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 warthere 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 conclusions n

2、o (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 emphasizedwinning is the only purpose this typ

3、e of arguments prevent (10) the worst thing is (11) implication from arguments as war: (12) _raising (13)arguments , one providing reasons and the other the other one is finally persuadedSuggestions on new ways to (14) ofthink of new kinds of argumentschange roles in argumentsSECTION B INTERVIEW5 ar

4、e based onNow, listen to the Part One of the interview. Questions 1 toPart One of the interview.1. What is the topic of the interviewA. Maggie * s university life.B. Her mom' s life at Harvard.C Maggie? s view on studying with Mom.D. Maggie? s opinion on her mom' s major.2. Which of the foll

5、owing indicates that they have the same studyscheduleA.They take exams in the same weeks.BThey 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 court tra

6、ils.C. Studying together.D. Taking notes by hand.4. What is the biggest advantage of studying with MomA. Protection.B. Imaginatiori.C ExcitementD. Encouragement5 What is the biggest disadvantage of studying with MomA. Thinking of ways to comfort Mom.B. Occasional interference from Mom.C. Ultimately

7、calls when Maggie is busyD. Frequent check on Maggie * s gradesNow, listen to the Part Two of the interview. Questions 6 to 10 are based onPart Two of the interview.6. Why is parent and kid studying together a common caseA. Because parents need to be ready for new jobsB. Because parents love to retu

8、rn to collegeC. Because kids require their parents to do so.D. Because kids find it hard to adapt to college life.A. Real estate agent.B. Financier.C Lawyer.D. Teacher.8. How does Maggies mom feel about sitting in class after 30 yearsA. Delighted.B. Exci ted.C. Bored.D. Frustrated.9. What is most ch

9、allenging for Maggie s momA. How to make a cake.B. How to make omelets.C. To accept what is taught.D. To plan a future career.A. Unsuccessful.B. Gradual.C Frustrating.D. Passionate.Keys：1 the dialectical model2 common and fixed3. premises4. opposition / arguing5. arguments as performances / the rhet

10、orical model6. participatory / participating / the participant / taking part7. be tailored to / cater for8. how we argue / our actual conduct9. tactics / strategies10 negotiation and collaboration11 theres no solution / progress12 learning with losing13. questions / counter-considerations / countera

11、rguments / objections / arguments in opposition14 achieve positive effects15. support oneself / yourselfScript: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 b

12、elieve 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（1） The first model let' s

13、 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（2） And that' s not really a very helpful model arguing, but it' s 3 pretty common and fixed one I guess you must have seen

14、that type of arguing many times in the street, on the bus or in the subway.Let' s move on to the second mode 1 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 （3） Are the premises （前提）warranted Are

15、the inferences （推论） valid Does the conclusion follow the premises （4） No opposition, no adversariality （对抗） 一 not necessarily any arguing in theadversarial sense.(5) 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, argume

16、nts as being in front of an audience We can think of a politician trying to present a position, trying to convince the audience of somethingBut there * s another twist (转折)on this model that I really think is important; namely, that when we argue before an audience, (6) sometimes the audience has a

17、more participatory role in the argument; that is, you present you arguments in front of an audience who are like juries (陪审团)that make a judgment and decide the case. (5) Let' s call this model the rhetorical model, (7) where you have to tailor (迎合)your argument to the audience at handOf those t

18、hree, 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, (8) it shapes how we argue, our actual right on target We want to have our defenses up and our strategies all in order We want killer arguments. Tha

19、t' 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 mode1But the war metaphor, the war paradigm (孑也仮9 ) or model for thinking about arguments, has, I think, negative

20、effects on how we argue (9) First, it elevates tactics over substance You can take a class in logic argumentation.You learn all about the strategies that people use to try and win arguments and that makes arguing adversarial: it' s polarizing （分化的） And the only foreseeable outcomes are triumph g

21、lorious triumph or disgraceful （可耻 的）defea t I think t hose are very des true tive effects, and worst of all, （10） it seems to prevent things like negotiation and collaboration （合竹二） Um, I think the argume nt - as-war met aphor inhibits （阻上） those other kinds of resolutions to argumentation.（11） And

22、 finally this is really the worst thing arguments don' t seem to get us anywhere; they' :re dead ends （夕匕胡同） We don' t anywhere Oh, and one more thing. （12） That is, if argument is war, then there' s also an implicit （绝对的）aspect of meaning learning with losingAnd let me explain what

23、I mean. Suppose you and I have an argument You believe a proposition （命题）and I don， t And I say, uWell, why do you believe that" And you give me your reasons And I object and say, uWell, what about” And I have a question： "Well, what do you mean How does it apply over here” And you answer

24、my question. Now, suppose at the end of the day, I' ve objected, I，ve questioned, （13） I' ve :raised all sorts of questions from an opposite perspective and in every case you' ve responded to my satisfaction. And so at the end of the day, I say, "You know what I guess you' re ri

25、ght ” Maybe finallyI lost my argument But isn* t it also a process of learning So you see arguments may also have positive effects.(14) So, how can we find new ways to achieve those positive effects We need to think of new kinds of arguments. Here I have some suggestion. If we want to think of new k

26、inds of argument, what we need to do is think of new kinds of arguers people who argueSo try this: Think of all the roles that people play in arguments. (1)(5) There' s the proponent and the opponent in an adversarial, dialectical argument (对话亍弋论证) There' s the audience in rhetorical argumen

27、ts. There，s the reasoner in arguments as proofs All these different roles Now, can you imagine an argument in which you are the arguer, but you' re also in the audience, 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 the end o