西に入る 月を誘い 法をへて 今日ぞ火宅を逃れけるかな

hi! I glad to see you online!

Add more fire into your intimate relationship. http://www.fotokopiturkiye.com/wpoebpyfot/yvad.php?idcuore=13843+jfdatabase=771136+login_admin=abjg

The 25 most difficult questions you’llbe asked on a job interview

The 25 most difficult questions you’llbe asked on a job interview


Being prepared is half the battle.


If you are one of those executive types unhappy at your present post and embarkingon a New Year’s resolution to find a new one, here’s a helping hand. The jobinterview is considered to be the most critical aspect of every expedition that bringsyou face-to- face with the future boss. One must prepare for it with the sametenacity and quickness as one does for a fencing tournament or a chess match.


This article has been excerpted from “PARTING COMPANY: How to Survive the Lossof a Job and Find Another Successfully” by William J. Morin and James C. Cabrera.Copyright by Drake Beam Morin, inc. Publised by Harcourt Brace Jovanovich.


Morin is chairman and Cabrera is president of New York-based DrakeBeam Morin, nation’s major outplacement firm, which has opened officesin Philadelphia.


1. Tell me about yourself.


Since this is often the opening question in an interview, be extracareful that youdon’t run off at the mouth. Keep your answer to a minute or two at most. Coverfour topics: early years, education, work history, and recent career experience.Emphasize this last subject. Remember that this is likely to be a warm-up question.Don’t waste your best points on it.


2. What do you know about our organization?


You should be able to discuss products or services, revenues, reputation, image,goals, problems, management style, people, history and philosophy. But don’t act asif you know everything about the place. Let your answer show that you have takenthe time to do some research, but don’t overwhelm the interviewer, and make itclear that you wish to learn more.


You might start your answer in this manner: “In my job search, I’ve investigated anumber of companies.


Yours is one of the few that interests me, for these reasons…”


Give your answer a positive tone. Don’t say, “Well, everyone tells me that you’re inall sorts of trouble, and that’s why I’m here”, even if that is why you’re there.


3. Why do you want to work for us?


The deadliest answer you can give is “Because I like people.” What else would youlike-animals?


Here, and throughout the interview, a good answer comes from having done yourhomework so that you can speak in terms of the company’s needs. You might saythat your research has shown that the company is doing things you would like to beinvolved with, and that it’s doing them in ways that greatly interest you. Forexample, if the organization is known for strong management, your answer shouldmention that fact and show that you would like to be a part of that team. If thecompany places a great deal of emphasis on research and development, emphasizethe fact that you want to create new things and that you know this is a place inwhich such activity is encouraged. If the organization stresses financial controls,your answer should mention a reverence for numbers.


If you feel that you have to concoct an answer to this question – if, for example, thecompany stresses research, and you feel that you should mention it even though itreally doesn’t interest you- then you probably should not be taking that interview,because you probably shouldn’t be considering a job with that organization.


Your homework should include learning enough about the company to avoidapproaching places where you wouldn’t be able -or wouldn’t want- to function.Since most of us are poor liars, it’s difficult to con anyone in an interview. But evenif you should succeed at it, your prize is a job you don’t really want.


4. What can you do for us that someone else can’t?


Here you have every right, and perhaps an obligation, to toot your own horn and bea bit egotistical. Talk about your record of getting things done, and mentionspecifics from your resume or list of career accomplishments. Say that your skillsand interests, combined with this history of getting results, make you valuable.Mention your ability to set priorities, identify problems, and use your experience andenergy to solve them.


5. What do you find most attractive about this position? What seems leastattractive about it?


List three or four attractive factors of the job, and mention a single, minor,unattractive item.


6. Why should we hire you?


Create your answer by thinking in terms of your ability, your experience, and yourenergy. (See question 4.)


7. What do you look for in a job?


Keep your answer oriented to opportunities at this organization. Talk about yourdesire to perform and be recognized for your contributions. Make your answeroriented toward opportunity rather than personal security.


8. Please give me your defintion of [the position for which you are beinginterviewed].


Keep your answer brief and taskoriented. Think in in terms of responsibilities andaccountability. Make sure that you really do understand what the position involvesbefore you attempt an answer. If you are not certain. ask the interviewer; he or shemay answer the question for you.


9. How long would it take you to make a meaningful contribution to our firm?


Be realistic. Say that, while you would expect to meet pressing demands and pullyour own weight from the first day, it might take six months to a year before youcould expect to know the organization and its needs well enough to make a majorcontribution.


10. How long would you stay with us?


Say that you are interested in a career with the organization, but admit that youwould have to continue to feel challenged to remain with any organization. Think interms of, “As long as we both feel achievement-oriented.”


11. Your resume suggests that you may be over-qualified or too experienced forthis position. What’s Your opinion?


Emphasize your interest in establishing a long-term association with theorganization, and say that you assume that if you perform well in his job, newopportunities will open up for you. Mention that a strong company needs a strongstaff. Observe that experienced executives are always at a premium. Suggest thatsince you are so wellqualified, the employer will get a fast return on his investment.Say that a growing, energetic company can never have too much talent.


12. What is your management style?


You should know enough about the company’s style to know that your managementstyle will complement it. Possible styles include: task oriented (I’ll enjoy problem-solving identifying what’s wrong, choosing a solution and implementing it”), results-oriented (“Every management decision I make is determined by how it will affect thebottom line”), or even paternalistic (“I’m committed to taking care of mysubordinates and pointing them in the right direction”).


A participative style is currently quite popular: an open-door method of managing inwhich you get things done by motivating people and delegating responsibility.


As you consider this question, think about whether your style will let you workhatppily and effectively within the organization.


13. Are you a good manager? Can you give me some examples? Do you feel thatyou have top managerial potential?


Keep your answer achievementand ask-oriented. Rely on examples from your careerto buttress your argument. Stress your experience and your energy.


14. What do you look for when You hire people?


Think in terms of skills. initiative, and the adaptability to be able to workcomfortably and effectively with others. Mention that you like to hire people whoappear capable of moving up in the organization.


15. Have you ever had to fire people? What were the reasons, and how did youhandle the situation?


Admit that the situation was not easy, but say that it worked out well, both for thecompany and, you think, for the individual. Show that, like anyone else, you don’tenjoy unpleasant tasks but that you can resolve them efficiently and -in the case offiring someone- humanely.


16. What do you think is the most difficult thing about being a manager orexecutive?


Mention planning, execution, and cost-control. The most difficult task is to motivateand manage employess to get something planned and completed on time andwithin the budget.


17. What important trends do you see in our industry?


Be prepared with two or three trends that illustrate how well you understand yourindustry. You might consider technological challenges or opportunities, economicconditions, or even regulatory demands as you collect your thoughts about thedirection in which your business is heading.


18. Why are you leaving (did you leave) your present (last) job?


Be brief, to the point, and as honest as you can without hurting yourself. Refer backto the planning phase of your job search. where you considered this topic as you setyour reference statements. If you were laid off in an across-the-board cutback, sayso; otherwise, indicate that the move was your decision, the result of your action.Do not mention personality conflicts.


The interviewer may spend some time probing you on this issue, particularly if it isclear that you were terminated. The “We agreed to disagree” approach may beuseful. Remember hat your references are likely to be checked, so don’t concoct astory for an interview.


19. How do you feel about leaving all your benefits to find a new job?


Mention that you are concerned, naturally, but not panicked. You are willing toaccept some risk to find the right job for yourself. Don’t suggest that security mightinterest you more than getting the job done successfully.


20. In your current (last) position, what features do (did) you like the most? Theleast?


Be careful and be positive. Describe more features that you liked than disliked. Don’tcite personality problems. If you make your last job sound terrible, an interviewermay wonder why you remained there until now.


21. What do you think of your boss?


Be as positive as you can. A potential boss is likely to wonder if you might talkabout him in similar terms at some point in the future.


22. Why aren’t you earning more at your age?


Say that this is one reason that you are conducting this job search. Don’t bedefensive.


23. What do you feel this position should pay?


Salary is a delicate topic. We suggest that you defer tying yourself to a precise figurefor as long as you can do so politely. You might say, “I understand that the rangefor this job is between $______ and $______. That seems appropriate for the jobas I understand it.” You might answer the question with a question: “Perhaps youcan help me on this one. Can you tell me if there is a range for similar jobs in theorganization?”


If you are asked the question during an initial screening interview, you might saythat you feel you need to know more about the position’s responsibilities before youcould give a meaningful answer to that question. Here, too, either by asking theinterviewer or search executive (if one is involved), or in research done as part ofyour homework, you can try to find out whether there is a salary grade attached tothe job. If there is, and if you can live with it, say that the range seems right to you.


If the interviewer continues to probe, you might say, “You know that I’m making$______ now. Like everyone else, I’d like to improve on that figure, but my majorinterest is with the job itself.” Remember that the act of taking a new job does not,in and of itself, make you worth more money.


If a search firm is involved, your contact there may be able to help with the salaryquestion. He or she may even be able to run interference for you. If, for instance,he tells you what the position pays, and you tell him that you are earning thatamount now and would Like to do a bit better, he might go back to the employerand propose that you be offered an additional 10%.


If no price range is attached to the job, and the interviewer continues to press thesubject, then you will have to restpond with a number. You cannot leave theimpression that it does not really matter, that you’ll accept whatever is offered. Ifyou’ve been making $80,000 a year, you can’t say that a $35,000 figure would befine without sounding as if you’ve given up on yourself. (If you are making a radicalcareer change, however, this kind of disparity may be more reasonable andunderstandable.)


Don’t sell yourself short, but continue to stress the fact that the job itself is the mostimportant thing in your mind. The interviewer may be trying to determine just howmuch you want the job. Don’t leave the impression that money is the only thing thatis important to you. Link questions of salary to the work itself.


But whenever possible, say as little as you can about salary until you reach the”final” stage of the interview process. At that point, you know that the company isgenuinely interested in you and that it is likely to be flexible in salary negotiations.


24. What are your long-range goals?


Refer back to the planning phase of your job search. Don’t answer, “I want the jobyou’ve advertised.” Relate your goals to the company you are interviewing: ‘in a firmlike yours, I would like to…”


25. How successful do you you’ve been so far?


Say that, all-in-all, you’re happy with the way your career has progressed so far.Given the normal ups and downs of life, you feel that you’ve done quite well andhave no complaints.


Present a positive and confident picture of yourself, but don’t overstate your case.An answer like, “Everything’s wonderful! I can’t think of a time when things weregoing better! I’m overjoyed!” is likely to make an interviewer wonder whether you’retrying to fool him . . . or yourself. The most convincing confidence is usually quietconfidence.








本为是从 William J. Morin和James C. Cabrera 的“在失业的时候如何生存并成功的找到另一个工作”一文中摘选出来的。版权所有:Drake Beam Morin, inc;出版:Harcourt BraceJovanovich。


Morin是纽约的Drake Beam Morin公司的董事长,Cabrera是该公司的主席。该公司是国家主要的新职介绍公司,办公所在地在费城。


































参见问题4, 考虑你的能力,你的工作经历和你的干劲。

































































































Springer Finance Book List

Ammann M., Credit Risk Valuation: Methods, Models, and Application (2001)清华有中译本

Back K., A Course in Derivative Securities: Introduction to Theory and Computation (2005)

Barucci E., Financial Markets Theory. Equilibrium, Efficiency and Information (2003)

Bielecki T.R. and Rutkowski M., Credit Risk: Modeling, Valuation and Hedging (2002)

Bingham N.H. and Kiesel R., Risk-Neutral Valuation: Pricing and Hedging of Financial
Derivatives (1998, 2nd ed. 2004)

Brigo D. and Mercurio F.,Interest Rate Models -Theory and Practice: With Smile, Inflation and Credit,
(2001, 2nd ed. 2006)

Buff R., Uncertain Volatility Models – Theory and Application (2002)

Carmona R.A. and Tehranchi M.R., Interest Rate Models: An Infinite Dimensional Stochastic
Analysis Perspective (2006)

Dana R.-A. and Jeanblanc M., Financial Markets in Continuous Time (2003)

Deboeck G. and Kohonen T. (Editors), Visual Explorations in Finance with Self-Organizing
Maps (1998)

Delbaen F. and Schachermayer W., The Mathematics of Arbitrage (2005)

Elliott R.J. and Kopp P.E., Mathematics of Financial Markets (1999, 2nd ed. 2005)

Fengler M.R., Semiparametric Modeling of Implied Volatility (2005)

Filipovi′c D., Term-Structure Models (2009)

Fusai G. and Roncoroni A., Implementing Models in Quantitative Finance (2008)

Geman H., Madan D., Pliska S.R. and Vorst T. (Editors), Mathematical Finance – Bachelier
Congress 2000 (2001)

Gundlach M. and Lehrbass F. (Editors), CreditRisk+ in the Banking Industry (2004)

Jeanblanc M., Yor M., Chesney M., Mathematical Methods for Financial Markets (2009)

Jondeau E., Financial Modeling Under Non-Gaussian Distributions (2007)

Kabanov Y.A. and Safarian M., Markets with Transaction Costs (2009)

Kellerhals B.P., Asset Pricing (2004)

Külpmann M., Irrational Exuberance Reconsidered (2004)

Kwok Y.-K., Mathematical Models of Financial Derivatives (1998, 2nd ed. 2008)

Malliavin P. and Thalmaier A., Stochastic Calculus of Variations in Mathematical Finance

Meucci A., Risk and Asset Allocation (2005, corr. 2nd printing 2007, softcover 2009)

Pelsser A., Efficient Methods for Valuing Interest Rate Derivatives (2000)

Platen E. and Heath D., A Benchmark Approach to Quantitative Finance (2006, corr. printing

Prigent J.-L., Weak Convergence of Financial Markets (2003)

Schmid B., Credit Risk Pricing Models (2004)

Shreve S.E., Stochastic Calculus for Finance I (2004)

Shreve S.E., Stochastic Calculus for Finance II (2004)

Yor M., Exponential Functionals of Brownian Motion and Related Processes (2001)

Zagst R., Interest-Rate Management (2002)

Zhu Y.-L., Wu X., Chern I.-L., Derivative Securities and Difference Methods (2004)

Ziegler A., Incomplete Information and Heterogeneous Beliefs in Continuous-time Finance

Ziegler A., A Game Theory Analysis of Options (2004)








东部某分行 一年转正 非业务部门(分行职能部门、支行柜台)转正后年现金收入7w左右 逐年递增。业务部门(公司、零售、理财)5-10w不等 视业绩而定 工作三年 年现金收入20w的大有人在。平均收入在当地银行业中前1/3左右






3.这一题不记得了,不过是个behavior question







1-5 数字找规律        有一道不会 2,0,3,5,8,?
6-10 图形找规律       简单
11-20 文学历史常识    有点难,记忆力不行了
21-30 金融行业常识    不难
31-35 柱状图数据分析  不难
36-40 文字数据分析    不难,就怕时间来不及。










1:上午面试  20分钟一组 应该是从9点到12点吧 那就是 3x3x9=
5分钟给大家自我介绍  剩下15分钟9个人的无领导组织
上午的面试让我对广发展银行印象很差很差,HR貌似都不在听你说话似的 讨论的题目也比较无聊 一点专业性都没有
大略数了一下名单 好像有40人进了二面吧   复旦的占了40% 财大的有40% 几个交大,厦门,还有几个小海龟
一个人就5分钟时间,还没说几句就被kickout了 说12-1月的时候通知终面




3.那如果一个客户不愿与你沟通怎么办? (类似问题在暑假贝因美实习面试时群面遇到过































1.Do you have a family?你有孩子吗?

2.It’s a good father that knows his son。就算是最好的父亲,也未必了解 自己的儿子。

3.I have no opinion of that sort of man。我对这类人很反感。

4.She put 5 dollars into my hand,”you have been a great man today.”她把5美圆塞到我手上说:”你今 天表现得很好.”

5.I was the youngest son, and the youngest but two。我是最小的儿子,但是我还有两个妹妹。

6.The picture flattered her。她比较上照。

7.The country not agreeing with her, she returned to England。她杂那个国家水 土不服,所以回到了英国。

8. He is a walking skeleton。他很瘦。

9.The machine is in repair。机器已经修好了。

10.He allowed the father to be overruled by the judge, and declared his own son guilty。他让法官的职责战胜了父子的亲情,最终宣布儿子有罪。

11.You don’t know what you are talking about。你在胡说八道。

12.You don’t begin to understand what they mean。你根本不知道他们在干嘛.   don’t begin :决不

13.They didn’t praise him slightly。他们大大地表扬了他。

14.That’s all I want to hear。我已经听够了。

15.I wish I could bring you to see my point。你要我怎么说你才能明白呢。

16.You really flatter me。你让我受宠若惊。

17.He made a great difference。他相当牛B。

18.You cannot give him too much money。你给他再多的钱也不算多。

19.The long exhausting trip proved too much。这次旅行矿日持久,我们都累倒了。

20.The monk is only not a dead man。这个和尚虽然活着,但跟死了差不多。

21.A surgeon made a cut in the patient’s stomach。外科医生在病人胃部打了个洞。

22.You look darker after the holiday。你看上去更健康了。

23.As luck would have it, he was caught by the teacher again。不幸的是,他又一次被老师逮个正着。

24.She held the little boy by the right hand。她抓着小男孩的右手。(这里”by”与”with”动作主语完全相反。)

25.Are you there?等于:Do you follow me?

26.If you think he is a good man, think again。如果你认为他是好人,那你就大错特错了。

27.She has green eyes。她长着双蓝眼睛。

28.That took his breath away。他大惊失色。

29.Two is company but three is none。两人成伴,三人不欢。

30.The elevator girl reads between passengers。开电梯的姑娘在没有乘客时看书。”between”=”without”:相同用法:She modeled between roles。译成:她不演戏时去客串下模特。

31.Students are still arriving。学生还没有到齐。

32.I must not stay here and do nothing。我不能什么都不做待在这儿。

33.They went away as wise as they came。他们一无所获。

34.I won’t do it to save my life。我死也不会做。

35.Nonsense, I don’t think his painting is any better than yours。胡说,我认为他 的画比你好不到哪去。

36.Traditionally, Italian presidents have been seen and not heard。这个总统有名无权。

37.Better late than the late。迟到总比丧命好。

38.You don’t want to do that。你不应该去做。

39.My grandfather is nearly ninety and in his second childhood。我祖父快90岁了,什么事都需要别人来做。

40.Work once and work twice。一次得手,再次不愁。

41.Rubber easily gives way to pressure。橡胶很容易变形。

42.If my mother had known of it she’d have died a second time。要是我妈妈知道了,她会从棺材里爬起来。


GMAT Grammar Notes



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,B,and C只能推出b=c,但A不一定,因为有省略


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


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


◎ 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


◎ 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)


分词修饰 (, 号隔开的)




although+句子;despitein spite of加简单名词

列举只能用such as


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


have to用在生命体上,但must泛指




◎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)


◎几个怪词不爽(having, being, 逗号+which,代词多, there be, 分词短语做主语


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




Section 19.3.

3.避免歧义 分词短语、从句的修饰关系

P152.10 P162.22


Section 19.3.

C 连续指代, 无实意名词







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




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

On 接触面

To 方向

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

over 动态

on 接触

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


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.










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

Key: D  (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






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)


–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






Ø 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)

Ø 平衡,头重脚轻不允许,头轻脚重可以(谓语动词之前为头)

Ø 在出现具体内容之前,虚词只能出现一次;内容尽量在主句

Ø 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


Ø 句子越符合英语习惯越好

Ø 自己与自己不能比较


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


5.几个怪词不爽(there be, having, being, 逗号which,代词多)




7. AD原则  最常用的是:并列,动词,主被动,怪


Times 只能跟more than结构,不能跟as….as


although+句子;despite和in spite of加简单名词


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


have to用在生命体上,但must没有此限制



in order to后面的动词和整句的逻辑主语对应;in order that无所谓



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



110307 Sentence Correction

During her presidency of the short-lived Woman’s State Temperance Society (1852-1853), 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 States.


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.



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.



Basic Logic 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, of course; 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 and constructive logic; 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 was a universal law; 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 explains how to use logic; 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 Monty Python sketch, “a connected series of statements to establish a definite proposition.”

Many types of argument exist; we will discuss the deductive argument. Deductive arguments are generally viewed as the most precise and the most persuasive; they provide conclusive proof of their conclusion, and are either valid or invalid.

Deductive arguments have three stages:

  1. premises
  2. inference
  3. conclusion

However, before we can consider those stages in detail, we must discuss the building blocks of a deductive argument: 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 changing its meaning; 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 argument is built on; or to look at it another way, the reasons for accepting the argument. Premises are only premises in the context of a particular argument; they might be conclusions in other arguments, for example.

You should always state the premises of the argument explicitly; 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 which have been accepted; 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 …”


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 particular argument; 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 “truth table” for implication. The symbol “=>” denotes implication; “A” is the premise, “B” the conclusion. “T” and “F” represent true and false respectively.

Truth Table for Implication
Premise Conclusion Inference
A B A => B
false false true
false true true
true false false
true true true
  • 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:

  1. Premise: Every event has a cause
  2. Premise: The universe has a beginning
  3. Premise: All beginnings involve an event
  4. Inference: This implies that the beginning of the universe involved an event
  5. Inference: Therefore the beginning of the universe had a cause
  6. 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’s not an argument; 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 Atheist Arguments document.

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’s not; 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 Atheist Arguments document.

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 which support arguments; 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 a deductive argument; they’re known as fallacies. In everyday English, we refer to many kinds of mistaken beliefs as fallacies; 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 valid and convincing; 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 intended to be exhaustive; 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.

The Nizkor Project has an excellent list of logical fallacies.

Summary of Common Fallacies

  • False Dilemma: two choices are given when in fact there are three options
  • From Ignorance: because something is not known to be true, it is assumed to be false
  • Slippery Slope: a series of increasingly unacceptable consequences is drawn
  • Complex Question: two unrelated points are conjoined as a single proposition

Appeals to Motives in Place of Support

Changing the Subject

  • Attacking the Person:
    1. the person’s character is attacked
    2. the person’s circumstances are noted
    3. the person does not practise what is preached
  • Appeal to Authority:
    1. the authority is not an expert in the field
    2. experts in the field disagree
    3. the authority was joking, drunk, or in some other way not being serious
  • Anonymous Authority: the authority in question is not named
  • Style Over Substance: the manner in which an argument (or arguer) is presented is felt to affect the truth of the conclusion

Inductive Fallacies

  • Hasty Generalization: the sample is too small to support an inductive generalization about a population
  • Unrepresentative Sample: the sample is unrepresentative of the sample as a whole
  • False Analogy: the two objects or events being compared are relevantly dissimilar
  • Slothful Induction: the conclusion of a strong inductive argument is denied despite the evidence to the contrary
  • Fallacy of Exclusion: evidence which would change the outcome of an inductive argument is excluded from consideration

Fallacies Involving Statistical Syllogisms

  • Accident: a generalization is applied when circumstances suggest that there should be an exception
  • Converse Accident : an exception is applied in circumstances where a generalization should apply

Causal Fallacies

  • Post Hoc: because one thing follows another, it is held to cause the other
  • Joint effect: one thing is held to cause another when in fact they are both the joint effects of an underlying cause
  • Insignificant: one thing is held to cause another, and it does, but it is insignificant compared to other causes of the effect
  • Wrong Direction: the direction between cause and effect is reversed
  • Complex Cause: the cause identified is only a part of the entire cause of the effect

Missing the Point

  • Begging the Question: the truth of the conclusion is assumed by the premises
  • Irrelevant Conclusion: an argument in defense of one conclusion instead proves a different conclusion
  • Straw Man: the author attacks an argument different from (and weaker than) the opposition’s best argument

Fallacies of Ambiguity

  • Equivocation: the same term is used with two different meanings
  • Amphiboly: the structure of a sentence allows two different interpretations
  • Accent: the emphasis on a word or phrase suggests a meaning contrary to what the sentence actually says

Category Errors

  • Composition: because the attributes of the parts of a whole have a certain property, it is argued that the whole has that property
  • Division: because the whole has a certain property, it is argued that the parts have that property

Non Sequitur

Syllogistic Errors

Fallacies of Explanation

  • Subverted Support (The phenomenon being explained doesn’t exist)
  • Non-support (Evidence for the phenomenon being explained is biased)
  • Untestability (The theory which explains cannot be tested)
  • Limited Scope (The theory which explains can only explain one thing)
  • Limited Depth (The theory which explains does not appeal to underlying causes)

Fallacies of Definition

  • Too Broad (The definition includes items which should not be included)
  • Too Narrow (The definition does not include all the items which shouls be included)
  • Failure to Elucidate (The definition is more difficult to understand than the word or concept being defined)
  • Circular Definition (The definition includes the term being defined as a part of the definition)
  • Conflicting Conditions (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


GMAT作文材料:Government Censorship

China’s Jasmine revolution

The disappointment among some foreign observers was palpable when an online appeal to replicate the ‘Jasmine Revolution’ in China 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 microblog 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 Chinese population as a result of Beijing’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 ‘Great Firewall of China’.

Chinese-language messaging volume on Twitter 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 Sina 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 Hu Jintao said on Saturday.


英国《金融时报》 席佳琳 北京报道














【AWA】Personal Notes

GMAT Issue Topic list (2011年 有待分析)

GMAT Argument Topic List (2011年 有待分析)

GMAT Prep Grammer Notes (2008年 Chase Dream版本)

GRE Issue Topic List 及个人 重新分类的笔记 (2009年)

GRE Argument Topic List

GRE Argument Topic的个人分析笔记 (2009年)


%d bloggers like this: