文：黄卓明（黄大仙）

        上一篇介绍了Manhattan这本书的一些基本哲学，应该说大体上大仙还是非常赞同的，今天介绍一下这本书提供的做题套路，在形而下的环节，大仙有一些不同看法。
 
(1) 基本入手点：

         Manhattan提出的是GMC原则，G即语法，M即意思，C是concision，即简洁。貌似老外都比较喜欢用几个字母缩写来让自己的理论更印象深刻。
        理论上这个原则是对的，挑毛病嘛无非就是这几个，反正什么毛病用这三个框框来套，基本都中了。但是体验过考试的同学都知道，这个考试的要害不是事后告诉你，某选项存在什么毛病，而是需要练就一个题目摆在你面前，你在毫无预期的情况下，快速排除选项的能力。

         当然，Manhattan也印证了我一直强调的观点，concison是个较后考虑的元素，且各项所谓规则皆容易有例外，被命题者所利用。

Remember, however, that Concision is the LAST of the three principles tested on Sentence Correction Problems (Grammar, Meaning, Conciion). Do not simply pick the shortest choice and      move on. Quite frequently, the GMAT will force you to pick a longer choice that is grammatically correct and clear in the mearning.
 
         和我国某机构的老师在很多年前一样，Manhattan也注意到了这个可爱的词：Being

 Here, being does not add to the meaning of sentence, so it should be eliminated. In fact, the word being almost always signals redundancy on the GMAT. You should avoid it whenever possible. (Note that the GMAT has recently come up with ways to make being right-generally, by making alternative choices grammatically wrong. So do not eliminate being purely as knee-jerk reaction.)

         当然，Manhattan比某机构的教师还是走得远一点，起码提到了GMAC的一个反向设计趋势，但是对于其本质的分析仍远远不够，推荐他们看看大仙的解毒十日谈系列吧！
 
 （2）基本策略：

         在求取最后正确选项的策略上，Manhattan推荐的是选项分组策略，这个和大仙教授的“先海选，再PK”有异曲同工之妙。同时也指出了分组的策略，以及选择自己熟悉、有把握的比较点的艺术， 也和大仙的“避实击虚”不谋而合。
       

我相信我摘录这段是全书最精华的部分: 
The key to answering Sentence Correction questions within this time frame is to split the
answer choices after you have read the given sentence. Follow these steps:

1. Write down “A   B   C   D   E” on your paper (or yellow tablet if you are taking the
actual test). It does not matter if you write this horizontally or vertically.

2. Read the sentence, noting any obvious errors as you read.

3. Scan the answer choices vertically—do not read them—looking for differences that split
the answer choices. For example, in the sample question above, you can split the answers
between those that begin with including and those that begin with like. Similarly, at the end
of the answers, there is a split between those with will and those without will (essentially a
split between the present and the future tense of remember). Ideal splits will divide the
answer choices into a 2–3 split (two choices with one option, three with the other).
Sometimes you will find a three-way split (for example, another problem might have have
lifted, lifted and have been lifted among the answer choices). A three-way split is useful as
long as you can eliminate at least one of the options. If you identify a split that distinguishes only one answer choice from the others (a 1–4 split) and you eliminate the choice represented by only one answer choice, you will end up eliminating only that one answer. Thus,
1–4 splits are less useful than other kinds of splits, though they should still be considered.

4. Choose a split for which you know the grammatical rule and which side of the split is
correct. Sometimes you find a split, but you do not know which side is correct. In this case,
maybe you did not yet master the relevant rule. Alternatively, the split might be a “red herring
split,” meaning that both sides of the split are grammatically correct.

5. On your paper, cross out the answer choices that include the incorrect side of the split.

6. Compare the remaining answer choices by re-splitting. Continue to find differences in
the answers, but make sure you use only the answer choices that remain from your initial
split.

7. Continue to split remaining choices until you have one answer left. 
Splitting and Re-Splitting is the foundation of the Manhattan GMAT approach to Sentence
Correction questions, so it is worth walking through the process with our sample question

        不过，这种严谨的教条执行起来，显然会让信息加工能力就比较慢的中国学生有点吃不消，说白了，老外还是没学会见招拆招，兵来将挡，缺乏对不同的情景下处理问题的灵活性，这个是后话了，无论如何，Manhattan的观察角度已经比早年的卡普兰和普林斯顿那种被门夹过的方法进步无数。