专8听力真题答案及讲座原文精编版

1、最新资料推荐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 arguing12the second model for arguing is arguments as proofs: (3) warranted valid inferences and conc

2、lusions 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 th

3、is 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 persuadedof argumentsSuggestions on new ways to (14)think of new kinds of argumentschange roles in arguments(15)SECTION B I

4、NTERVIEWNow, listen to the Part One of the interview. Questions 1 to 5 are based on Part Oneof the interview.1.What is the topic of the interview?A. 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 following

5、 indicates that they have the same study schedule?A. 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 students?A. 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 Mom?A. Protection.B. Imagination.C. Excitement.D. Encouragement.5. What is the biggest disadvantage of studying with Mom?A. Thinking of ways to comfort Mom.B. Occasional interference from Mom.C. Ultimat

7、ely 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 PartTwo of the interview.6.Why is parent and kid studying together a common case?A. Because parents need to be ready for new jobs.B. Because parents love to

8、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 Maggies mom like to be after college?A. Real estate agent.B. Financier.C. Lawyer.D. Teacher.8.How does Maggies mom feel about sitting in class after 30 years?A. Delight

9、ed.B. Excited.C. Bored.D. Frustrated.9. What is most challenging forMaggiesmom?A. 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 osnecareer path?A. Unsuccessful.B. Gradual.C. Frustrating.D. Pas

10、sionate.Keys:1.the dialectical mon 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 / strategies10.negotiation a

11、nd collaboration11.theres no solution / progress12.learning with losing13.questions / counter-considerations / counter-arguments / objections /arguments in opposition14. achieve positive effects15. support oneself / yourselfScript:Good morning, every one. My n ame is David and I am good at arguing.

12、Sowelcome to our in troductory lecture on argume ntatio n. Why do we want to argue?Why do we try to convince other people to believe things that they don want to believe? And is that eve n a n ice thi ng to do? Is that a n ice way to treat other huma n being, try and make them thi nk somethi ng they

13、 dowa nt to thi nk? Well, my an swer is going to make refere nee to three models for argume nts.(1) The first model let call this the dialectical model is that we thinkof argume nts as war. And you know what thats like. There is a lot of scream ing and shouting and winning and losing. (2) And that n

14、ot really a very helpful model arguing, but its a pretty com mon and fixed one.l guess you must have seen 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 regardsarguments as proofs. Think of a mathematicians arg

15、ument. Here my argument.Does it work? Is it any good? (3) Are the premises (前提) warranted? Are theinferences (推论) )valid? Does the conclusion follow the premises? (4) No adversarial sense.opposition, no adversariality (对抗)not necessarily any arguing in the(5) And therea third model to kee p in mind

16、that I thi nk is going to be veryhelpful, and that is arguments as performances, arguments as being in front of an audience. We can thi nk of a p oliticia n tryi ng to p rese nt a p ositi on, tryi ng to convince the audie nee of somethi ng.But theres ano ther twist （转折） on this model that I really t

17、hi nk is imp orta nt;namely, that when we argue before an audienee, （6） sometimes the audienee has a more participatory role in the argument;that is, you present you arguments in front of an audie nee who are like juries（陪审团） that make a judgme nt and decide the ease.（5） Let call this model the rhet

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

19、target. We want to have our defe nses up and our strategies all in order. We want killer argume nts. Thas the ki nd of argument we want. It is the dominant way of thinking about arguments. When I talk ing about argume nts, thats p robably what you thought of, the adversarial model.But the war meta p

20、hor, the war p aradigm （范例）or model for thi nking aboutargume nts, has, I think, n egative effects on how we argue. （9First, it elevates tactics over substa nee. 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 makes

21、 arguing adversarial; itpolarizing （分化的）.And the only foreseeable outcomes are triumphglorious triumph or disgraceful （可耻的）defeat. I think those are very destructive effects, and worst of all, （10） it seems to pr eve nt thi ngs like n egotiati on and collaboration（合作）.Um, I think the argument-as-war

22、 metaphor inhibits（阻止） those other kinds of resoluti ons to argume ntatio n.（11） And finally this is really the worst thing arguments dontseem to get us any where; theyre dead end(死胡同).We dona ny where. Oh, and one morething. (12) That is, if argument is war, then ther also an implicit (绝对的)aspect o

23、f mea ning lear ning with los ing.And let me explain what I mean. Suppose you and I have an argument. Youbelieve a proposition(命题)and I don. 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 questi on: Well, what do you mean

24、? How does it apply over here?” And you answer my question. Now, suppose at the end of the day, I ve objected, I e questioned, (13)1 ve raised all sorts of questio ns from an opp osite persp ective and in every case youe respon ded to my satisfacti on. And so at the end of the day, I say,You know wh

25、at? I guess youre right. ” Maybe fin ally I lost my argume nt. But isn it also a pr ocess of lear ning? So you see argume nts may also have po sitive effects.(14) So, how can we find new ways to achieve those positive effects?We needto think of new kinds of argume nts. Here I have some suggesti on.

26、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 p lay in argume nts. (1) (5) Therethe proponent and the opponent in an adversarial, dialectical argum(对话式论证).Therethe audienee in rhe

27、torical arguments. There the reasonerin arguments as p roofs. All these differe nt roles. Now, can you imagi ne an argume nt in which you are the arguer, but youre also in the audienee, watching yourself argue? Can you imagine yourself watching yourself argue? (15)That mea ns you n eed to be supported by yourself. Even when you lose the argument, still, at the end of th