11月GMAT阅读机经：惯例(传统)和描述性语法.

　　已经成为GMAT考试的指导，GMAT机经对于各位考生们非常重要。在考试之前，对GMAT真题的复习，是最直接最有利于考生们的复习材料。下面是十一月最近阅读机经，希望帮助大家复习。澳际教育在这里将最新的GMAT机经分享给大家，希望帮助考生们认真备考。

　　【本月原始】

　　阅读：考了一篇 两本英语词典的，长约一屏半，饭饭有考古了。 题目不太难。 另外两篇失忆。。。。。By verawu

　　【主题思路】：

　　看段落大意。

　　【段落大意】：

　　第一段：介绍这两种语法,先给出了几点区别

　　大概介绍了descriptive grammar 和prescriptive grammar的概念和区别。

　　第二段：继续说明二者的区别,好像讲了满多用法的不同

　　进一步说区别，后半段主要说的是prescriptive grammar中包含一种usage manual(考点：下面哪个选项不是作者在文中提到关于usage manual的信息，实在不记得选了什么了，但是好好读第二段应该没有问题)，usage manual 大概就是prescriptive的一种语法规则，虽然它可以知道人们哪些是对的哪些是错的语法，但它的区分有时是不正确的。

　　第三段：矛盾的例子

　　紧接着开始举例说明为什么它的区分不正确(考点：举例作用题，我选的就是举了一例子说明文章的一个观点)。例子里包含两组对比，第一个对比是standard structure和Unstandard structure，文中表示usage manual 来区分这两种是正确的(就是说unstandard structure确实不正确)。第二个对比是formal language和informal language，文中指出这种对比是不对的，因为不能说informal language就是incorrect grammar，其实就是说informal language同样正确(考点，问在accurate prescriptive grammar book里面，下面哪种说法正确，我选了a)。

　　第四段：作者说其实二者之间的区别不是太重要,重要的是人.只要人能使用,就不在乎。

　　说这些grammar rule虽然存在，但其实语言是人们流传下来的，人们根据自身的习惯来决定到底什么不正确什么正确。这里也有考点，问作者的观点，忘了我选了哪个了，错误选项中好像有说必须得了解语言的历史才能学好语言，还有必须在语法规则的指导下才能正确运用语言。

　　【题目】：

　　1)文中例句按照description的语法惯例来看哪个是对的，我选的好像是B?

　　2) 以下哪个代表文中观点-好像是两种语法都支持什么什么fact还是啥。。

　　3)最后一段的结构，选assumpiton，consideration，conclusion

　　【背景资料1】：

　　Descriptive grammar (dinition #1) rers to the structure of a language as it is actually used by speakers and writers. Prescriptive grammar (dinition #2) rers to the structure of a language as certain people think it should be used.

　　Both kinds of grammar are concerned with rules--but in different ways. Specialists in descriptive grammar (called linguists) study the rules or patterns that underlie our use of words, phrases, clauses, and sentences. On the other hand, prescriptive grammarians (such as most editors and teachers) lay out rules about what they believe to be the “correct” or “incorrect” use of language。

　　Descriptive grammarians generally advise us not to be overly concerned with matters of correctness: language, they say, isn&apost good or bad; it simply is. As the history of the glamorous word grammar demonstrates, the English language is a living system of communication, a continually evolving affair. Within a generation or two, words and phrases come into fashion and fall out again. Over centuries, word endings and entire sentence structures can change or disappear.

　　Prescriptive grammarians prer giving practical advice about using language: straightforward rules to help us avoid making errors. The rules may be over-simplified at times, but they are meant to keep us out of trouble--the kind of trouble that may distract or even confuse our readers.

　　【背景资料2】：

　　For the past half-century, these terms have served as usul labels for two contrasting approaches to the study of grammar and usage and especially to the teaching of these matters. They have also long served as epithets in the recurrent name-calling that quarreling over correctness, appropriateness, and permissiveness in language seems to elicit. The terms represent polar values: (1) A descriptive approach to language describes in full detail precisely how we use that language. The chi values of this approach are accuracy and an unretouched picture of usage, warts and all. (2) A prescriptive approach insists that however many variables might be found, there are better and worse choices; it will specify at least which is most appropriate, more likely which is acceptable, or, in its most rigorous application, which is correct. Clearly, the prescriptive approach is easier to teach—there is always one right answer; the descriptive approach may offer several possible answers, each appropriate in one or another context. This book uses both approaches. Users are seeking help, and they should find it. The problem is that a simplistic “correct” answer may seem helpful, but often when it appears to contradict users’ experience, they will either shrug off the prescription or find themselves unable to accept it. For example: to say succinctly that irregardless is not a word or at least that it ought to be treated as though it were not a word, is prescriptive. The “rule” being promulgated is: Don’t use irregardless; pretend it doesn’t exist, because, in fact, it’s not in Standard English. But, in fact, that’s not true. It is a word, and therore it is in the dictionaries; many people use it, including some who in other respects speak Standard English. A descriptive account of the word will show who uses it and when, where, and why. Irregardless, it turns out, occurs regularly in Common and Vulgar English, but in Standard its only acceptable use is jocular. A descriptive account will end by pointing out that the inadvertent use of irregardless in Standard English can be a shibth. The prescriptive commentator then impatiently inquires, Why all the fuss? Why pussyfoot about? Just tell the world not to use irregardless—that’s simple, sound, and teachable. The descriptive commentator will offer at least two objections: (1) The word may be Substandard now, but you can’t be sure it won’t change in status. In fact it may be in the process of such change even now: it may be fading to an obsolete status (in which case we can stop talking about it), or it may someday become Standard. (2) Even more important, sometimes standard speakers do use irregardless; the issue is where and how. Even in spelling and pronunciation, where prescription may seem less problematic, description may sometimes be more nearly accurate. Prescription says judgment is the correct spelling, but description accurately points out that even Edited English considers judgement correct too. And although the teacher may prescribe DEK-uh-dent as the correct way to say decadent, the student will discover other teachers who say (also in Standard English) dee-KAI-dent. This book, as it must, uses both approaches, depending on the problem. See the entry on RULES AND GENERALIZATIONS for an account of the aptness of each approach to particular kinds of questions: Where real rules apply, prescription is the way to go. But much of grammar and most of usage require generalizations rather than rules, because what so often we must provide is some current best advice on a problem that is undergoing change even as we discuss it. Description faces up to complexity and raggedness and avoids simplistic glossing over of existing variation in pronunciations, forms, or meanings. Rigorous prescribers often charge describers with being permissive, and the countercharge of describers is that prescribers are simplistic, peddling half-truths and lies as though they were true. But in the end, a guide to usage must give advice, and so this manual prescribes for its users when it can. The difference is that it also explains such other experiences as users are likely to encounter and where possible explains what they mean. See also CONSERVATIVES IN LANGUAGE MATTERS; CONSERVATIVE USAGE; LIBERALS IN LANGUAGE MATTERS; LIBERAL USAGE; PURISTS.

　　还有更多关于GMAT机经的内容请关注澳际教育，澳际教育将第一时间将最新的GMAT机经分享给大家，同时也希望在考生们利用GMAT机经复习的同时，注重学习方法的总结，考出理想的成绩。