打算开始通过精读的方法训练英文阅读能力，词汇掌握，已经写作能力，是受到这一篇文章的启发。
文中所述方法，与一般概念中的精读不同，不限于词语选择和造句分段，而是引领读者关注表达过程中逻辑的铺陈、情绪的带入、内容的呈现、对于细节浓缩还是铺陈的不同处理。
当然，对于大部分的学习者，基本的词汇扩展和语法运用尚未熟稔，仍然是绕不开的步骤。因此，我为自己设定了以下的精读框架，多做精读作业，力求在表达的形与质上皆有进益。
精读框架
首先，逐段扫清语句障碍，掌握不熟悉的词法和句法
- 词法：同义替换，助记
- 句法：特别句式仿写
其次，依据小鹿的方法完成十步观察
Abstract
(complete and concise)Steps of the main argument
A functional outline
(using precise and expressive verbs)Intended audiences (with examples)
Ways of involving readers (with examples)
Ways of dealing with other scholars in the field
Describing the essay's voice
(stands, personality, intention, attitude...)Evaluating the essay's line of logic
(clear or not? fuzzy parts? suggestions to fix?)Functioning of the opening
(engaging or not? )Functioning of the ending
附小鹿原文：
Write a very brief abstract (a few sentences), starting with, "In a nutshell, X argues that ...." Polish this; make it as complete AND as concise as possible.
Divide the essay into sections, identifying the important steps of the argument. Think about what size units feel right for this purpose. If the author has divided the essay into sections (subheadings, dividers of some sort), you almost certainly need to subdivide further and identify smaller units. On the other hand, it doesn't need to be paragraph by paragraph either.
Write a "functional" or "dynamic" outline using these divisions, that is, focus on what the author does in each section. ("The author raises the question . . . " "the author refutes . . . " "the author distinguishes between . . . "). Take care over the verbs: make them as precise and expressive as possible. Let's agree to ban generics like "says" or "states." Be sparing with "explains."
What is this essay's intended audience? Be specific: in most cases, the audience will be broadly academic. But within that? Is the essay addressed to specialists in a small field/ people already familiar with the texts and/or main issues, or does it seek to include literary scholars more broadly? Does it seek to include readers beyond literary studies? Beyond academia? How can you tell? Identify a few good examples of what you're describing.
How does the essay involve its readers? Does it directly address us? Take us along? Coopt us? Antagonize us? Puzzle us? Find good examples.
How does the essay deal with other scholars in the field? Does it quote a lot? Effectively? Does it provide an overview of previous scholarship? Does it insert itself into that broader field, or try to distinguish itself from it? Does it build on other people's work, or bounce off it? Does it use "strawmen" (i.e., weak arguments introduced solely for the purpose of being knocked over)? Is it collegial, antagonistic . . . ? Find good examples.
How would you describe the essay's voice? (You can even play games if you like: how do you picture the author? How does she look/what does she wear/age? Where does he sit as he writes? How do you imagine his or her speaking voice sounds? Now try to account for these impressions: where do they come from?) Is the author trying to establish a voice, or seeking to remain neutral?
Is the essay clearly argued? Does it mean to be "easy" to follow, or is it aiming to challenge and puzzle you? Are there places where you get lost? Why is that? Would you advise the author to fix that? How?
Look at the opening paragraph (or paragraphs—you decide what constitutes "the opening"). Divide it into functional steps, much as you did for the whole essay in 2. and 3. What does the author do to introduce the problem/question/issue we'll be looking at? How does the author motivate you to enter into the discussion with her? Does the author give a "thesis statement" or preview his or her conclusion? Entirely/partially? How? Do you like the opening paragraph(s)?
Look at the ending: how does the author leave things? Is there a summation? A looking ahead to further questions? Some kind of special effect? Is it effective?
Note any other observations that didn't come under any of these questions.
版权所有，转载请注明出处和链结
微博：@小鹿撞兔老师
http://weibo.com/deerdreams
微信公共号：小鹿撞兔留学申请教室
