【九届通译杯】大赛辅导-听辨2

大赛辅导-听辨2

         在赛前辅导-听辨1的分享当中，本栏目给大家介绍了精听的听力练习方法。精听的目的是提高听辨能力的准确度，提高词汇量。同时我们上次也提到了另一种练习听辨能力的方法，那就是泛听。

         现在很流行的一个概念是“沉浸式体验”，可以说泛听就是这样的一种练习听力的方式了，泛听适用于大批量的听力练习，在泛听练习的过程当时，可以快速的使同学们对语言环境、英语口音熟悉起来，也是我们经常说的“磨耳朵”。在泛听材料的选择方面，通常我们可以选择科普性质的较长的文章，或是对话和辩论。例如BBC的24小时全天广播，可以满足同学们不管在何时何地都练习泛听的要求，该电台涵盖的主题也是十分丰富，从航天航空到商业发展等等。

         在练习泛听的时候，同学们应该注意语段或者探讨内容的主题，抓住文章的中心思想和主要逻辑，不要过于纠结某一个词的意思，要着重提高自己的理解能力。听力练习告一段落后，推荐大家静下心来，回想一下刚刚听到的内容，自己做个英文总结，这种总结不一定非要以书面的形式呈现，可以是口头的，但要注意在作总结练习的时候自己语法和句子的应用。

         接下来就请大家听一下长度为3分钟左右的一篇文章，并做泛听练习。

参考文本：

Models for Arguments

Good morning, everyone. My name is David and I am good at arguing. So welcome to our introductory lecture on argumentation.

Why do we want to argue? Why do we try to convince other people to believe things that they don't want to believe? And is that even a nice thing to do? Is that a nice way to treat other human being, try and make them think something they don't want to think?

Well, my answer is going to make reference to three models for arguments.

The first model --- let's call this the dialectical model--- is that we think of arguments as war.

And you know what that's like. There is a lot of screaming and shouting and winning and losing.

And that's not really a very helpful model for arguing, but it's a pretty common and fixed one. I guess you must have seen that type of arguing many times--- in the street, on the bus or in the subway.

Let's move on to the second model. The second model for arguing regards arguments as proofs. Think of a mathematician's argument. Here's my argument. Does it work? Is it any good? Are the premises warranted? Are the inferences valid? Does the conclusion follow the premises? No opposition, no adversary--- not necessarily any arguing in the adversarial sense.

And there's a third model to keep in mind that I think is going to be very helpful, and that is arguments as performances. Argument has been in front of an audience. We can think of a politician trying to present a position, trying to convince the audience of something.

But there's another twist on this model that I really think is important; namely, that when we argue before an audience, sometimes the audience has a more participatory role in the argument; that is, you present your arguments in front of an audience who are like juries that make a judgment and decide the case.Let's call this model the rhetorical model, where you have to tailor your argument to the audience at hand.

Of those three, the argument as war is the dominant one. It dominates how we talk about arguments; it dominates how we think about arguments, and because of that, it shapes how we argue, our actual conduct in arguments. We want strong arguments, arguments that have a lot of punch, arguments that are right on target. We want to have our defenses up and our strategies all in order. We want killer arguments. That's the kind of argument we want. It is the dominant way of thinking about arguments.

When I'm talking about arguments, that's probably what you thought of, the adversarial model. But the war metaphor, the war paradigm or model for thinking about arguments, has, I think, negative effects on how we argue.

参考译文：

论证的模式

大家早上好。

我叫大卫，擅长辩论。欢迎大家来听这次辩论的介绍。

我们为什么想要辩论？为什么我们想要让别人相信他们不愿相信的事情。这样做到底好不好？这样对待别人，试图让他们思考不想思考的事情，到底合不合适？

我的答案将涉及到三种辩论模式。

第一种模式，我们叫它辩证模式，这种模式中，我们把辩论看作战争。你也知道那是怎样的情况。充斥着扰攘与成败。这种模式对辩论帮助不大，却很普遍，很常用。我猜你一定经常看到这种辩论：大街上，公交车上，地铁里。

接下来我们看第二种模式。第二种论证模式把争论作为验证过程。想想数学家的论证。这是我的论点。这个论点有效吗？有什么优点吗？前提可以保证为真吗？推断有效吗？结论与前提一致吗？没有反对方，没有对抗，不需要任何反对的声音与之争论。

还有第三种模式，我觉得非常有用，它把辩论看作表演。辩论被呈现在观众面前。说到这里我们可以想到竞争某个职位的政客，试图说服人们相信某些事。

但是我认为对这个模式的一个变化有必要指出，我们在观众面前辩论的时候，观众有时候会参与到辩论中。你将辩论呈现在观众面前，他们像陪审团一样，做出决定，裁决案件。

我们把这个模式叫作修辞模式，你可以根据面前的观众修改辩论。

这三个模式中，将辩论当作战争的模式占主导地位。它使每当我们提起辩论，就是这种模式。这种模式基本代表了我们对辩论的理解，因此，它也影响着我们论证的方式以及在论证中我们的实际做法。我们需要强有力的辩论，直指目标。我们想把自己武装起来，组织好策略去应对。我们想要击败对手。这是我们想要的辩论。这就是一种主流的辩论观。

谈到论证，你可能会想到对抗模式。但是我认为战争这个隐喻，将论证看作战争的范式或者模式对我们的辩论方式产生了消极作用。