age, with different backgrounds, and having different hobbies in helping neighborhoods. This means that students may have to learn how to express ideas, listen to others and cooperate with others, since much team work tends to be involved in the process of doing community service. Last month, I helped plant several trees in my community, and met a retired professor who is also a volunteer. He imparted me a great deal of knowledge about trees and planting. Because of his age, I also helped him finish nearly all labor work and he was more like a director who gave me suggestions and guidance. Evidently, if rejecting community service, I would definitely lose such a precious opportunity.

如果单看上面这个段落，不难看出，作者思路清晰、文字流畅、论述有理有据，但是如果结合题目，其实也不难体会到，作者清晰的思路其实都用在了一个跑偏的方向上。题目问我们“是否同意：如今的年轻人并没有花足够的时间做社区服务”，上文中句里的“disagree”告诉我们他不同意，但是读完整个段落，你是否发现，他不同意的并不是题目，而是这样一个命题，即“如今的年轻人不应该花时间来做社区服务”，因为整个段落他讲的都是做社区服务的好处。

如果回答题目，很明显应该分析的是年轻人为什么已经花了/并没有花足够的时间做社区服务。所以分析的角度也自然应该从年轻人出发，比如如果同意，可能会说现在年轻人太忙了，或是服务意识下降了，或是现在的社会足够健全，不需要年轻人了；如果不同意可以说现在的年轻人服务意识更强了，学校组织或公司组织的服务活动很多，或一些民间NGO等等都让现在的年轻人花了更多时间在help communities上。

这样，才是正确的解题思路，而按照上文的思路，就算文字再好，逻辑再连贯，也只能接受成绩不理想的后果了。这种跑题我们可以称之为是一种宏观的、彻头彻尾的跑题，像踩中了地雷，还是那种一踩即爆的雷，基本后果只能是粉身碎骨。不过如果在考试之前加以足够的练习，这种严重的跑题大部分同学基本都可以避免，然而接下来这种微观的审题失误造成文章跑题就稍显麻烦了。

我们来看一下以下这道题目：

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?

Television, newspapers, magazines, and other media pay too much attention to the personal lives of famous people such as public figures and celebrities.

以下是一位学生的作文片段，开头段和主体段（让步段）：

In almost every form of media, including television, newspapers and magazines, a great deal of attention is paid to the personal lives of celebrities. It seems that the public cannot get enough of this kind of news. However, I believe that what the media should do is to protect and respect the lives of public figures rather than giving too much exposure.

Of course, close reports of super stars, especially news about their private lives and relationships, can satisfy fans’ curiosity and therefore promote the sales of fan magazines and other related products. Those celebrities can also achieve more affection and appear more on TV shows or entertainment news. However, the media should respect the privacy of every individual, including public figures. It is true that celebrities may have chosen to be in the public eye, but that does not give the public the right to know everything about them. Zhang Bozhi, a famous Chinese actress, has to change her dwelling places for three times to protect her sons due to the fanatical paparazzi. It is definitely understandable that a super star should have privacy and an ordinary life.

相信你如果只看以上两个段落可能并不会觉得有什么问题，但是如果我们结合起来题目，不免会产生一些犹疑，也就是很多学生经常有的一种感受，叫做“怪怪的”，这样写得话真的对吗？

我们先来分析下题目：

“你是否同意：电视、报纸、杂志以及其他媒体过于关注名人（比如公众人物或者明星）的私生活了。”

对于这样的问题，我们该如何切题得回答呢？咱们不妨来打个比方，如果你跟你的朋友抱怨“我妈最近太关注我学习了”，那么接下来你的解释应该选择以下哪种思路呢？

1. 她老人家天天盯着我写作业，每天检查我做了多少道题，每周都会跟我们班主任沟通我上课的情况，导致我现在压力非常大，每天都神经紧绷，上课也非常紧张，怕老师跟我妈打小报告；

2. 我妈不应该这么关注我学习，她这样做导致我每天都神经紧绷，上课也非常紧张，怕老师跟我妈打小报告，她也应该关心关心我的心理状态还有我的日常生活。

很明显，种回答方法，是先对于“我妈关注我学习”进行了解释，然后又说了下这样的关注产生的后果，来说明“已经过头了”，而第二种回答方式，虽然也有说到“关注的后果”，但是重点则是在讨论“我妈该不该这样做，我妈应该怎样做才对”。虽然上面两种回答中有相同的地方，但是出发点不一样，导致终点势必有些区别。很明显种答法更符合题目要求，既回应了“关注”又回应了“太”。

类比一下上面的作文题目，如果我同意，应该论述的是“媒体就是太关注了”，反之，应该论述的是“媒体并没有过分关注”，至于“媒体是否应该关注”，这个论题并不是我们重点要讨论的内容，但是“媒体过分关注所产生的后果”可以作为一部分支持论述来支持“too much”。

在上文的写作片段中，作者从开头段开始就已经走在了一条不太正确的道路上：“…a great deal of attention is paid to the personal lives of celebrities … However, I believe that what the media should do is to protect and respect the lives of public figures rather than giving too much exposure.”他用一句话回应了题目，而立场则开始带入了明显的评价。接下来在让步段，前半段他说明的是媒体这样做的意义或产生的正作用，但是接下来话锋一转，说媒体不该这样做，这样的做法其实并没有尊重名人们的隐私，并用影星张柏芝的例子来证明，媒体这样的报道所产生的问题。如此种种，该考生已经沉浸在自己所设定的题目中了，即讨论“媒体是否应该过分关注明星”，至于“pay attention”这个关键词却并没有给出明确的回应，因此即使语言再好，恐怕得分也不会太高。

那么该如何改正呢？既然题目只是问我们一个客观事实，那么论述的过程要么就是用事实说话，摆事实讲道理，比如记者会跟踪、偷拍明星，并将他们的一举一动在时间发布；电视上会邀请明星来参加真人秀（reality shows），甚至还会到明星家里去拍亲子秀，这样明星的整个生活都暴露在公众视野；为了博眼球，他们甚至还会将一些信息进行拼接来制造新闻，甚至是假新闻，然后引发公众关注，企图明星能更多地曝光自己的生活等等，然后再说明这样的关注已经过分了。以下是笔者给出的一个参考主体段：

… I do agree that the media have laid too much emphasis on the privacy of famous people.（开头段）

Firstly, a tendency has emerged that some producers of reality TV shows are willing to allocate large amounts of money to invite celebrities and even their children or families. It is evident that viewers could have an opportunity to get access to the real life of a super star, i.e., to see what a working day or a weekend of a star is, how different a star’s growing experience is from ordinary people, or what a star will do in a relationship. These shows can thus gain its popularity and then earn more from commercials but the celebrities have lost all their privacy and their families’ lives may be bothered as well.

上文中从事实切入，说了所谓“媒体关注”的方式，考生们在写的时候也可以用具体的例子，接下来点到这对于明星来说会产生的问题，以此来回应“too much”。当然这不是唯一的解题思路，对于这道题我们也可以分析这个现象背后存在的原因，但归根结底需要的是命题这个结论。

再来看一下TPO 20这道题目：

Do you agree or disagree with the following statement?

Successful people try new things and take risks rather than only doing what they know how to do well.

Use specific reasons and examples to support your answer.

以下是来自一位学生的开头段和个主体段：

Nowadays there is a controversial issue about how people achieve success. Someone holds the opinion that by trying new things and taking risks that they become successful, while others think that they already know how to do well. From my perspective, I agree that it’s the spirit of adventure that plays the most important role in being successful.

First of all, trying new things could bring people more creativity and inspiration. To achieve success, you must make your products or services outstanding from the competitors. How to do it? I think the key factor is to be creative. In order to be creative, people must try new things. Let us take Jobs for example. The Apple was nearly bankrupt before Steve Jobs was invited to come back. As the CEO, what Jobs had done was trying his best to make products full of creativity. Iphone is the first cellphone using the technique of multi-touch, Macbook air is thinner than any laptops. Therefore, it is creativity that brings Apple from the edge of bankruptcy to the biggest company in the world.

如果读者有关注到上文中加粗的位置，相信你心里也一定在犯嘀咕了，也许也会有一种感觉，叫做“文不对题吧”。我们还是先来翻译一下这道题目的问题：

你是否同意如下观点：成功人士（往往都是）尝试新鲜事物，而不是只做自己确定能做好的事。

刷过一些独立写作题目的考生可能会有一个思维定式，就是认为独立写作基本就在考察某些事情的好与不好。很明显上文中的同学，就把这道题想成了“如何成功”或“成功的要素”，于是他的思路就变成了“冒险创新”跟“稳中求进”，哪个更能让人成功。于是也就有了他的个理由：“尝试新事物可以让人更有创造力。”有同学可能会问，这难道不对吗？成功的人不就是这样的吗？问题就在这里，我们需要论证的是，“成功的人都会尝试新事物”，而不是“尝试新事物使人成功”，细说来，后者应该是前者论题在论述中的一个部分或环节，我们最终需要证明的是一个事实，即“成功人士更爱冒险尝试新事物还是只做自己确定能做好的事”。

于是到这里可能有人会问，刚刚上面的段落中不也举了赫赫有名的乔帮主和他的苹果帝国作例子吗？这恰好不也从正面印证了这个事实吗？没错，如果单独看这个例子其实并无问题，但因为例子去证明的观点并不是考官所问的，所以即使例子对，也会显得文不对题。笔者将上面的例子进行了修正，将它们改成了相对比较正确的内容，读者可以参考对比：

Successful people have long been regarded as the role models for ordinary people and the ones many are willing to imitate. How they succeed in their fields has also been a topic of discussion among public. Although it is sometimes believed that only doing things one person is good at will make success, I still think it is trying new things that should be defined as the determining factor for success, since a diversity of examples have proven this statement.

First of all, the success of a great many business elites should be undoubtedly ascribed to the attempts to develop new fields. Most of them were faced with similar situations when starting their business: being negated, doubted, refused, even despised, just because things they had done were totally new and risky, not only for themselves, but for the market. The only positive side probably lies in the number of their rivals, zero. However, just by doing this, they finally exploit new opportunities, open new markets, and become the winner in the competition. Ma Yun, now the richest man in China, is a good example. After being turned down for hundreds of times, he has built his e-commercial empire all over the world, which used to be labeled as “impossible”. Steve Jobs, used to be the CEO of Apple, has been a legend and the God for billions of fans, largely due to his on-going efforts on the innovation of his products. It is not difficult to imagine that if they had only done what they know they can do well: Ma would have been teaching English in a school and Jobs perhaps a common Harvard undergraduate.

再次提到乔帮主，但提到乔帮主的意义是为了证明一个事实。那么相似地，对于其他类似题目的回答，考生们也应该避免简单的利弊分析，思考清楚，从事实出发，讲道理，切莫“一本正经地胡说八道”。