英语写作段落扩展的方法【精选20篇】

下面是小编为你带来的怎样写事的作文写作方法，希望对你有帮助。

写事要求清楚、具体。一件事情的发生，总离不开时间、地点、人物和事情的起因、经过、结果。这就是人们常说的“记叙文六要素”。把这六个方面写清楚了，才能让读者明白究竟是一件什么事。同时，还要寓理于事，即通过一件事或几件事来说明一个道理。在六要素当中，起因、经过、结果是事情的主要环节。其中，“经过”部分又是事情的核心，是全文成败的关键所在。在小学生的作文里，“经过”部分写得不具体是带有普遍性的问题。小学生的继续文不感人，平淡乏味，这是其中一个重要原因。记事的记叙文可分两种：写事和写活动。

(一)怎样写事

一是把“经过”部分分成几个阶段，然后按照先后顺序一层一层地写得清楚。写的时候多文几个“后来怎样”，文章就具体了。

二是注意材料的详略，有所侧重。对一些重要的过程、场面要细致描绘，使读者有如身临其境。

三是对事件中的人物，特别是主要人物，当时是“怎么说的”、“怎么做的”，又是“怎么想的”，一定要写具体。

(二)怎样写活动

活动都是有目的、有形式、有过程的。搞什么活动?为什么搞活动?则眼搞活动?活动的结果怎样?都要写清楚。写活动也要求写清楚“六要素”，要把活动的时间、地点、人物和活动开始、经过、结果写出来。 在整个活动当中，不是写一个人，二是写一群人;不是用一两件事来写人物，而是通过写一个活动场面，来表现人物的精神面貌。写活动的记叙文，最大的特点就是必须有活动的基本内容、主要过程和重要场面。把印象最深刻的内容作为重点，把自己看到的、听到的、亲身经历的主要部分记叙下来，采用点面结合的方法，既要写好群体活动，又要把个体代表写进去;既要写整个场面，又要突出典型人物。

写活动的文章一般包括两大部分：一是活动的经过，二是自己的感受。如果写“参观”活动，就要用“观一处，感一处”的方法。写整个活动的过程，要用顺叙法，即按活动的先后顺序，把活动时间、地点、人物及活动的经过和结果依次写出来。

电视剧是一种适应电视广播特点、融合舞台和电影艺术的表现方法而形成的艺术样式。小编收集了关于电视剧的写作方法，欢迎阅读。

第一节

剧本基本理论：

态度——写故事最重要的是对故事的态度，不同的态度会产生不同的效果。

主题——在下笔写故事之前，你必须要问自己：你要讲怎样一个故事?是朋友之间的友情，男女之间的爱情，外星入侵地球的故事，还是控诉战争的故事等，这就是主题。

主题必须明确、贯彻、毫不怀疑。一套成功的剧本是要观众看完后，清楚明白作者想表达的思想和主题。

第二节

创造角色冲突

角色冲突是吸引观众的不二法门。这包括故事角色和角色之间的冲突，角色和他自身价值观的冲突等。

方法一：故事里的人物想做一些事情，但有一股力量抗衡他 方法二：不能分解的关系

第三节

创造表面张力

方法一：让你的观众知道一些事而故事中的角色是不知道的。

方法二：让你的观众感到故事中的角色是走在一条错误的路上。

方法三：时间限制

方法四：转折点——使用转折点能制造意外效果，引起观众的预期心理，加强情节的张力，从而持续观众对故事的兴趣。转折点最常出现于故事的前段和后段。剧本前段的转折点一般用于开启故事和陈列出主角即将面临的各项选择。至于后段的转折点则指向主角解决危机，收拢故事。

第四节

其他技巧

伏笔：埋下伏线可以吸引观众追看剧情。

关键匙：就是最能象征整个故事的对象。

蒙太奇：有两个画面，梅花间竹地播出，这就是蒙太奇。蒙太奇亦可以指一些不同而没有关系的画面，当它们剪接在一起时，会产生另一种意义。

第五节

剧本三大忌：

写剧本变写小说：剧本写作和小说写作是两样完全不同的事。写剧本的目的是用文字去表达一连串的画面，所以你要让看剧本的人见到文字而又能够实时联想到一幅图画，将他们带到动画的世界里。小说就不同，它除了写出画面外，更包括抒情句子，修辞手法，和角色内心世界的描述。这些在剧本里是不应该有的。

用说话去交待剧情：剧本里不宜有太多的对话(除非是剧情的需要)，否则整个故事会变得不连贯，缺乏动作，观众看起来就似听读剧本一样，好闷。要知道你现在要写的是电影语言，而不是文学语言，只适合于读而不适合于看的便不是好剧本。所以，一部优秀的剧本，对白越少，画面感就越强，冲击力就会越大。

故事太多枝节：很多人写剧本都写得太多枝节，在枝节中有很多的角色，穿插了很多的场口，使故事变得复杂化，观众可能会看得不明白，不清楚作者想要表达什么主题。写剧本有一句格言：Simple is the best!愈简单的故事就越好。但是，简单永远是最困难的：Simple is difficult.

下面的材料旨在丰富学生在是非问题写作方面的思想和语言，考生在复习时可以先分类阅读这些篇章，然后尝试写相关方面的作文题。

对于素材中用黑体字的部分，特别建议你熟读，背诵，因为它们在语言和观点上都值得吸收。学习语言的人应该明白，表达能力和思想深度都靠日积月累，潜移默化。从某种意义上说，提高英语写作能力无捷径可走，你必须大段背诵英语文章才能逐渐形成语感和用英语进行表达的能力。这一关，没有任何人能代替你过。

因此，建议你下点苦功夫，把背单词的精神拿出来背诵文章。何况，并不是要求你背了之后永远牢记在心：你可以这个星期背，下个星期忘。这没有关系，相信你的大脑具有神奇的能力。背了工具箱里的文章后，你会惊讶的发现：I can think in English now！

1.?????? Proverbs

1. A graduation ceremony is an event where the commencement speaker tells thousands of students dressed in identical caps and gowns that individuality is the key to success.

2. The primary purpose of a liberal education is to make one’s mind a pleasant place in which to spend one’s time.

3. Next in importance to freedom and justice is popular education, without which neither freedom nor justice can be permanently maintained.

4. The classroom--not the trench--is the frontier of freedom now and forevermore.

5. Education’s purpose is to replace an empty mind with an open one.

6. It is the purpose of education to help us become autonomous, creative, inquiring people who have the will and intelligence to create our own destiny.

7. You see, real ongoing, lifelong education doesn’t answer questions; it provokes them.

8. People will pay more to be entertained than educated.

9.the most important function of education at any level is to develop the personality of the individual and the significance of his life to himself and to others. This is the basic architecture of a life; the rest is ornamentation and decoration of the structure.

10. The essence of our efforts to see that every child has a chance must be to assure each as equal opportunity, not to become equal, but to become different-to realize whatever unique potential of body, mind, and spirit he or she possesses.

11. A great teacher never strives to explain his vision-he simply invites you to stand beside him and see for yourself.

12. If you can read and don’, you are an illiterate by choice.

2. Damaging Research

A study by National Parent-Teacher Organization revealed that in the average American school, eighteen negatives are identified for every positive that is pointed out. The Wisconsin study revealed that when children enter the first grade, 80 percent of them feel pretty good themselves, but by the time they get to the sixth grade, only 10 percent of them have good self-images.

3. Education and Citizenship

An important aspect of education in the United States is the relationship between education and citizenship. Throughout its history this nation has emphasized public education as a means of transmitting democratic values, creating equality of opportunity, and preparing new generations of citizens to function in society. In addition, the schools have been expected to help shape society itself. During the 1950s, for example, efforts to combat racial segregation focused on the schools. Later, when the Soviet Union launched the first orbiting satellite, American schools and colleges came under intense pressure and were offered many incentives to improve their science and mathematics programs so that the nations would not fall behind the Soviet Union in scientific and technological capabilities.

Education is often viewed as a tool for solving social problems, especially social inequality. The schools, t is thought, can transform young people from vastly different backgrounds into competent, upwardly mobile adults. Yet these goals seem almost impossible to attain. In recent years, in fact, public education has been at the center of numerous controversies arising from the gap between the ideal and the reality. Part of the problem is that different groups in society have different have different expectations. Some feel that children should be taught basic job-related skills; still others believe education should not only prepare children to compete in society but also help them maintain their cultural identity (and, in the case of Hispanic children, their language). On the other hand, policymakers concerned with education emphasize the need to increase the level of student achievement and to improve parents in their children’s education.

Some reformers and critics have called attention to the need to link formal schooling with programs designed to address social problems. Sociologist Charles Moscos, for example, is a leader in the movement to expand programs like the Peace Corps, Vista, and Outward Bound into a system of voluntary national service. National service, as Moscos defines it, would entail “the full-time undertaking of public duties by young people whether as citizen soldiers or civilian servers-who are paid subsistence wages” and serve for at least one year. In return for this period of service, the volunteers would receive assistance in paying for college or other educational expenses.

Advocates of national service and school-to-work programs believe that education does not have to be confined to formal schooling. In devising strategies to provide opportunities for young people to serve their society, they emphasize the educational value of citizenship experiences gained outside the classroom. At this writing there is little indication that national service will become a new educational institution in the United States, although the concept is steadily gaining support among educators and social critics.

4. The Teacher’s Role

Given the undeniable importance of classroom experience, sociologists have done a considerable amount of research on what goes on in the classroom. Often they start from the premise that, along with the influence of peers, students’ experiences in the classroom are of central importance to their later development. One study examined the impact of a single first-grade teacher on her students’ subsequent adult status. The surprising results of this study have important implications. It is evident that good teachers can make a big difference in children’s lives, a fact that gives increased urgency to the need to improve the quality of primary-school teaching. The reforms carried out by educational leaders like James Comer suggest that when good teaching is combined with high levels of parental involvement the results can be even more dramatic.

Because the role of the teacher is to change the learner in some way, the teacher-student relationship is an important part of education. Sociologists have pointed out that this relationship is asymmetrical or unbalanced, with the teacher being in a position of authority and the student having little choice but to passively absorb the information provided by the teacher. In other words, in conventional classrooms there is little opportunity for the students to become actively involved in the learning process. On the other hand, students often develop strategies for undercutting the teacher’s authority: mentally withdrawing, interrupting, and the like. Hence, much current research assumes that students and teachers influence each other instead of assuming that the influence is always in a single direction.

5. Education Philosophy

For the past fifty years our schools have operated on the theories of John Dewey (1859-1953), an American educator and writer. Dewey believed hat the school’s job was to enhance the natural development of the growing child, rather than to pour information, for which the child had no context, into him or her. In the Dewey system, the child becomes the active agent in his own education, rather than a passive receptacle for facts.

Consequently, American schools are very enthusiastic about teaching “life skills” –logical thinking, analysis, creative problem--solving. The actual content of the lessons is secondary to the process, which is supposed to train the child to be able to handle whatever life may present, including all the unknowns of the future. Students and teachers both regard pure memorization as an uncreative and somewhat vulgar.

In addition to “life skills”, schools are assigned to solve the ever growing stoke of social problems. Racism, teenage pregnancy, alcoholism, drug use, reckless driving, and are just a few of the modern problems that have appeared on the school curriculum.

This all contributes to a high degree of social awareness in American youngsters.

6. Student Life

To the students, the most notable difference between elementary school and the higher levels is that in junior high they start “changing classes”. This means that rather than spending the day in one classroom, they switch classrooms to meet their different teachers. This gives them three or four minutes between classes in the hallways, where a great deal of the important social action of high school traditionally takes place. Students have lockers in these hallways, around which thy congregate.

Society in general does not take the business of studying very seriously. Schoolchildren have a great deal of free time, which they are encouraged to fill with extracurricular activities—sports, clubs, cheerleading, scouts—supposed to inculcate such qualities as leadership, sportsmanship, ability to organize, etc. those who don’t become engaged in such activities or have afterschool jobs have plenty of opportunity to “hang out”, listen to teenager music, and watch television.

Compared to other nations, American students do not have much homework. Studies also show that American parents have lower expectations for their children’s success in school than other nationalities do. (Historically, there has not been much correlation between American school success and success in later life.) “He’s just not a scholar”, the American parents might say, content that their son is on the swim team and doesn’t take drugs. (Some of the young do choose to study hard, for reason of their own, such as determining that the road to riches lies through Harvard Business School.)

What American schools do effectively teach is the competitive method. In innumerable ways children are pitted against each other—whether in classroom discussion, spelling bees, reading groups, or tests. Every classroom is expected to produce a scattering of A’s and F’s (teachers often grade A=excellent; B=good; C=average; D=poor; and F=failed). A teacher who gives all A’s looks too soft—so students are aware that they are competing for the limited number of top marks.

Foreign students sometimes don’t understand that copying from other people’s papers or from books is considered wrong and taken seriously. Here, it is important to show that you have done your own work and are displaying your own knowledge. It is more important than helping your friends to pass, whom we think do not deserve to pass unless they can provide their own answers. Group effort goes against the competitive grain, and American students do not study together as many Asians do. Many Asians in this country consider their group study habits a large contributor to their school success.

7. Adult Education

After complaining about many aspects of American life, a 40-year-old woman from Hong Kong concluded, “But where else could someone my age go back to school and get a degree in social work? Here you can change your whole life, start a new business, do what you really want to do.”

So at least to this person, school requirements weren’t inhibiting. And to millions of others, adult education is the path to a new career, or if not to a new career, to a new outlook. Schools generally encourage the older person who wants to start anew, and besides regular classes, schedule evening classes in special programs. Today there are so many people of retirement age in college that it is no longer remarkable.

8. Moral Relativism in American

Improving American education requires not doing new things but doing (and remembering) some good old things. At the time of our nation’s founding, Thomas Jefferson listed the requirements for a sound education in the Report of the Commissioners for the University of Virginia. In this landmark statement on American education, Jefferson wrote of the importance of education and writing, and of reading history, and geography. But he also emphasized the need “to instruct the mass of our citizens in these, their rights, interests, and duties, as men and citizens.” Jefferson believed education should aim at the improvement of both one’s “morals” and “faculties”. That has been the dominant view of the aims of American education for over two centuries. But a number of changes, most of them unsound, have diverted schools from these great pursuits. And the story of the loss of the school’s original moral mission explains a great deal.

Starting in the early seventies, “values clarification” programs started turning up in schools all over America. According to this philosophy, the schools were not to take part in their time-honored task of transmitting sound moral values; rather, they were to allow the child to “clarify” his own values (which adults, including parents, had no “rights” to criticize). The “values clarification” movement didn’t clarify values; it clarified wants and desires. This form of moral relativism said, in effect, that no set of values was right or wrong; everybody had an equal right to his own values; and all values were subjective, relative, and personal. This destructive view took hold with a vengeance.

In 1985 The York Times published an article quoting New York area educators, in slavish devotion to this new view, proclaiming, “They deliberately avoid trying to tell students what is ethically right and wrong.” The article told of one counseling session involving fifteen high school juniors and seniors. In the course of that session a student concluded that a fellow student had been foolish to return one thousand dollars she found in a purse at school. According to the article, when the youngsters asked the counselor’s opinion, “He told them he believed the girl had done the right thing, but that, of course, he would not try to force his values on them. ‘If I come from the position of what is wrong,’ he explained, ‘then I’m not their counselor.’”

Once upon a time, a counselor offered counselor, and he knew that an adult does not form character in the young by taking a stance of neutrality toward questions of right and wrong or by merely offering “choices” or “options”.

In response to the belief that adults and educators should teach children sound morals, one can expect from some quarters indignant objections (I’ve heard one version of it expressed countless times over the years): “Who are you to say what’s important?” or “Whose standards and judgments do we use?”

The correct response, it seems to me, is, is we ready to do away with standards and judgments? Is anyone going to argue seriously that a life of cheating and swindling is as worthy as a life of honest, hard work? Is anyone (with the exception of some literature professors at our elite universities) going to argue seriously the intellectual corollary, that a Marvel comic book is as good as Macbeth? Unless we are willing to embrace some pretty silly position, we’ve got to admit the need for moral and intellectual standards. The problem is that some people tend to regard anyone who would pronounce a definitive judgment as an unsophisticated Philistine or a closed-minded “elitist” trying to impose his view on everybody else.

The truth of the real world is that without standards and judgments, there can be no progress. Unless we are prepared to say irrational things—that nothing can be proven more valuable than anything else or that everything is equally worthless—we must ask the normative question. It may come, as a surprise to those who fell that to be “progressive” is to be value-neutral. But as Matthew Amold said, “the world is forwarded by having its attention fixed on the best things” and if the world can’t decide what the best things are, at least to some degree, then it follows that progress, and character, is in trouble. We shouldn’t be reluctant to declare that some things, some lives, books, ideas, and values are better than others. It is the responsibility of the schools to teach these better things.

At one time, we weren’t so reluctant to teach them. In the mid-nineteenth century, a diverse, widespread group of crusaders began to work for the public support of what was then called the “common school”, the forerunner of the public school. They were to be charged with the mission of school felt that the nation could fulfill its destiny only if every new generation was taught these values together in a common institution.

The leaders of the common school movement were mainly citizens who were prominent in their communities—businessmen, ministers, local civic and government officials. These people saw the schools as upholders of standards of individual morality and small incubators of civic and personal virtue; the founders of the public schools had faith that public education could teach good moral and civic character from a common ground of American values.

But in the past quarter century or so, some of the so-called experts became experts of value neutrality, and moral education was increasingly left in their hands. The commonsense view of parents and the publicthat schools should reinforce rather than undermine the values of home, family, and country, was increasingly rejected.

There are those today still that claim we are now too diverse a nation, that we consist of too many competing convictions and interests to instill common values. They are wrong. Of course we are a diverse people. We have always been a diverse people. And as Madison wrote in FederalistNo.10, the competing, balancing interests of a diverse people can help ensure the survival of liberty. But there are values that all American citizens share and that we should want all American students to know and to make their own: honesty, fairness, self-discipline, fidelity to task, friends, and family, personal responsibility, love of country, and belief in the principles of liberty, equality, and the freedom to practice one’s faith. The explicit teaching of these values is the legacy of the common schools, and it is a legacy to which we must return.

9. Schools Should Teach Values

People often said, “Yes, we should teach these values, but how do we teach them?” this question deserves a candid response, one that isn’t given often enough. It is by exposing our children to good character and inviting its imitation that we will transmit to them a moral foundation. This happens when teachers and principals, by their words and actions, embody sound convictions. As Oxford’s Mary Warnock has written, “You cannot teach morality without being committed to morality yourself; and you cannot be committed to morality yourself without holding that some things are right and others wrong.” The theologian Martin Buber wrote that the educator is distinguished from all other influences “by his will to take part in the stamping of character and by his consciousness that he represents in the eyes of the growing person a certain selection of what is, the selection of what is ‘right’, of what should be.” It is in this will, Buber says, in this clear standing for something, that the “vocation as an educator finds its fundamental expression.”

There is no escaping the fact that young people need as example principals and teachers who know the difference between right and wrong, good and bad, and who themselves exemplify high moral purpose.

As Education Secretary, I visited a class at Waterbury Elementary School in Waterbury, Vermont, and asked the students, “Is this a good school?” They answered, “Yes, this is a good school.” I asked them, “Why?” Among other things, one eight-year-old said, “The principal Mr. Riegel, makes good rules and everybody obeys them.” So I said, “Give me an example.” And another answered, “You can’t climb on the pipes in the bathroom. We don’t climb on the pipes and the principal doesn’t either.”

This example is probably too simple to please a lot of people who want to make the topic of moral education difficult, but there is something profound in the answer of those children, something education should pay more attention to. You can’t expect children to take messages about rules or morality seriously unless they see adults taking those rules seriously in their day-to-day affairs. Certain must be said, certain limits lay down, and certain examples set. There is no other way.

We should also do a better job at curriculum selection. The research shows that most “values education” exercises and separate courses in “moral reasoning” tend not to affect children’s behavior; if anything, they may leave children morally adrift. Where to turn? I believe our literature and our history are a rich quarry of moral literacy. We should mine that quarry. Children should have at their disposal a stock of examples illustrating what we believe to be right and wrong, good and bad—examples illustrating what are morally right and wrong can indeed be known and that there is a difference.

What kind of stories, historical events, and famous lives am I talking about? If we want our children to know about honesty, we should teach them about Abe Lincoln walking three miles to return six cents and conversely, about Aesop’s shepherd boy who cried wolf if we want them to know about courage, we should teach them about Joan of Arc, Horatius at the bridge, and Harriet Tubman and the Underground Railroad. If we want them to know about persistence in the face of adversity, they should know about the voyages of Columbus and the character of Washington during the Civil War. And our youngest should be told about the Little Engine That Could. If we want them to know about respect for the law, they should understand why Socrates told Crito: “No, I must submit to the decree of Athens.” If we want our children to respect the rights of others, they should read the Declaration of Independence, the Bill of Rights, the Gettysburg Address, and Martin Luther King, Jr.’ “Letter from Birmingham jail.” From the Bible they should know about Ruth’s loyalty to Naomi, Joseph’s forgiveness of his brothers, Jonathan’s friendship with David, the Good Samaritan’s kindness toward a stranger, and David’s cleverness and courage in facing Goliath.

These are only a few of the hundreds of examples we can call on. And we need not get into issues like nuclear war, abortion, creationism, or euthanasia. This may come as a disappointment to some people, but the fact is that the formation of character in young people is educationally a task different from, and prior to, the discussion of the great, difficult controversies of the day. First things come first. We should teach values the same way we teach other things: one step at a time. We should not use the fact that there are many difficult and controversial moral questions as an argument against basic instruction in the subject.

After all, we do not argue against teaching physics because laser physics is difficult, against teaching American history because there are heated disputes about the Founders’ intent. Every field has its complexities and its controversies. And every field has its basics, its fundamentals. So they are too with forming character and achieving moral literacy. As any parent knows, teaching character is a difficult task. But it is a crucial task, because we want our children to be healthy, happy, and successful but decent, strong, and good. None of this happens automatically; there is no genetic transmission of virtue. It takes the conscious, committed efforts of adults. It takes careful attention.

10. College Pressures

Mainly I try to remind that the road ahead is a long one and that it will have more unexpected turns than they think. There will be plenty of time to change jobs, change careers, change whole attitudes and approaches. They don not want to hear such liberating news. They want a map—right now – that they can follow unswervingly to career security, financial security, Social Security and, presumably, a prepaid grave.

What I wish for all students is some release from the clammy grip of the future. I wish them a chance to savor each segment of their education as an experience in itself and not as a grim preparation for the next step. I wish them the right to experiment, to trip and fall, to learn that defeat is as instructive as victory and is not the end of the world.

My wish, of course, is na?ve. One of the national gods venerated in our media—the million-dollar athlete, the wealthy executive—and glorified in our praise of possessions. In the presence of such a potent state religion, the young are growing up old.

I see four kinds of pressure working on college students today: economic pressure, parental pressure, peer pressure, and self-induced pressure. It is easy to look around for villains—to blame the colleges for charging too much money, the professors for assigning too much work, the parents for pushing their children too far, and the students for driving themselves too hard. But there are no villains: only victims.

“In the late 1960s.” one dean told me. “The typical question that I got from students was ‘Why is there so much suffering in the world’ or ‘how I can make a contribution?’ Today it’s ‘Do you think it would look better for getting into law school if I did a double major in history and political science, or just majored in one of them?’” many other deans confirmed this pattern. One said: “They are trying to find an edge—the intangible something that will look better on paper if two students are about equal.”

Note the emphasis on looking better. The transcript has become a sacred document, the passport to security. How one appears on paper is more important than how one appears in person. A is for Admirable and B is for Borderline, even though, in Yale’s official system of grading, A means “excellent” and B means “very good.” Today, looking very good is no longer good enough, especially for students who hope to go on to law school or medical school. They know that entrance into the better schools will be an entrance into the better law firms and better medical practices where they will make a lot of money. They also know that the odds are harsh. Yale Law School, for instance, matriculates 170students from an applicant pool of 3,700; Harvard enrolls 550 from a pool of 7,000.

It’s all very well for those of us who write letters of recommendation for our students to stress the qualities of humanity that will make them good lawyers or doctors. And it’s nice to think that admission officers are ready reading our letters and looking for the extra dimension of commitment or concern. Still, it would be hard for a student not to visualize these officers shuffling so many transcripts studded with As that they regard a B as positively shameful.

The pressure is almost as heavy on students who just want to graduate and get a job. Long gone are the days of the “gentleman’s C.” when students journeyed through college with a certain relaxation, sampling a wide variety of courses-music, art, philosophy, classics, anthropology, poetry, religion—that would send them out as liberally educated men and women. If I were an employer I would rather employ graduates who have this range and curiosity than those who narrowly pursued safe subjects and high grades. I know countless students whose inquiring minds exhilarate me. I like to hear the play of their ideas. I do not know if they are getting As or Cs, and I do not care. I also like them as people. The country needs them, and they will find satisfying jobs. I tell them to relax. They cannot.

Nor can I blame them. They live in a brutal economy. Tuition, room, and board at most private colleges now come to at least $7,000, not counting books and fees. This might seem to suggest that the colleges are getting rich. But they are equally battered by inflation. Tuition covers only 60 percent of what it costs to educate a student, and ordinarily the remainder comes from what college receives in endowments, grants, and gifts. Now, the remainder keeps being swallowed by the cruel costs—higher every year—of just opening the doors. Heating oil is up. Insurance is up. Postage is up. Health-premium costs are up. Everything is up. Deficits are up. We are witnessing in American the creation of a brotherhood of paupers—colleges, parents, and students, joined by the common bond of debt.

Today it is not unusual for a student, even if he works part time at college and full time during the summer, to accrue $5,000 in loans after four years—loans that he must start to repay within one year after graduation. Exhorted at commencement to go forth into the world, he is already behind as he goes forth. How could he not feel under pressure throughout college to prepare for this day of reckoning? I have used “he,” incidentally, only for brevity. Women at Yale are under no less pressure to justify their expensive education to themselves, their parents, and society. In fact, they are probably under more pressure. For although they leave college superbly equipped to bring fresh leadership to traditionally male jobs, society has not yet caught up with this fact.

Along with economic pressure goes parental pressure. Inevitably, the two are deeply intertwined.

I see many students taking pre-medical courses with joyless tenacity. They go off to their labs as if they were going to the dentist. It saddens me because I know tem in other corners of their life as cheerful people.

“Do you want to medical school?” I asked them.

“I guess so,” they say, without conviction, or “Not really.”

“Then why are you going?”

“Well, my parents want me to be a doctor. They are paying all this money and …”

Poor students, poor parents, they are caught in one of the oldest webs of love and duty and guilt. The parents mean will; they are trying to steer their sons and draughts toward a secure future. But the sons and daughter want to major in history or classics or philosophy—subjects with no “practical” value. Where’s the payoff on the humanities? It’s not easy to persuade such loving parents that the humanities do indeed pay off. The intellectual faculties developed by studying subjects like history and classics—an ability to synthesize and relate, to weigh cause and effect, to see events in perspective—are just the faculties that make creative leaders in business or almost any general field. Still, many fathers would rather put their money on courses that point toward specific profession—courses that are pre-law, pre-medical, pre-business, or, as I sometimes heard it put, “pre-rich.”

But the pressure on students is severe. They are truly torn. One part of them feels obliged to fulfill their parents’ expectations; after all, their parents are older and presumably wiser. Another part tells them that the expectations that are right for their parents are not right for them.

I know a student who wants to be an artist. She is very obviously an artist and will be a good one—she has already had several modest local exhibits. Meanwhile she is growing as a well-round person and taking humanistic subjects that will enrich the inner resources out of which her art will grow. But her father is strongly opposed. He thinks that an artist is a “dumb” thing to be. The student vacillates and tries to please everybody. She keeps up with her art somewhat furtively and takes some of the “dumb” courses her father wants her to take—at least they are dumb courses for her. She is a free spirit on a campus of tense students—no small achievement in it—and she deserves to follow her muse.

Peer pressure and self-induced pressure are also intertwined, and they begin almost at the beginning of freshman year.

“I had a freshman student I’ll call Linda,” one dean told me, “who came in and said she was under terrible pressure because her roommate, Barbara, was much brighter and studied all the time. I could not tell her that Barbara had come in two hours earlier to say the same thing about Linda.”

The story is almost funny—except that it is not. It is symptomatic of all the pressure put together. When every student thinks every other student is working harder and doing better, the only solution is to study harder still. I see students going off to the library every night after dinner and coming back when it closes at midnight. I wish they would sometimes forget about their peers and go to a movie. I hear the clacking of typewriters in the hours before dawn. I see the tension in their eyes when exams are approaching and papers are due: “Will I get everything done?”

Probably they won’t. They will get blocked. They will sleep. They will oversleep. They will bug out.

Part of the problem is that they are expected to do. A professor will assign five page papers. Several students will start writing ten page papers to impress him. Then more students will write ten page papers, and a few will raise the ante to fifteen. Pity the poor student who is still just doing the assignment.

“Once you have twenty or thirty percent of the student population deliberately overexerting,” one dean points out, “It’s bad for everybody. When a teacher gets more and more effort from his class, the student who is doing normal work can be perceived as not doing well. The tactic work, psychologically.”

Why cannot the professor just cut back and not accept longer papers? He can, and he probably will. But by then the term will be half over and the damage done. Grade fever is highly contagious and not easily reversed. Besides, the professor’s main concern is with his course. He knows his students only in relation to the course and does not know that they are also overexerting in their other courses. Nor is it really his business. He did not sign up for dealing with the student as a whole person and with all the emotional baggage the student brought along from home. That’s what deans, masters, chaplains, and psychiatrists are for.

To some extent this is nothing new: a certain number of professors have always been self-contained islands of scholarship and shyness, more comfortable with books than with people. But the new pauperism has widened the gap still further, for professors who actually like to spend time with students do not have as much time to spend. They are also overexerting. If they are young, they are busy trying to publish in order not to perish, hanging by their figure nails onto a shrinking profession.

If they are old and tenured, they are buried under the duties of administering departments—as departmental chairmen or members of committees—that have been thinned out by the budgetary axe.

Ultimately it will be the students’ own business to break the circles in which they are trapped. They are too young to be prisoners of their parents’ dreams and their classmates’ fears. They must be jolted into believing into themselves as unique men and women who have the power to shape their own future.

“Violence is being done to the undergraduate experience,” says Carlos Hortas. “College should be open-ended: at the end it should open many, many roads. Instead, students are choosing their goal in advance, and their choices narrow as they go along. It’s almost as if they think that the country has been codified in the type of jobs that exist-that they’ve got to fit into certain slots. Therefore, fit into the best paying slot.”

“They ought to take chances. Not taking chances will lead to life of colorless mediocrity. They’ll be comfortable. But something in the spirit will be missing.”

I have painted too drab a portrait of today’s students, making them seem a solemn lot. That is only half of their story; if they were so dreary I wouldn’t so thoroughly enjoy their company. The other half is that they are easy to like. They are quick to laugh and to offer friendship. They are not introverts. They are usually kind and are more considerate of one another than any student generation I have known.

Nor are they so obsessed with their studies that they avoid sports and extracurricular activities. On the contrary, they juggle their crowded hours to play on a variety of teams, perform with musical and dramatic groups, and write for campus publications. But this in turn is one more cause of anxiety. There are too many choices. Academically, they have 1,300 courses to select from; outside class they have to decide how much spare time they can spare and how to spend it.

This means that they engage in fewer extracurricular pursuits than their predecessors did. If they want to row on the crew and play in the symphony they will eliminate one; in the ‘60s they would have done both. They also tend to choose activities that are self-limiting. Drama, for instance, is flourishing in all twelve of Yale’s residential colleges, as it never has before. Students hurl themselves into these productions—as actors, directors, carpenters, and technicians—with a dedication to create the best possible play, knowing that the day will come when the run will end and they can get back to their studies.

They also cannot afford to be the willing slave of organizations like the Yale Daily News. Last spring at the one-hundredth anniversary banquet of that paper—who’s past chairmen include such once and future kings as Potter Stewart, Kingman Brewster, and William F. Buckley, Jr.—much was made of the fact that the editorial staff used to be small and totally committed and that “newsies” routinely worked fifty hours a week. In effect they belonged to a club; Newsies is how they defined themselves at Yale. Today’s students will one or two articles a week, when he can, and he defines himself as a student. I’ve never heard the word Newsie except at the banquet.

If I have described the modern undergraduate primarily as a driven creature who is largely ignoring the blithe spirit inside who keeps trying to come out and play, it’s because that’s where the crunch is, not only at Yale but throughout American education. It’s why I think we should all be worried about the values that are nurturing a generation so fearful of risk and so goal-obsessed at such an early age.

I tell students that there is no one “right” way to get ahead—that each of them is a different person, starting from a different point and bound for a different destination. I tell neither them that change is a tonic and that all the slots are not codified nor the frontiers closed. One of my ways of telling them is to invite men and women who have achieved success outside the academic world to come and talk informally with my students during the year. They are heads of companies or ad agencies, editors of magazines, politicians, public officials, television magnates, labor leaders, business executives, Broadway products, artists, writers, economists, photographers, scientists, historians—a mixed bag of achievers.

I asked them to say a few words about how they got started. The students assume that they started in their present profession and knew all along that it was what they wanted to do. Luckily for me, most of them got into their field by a circuitous route, to their surprise, after many detours. The students are startled. They can hardly conceive of a career that was not pre-planned. They can hardly imagine allowing the hand of God or chance to nudge them down some unforeseen trail.

11. To Err Is Wrong

In the summer of 1979, Boston Red Sox first baseman Carl Yastrzemski became the fifteenth player in baseball history to reach the three thousand hit plateaus. This event drew a lot of media attention, and for about a week prior to the attainment of this goal, hundreds of reports covered Yaz’s every more. Finally, one reporter asked, “Hey Yaz, aren’t you afraid all of this attention will go to your head?” Yastrzemski replied, “I look at this way: in my career I’ve been up to bat over ten thousand times. That means I’ve been unsuccessful at the plate over seven thousand times. That fact alone keeps me from getting a swollen head.”?

Most people consider success and failure as opposites, but they are actually both products of the same process. As Yaz suggest, an activity that produces a hit may also produce a miss. It is the same with creative thinking; the same energy that generates good creative ideas also produces errors.

Many people, however, are not comfortable with errors. Our educational system, based on “the right answer” belief, cultivates our thinking in another, more conservative way. From an early age, we are taught that right answers are good and incorrect answers are bad. This value is deeply embedded in the incentive system used in most schools:

Right over 90% of the time = “A”

Right over 80% of the time = “B~”

Right over 70% of the time = “C~” Right over 60% of the time = “D~” Less than 60% correct, you fail.

From this we learn to be right as often as possible and to keep our mistakes to a minimum. We learn, in other words, that “to err is wrong.

Playing It Safe

With this kind of attitude, you aren’t going to be taking too many chances. If you learn that failing even a litter penalizes you (e.g., being wrong only 15% of the time garners you only a “B” performance), you learn not to make mistakes. And more important, you learn not to put yourself to situation where you might fall. This leads to conservative thought pattern designed to avoid the stigma our society puts on “failure”.

I have a friend who recently graduated from college with a Master’s degree in Journalism. For the last six month, she has been trying to find a job, but to no avail. I talked with her about situation, and realized that her problem is that she doesn’t know how to fail. She went through eighteen years of schooling to try any approaches where she might fail. She has been conditioned to believe that failure is bad in and of itself, rather than a potential stepping-stone to new ideas.

Look around. How many middle managers, housewives, administrators, teachers, and other people do you see who are to try anything new because of this failure? Most of us have learned not to make mistakes in public. As a result, we remove ourselves from many learning experience except for those occurring in the most private of circumstances.

Different Logic

From a practical point of view, “to err is wrong” makes sense. Our survival in the everyday world requires us to perform thousand of small tasks without failure. Think about it: you wouldn’t last very long if you were to step out in front of traffic or stick your hand a pot of boiling water. In addition, engineers whose bridges collapse, stock brokers who lose money for their clients, and copywriters whose ad campaigns decrease sales won’t keep their jobs very long.

Nevertheless, too great an adherence to the belief “to err is wrong” can greatly undermine your attempts to generate new ideas. If you are more concerned with producing right answers than generating original ideas, you’ll probably make uncritical use of the rules, formulae, and procedures used to obtain these right answers. By doing this, you’ll by-pass the germinal phase of the creative process, and thus spend litter time testing assumptions, challenging the rules, asking what-if questions, or just playing around with the problem. All of these techniques will produce some incorrect answers, but in the germinal phase errors are viewed as a necessary by-product of creative thinking. As Yaz would put it, “if you want the hits, be prepared for the misses.” That’s the way the game of life goes.

Errors as Stepping Stones

Whenever an error pops up, the usual response is “Jeez, another screw up, what went wrong this time?” the creative thinker, on the other hand, will realize the potential value of errors, and perhaps say something like, “Would you look at that! Where can it lead our thinking?” and then he or she will go on to use the error as a stepping stone to a new idea. As a matter of fact, the whole history of discovery is filed with people who used erroneous assumptions and failed ideas as stepping-stones to new ideas. Columbus thought he was finding a shorter route to India. Johannes Kepler stumbled on to the idea of interplanetary gravity because of assumptions that were right for the wrong reasons. And, Thomas Edison knew 1800 ways not to build a light bulb.

The following story about the automotive genius Charles Kettering exemplifies the spirit of working through erroneous assumptions to good ideas. In 1912, when the automobile industry was just beginning to grow, Kettering was interested in improving gasoline engine efficiency. The problem he faced was“knockthe phenomenon in which gasoline takes too long to burn in the cylinder-thereby reducing efficiency.

Kettering began searching for ways to eliminate the “knock.” He thought to him, “How can I get the gasoline to combust in the cylinder at an earlier time?” the key concept here is “early”. Searching for analogous situations, he looked around for models of “things that happen early.” He thought of historical models, physical models, and biological models. Finally, he remembered a particular plant, the trailing arbutus, which “happens early,” i.e., it blooms in the snow (“earlier” than other plants). One of this plant’s chief characteristics is its’ red leaves, which help the plant retain light at certain wavelengths. Kettering figured that it must be the red color, which made the trailing arbutus bloom earlier.

Now came the critical step in Kettering’s chain of thought. He asked himself, “How can I make the gasoline red?” perhaps I’ll put red dye in the gasoline—maybe that’ll make it combust earlier.” He looked around his workshop, and found that he didn’t have any red dye. But he did happen to have some iodine—perhaps that would do. He added the iodine to the gasoline and, lo and behold, the engine didn’t “knock”.

[英语作文写作的需要背诵的部分

but, however, on the other hand, on the contrary, in contrast, in any case, at any rate(无论如何), nevertheless(虽然如此), otherwise, or, or else, while, whereas, but, despite, in spite of ..., yet, instead,

I do not believe that…,

Perhaps you’ll ask why…

This may be true, but we still have a problem with regard to…,

Though we are in basic agreement with …, yet differences will be found,

That’s why I feel that…

下面小编为大家整理了一篇雅思写作技巧的相关信息，是关于间接表达法的。间接表达法这种在雅思写作技巧是用在这样的情况下的：有的时候，发言者为了充分地表达自己的观点，或者为了使自己的观点显得不偏激，会很委婉地表述观点。下面我们一起来看看。

间接表述观点

比如：

Well， I dont think you should start with the case study too early unless you have made full preparation or you might find you cant meet the deadline. However， it really is the best approach you can try to get peoples response though it is somewhat time-consuming. If you think you can spare your study time， just go for it.

第一句话出现dont think，转折词However引出了意思上大的转变，这里的it really is the best approach就是很大的一个转折，说明持支持的态度的。此外，最后一句话是总结性的观点，一句just go for it非常清楚地再次表示其支持观点。

间接观点表达：

Through observation study， you can just watch and take notes. And you can get some unforeseeable results from peoples behavior， but it can only cover certain aspects. Therefore， you need other research method to assist it. But you can try if you want.中立

中学生学习课文时理解了托物言志、状物抒怀这种写作特点，但在练习写作时却未必能写得出象样的托物言志作文。下面是小编整理的托物言志作文的写作方法，希望对你有帮助！

一、知识要点梳理

l，立意

(1)通过某种事物描状，表现某类人或某个人的精神品质。

(2)寓社会、世态、人生的某些哲理。a、写此物含彼意 b、明写物暗喻人。

(3)要昭示人、感召人、激励人、鼓舞人生活、思考、斗争、前进。

(4)立意可发散性多元思维，从中选出最佳立意，也可逆向立意。

2、选材

(1)或取不知名、不起眼的花草木石，人格化地表现普通人的精神品质。

(2)或取日月星辰、山川河流、雨雪雷电，象征性地寄寓某种哲理。

(3)或取用品什物、家具器皿，形象化地反映一种思想感情。

(4)或取家畜、飞禽、走兽，拟人化地蕴含某种思想。

3、语言

(1)诗化语言，绘画语言，浓淡相宜，饱含感情，含蓄深刻。

(2)描物状形语言是全文重点，要占多半篇幅，而议论、抒情性的点题语言宜少，适可即止。

二、命题引导立意

1、顺向立意

(1)耕牛：描写耕牛紧拉套绳，步履坚定，任劳任怨。人格化地表现默默奉献、埋头苦

干的精神和“得到的甚少，给予人的很多”的品质的人。

(2)红叶、菊花：描写红叶、菊花霜凌之后叶更红、花更艳、人更爱。拟人化地表现人生经历艰辛苦寒是一种丰富，一种收获，一种精神财富。

(3)夕阳：描写“夕阳无限好”，依然绚丽依然辉煌。象征性地反映老一代老当益壮、甘愿奉献余热于人间的精神。

(4)溪流：描写溪流冲过各种艰难险阻，百折不回，奔向江河。人格化地表现某种永往直前、追求不息的性格。

(5)梯子：描写梯子朴实无华，忍辱负重。形象化地表现为了祖国未来、为了他人甘愿做人梯的奉献精神。

(6)老树：描写老树饱经风雨雷电的考验，历经沧桑岁月，目睹世事变化。人格化地表现承受艰苦生活环境磨炼的年富力强、精神财富富有的劳动者和建设者。

(7)烟雾：描写白雾弥漫，蒙住山峦沟壑，若不明辨，就会迷失方向。象征性地反映生活中有时团团迷雾，遮住真相，掩埋真理。启示人们在前进的道路上要头脑清醒、明辨是非、识别方向，尽量少走弯路和错路。

(8)仙人掌：描写仙人掌不择环境，只要有泥土，哪怕再贫瘠的泥土也能生根长大。拟人化地表现旺盛的生命力，鼓励有志青年去老少边穷地区生根、发芽、开花、结果，为开发建设大西北贡献力量。

(9)星空：描写繁星闪烁，星光璀灿。象征祖国群星灿烂，象征性地表现当今时代人才辈出，明星闪耀，“江山代有才人出，各领风骚数百年”，激励青年一代积聚知识、智慧、力量，脱颖而出，辉耀于祖国上空。

(10)无名花：描写无名小花繁盛艳丽，竞相开放，争奇斗娇。一改文学作品歌颂明星、名人、将军、功臣，而拟人化的讴歌不知名不起眼的小民百姓的朴实、正直、敦厚的美德。

2、逆向立意

(1)翠竹：描写翠竹傲寒凌雪，与松梅为“岁寒三友”，高洁而令人钦敬。但反其意而立新意，拟人化地反映那种徒有虚名、内心空虚、华而不实、哗众取宠、“嘴尖皮厚腹中空”的人，启示我们应做内心充实、表里一致、朴实无华的人。

(2)牵牛花(藤萝)：描写牵牛花(藤萝)枝枝蔓蔓，五彩缤纷，如荫如盖，浓郁茂盛，借助他物攀得远，爬得高。人格化地表现攀附权要，趋炎附势一类依附者形象，启发人们应有独立人格。

(3)芦苇：描写芦苇纤细轻盈，芦花如雪，随风摇曳，为秋色增美增趣。形象化地表现生活中见风使舵，随风摇摆那类人的性格特点，告诫人们做一个立场坚定的人。

(4)鹅卵石：描写鹅卵石在急流中不停滚动碰撞，被波浪涌上沙滩，圆溜、光滑、可爱。形象亿地反映人际关系中那类无爱憎无棱角圆滑光溜的处世哲学。

(5)爆竹：描写爆竹在欢喜庆贺时增加节日气氛，使人欢快喜悦，为庆贺呐喊不惜献身碎骨。形象化地表现那类一发脾气，后果就不堪设想，或因炫耀威力而自取灭亡的脾气暴躁者。警戒人们“忍”字当先，三思而行。

三、写景三注意

景物描写在记叙文写作中往往是必不可少的。可是许多同学在写作中不懂得景物描写的特点，有的描写模糊不清，有的分不清主次，有的缺乏情感，出现了许多不应有的败笔。那么，在记叙文的写作中应该怎样去描写自然景色呢?具体来说，景物描写应注意一下三个问题：

(1)写景要有顺序。人们观赏景物都有一定的规律：或定点环顾，或边走边看。描写时也应该“顺其自然”。例如老舍先生的《济南的冬天》一文，描写济南城周围的环境时写道：“小山把济南整个儿围个圈儿，只有北边缺点口儿。这一圈小山在冬天特别可爱，好像把济南放在一个小摇篮里。”景物描写与作者的定点鸟瞰相吻合，自然清晰，形象准确。又如凡妮的《野景偶拾》一文，按照沿途所见，依次描写绕村的溪流，山梁的小路、盆地的高粱、山坡的谷穗、旷野的幽静、落日的霞光、宛如绸带的河流和公路、华美如贝雕的田野和山林。移步换形，有如移舟前进，时过景迁，景观随之改换，给人一种身临其境之感。

(2)写景要有选择。写景时应要有所取有所弃，抓住最能代表彼时彼地特征的景物加以描写，其它的景色则略写或不写。老舍先生的《在烈日和暴雨下》，为了突出天气变化的过程，就着力描写了杨柳的动态：“一点风也没有时——枝条一动懒得动;有一点凉风时——枝条微微动了两下;风大起来时——柳条横着飞。”通过杨柳的动态。显示了风的从无到有、由小到大，而对暴风雨降临时其它景象的变化，作者作了简略处理。这样，抓住特征，既形象地表现了天气变化的过程，又避免了描写的呆板重复，使得文字准确而精练。

(3)写景要有情致。人们观赏景物总是要带有某种感情的。因此，描写时也应该将这种感情一起表达出来，做到寓情于景，情景相映。鲁迅先生的《故乡》一文，反映旧中国农村衰败萧条，日趋破产的悲惨景象时，笔下的景色是“苍黄的天空下，远近横着几个萧索的荒村，没有一些活气。”而脑海中闪现出少年闰土的美好形象时，则为“深蓝的天空中挂着一轮金黄的圆月。”景物描写之中渗透着作者爱憎分明的思想感情。以景促情，情景交融，有力地深化了文章的主题。

四、抒情三要求

抒情有好几种方式，而表现出来，却有两种不同的方法。一种是强烈的、紧张的;一种是轻淡的、弛缓的。比如同是欢乐，可以欢呼狂叫，也可以别有会心;同是悲哀，可以痛苦流涕，也可以别有凄心。不同的抒情方法，会收到不同的表达效果。紧张的抒情，直抒所感，不加节制，也不隐晦和改易，只要内蕴的情感真切、深沉，就会写出很好的抒情文字。弛缓的抒情，则把内蕴的丰富感情，表露出一部分来，于平淡中抓取精神实质，能给读者以暗示和启发，自有感人至深之处。那么，对抒情有哪些要求呢?

(1)要真挚自然。对表现的事物，要有深切的感受，情感要发自内心，这样的抒情，才是真挚的、诚恳的，也才能是深沉的、感人的。感情要自然地流露出来。抒情最不能作伪，虚假的、矫柔造作的东西，是最要不得的，那种抒情，不仅不能感染读者，而只能使人产生厌恶的情绪。

(2)要健康向上。我们抒发的感情，必须具有健康的情趣，用健康的、朝气蓬勃的思想感情去打动读者。那种低级、消极、颓废等不健康的感情，我们要坚决反对。

(3)要具体生动。抒情要生动，切忌呆板和干瘪，重复老一套的东西，是不能给人以新鲜感的。不新鲜、不生动，也就不能感动读者、打动读者。感情是比较抽象的东西，要抒发得具体，是不容易的。而过于抽象或空洞的抒情，是没有力量的。我们要善于把抽象的、不易表达的感情写得具体，这要有些手段。例如：“不是年轻的为年老的写纪念，而在这三十年中，却使我目睹许多青年的血，层层淤积起来，将我埋得不能呼吸，我只能用这样的笔墨，写几句文章，算是从泥土中挖一个小孔。自己延口残喘，这是怎样的世界呢。夜正长，路也正长，我不如忘却，不说的好罢。但我知道，即使不是我，将来总会有记起他们，再说他们的时候的。……”鲁迅先生这一段抒情，写得十分深沉。他用一个形象的比喻把对在国党白色恐怖下牺牲的战友的怀念之情具体、真挚而深刻地表现出来了。

五、小结

以上所列，不一而足，意在抛砖引玉。运用了托物言志的写法，情景描写、物品描写不再是空洞无物的吟风弄草，风花雪月，而讲求寓意和含量。咏物时要形象地赋予所咏事物以人的性格特点，或讴歌，或贬斥，都能使人通过所描写的文字感到作者的用意，写此物言彼意，明写物暗喻人。这样坚持练习几次，同学们就会对这类作文的立意和写法悟到其中的奥妙。

首先写散文诗不难，但是，能写出好的散文诗却非常难。散文诗的作者既要懂得写诗，又要懂得写散文。诗和散文的特点都要了解和掌握。诗的音节、对仗、格律和诗的凝练，虽说未必深入钻研，但诗的情绪、诗的跳跃节奏、诗的凝聚概括，这些都是散文诗本身形式所必须的。另外，还要谙练散文的抒情和议论，把散文中的这些因素和特点汲取到散文诗中来，使得散文和诗的特点自然有机地揉和到散文诗中，这就是写散文诗必须具备的基本功。除此之外，无捷径可走。

在优秀散文诗中，艺术手法凝重、婉约而显阴柔之美，其文偏重于诗;艺术手法明快、坦直而具阳刚之美，文则偏重于散文;又因它既不是诗也不是散文，而是诗和散文两者的结合，是一种新型的文体。

其次，是散文诗的文体。大概可分为：哲理(寓言)体、抒情体、叙述体。

哲理寓言体有运用寓言对话形式来写散文诗，通俗、活泼，寓言有深刻的比喻，思想性强，可防止空泛。

抒情体写作形式多样，是通过一个情景、一个事物侧面或侧面的一个点、一个片断抒发作者的思想感情。与抒情散文的不同在于它的跳跃性、片断性，是一个独立的点、独立的片断。由于是抒情散文诗，其情感、情调、意境、想象、幻觉主观成份浓郁，通体显隐约含蓄。抒情散文诗愈有作家独特的个性，感情就愈深刻真挚动人。此类散文诗如果解决不好与时代、实际生活相结合问题，一是情感不够而显得苍白无物，或主旨不明无积极意义;二是散文诗写得看不懂，或把情感隐藏起来，或写出自己也说不清楚的莫名其妙的东西，还自觉高超“朦胧”。我们说艺术的比喻、含蓄、隐约，要通过感情的形象表达，这才是艺术的技巧，与那些看不懂说不明的东西是风马牛不相及的。

叙述体散文诗是把叙述的景物、人事放在第一位，客观通过描绘一定场景、片断的情节来表达自己的情感。特点是明朗、粗犷、结合现实较紧。生活气息浓。初学写作者从叙述体入手，以此为基础藉以情感抒发，再上升到一定哲理。此类散文诗一要防止情景事物停留表面描述而发掘不深;二要防止就事论事。

以上三种文体有时是互相交替的，哲理、抒情、叙事融为一体也常见。

再次，谈谈散文诗的主题思想。主题思想是作品的灵魂和统帅，决不能忽视散文诗的思想性。有人甚至名家也说过散文诗不可能反映大的主题思想，这是误区。散文诗如果只是短小，起一种“生活中的小摆设”的作用，那么，散文诗就走进了一条狭小的死胡同，也就没有强大的生命力。事实并非如此，近些年来散文诗的创作者在形式上、内容上进行了成功的实践和突破，反映重大深刻主题的优秀散文诗长卷层出不穷，散文诗的革命必将推动散文诗质的飞跃。再说，我们写一些容量小的散文诗，也可以做到“小中见大”，反映较大、较多的内容，问题是要求我们精于选材，善于选材。选取题材一个侧面，取题材侧面一个点，而且是最典型最本质的侧面和点，也就是说用题材最小最本质的一部分，来反映题材的全部内涵。这是短小散文诗的优越性，散文诗作者必须遵循这个创作规律。散文诗要通过情景(意象)、事物，形象地、生动准确地反映作品的主题思想。反对公式化、口号式和生硬地在作品中写主题思想以及僵化的说教，这些都不是艺术。优秀的散文诗是艺术性和思想性的统一。有位散文诗名家说过这样的话：散文诗的作者是爆破手，摄取最少的最优质的炸药，爆发出最大的热能。要做到这一点，只能从生活中感受和挖掘深刻的主题思想，进行最优质的典型的题材选取。

第四，说说散文诗的结构。散文诗的结构是最严谨的，形散神聚。题材是精选的典型的一个侧面或一个片断，可把一、二个(或更多的)精选出来的典型侧面、片断结构在一起，就能够准确表达作者主题思想，构成一篇完整的散文诗。禁忌拖泥带水，禁忌出现无意义画面，禁忌含有多余废笔。散文诗结构特征是跳跃性，诗化的跳跃是扩大容量必然的要求。要从一个联想飞跃到另一个联想，要从一个场景迅速转换到另一个新的场景，意象摇曳、叠加，贯穿连结的是相通的点。不能繁琐地从头说到尾，不能平淡、空洞、言之无物。散文诗的结构美是片断到片断，是一、二个(乃至多个)点的巧妙连接，是跳跃的美和暂歇的美，是给读者以无限想象的空白美。散文诗结构中，一个片断接一个片断，这种跳跃性在读者情绪中留下短暂的空白，也叫暂歇。这是散文诗独特的空白美。

第五，散文诗的语言和思想情感。散文诗同其他文学样式一样，也是语言艺术，而且是要求更严、标准更高的语言艺术。驾驭文字、培育情感、发掘主题是散文诗作家基本的文学素养。散文诗的语言如何?如何寻求散文诗形式和内容的统一?这方面的探索和研究必将反作用于散文诗的取材和反映的思想感情。散文诗作者的思想情感是最终决定一篇散文诗的好坏和成败的关键。决定散文诗取何材、写什么东西，从何角度写，如何写都要受作者的思想情感的支配，特别是散文诗要通过浓厚的作者思想情感去反映事物。如何培育思想情感，是一个如何写好散文诗的根本性问题，要从复杂平凡的生活中发掘新生的美好事物，获得尖锐的眼光、独到的思想、深刻的情感，才能在主题思想酝酿、艺术表现手法、言语文字运用上得心应手。

在整一张语文卷当中，作文占的比例分数是最高的，下面是小编为大家整理的高考满分作文的写作方法，希望能帮到您！

第一：全

全即文章的结合呼应，给人完整感。阅卷人的心理，对文章的开头、中间、结尾很看重，特别是结尾的结构呼应或者主题升华的语言等等。

第二：亮

亮就是试卷上的亮点。亮点是多方面的，字迹端正、卷面整洁是其中第一要着。文章无错别字，没有明显的病句，没有明显的涂改痕迹，行款漂亮等等，都会让阅卷老师一翻到试卷就精神大振，产生好感，不忍心打低分。

第三：显

由于时间关系，高考阅卷老师不能细细揣摩文章，也不能明晓考生的作文功底，考生要特别讲究一个“显”字。

首先，文章的主旨要明了，平时作文，有学生喜欢写些含蓄的文字，以求文学的含蓄美，也得到了老师的青睐，甚至发表了不少的文章，但是高考场上不能这样做，太含蓄了，就会使文章走进隐讳的死胡同，短时间内难以让人读懂，就很容易被阅卷老师误认为离题打入冷宫。

其次，文章的分论点最好用分段的方式明确摆出，开头、中间、结尾都要顾及体现自己中心思想的语句，最明显的方法就是把它们放在段首，好让阅卷者一目了然。

第四：虚

虚就是虚构。高考作文能写实固然好，但由于我们长期处在学校——家庭两点一线的生活方式，很难发现生活中真实动人的故事。高考作文要求有创新，必然把原本平淡无奇的事情编得生动曲折。

第五：简

简即简笔勾勒。高考的一般议论文也好，一般记叙文也好，最好需要多种材料的荟萃，这样信息量大，以符合“内容充实”的要求，因而不欢迎一些时间、地点、人物、发生、发展、高潮、结局俱在的材料啰嗦记叙。

如果在高考作文的时候，能够很好的把握上面五个字，那高考作文将有可能获得满分。

在多年的雅思教学中，我发现学生在实际考试中面临着不同的写作障碍，影响了考试成绩，雅思考试中应该如何克服写作障碍。归纳起来大致有以下几个方面:

一、真情流露，无从下笔；

有的考生在考试时见到作文题，顿感思路塞车，好像有许多话要说，但又不知究竟应从那里写起。明智的做法是“投其所好、尽情发挥。”考生不妨把作文的要求量化到每一个段落，一篇250词左右的作文一般不会超过15句话，把这15句话根据题目要求分配到各段中去，每一段大概只说那么几句话，事实上往往是说得越多错误越多。因此，每句话紧扣提纲，见好就收,这才是最稳妥的对策。

二、心里明白，难以表达；

在考场上有的考生题目看得懂，提纲也明白，就是不知道该说什么，头脑里一片空白。这是在雅思写作考试中的一种常见的现象，针对这一现象，最有效的办法就是要善于联想到一些具体的事实，具体的例证和具体的现象。事实上，雅思的作文题目一定是一个具有社会普遍型话题，其目的是让不同教育背景的考生都有话可说。因此，考生一定能就题目联想起具体细小的事情再形成观点。把看得见摸得着的事物带来的思考变成作文里的实质内容，这不失为一种很好的策略。

因此，当头脑出现空白时，应该由具体细小的、琐碎的、微不足道的事物所引发的思考形成观点，再进行论述。这种定式思维的形成需要多下功夫多练习。

三、一味追求标新立异，导致无从下笔；

考试时通常发现有的考生聚精会神的坐在那里冥思苦想，非要想出一个与众不同的观点。陷入这种境地的考生，显然犯了一个根本性的错误，参考时间为40分钟的作文，一般应在35分钟之内完成,再用几分钟的时间检查语言错误。可有的考生十几分钟一句话都写不了，就是因为他太进入角色了，这是考试中一个很大的误区。

考作文的目的纯粹是通过这一命题形式，考查考生的英语水平如何，其它英语写作《雅思考试中应该如何克服写作障碍》。命题人关注的是书面表达能力，而不是看一个人有没有内容，思想有没有深度，所以“一味追求标新立异”是没有必要的。

四、构思、写作不统一，落实有困难；

实事求是的讲，要求考生完全运用英语思维来写作文是不现实的。很多考生在实际写作过程中，脑子里想的是中文句子，然后再把中文句子译成英文。因此采用“得其意，忘其形”的方法，忘掉中文的语法结构，句法形式则可能要整个地打乱.，“钻进去，跳出来”。所谓“钻进去”就是要看意思是否到位了，“跳出来”就是要忘记中文的语言形式。实际上把英文译成中文，关键是要在转换中把意思表达出来。

针对构思、写作不统一，落实有困难情况。必须摒弃翻译中追求一一对应的关系，并机械地把中文译成英文的方法，应该把中文句子结构彻底地忘记，然后用比较简单的“万能”英语表达。平时不妨做一做这样的练习，通过阅读不认识词条的英文注解，然后试着把单词译成中文词，再去对照英汉词典的汉语释义，慢慢地就会开始领会用英语表达的门道了。

五、被动心态压抑新构思。

尽管雅思考试作文为规定式命题，但考生仍可积极主动地发挥。其主动性在于采取回避的策略，表达上采取迂回的方式，即运用不很复杂的语言。内容的取舍上避重就轻地写比较易于表达的内容。很多人在写作过程中从头至尾都处于被动状态，当有内容想要表达清楚的时候，却又发现种种途径都不可能表达好，只好硬着头皮把自己意识到没把握的东西勉强写上去。连自己都意识到可能是错误的东西，只会产生于己不利的负面影响。所以，当有的内容感觉一点找不着，英语实在表达不清楚的时候，就应该彻底地放弃。单词拼写错误也是雅思考试作文写作的一大问题。常用单词是不能拼错的，有的单词平时会拼写，考试时突然没把握了，不妨换一下或许还能想起另外一个难度大一点、拼写有把握的来代替。应该回避明确知道自己不会拼写的词。如果没法换一个词，将句子改换一种说法亦未尝不可。有的考生在考卷上没把握的地方标上问号，或者把两种可能都写上，让判卷老师选择，这个方法是不可取的。

总之，不能让自己陷人被动，想说什么，用什么方式说。说多少，说到什么程度。一切都应由考生主动把握，这样才会减少心理上的压力，更好地发挥出自己应有的写作水平。

景色是作文里常常出现的话题，写景的作文也是数不胜数，但写景也并非像我们说看到的情况那样如实的写进去，我们应该懂得如何写景才能把文章的整体水平有所提高。让我们一起来看看，写景的作文写作技巧吧。

1、方位顺序。写景作文要有方位的条理性，由近及远，由远及近，由上而下，由下而上，由里到外，由外到里，或由中间到四周等等有次序地描写，要主次分明，详略得当。

2、景物的类别。来写，如山、水、花、鸟;瀑、石、峰、洞;亭、台、楼阁等。要写出景物的光、色、味;既要写它的静态，也要写它的动态，还可以写出它的环境气氛。

3、要仔细观察，抓住在不同季节里景物的不同特点进行描写，不要硬编乱造，凭自己的想象来写。

4、写景中也可以具体地写些人和事，若让人、景、事三者交融一体来写，可以使作文更为感人。

5、写景物时不要忘掉自己与景物之间的关系，要有意识地把自己的感情、感受写进去，这样使人读了会产生一种身临其境之感。叶圣陶老爷爷写的《记金华的双龙洞》不是具有这样的特点吗?

6、适当地、正确地引用前人描写景物的诗词歌赋，也可以为作文增色。这就需要你平时多加阅读和积累，别等用时再去找。

People hold different views about X. Some people are of the opinion that 观点1, while others point out that 观点2. As far as I am concerned, the former/latter opinion holds more weight. For one thing, 论据1. For another, 论据2.

Last but not the least, 论据3.

To conclude, 总结观点. As a college student, I am supposed to 表决心. 或 From above, we can predict that 预测.

在任务驱动型作文的背景下，怎样才能把一个论题阐述深透呢?许多同学无从下手，所写的文章老是停留在肤浅的层面，得分不高，在此，介绍“巧设反方，探源究底”的方法，以供同学学习参考。

“巧设反方”就是在正面论述的基础之上，提出有可能出现的反方看法或观点，尽力预设，尽力设全，以体现你思维的周密性。

“探源究底”就是在预设反方的前提下，探究反方观点产生的根源以及错误的本质，甚至对反方观点进行有力的批驳，让它站不住脚，从而使自己的看法有理有力。

例如：

阅读下面的材料，根据要求写一篇不少于800字的文章。(60分)

不久前，某大学在临近期末时发生了这样一事：夜幕下，风雨中，一群大学生在校农场打着手电栽种油菜。校长对媒体说：“学生必须亲手碰到泥巴，才能知道什么是奋斗，什么是劳动。”农场劳动是该校的必修课，是“毕业通行证”。这种观点和做法得到了不少网民的支持。

然而也有人持不同意见：为挣学分冒雨挑灯夜战，是否有矫枉过正之嫌?还有人认为，大学生的首要任务是学习专业知识，此举有形式主义之嫌。

对于以上事件及不同观点，你怎么看?请表明你的态度，阐述你的看法。要求综合材料内容及含意，选好角度，确定立意，完成写作任务。

示范例文：

亲历劳动，方知奋斗

某高校开设种田必修课，学生夜里打手电种油菜，新闻一出，立刻引发热议，有支持者，也有反对者，更有抨击者，但无论何种反应都体现了大众对高校教育、对人才培养的一种关注、一种思索。

亲历劳动，方知奋斗。学校的良苦用心是值得大力称赞的。农场劳动，不单是一门必修课程，是毕业的通行证，更是一种观念、一种品质的培养。党的教育方针明确指出：教育必须与生产劳动相结合……未来世界的竞争是“人才素质”的竞争，而劳动素质又是人才素质中极其重要的一个方面。但令人叹息的是，有许多的网民，却反对高校的这种做法，质疑这种做法的真正意图，或许是因为他们觉得大学生的首要任务是学习专业知识，应该把时间更多地放在精进自己的专业水平上，不能也没有必要去做“普通农民”所做的“农活”，然而，这个理由不过只是个幌子，是个借口，何况精进专业知识，也不是“不问世事，一心只读圣贤书”就能达成的，再说，闭门苦读就一定能够学好专业知识吗?更深层的原因，恐怕是大众内心对“农”的鄙视，是自古以来就有的对“读书人”的崇敬与膜拜：认为田间劳作是没有文化修养或修养较低的农民干的，文化人，既然已经跳出农门，就不要也不必再碰农活了。他们主观上认为“读书人”与“农民”是截然不同的两种身份，而这种认识，又恰恰是长期以来由阶级的差距衍生出的优越感而催生的。

爱劳动，才会生活;学会劳动，才能学会生活。高校开展农场劳动必修课，不仅可行，更有深远意义。学生在学校，不仅要学会一些理论性的东西，还需进行各种各样的实践劳动，只有二者相结合，才能更好地提升学生的综合素质。农场劳动，除了能提高学生们的动手能力、实践能力，让学生更接地气，还能让学生在获得劳动的切身体验中，认识到粒粒皆辛苦，尊重劳动人民和劳动成果，更能让学生在艰苦环境的磨炼中，培养一种吃苦耐劳、艰苦奋斗的精神。事实上，人的很多优秀的品质，都可以在劳动中形成。

发扬光大该校的这一做法，或许我们可以有更好做法，加强宣传教育，提高学生积极主动参加劳动实践的意识，鼓励学生积极参加各种各样的社会实践活动，而不局限于田间劳作，更无需用“必修”的形式，来强制学生，为完成学分临时抱佛脚而在临近期末时连夜冒雨打手电种油菜。

“民生在勤，勤则不匮”，无论时代如何变化，我们始终都要热爱劳动、崇尚劳动。

【点评】

本文在正面阐述了理由之后，先预设网民的不同观点与看法，然后，逐步探寻出产生这些看法的根源，有表面的原因，也有更深层次的原因。显示作者非一般的思维能力，文章也因此步入更高的档次。是一种不可多得的方法。

1、语言方面要建立“语汇库”。

语汇是文章的细胞。广义的语汇，不仅指词、短语的总汇，还包括句子、句群。平时广泛阅读书籍、报刊，把一些优美的词语、句子、语段摘录在特定的本子上，也可以制作读书卡片。生活中还可以捕捉大众口语中鲜活的语言，并把这些记在随身带的小本上。日积月累，作文中表达的语言也会不落俗套。

2、要加强材料方面的积累和梳理。

由于平时不注意积累素材，孩子们会每到作文时就去搜肠刮肚，依赖家长或者网络。解决这一问题的根本方法是，深入生活去积累素材。写日记、写观察笔记如果觉得困难，以写微日记、做图文并茂的心情日记等形式为主要途径，及时记录家庭生活、校园生活、社会生活中的见闻。记录时要抓住最核心的、最触动自己的细节，把握人、事、物、景的特征。这样，习作素材就变得有血有肉。

3、要加强思想方面的积累。

观点是文章的灵魂，平时遇到事情要深入思考，多问问“为什么”“是什么”“怎么样”。孩子没有形成这样的习惯时，就需要家长去引导。比如，每天有固定的“亲子互动聊天”时间，让孩子畅谈他最想谈的内容，适时点拨。家长还可以帮助孩子以博大精深的中华传统文化精髓（成语、谚语、歇后语）来点评。

我们应该从历史上，找出散文创作成败得失的一些规律，那对我们衡量当前的散文，可能是比较有用的。

从我们熟读的一些古代或近代的散文看，凡是长时期被人称诵的名篇，都是感情真实，文字朴实之作。比如说欧阳修的《陇冈阡表》，诸葛亮的《出师表》，李密的《陈情表》。

我们常说，文章要感人肺腑，出自肺腑之言，才能感动别人的肺腑。言不由衷，读者自然会认为你是欺骗。读者和作者一样，都具备人的良知良能，不会是阿斗。你有几分真诚，读者就感受到几分真诚，丝毫作不得假。

如果有时间，读一些旧报纸，旧期刊是有好处的。在三中全会以前，报刊上的文章，包括散文在内，虚假的东西太多了，现在找来一看，常常使人啼笑皆非。这种散文，即使没有政治上的拨乱反正，也是当日无读者，何况流传?

但是，这种文风，曾经猖獗了若干年，要说是完全根绝了它的影响，也不是事实。

欧阳修在写他这篇文章时，叙述的只是家庭琐事，夫妇、母子之常景常情。诸葛亮当时虽然是丞相，他这一篇文章，并没有多少空洞的官腔。李密当时的处境，尤其困难，如果他不说真情实话，能够瞒得过司马氏的耳目?

文章能取信于当世，方能取信于后代。这三篇文章，所以能流传百代，就是因为感情的真挚和文字的朴素无华。

所谓感情真实，就是如实地写出作者当时的身份、处境、思想、心情，以及与外界事物的关系。写出这些，这本来是很自然的事情，但一触及文字，很多人就做不到。这就无怪自古以来，名篇范作如凤毛麟角了。

文字是很敏感的东西，其涉及个人利害，他人利害，远远超过语言。作者执笔，不只考虑当前，而且考虑今后，不只考虑自己，而且考虑周围，困惑重重，叫他写出真实情感是很难的。

只有忘掉这些顾虑的人，才能写出真诚的散文。

司马迁的《报任安书》，因为是私人信件，并非公开流布的文字，所以他才说了那么多真心话，才成为千古绝唱。嵇康的《与山巨源绝交书》，也说了些真心话，透露了出去，就招来了大祸害。有鉴于此，致使文人执笔，左顾右盼，自然也有其不得已的地方。现在，有论者居然责怪：在“四人帮”肆虐期间，作家们为什么没有站起来，大声疾呼?这种要求，未免不近人情。在当时，一个作家，能够沉默，不去帮凶，就算可以了。论者当时如何表现，不得而知，至少他是没有去反抗的。不然，他早就成为张志新了。

但就散文的规律而言，真诚与朴实，正如水土之于花木，是个根本，不能改变。如果不只从数量上看，主要从质量上看，当前散文创作的不足之处，恐怕还是在作者的创作用心上，有或多或少的华而不实之处吧!

这不能完全归咎于作者。在一个不算短的时期中，在各个现实领域，虚假浮夸，不大遇到批评和制裁，而真实地反映情况，即说真话，却常常遭到难以想象的打击。这不能不反映到文学创作上。现在虽力加纠正，在意识形态领域中，清除这种遗留的影响，有时比在现实生活中清除，还要慢一些，复杂一些。而散文创作，以其更直接的现实性，在这方面的表现，就更比其他艺术领域显著。

有些散文，其不足之处，可以归纳为：

一、对所记事物，缺乏真实深刻感受，有时反故弄玄虚。

二、情感迎合风尚，夸张虚伪。

三、所用词藻，外表华丽，实多相互抄袭，已成陈词滥调。

四、因以上种种，造成当前散文篇幅都很长，欲求古代之一千字上下的散文，几不可得。

古代散文，意境深远，但皆言之有物。柳宗元的散文，写驴，写鼠，写麋，写蝜虾，取材很细小，而意义很深刻。韩愈《进学解》，则对自己作深刻的剖析，发挥自己的见解，这也是很有勇气的。

散文短小，当然也有所谓布局谋篇，但我以为，作者如确有深刻感触，不言不快，直抒胸臆即可，是不用过多的构思设想的。现在一些文章评论家，谈论构思太多，也太机械。

实际创作的过程，往往并非如此。散文之作，一触即发。真情实感，是构思不来的。

散文中的议论，也是自然事物演变的结果，在很多情况下，并非散文作者主观的前提。而苏子瞻常先有警句，冠于篇首，但与所叙事物，仍为血肉，并非徒具大言，以惊流俗。

抒情亦如此。无情而强抒，与无病呻吟等。感情低下，不如不抒。面对大好河山，内心营营苟苟，故作堂皇之言是对河山的不敬。

状景抒情，成为散文的意境。意境有高下，正如作者修养有高下，胸襟有广狭，志趣有崇卑，不可勉强。当然，人可以通过修养，提高其志趣。总之人心之不同，有如其面。散文意境之有区分，也在于此。范仲淹先忧后乐之名言，并非一时乘兴，创作出来，乃是久萦于心的素志，触景生情而出。

散文的语言很重要，一篇短文，语言文字不讲求，是成不了家传户诵之作的。当然语言文字也与作者的真情实感紧紧相关。

中国散文的品类繁多。所以，散文作者，首先应该涉猎中国散文的丰富遗产，知道有多少体制，明白各种体制的作用，各类文章的写作要点。

1、充分发挥自己的优势。

认识水平高、擅长理性思维的同学可选择议论文，擅长形象思维、会刻画人物的同学可选择微型小说，擅长抒情的同学可选择散文。

2、精写前几段，给评卷老师留下一个好印象。

要精雕细刻，要出彩。比如，可开门见山，直奔主题;可制造悬念，引人入胜;可提出问题，引人注意;或巧用排比、比喻、拟人等修辞手法，或巧述故事，引人入胜，或巧用题记，揭示主旨，或巧用诗文显诗意。写好结尾和过渡段。阅卷老师一般是S型的扫描全文。结尾可画龙点睛，发人深思;或总结全文，照应开头;或虚笔拓展，扩大容量;或精辟议论，深化主旨。

3、要给自己充足的构思时间，不要急于动笔。

“宁停三分，不争一秒”，因为写作是“开弓没有回头箭”的，写到一半，突然发现，呀，把题目理解错了，或没领会好命题的要求。最可怕的是文章写到一半，又想另起炉灶。时间没了，心情也坏了，干着急。建议打草稿，防止“三边工程”(边立项，边设计，边施工)。考场作文不宜见异思迁，边写边改。要贯彻一种构思。一旦构思已定，就不要轻易改变。

4、要力避前松后紧、虎头蛇尾。

有些同学构思、提纲拟好后，开头反复推敲，精雕细琢，后来发现时间不够，于是草草收兵。此外，要谨慎对待修改。今年实行网上评卷，更应慎重。修改一般只着眼于字词方面的，可用米尺比好之后划两横。结构方面不能修改。要保持卷面的整洁美观，要努力做到改动少而效果好。

5、如果偏题或者离题，作文的主要分数就失去了。

为防止跑题，可从如下几点做出努力：一是将材料、引语和话题联系起来思考，不可单看话题;二是看自己确立的观点能否用话题所给材料来证明;三是想一想这则材料当初发在媒体上登载是要达到一个什么效果的。万一跑题了，要考虑逆挽，使文章形成一种欲扬先抑的结构形态。

6、一定要完篇。

熟话说，好文章是风头、猪肚、豹尾。没有豹尾，老鼠尾巴也要有一个，绝不能写半头文。用半篇文章给你评分，怎么会得高分?

7、要重视拟题，特别要注意不能缺题。

不是万不得已，不要以话题做标题。张伟民讲那是一种浪费。拟题是显示你才气的一个好的平台，不能轻易放弃。缺题影响远不止2分。正好给了评卷老师扣分的理由。

8、不可按上年或前几年的高考作文思路行文。

求新、求变是人们所追求的，高考作文也不例外。但若按上年或前几年的高考作文思路行文，甚至拿来套用，机械模仿，不懂灵活应变，就会吃力不讨好，这也是失分的点。因为阅卷者大都是相对固定的，对以前的高考作文非常熟悉。不主张写诗歌、文言文。

9、苦于材料缺乏则可以突出自己的爱好。

你如果喜欢体育，那你就像体育记者一样，叙体育、议体育，只要切合题意就好。你如果喜欢听××的歌、看××的书、爱好上网……你就可以将自己这一方面的经历和感受与命题联系起来。那样就不愁内容贫乏、文思枯竭。不要瞎编乱造。靠编故事骗取老师的眼泪从而获得高分的时代已经一去不复返了。

10、要美化自己，而不是丑化自己。

要显现自己的高境界、大抱负、多知识、同情心，要显现自己以天下为己任的豪情。不要出于反衬别人等考虑而故意丑化自己，如果让评卷老师以为你真就是那样，那就麻烦了，因为高考是选拔性考试。从某个角度讲，评卷老师评卷的过程就是一个选择淘汰对象的过程。

11、字数以900字左右为宜。

不能给人凑字数的感觉，但也不能拖得太长，不允许加纸条。许欢写长文的同学，开篇要注意不要放得太开，开口不要太大，能跳过去的就跳过去，要相信读者的理解能力。要注意节省篇幅，要防止高潮来了没地方写了。切忌三段文。要突出的句子(扣题的、表现主旨的、文眼、点睛之笔、抒情议论、议论文的分论点等)最好单独成段。

12、看到题目后，可先搜索一下自己以往所写的优秀作文，看有没有可以再利用的。

需要注意的是一定要不牵强。

13、文章要有一至两个亮点。

如果是记叙文，应该用抓人的情节和生动的描写表现你的真情，记叙文不能没有描写。如果是议论文，就一定要有12个典型的论据，就应该有纵横捭阖，很深刻的见解。如果是微型小说一定要有巧妙的构思。这个亮点还可以是一句富有哲理的警句，也可以是一个精彩的比喻，也可以是一个超常的搭配(酽酽的歌喉)。总之，要能使评卷老师精神为之一震。

14、行文中要多次扣题，要一路扣题一路歌。

材料、引语和话题中的相关文字至少在文中出现三次以上。开头三句话内应点题一次，结尾应回扣标题，“回眸一笑百媚生”。中间至少扣题一次。几次扣题事实上也是在不断地提醒自己不要跑题。有球场上叫暂停的效果，可以调整思路和写法。

15、思想要健康。

“思想健康”不是说要你只说冠冕堂皇的话，不是要你刻意拔高，“健康”是针对“病态”、“庸俗”而言的，它的底线是不能欣赏违背法律法规和偏离社会道德的事。恋爱题材是考场作文的禁区，无论考生写得如何缠绵悱恻，真挚动人，因其行为是中学生日常行为规范所不允许的，这类作文自然得不了高分。

16、观点不可太绝对，要留有余地。

“义正”未必要“辞严”，“理直”未必就要“气壮”。联系现实生活时，涉及社会黑暗面时，要有分寸，不要一味指责。“质问京山大冤案”。批评家长、老师和社会要与人为善，抱着协商与治病救人的态度，要提建设性意见。不可尖刻、讽刺、挖苦，甚至恶意地进行人身攻击。

17、临场写作时可以根据题意和你的表达需要想像一个或一类读者就在你的面前。

如以“沟通”为话题作文，写与家长的沟通，可想像父母就在身边;写“沟通”之艰难和必要，就好像误解过你的人正在听你倾诉;写国际间通过沟通走向合作，就设想自己参与了国与国的谈判。即使所写文章没有明确的阅读对象，你也可以想像此文是写给你的语文老师的。你要知道，你的文章的惟一读者是那位跟你的语文老师非常相似的人。写记叙文，且最好将主人公设定为自己。想想阅卷老师的喜好，说他们想听的话。尽可能赢得评卷老师的同情。

18、写法上可以求新。

要考虑，怎样表现更智慧，更艺术，更有可读性;但更要求稳。我的意见是大家一定要在一种比较稳的情况下，确有把握时才可写小小说或者是写戏剧，或者是写别的，确有把握之后才写这种文体，如果没有把握的话，就选择比较稳妥的老的文体，老的写法。

1 做模版：不用找什么马思德，就拿几片范文，找几句比较拽的结构型句子，拼凑出一个你自己顺手的框架即可。不用到处找，也不用找很多，一个框架即可，当然，准备一些可以替换的词：比如recommendation替换conclusion.漂亮句子很多，但若水三千，我只掬一瓢饮。

2 找出主要的错误类型，每种写出一道两句经典的表述即可。

3 考时30分钟分三个阶段：一)12-15分钟，写出完整的第一段，三个征文段的topic sentence，和完整的末段。写第一段的同时就构思topicsentence,末段无非是重复结论和三句topic。这样的好处是结构已经完整了，你不用慌了。。二)13-10分钟，完成三段正文。我以前觉得这个很困难，后来想通了。无非是把这层意思说清楚就行。3句话就够了。也够长了。三)5分钟check.还一个作用时，是在前面没有完成，还有一个buffer,也不至于弹尽粮绝。

4 非常措施：考试万一时间不够，首段就抄原句;如果时间还不够，末段就cut-paste首段和topic 的文本，稍加修改即可。但是，结构是完整的。

5 gmat快速成文法的精髓和适用范围：精髓：看上去很美。适用范围：不想得6分的人(因为想的6分的人追求的是实际上也很美。如果运气好，可以的5分，运气不好，可以的4分。

在写记叙文的时候，我们要有条理性，先要想好先写什么，后写什么，安排好记叙的顺序，不然就会头绪杂乱，条理不清。那么我们要怎么写才能让文章条理清楚呢

一、运用顺叙。

顺叙，是按照事物发生、发展的先后次序进行叙述。这样写，可以将事物的发展过程，有头有尾地叙述出来，来龙去脉，十分清楚。运用顺叙写成的文章，它的层次、段落和事物发生、发展的过程是基本一致的。

顺叙有以时间为顺序的，有以事物发展规律为顺序的，也有以空间变换为顺序的。在叙事性的文章中，大多是以时间为顺序和以事物发展规律为顺序的。

按时间顺序进行叙述时，必须严格地安排好顺序，写清楚叙述的时间。现实生活中任何事情都不会突然发生，它总有一个发生、发展的过程。因此，作者常常要根据事情发生、发展、高潮、结局这一事情发展的规律来进行叙述，文章的层次也是清楚、明了的。

当然，有的文章事情比较简单，因而不一定非要写出事情过程的四个层次(发生、发展、高潮、结局)。

二、运用倒叙。

倒叙，就是把事件的结局或某个最突出的片断提在前面叙述，然后再从事件的开头进行叙述。

需要指出的是，运用倒叙的写法，必须注意交代清楚倒叙的起讫点，顺叙和倒叙的转换处要有明显的界限、必要的文字过渡。这些地方处理不好，会使文章脉络不清，头绪不明，影响内容的表达。

三、运用插叙。

插叙是指在叙述中心事件的过程中，由于某种需要暂时中断叙述的线索而插入的关于另一件事情的叙述。

需要指出的是，在运用插叙时不能打乱原来的叙述线索，要注意与上下文的衔接。这样，文章的结构不仅富有变化，而且叙述事情的条理非常清楚。

[记事类作文的写作方法

《语文课程标准》对学生写作方面明确要求：“写作要感情真挚，力求表达自己对自然、社会、人生的独特感受和真切体验。多角度地观察生活，发现生活的丰富多彩，捕捉事物的特征，力求有创意地表达。”写作水平的高低，作文成绩的好坏，直接反映学生的语文素质。在中学语文写作教学过程中发现，有相当一部分的学生根本没有写作欲望，出现作文内容空洞，缺乏对生活的感受与体验，没有新意，语言表达平淡无味，更谈不上写作的个性与创意，甚至就是应付了事。

因此，中学语文教师，应该把写作教学当成语文教学的一个重要的环节。探索作文教学方法或教学形式，尤为重要。其目的是让学生把写作当成是一件快乐的事情，在快乐的情感体验中，完成表情达意能力提升的目标。

一、参与生活，发现生活

著名艺术家罗丹说：“美到处都有，生活中不是缺少美，而是缺少发现的眼睛。”因此，教师在写作教学中，一定要引导学生去发现生活中的美，使学生对生活中的美产生感动，从而让生活真正成为学生写作的源头活水。学生不是没有生活，只是缺乏有意识地感悟、体味和提炼，不能引起他们观察、表达的兴趣，更不用说挖掘生活的内涵了。因此，让学生参与和发现生活，教师必须学会创新生活，使寻常的生活产生新的变化，使之具有陌生化的效应。

教师要因地制宜，创设条件让学生融入社会，投入生活，拥抱自然，积淀情思。例如，学生可以深入社区，或走进工厂农村，进行调查研究、收集材料、采访人物等等，这样学生面对沸腾的社会生活，对瞬息万变的世界，对人们价值观念的嬗变都有了直接的印象、深刻的体验。

一旦对生活有了独到的发现，有了深刻的领悟，就有了切入点，便能信手拈来，写出原汁原味的好文章来。

二、创设情境，激发灵感

写作灵感是人的显意识和潜意识交互作用的结果，是创作的灵感火花。作文教学中创设情境是提高学生写作兴趣，激发学生写作灵感的催化剂。教师在指导学生写作时，可创设使学生心理亢奋的情境，使其在不知不觉中进入积极思维的状态。

设计导语，激发兴趣。教师在作文教学中要精心设计导语，引导学生将注意力转移到教学活动中，产生写作的愿望。例如：指导作文《最难忘的老师》，教师可设计这样的导语：同学们在刚刚迈进高中校门时，偶尔会想起小学或初中时的快乐时光，想起同学和老师，下面这个作文题目《最难忘的老师》，请问同学们是哪位呢？你最难忘的是他们的哪些地方呢？学生听后，马上就会在头脑中寻找令自己难忘的老师的形象，回忆发生在他们身上的某些难忘的往事。

以读促写，以写导读。作文教学中，学生的分析能力，多角度思维能力，以及语言表达能力，都要在平日的学习过程中获得。因此应该重视在阅读中提高学生的写作能力。例如：学习诗歌和散文单元，可以让学生写短评，从不同角度欣赏作品的艺术魅力；学习小说，让学生分析人物形象，或谈对主题的理解等；学习《陈情表》让学生谈自己对新时代“孝”的认识；读《伊索寓言》学习作者的思维方法，自己重新解读一则大家熟悉的寓言故事，锻炼多角度思维能力。

捕捉直觉，诱发灵感。所谓直觉，就是脑海里一闪而过的念头。写作无从下手的同学很大程度上是弃这种直觉于不顾，一心只想如何写完作文。教师应该要求学生每人一本摘记本，不光摘录认为有价值的句或文，更重要是记录那一闪即逝的某种“念头”，也许它还不足以使你“心有所动”，但却不能轻易放过。记下它，积累一段时间后，也许你会发现，从两个或三个“无头线索”中就能“有所触动”，这不就是“柳暗花明又一村”，灵感之泉喷涌而出之时吗？

三、广泛阅读，厚积薄发

阅读与写作的关系，就是吸收与表达的关系，无法设想只写不读会导致学生怎样贫乏与苍白的作文。美国著名心理学家克拉森的实验研究已经表明学生充满趣味的课外阅读对发展其写作能力，远胜于机械的写作训练。建立在持续的、大量的课外阅读基础上的练笔，形式随意，短小轻松，对于丰富学生词汇量、提高其驾驭语言的能力、养成个性化的写作习惯，具有显著功效。读写相结合的积累，可以提高学生写作的基本素养，对于写好文章也将是一把万能的钥匙，足可以不变应万变。

梁启超说过：“阅读是写作的前提和基础，要指导学生作文，首先应教会他们如何读书。”叶圣陶也曾把阅读和写作比喻为“吸收”和“倾吐”的关系，不吸收丰富的养料，就写不出好的文章。因此，广泛阅读是写作的前提。

四、自改互改，优化评改

作文评改的目的是让每个学生认识到自己认真写出的作文有什么优缺点，明确今后作文的方向，树立写好作文的信心。单一的由教师全批全改作文的形式一般是达不到这种效果的，这也是对学生劳动的一种不尊重，最终导致作文评改目的的落空。学生的自改、互改和老师的评改相结合，让每个学生都参与到作文评改的活动中来，体现他们在作文活动中的主体地位，真正认识到自己和他人作文的得失，才能相互促进，起到作文评改应有的作用。

学生作文自改、互改并不意味着教师任务的减轻，如果抱着甩包袱的想法，学生作文的自改、互改注定要失败。学生在自改、互改时往往会有许多矛盾产生，这需要教师及时了解，作化解工作。如果不到位，至少这个小组的活动就不会流畅顺利。由于学生评改作文的能力有待提高，这需要教师对他们循序渐进的指导批改作文的方法。

注重教师评语。教师评语是联系写作与教学的重要通道，优秀的评语能够双重关注学生的写作能力和人格成长。它不但能引发学生写作的强劲内驱力，而且能够唤醒其热爱未来的美好情愫，坚定其克服困难与挫折的意志力量；它不但能对学生的语言发挥榜样的作用，提升其言语的文化品格，而且能对学生产生思想上的影响力、情感上的向心力和人格上的感召力。

总之，写作教学并不是一蹴而就的。语文教师要在写作教学工作中不断总结，勇于创新，遵循一定的规律和方法，运用恰当的教法，坚持一些有价值的训练，学生的写作水平定会有质的飞跃，并得到持续的发展。

一、一线串珠

内涵：记叙文的线索是贯穿全文、将材料串联起来的一条主线，它把文章的各个部分联结成一个统一和谐的有机体。如果说丰富而生动的材料是一颗颗珍珠，那么线索就是将这些珍珠串联起来的一条线。

记叙文的线索主要有实物、人物、事件、时间、地点以及作者的思想感情等。无论采取何种线索，都必须从表现文章的中心思想和体现各种材料之间的内在联系出发，灵活巧妙地确定。

[示例]当代作家赵丽宏的《炊烟》是此类作品中的杰作，该作品记叙的是作者在福建武夷山风景区旅游途中的一次经历，作品中作者从渴望炊烟写到看见炊烟，再由看见炊烟写到走近炊烟，认识炊烟，直到最后告别炊烟。

文章刻画了一对淳朴憨厚热情好客的对未来满怀憧憬的山村中年夫妇形象，始终围绕“炊烟”行文，推动情节发展。文中炊烟不光渲染了一种亲切自然的意境，更重要的还在于它为作品的展开铺设了一条亮丽的大道，起到了“一线串珠”的良好效果。

二、以小见大

内涵：就是以小题材表现大主题的方法。生活中有些材料看起来似乎很平常，却包含了深刻的意义。“一滴水也可以反映太阳的光辉”。只要善于透过现象发现本质，小材料同样能反映深刻的主题。在写作中对形象进行强调、取舍、浓缩，以独到的想象抓住一点或一个局部加以集中描写或延伸放大，以更充分地表达主题思想。这种艺术处理以一点观全面，以小见大，从不全到全，给写作者带来了很大的灵活性和无限的表现力，同时为读者提供了广阔的想象空间，获得生动的情趣和丰富的联想。

[示例]克里蒙·史东是美国联合保险公司的董事长。小时候，家里穷，他就卖报纸为家里补贴。一天他到一家餐馆卖报纸，刚进去就被老板赶出来。他没有放弃，趁老板不注意又溜了进去，老板发现后把他踢了出来，小史东揉揉屁股又走了进去，客人们被这个小男孩的勇敢所感动，纷纷向老板求情，又买了他的报纸。中年后史东创建了保险公司，以被认为傻的举动，获得了惊人的销售额。他说过：要是在哪里倒下，就要在哪里爬起来。(《倒树精神》)

本段节选就是运用了“以小见大”手法，用克里蒙·史东的事件折射那些没有放弃生存的希望，以顽强的生命力证实自己的一类人。“以小见大”中的“小”，是描写的焦点，它既是写作创意的浓缩和生发，也是写作者匠心独具的安排，因为它已不是一般意义的“小”，而是小中寓大，以小胜大的高度提炼的产物，是简洁的刻意追求。

三、穿插流动

[示例]王安忆的《雨，沙沙沙》记叙一位姑娘在雨夜没搭上末班车而走回家，一路上思绪流动，文章就多次插入这位姑娘心灵深处的意识活动，反映了姑娘对美好未来的向往和追求。

这篇文章就是运用了穿插流动的手法。这些插入，不仅让我们了解了姑娘的内心世界，丰富了文章内容，而且增加了可读性。

四、粗笔勾勒

内涵：粗笔勾勒法就是用寥寥的几笔重点勾勒出人物外貌的主要特征。采用粗笔勾勒法描写人物肖像，可以对人物的身材、体型、衣着、容貌、神情、姿态、风度的某一方面或几个方面作简要的勾勒。

运用粗笔勾勒法描写人物肖像要抓住人物的最主要的特征，用朴实的文字简略地写出来，不宜用过多的形容词、过多的比喻。其次要简练传神，通过寥寥几笔勾勒出人物的大致形象。

[示例]领头的纤夫是个肩膀宽阔的老头儿。他包着头巾，衣服上打着补丁，他的眼睛漠然地望着前方，路还长着呢!老头儿的右边是一个头发胡须都很浓密的中年人。他身强力壮，显得很有力气。这两个人走在行列的前头。紧跟在他们后面的是个高个子，保留着农民的打扮。他直着身子，没精打采地衔着烟斗，好像已经厌倦了拉纤的生活。(《伏尔加河上的纤夫》)

这段文字运用粗笔勾勒法描绘了伏尔加河上纤夫的形象。

文段在勾勒这些纤夫时，侧重点不同。领头的纤夫，是写他的衣着和肩膀;中年人，是写他的胡须和体型;高个子，是写他的神态和动作。

五、曲径通幽

内涵：曲径通幽法就是通过曲折回环的描写和起伏多变的文笔来揭示文章的主旨，使文章摇曳多姿、引人入胜的写作方法。运用“曲径通幽”法，要注意两点：第一、“曲径”是手段，“通幽”是目的，手段要为目的服务;第二、行文的曲折应适当有度，不要为曲折而曲折。

[示例]杨朔的散文《荔枝蜜》意在由蜜蜂而赞颂劳动人民的崇高品质，并表达自己向劳动人民学习的意愿。但文章并没有直接道出这一主题，而是通过展示作者对蜜蜂思想感情的变化，曲折有致地表达了主题。作者开头写自己对蜜蜂在感情上“疙疙瘩瘩”，接着写自己因吃了荔枝蜜而“想去看蜜蜂”，然后又写了蜜蜂的辛勤劳动与养蜂人对蜜蜂的介绍。文章结尾写作者做梦“变成了一只小蜜蜂”。

由《荔枝蜜》可见，“曲径通幽”不是开门见山、直抒胸臆，而是曲折委婉地逐步显现主题的一种谋篇手法。在很多情况下，运用“曲径通幽”能够造成峰回路转、恍然大悟的艺术效果。

六、铺垫照应

内涵：为了使文章内容衔接紧凑，结构严谨，一篇文章中，前面写到的，中间或结尾要有交代;后面提到的，前面要有所铺垫，这种安排设计叫做“照应”。照应一般有以下几种：(1)文题照应。这种照应方法常常是文章中安排多处和题目照应，在恰当的地方直接或间接地点明题意。

(2)前后照应。这种照应方法就是在文章前面写事，后面行文交代前面所写事的结果，使内容相互补充，层层深入。

(3)首尾照应。在文章的结尾处对开头交代的事情作必要的提及，使文章首尾一致，成为有机的整体。

[示例]这三种照应在《小桔灯》一文中都有所体现。

(1)文题照应。全文中，多处照应了题目。如第5段的买桔子，第6、7、8段小姑娘掰开桔子及做小桔灯的动作，第10段我提着小桔灯走在路上的联想等。语文新高考博客

(2)前后照应。如第2段对房间陈设的描写，提到竹凳及墙上的电话;第3段写小姑娘登上凳子要打电话的动作;第2段提到朋友有事出去，第11段则交代朋友已经回来了;第9段写小姑娘的话“我爸爸一定会回来的”，第12段则呼应“那小姑娘的爸爸一定早回来了”。

(3)首尾照应。开头写道：“这是十几年以前的事了。”“在一个春节前一天的下午……”结尾呼应：“但是从那时候起，每逢春节……十二年过去了……”从《小桔灯》行文的处处照应，没有丝毫疏漏，可见作家冰心的写作技巧，正因为如此，文章才做到结构严谨，清晰鲜明。

作文时，注意前后照应很重要，这样能使文章结构严谨，重点突出，中心明确。不管用哪种照应方法，下笔前都必须考虑周密，不可提笔就写，写着前边，忘了后边;或前边没写，“半道杀出个程咬金”来，首尾脱节，使别人读不懂。

1.写熟悉的人和事。因为熟悉的人和事，都是自己了解透彻、认识深刻、感受深切的，写作时就能准确地把握住写作对象的个性特征，就能写得真实自然、生动形象，具有感人的力量。日常生活中，学生接触最多的是父母、老师和同学。因此，学生对他们的外貌、性格、爱好、思想品质等了如指掌，描写时自然容易抓住人物的特点。

2.真情实感。写规范记叙文最重要的就是要有真情实感，只有你把自己的感情投入其中才能赢得别人的共鸣，有时候文章不需华丽，但求恳切，用词华丽堆砌起来的东西，会让人感觉很单薄，无法打动人心，而一篇好的文章，只有在“于人心有戚戚焉”的时候，才叫成功。

3.学会观察。生活是创作的源泉。写作文，也不能脱离生活，所以要看，要听。

4.各种技巧的综合运用。学会运用各种写作技巧，但不能为了技巧而技巧。

一、代入法

这是进行英语写作时最常用的方法。同学们在掌握一定的词汇和短语之后，结合一定的语法知识，按照句子的结构特点，直接用英语代人相应的句式即可。如：

1. 他从不承认自己的失败。

He never admits his failure.

2. 那项比赛吸引了大批观众。

The match attracted a large crowd.

3. 他把蛋糕分成4块。

He divided the cake into four pieces.

二、还原法

即把疑问句、强调句、倒装句等还原成基本结构。这是避免写错句子的一种有效的办法。如：

1. 这是开往格拉斯哥的火车吗?

Is this the train for Glasgow?

还原为陈述句：This is the train for Glasgow.

2. 他是因为爱我的钱才同我结了婚。

It was because he loved my money that he married me.

还原为非强调句：Because he loved my money, he married me.

3. 光速很快，我们几乎没法想像它的速度。

So fast does light travel that we can hardly imagine its speed.

还原为正常语序：Light travels so fast that we can hardly imagine its speed.

三、分解法

把一个句子分成两个或两个以上的句子。这样既能把意思表达得更明了，又能减少写错句子的几率。如：

1. 我们要干就要干好。

If we do a thing, we should do it well.

2. 从各地来的学生中有许多是北方人。

There are students here from all over the country. Many of them are from the North.

四、合并法

就是把两个或两个以上的简单句用一个复合句或较复杂的简单句表达出来。这种方法最能体现学生的英语表达能力，同时也最能提高文章的可读性。如：

1. 我们迷路了，这使我们的旅行变成了一次冒险。

Our trip turned into an adventure when we got lost.

2. 天气转晴了，这是我们没有想到的。

The weather turned out to be very good, which was more than we could expect.

3. 狼是高度群体化的动物，它们的成功依赖于合作。

Wolves are highly social animals whose success depends upon their cooperation.

五、删减法

就是在写英语句子时，把相应汉语句子里的某些词、短语或重复的成分删掉或省略。如：

1. 这部打字机真是价廉物美。

This typewriter is very cheap and fine indeed.

注：汉语表达中的“价”和“物”在英语中均无需译出。

2. 个子不高不是人生中的严重缺陷。

Not being tall is not a serious disadvantage in life.

注：汉语说“个子不高”，其实就是“不高”。也就是说，其中的“个子”在英语中无需译出。

六、移位法

由于英语和汉语在表达习惯上存在差异，根据表达的需要，某些成分需要前置或后移。如：

1. 他发现赚点外快很容易。

He found it easy to earn extra money.

注：it在此为形式宾语，真正的宾语是句末的不定式to earn extra money。

2. 告诉我这事的人不肯告诉我他的名字。

The man who told me this refused to tell me his name.

注：who told me this为修饰the man的定语从句，应置于其后。

3. 直到我遇到你以后，我才真正体会到幸福。

It was not until I met you that I knew real happiness.

注：not...until...为英语中的固定句式，其意为“直到……才……”。

七、分析法

指根据要表示的汉语意思，通过进行语法分析和句式判断，然后写出准确地道的英语句子。如：

1. 从这个角度看，问题并不像人们一般料想的那样严重。

Seen in this light, the matter is not as serious as people generally suppose.

注：分词短语作状语时，其逻辑主语应与句子主语一致，由于the matter与see之间为被动关系，故see要用过去分词seen。

2. 我没有见过他，所以说不出他的模样。

Not having met him, I cannot tell you what he is like.

注：如果分词的动作发生在谓语动作之前，且与逻辑主语是主动关系，则用现在分词的完成式。

八、意译法

有的同学在写句子时，一遇见生词或不熟悉的表达，就以为是“山穷水尽”了。其实，此时我们可以设法绕开难点，在保持原意的基础上，用不同的表达方式写出来。如：

1. 汤姆一直在扰乱别的孩子，我就把他撵了出去。

Tom was upsetting the other children, so I showed him the door.

2. 有志者事竟成。

Where there is a will, there is a way.

3. 你可以同我们一起去或是呆在家中，悉听尊便。

You can go with us or stay at home, whichever you choose.

话题作文作为一种开放性作文，的确为考生在完成考场作文时提供了施展才华的良机，从近几年来反馈的信息来看，也确实体现了这样的问题。让每一个学生都有话可写，自由发挥，也已成为命题者在拟题时必须遵循的一条原则。而要在很短的时间内完成一篇出色的话题作文，创新就成为摆在每一个考生面前的首选，事实上，创新成为每一个考生嘴边的一条口头禅，也早已不是什么新鲜事，因而在创新大旗的凛冽劲风中，一大批主题深刻、形式新颖、思路活跃的优秀习作便脱颖而出，也大受广大教师尤其是阅卷老师以及学生的青睐。然而，接踵而至的问题是，很多的考生对创新作文的理解往往过于狭隘，他们一味地认为，既然没了桎梏，那么就可以随情由性、信马由缰、海阔天空，甚至有些为所欲为了，也正由于如此，这就不可避免地出现了一些所谓的创新作文走进了只重形式，而忽视内容的误区，甚至有的作文为了追求观点的标新立异，往往带有明显的错误倾向，这些都是我们的考生在应考时应引起高度重视的问题，下面，我想就学生在试图完成创新作文时出现的一些问题作一些分析，以期我们的考生能在应考时引起警觉。

曾受2001年高考满分作文《患者无诚信的就诊报告》的影响，因而举国上下，就诊报告便一窝蜂地进入了考场，如果说当初的那篇就诊报告还能给人以耳目一新的感觉，或者说还能称得上是一种创新的话，那么后来我们第二次看到的，甚至第三次第四次看到的就怎么也不会吊起我们的胃口。相反，恰恰就是由于屡次出现的这种形式反而给人们以倒胃口的感觉，这无疑与第二个、第三个把女人比作花的文学笑语是一致的。

文体不限成为这些年来话题作文的一大亮点，也是话题作文开放性的重要标志之一，其实质是解放了考生的手脚，为考生创造了充分展示自己独特个性的自由空间，也有利于考生发挥出最佳的写作水平，正因为如此，一大批才华横溢的考生脱颖而出。但是也正是由于文体不限，导致不少考生为追求文体创新，硬是选择那些自己本不熟悉的文体，如话剧、小品、影视脚本、教学求证、报告记录式、模拟法庭式，甚至新概念作文大赛模式在中高考作文中也已是屡见不鲜，其结果只能是不仅把形式搞丢了，甚至把内容也跟着丢了。

比如在一篇题为《初三学习时间表》的考场作文中，考生为了求得作文形式上的创新，从头至尾仅列出了一张作息时间表，想以此来反映初三学生学习生活的紧张忙碌。想法也许是好的，但整篇文章干巴巴的几句话：吃饭上课自习作业没有一点点文采，形式可以说是新了点，但这还能叫文章吗？

因此针对这种情况，我们在完成作文时，尤其是在考场作文中，应树立一种全新的作文结构理念，不能因为想达到某种创新，而片面地狭隘地去追求某种结构形式。慎重的态度应当是根据自己的特长，首先确定适合自己的文体，然后再根据这种文体的特点去构思形式。如你平时喜欢戏剧，我认为把戏剧作为作文模式，就不失为一种明智之举，如你喜欢写诗，那么不妨就酝酿激情，赋诗一首。一旦如此，不但尽显了自己作文的特长，而且此时的作文形式也跟着给人以耳目一新的感觉。