专听力真题答案及讲座原文

1、SECTION A MINI-LECTUREModels for ArgumentsThree models for argumentsthe first model for arguing is called (1) ; arguments are treated as war there is much winning and losing it is a (2) model for arguingthe second model for arguing is arguments as proofs: (3) warranted valid inferences and conclusio

2、ns no (4) in the adversarial sensethe third model for arguing is (5) : the audience is (6) in the arguments arguments must (7) the audienceTraits of the argument as warvery dominant: it can shape (8) strong arguments are needednegative effects include: (9) are emphasized winning is the only purpose

3、this type of arguments prevent (10) the worst thing is (11) implication from arguments as war: (12) e.g., one providing reasons and the other raising (13) the other one is finally persuadedSuggestions on new ways to (14) of argumentsthink of new kinds of argumentschange roles in arguments(15) SECTIO

4、N B INTERVIEWNow, listen to the Part One of the interview. Questions 1 to 5 are based on Part One of the interview.1. What is the topic of the interviewA. Maggie s university life.B. Her moms life at Harvard.C. Maggies view on studying with Mom.D. Maggies opinion on her moms major.2. Which of the fo

5、llowing indicates that they have the same study scheduleA. They take exams in the same weeks.B. They have similar lecture notes.C. They apply for the same internship.D. They follow the same fashion.3. What do the mother and the daughter have in common as studentsA. Having roommates.B. Practicing cou

6、rt trails.C. Studying together.D. Taking notes by hand.4. What is the biggest advantage of studying with MomA. Protection.B. Imagination.C. Excitement.D. Encouragement.5. What is the biggest disadvantage of studying with MomA. Thinking of ways to comfort Mom.B. Occasional interference from Mom.C. Ul

7、timately calls when Maggie is busy.D. Frequent check on Maggies grades.Now, listen to the Part Two of the interview. Questions 6 to 10 are based on Part Two of the interview.6. Why is parent and kid studying together a common caseA. Because parents need to be ready for new jobs.B. Because parents lo

8、ve to return to college.C. Because kids require their parents to do so.D. Because kids find it hard to adapt to college life.7. What would Maggie s mom like to be after collegeA. Real estate agent.B. Financier.C. Lawyer.D. Teacher.8. How does Maggie smom feel about sitting in class after 30 yearsA.

9、Delighted.B. Excited.C. Bored.D. Frustrated.9. What is most challenging for MaggiesmomA. How to make a cake.B. How to make omelets.C. To accept what is taught.D. To plan a future career.10. How does Maggie describe the process of thinking out one s career pathA. Unsuccessful.B. Gradual.C. Frustratin

10、g.D. Passionate.Keys:1. the dialectical model2. common and fixed3. premises4. opposition / arguing5. arguments as performances / the rhetorical model6. participatory / participating / the participant / taking part7. be tailored to / cater for8. how we argue / our actual conduct9. tactics / strategie

11、s10. negotiation and collaboration11. theres no solution / progress12. learning with losing13. questions / counter-considerations / counter-arguments / objections / arguments in opposition14. achieve positive effects15. support oneself / yourselfC A D D BA C D C BScript:Good morning, everyone. My na

12、me 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 dont want to believe And is that even a nice thing to do Is that a nice way to treat other human being, try and ma

13、ke them think something they dont want to think Well, my answer is going to make reference to three models for arguments.(1) The first model let call this the dialectical model is that we thi nk of argume nts as war. And you know what thats like. There is a lot of scream ing and shouting and winning

14、 and losing. (2) And thats not really a very helpful model arguing, but its a pretty com mon and fixed oneguess you must have see n that type of arguing many times in the street, on the bus or in the subway.Let move on to the second model. The second model for arguing regards arguments as proofs. Th

15、ink of a mathematicians argument. Heres my argument. Does it work Is it any good (3) Are the premise 前提)warranted Are the inferences (推论)valid Does the conclusion follow the premises (4) No opposition, no adversariality (对抗) not necessarily any arguing in the adversarial sense.(5) And there sa third

16、 model to keep in mind that I thi nk is going to be very helpful, and that is arguments as performances, arguments as being in front of an audienee. We can think of a politician trying to present a position, trying to convince the audie nee of somethi ng.But theres another twist (转折) on this model t

17、hat I really think is important; namely, that when we argue before an audienee, (6) sometimes the audienee has a more participatory role in the argume nt;that is, you prese nt you argume nts in front of an audie nee who are like juries(陪审团)that make a judgme nt and decide the case.(5) Let call this

18、model the rhetorical model, (7) where you have to tailor (迎合) your argume nt to the audie nee at hand.Of those three, the argument as war is the dominant one. It dominates how wetalk about arguments, it dominates how we think about arguments, and becauseof that, （8） it shapes how we argue, our actua

19、l right on target. We want to have our defenses up and our strategies all in order. We want killer arguments. ThaS the kind of argument we want. It is the dominant way of thinking about arguments. When I talk ing about argume nts, thats probably what you thought of, the adversarial model.But the war

20、 metaphor, the war paradigm （范例） or model for thi nking about argume nts, has, I think, n egative effects on how we argue. （9First, it elevates tactics over substa nce.You can take a class in logic argume ntatio n. You lear n all about the strategies that people use to try and win arguments and that

21、 makes arguing adversarial; itspolarizing （分化的）.And the only foreseeable outcomes are triumph glorious triumph or disgraceful （可耻的） defeat. I think those are very destructive effects, and worst of all, （10） it seems to prevent things like negotiation and collaboration（合作）.Um, I think the argument-as

22、-war metaphor inhibits（阻止） those other kinds of resoluti ons to argume ntatio n.（11） And fin ally this is really the worst thi ng argume nts dontseem to get us any where; theyre dead end（死胡同）.We dont any where. Oh, and one more thing. （12） That is, if argument is war, then therms also an implicit （绝

23、对的） aspect of meaning learning with losing.And let me explain what I mean. Suppose you and I have an argument. You believe a propositi on （命题） and I dont. And I say, Well, why do you believe that” And you give me your reasons. And I object and say, Well, what about？ ” And I have a question: Well, wh

24、at do you mean How does it apply over here ” And you answer my question. Now, suppose at the end of the day, I ve objected, I e questi on ed, (13)1 ve raised all sorts of questio ns from an opposite perspective and in every case youve respon ded to my satisfacti on. And so at the end of the day, I s

25、ay,You know what I guess youre right. ” Maybe fin ally I lost my argume nt. But isn t it also a process of lear ning So you see argume nts may also have positive effects.(14) So, how can we find new ways to achieve those positive effects We n eed to think of new kinds of argume nts. Here I have some

26、 suggesti on. If we want to thi nk of new kinds of argume nt, what we n eed to do is thi nk of new kinds of arguers people who argue.So try this: Think of all the roles that people play in argume nts. (1) (5) Theres the proponent and the opponent in an adversarial, dialectical argume话式论证). Theres th

27、e audienee in rhetorical arguments. Theres the reasonerin arguments as proofs. All these differe nt roles. Now, can you imagi ne an argume nt in which you are the arguer, but you re also in the audienee, watching yourself argue Can you imagine yourself watching yourself argue (15) That means you need to be supported by yourself. Even when you lose the argument, still, at