GMAT邏輯題，也是歷年GMAT考試的痼疾。都說GMAT邏輯題比其他部分都好拿分，原因是GMAT邏輯題只需對命題做出判斷。實則不然，看上去簡單的GMAT邏輯題實際上暗藏門道。它對GMAT邏輯推理的要求要高於平常的邏輯學習。為了便於考生進行復習，下面yjbys網小編就向大家介紹一下GMAT邏輯題的幾個理解思路，以及如何更好地訓練自己的GMAT邏輯推理能力。
1.如何正確理解weaken ， support
① 支援：(support)，將答案放在論據和結論之間，對原文推理或者結論有支援作用就可
以， 所以既可非充分又可非必要
② 駁斥：(weaken)，將答案放在論據和結論之間，對原文推理或者結論有駁斥作用就
可以， 所以也是既可非充分又可非必要
③ 如何理解充分和必要
1.充分：所謂充分條件就是僅有這條件就足以帶來結果，不需考慮別的條件了。
它是誰成立，誰一定也成立，比如A→B， 如果A成立，那麼一定有B
2.必要：所謂必要條件就是沒有這個條件結果一定不對。
2.前因後果結構
推理中的前提和結論在大多數情況下用因果關係來表示，根據因果關係中的結果成立
不成立我們分為兩種邏輯結構，前因後果結果和Causal Explanations結構，以後講的答
案方向點區別並不大，但是我們為了利於理解進行這個分類
前因後果結構表示： (A——B)
從這個原因是否能夠得到這個結果?(注意because， since， for等原因引導詞 )
GMAT邏輯題的方法，不是一朝一夕就能熟悉和掌握的，為了在有限的時間內掌握一種最適合你的GMAT邏輯題解題技巧，就需要大家在平時的GMAT邏輯題複習中，不斷培養自己的GMAT邏輯推理能力，考生千萬不要小看GMAT邏輯推理能力，它還可以在其他部分的考試中發揮巨大威力。
通過上面對如何訓練gmat邏輯推理能力的介紹，相信對於很多計劃參加gmat考試的人來說，可以參考上述的方法和技巧來做好gmat邏輯推理的備考和訓練。
【The Economist《經濟學人》常用詞彙】
91、長期(Long run)
長期是指所有投入品都是可變的時間期限。在長期中廠商可以全部改變它所使用的資源。
92、邊際成本(Marginal cost)
邊際成本是指由於增加最後一單位產量導致的總成本的增加。
93、邊際成本定價(Marginal cost pricing)
邊際成本定價是指這樣一種定價規則，廠商或國有企業使得價格等於邊際成本。
94、邊際支出曲線(Manginal expenditure curve)
邊際支出曲線表示廠商增加1單位投人品X所引起的成本的增加。
95、邊際產品(Marginal product)
邊際產品是指由於增加最後一單位某種投入品(其他投入品的`數量保持不變)所帶來的總產量的增加。
96、邊際產品轉換率(Marginal rate of product transformation)
邊際產品轉換率是指生產可能性曲線斜率的負數。
97、邊際替代率(Marginal rate of substitution)
邊際替代率是指如果消費者在收到額外一單位商品X之後要保持滿足水平不變而必須放棄的商品Y的數量。
98、邊際收益(Marginal revenue)
邊際收益是指出售額外一單位產品所帶來的總收益的增加。
99、邊際收益產品(Marginal revenue product)
邊際收益產品是指由於使用額外一單位投入品X所帶來的總收益的增加。它等於投入X的邊際產品乘以廠商的邊際收益。
100、邊際效用( Marginal utility)
邊際效用是指(當所有其他的商品的消費水平保持不變時)從額外一單位商品中所獲得額外滿足(即效用)。
【GMAT寫作範文】
following appeared as part of an article in the travel section of a newspaper.“Over the past decade，the restaurant industry in the country of Spiessa has experienced unprecedented surge can be expected to continue in the coming years，fueled by recent social changes: personal incomes are rising，more leisure time is available，single-person households are more common，and people have a greater interest in gourmet food，as evidenced by a proliferation of publications on the subject.” Discuss how well .
Recent social changes in the country of Spiessa lead the author to predict a continued surge in growth of that country's restaurant ng personal incomes，additional leisure time，an increase in single-person households，and greater interest in gourmet food are cited as the main reasons for this optimistic of these factors are indeed relevant to growth in the restaurant industry; so the prediction appears reasonable on its ver，three questionable assumptions operative in this argument bear close examination.
The first dubious assumption is that the supply of restaurants in Spiessa will continue to grow at the same rate as in the recent ver，even in the most favorable conditions and the best of economic times there are just so many restaurants that a given population can accommodate and is possible that the demand for restaurants has already been met by the unprecedented growth of the past decade，in which case the recent social changes will have little impact on the growth of the restaurant industry.
A second assumption is that the economic and social circumstances cited by the author will actually result in more people eating out at assumption is unwarranted， example，increased leisure time may just as likely result in more people spending more time cooking gourmet meals in their own ，single people may actually be more likely than married people to eat at home than to go out for lly，people may choose to spend their additional income in other ways—on expensive cars，travel，or larger homes.
A third poor assumption is that，even assuming people in Spiessa will choose to spend more time and money eating out，no extrinsic factors will stifle this assumption is number of extrinsic factors—such as a downturn in the general economy or significant layoffs at Spiessa's largest businesses—may stall the current restaurant over，the argument fails to specify the “social changes” that have led to the current economic it turns out these changes are politically driven，then the surge may very well reverse if political power changes hands.
In conclusion，this argument unfairly assumes a predictable future course for both supply and strengthen the argument，the author must at the very least show that demand for new restaurants has not yet been exhausted，that Spiessa can accommodate new restaurants well into the future，and that the people of Spiessa actually want to eat out more.
