英语辩论赛技巧(外研社辩论赛思辨和语言训练).doc

英语辩论赛技巧（外研社辩论赛思辨和语言训练）
Introduction About Debate
MATTER 素材
1. ‘Matter’ relates to the issues in debate, the case being presented and the material used to substantiate argumentation.
2. The issues under debate should be correctly prioritized (by teams) and ordered (by individuals), dealing with the most important/pertinent first.
3. Matter should be logical and well reasoned.
4. Matter should be relevant, both to the issue in contention and the cases being advanced.
5. Matter should be persuasive.

wNo ‘new matter’ is to be introduced during Reply Speeches. The Reply Speech presents teams with an opportunity to focus on the major issue(s) in the debate and the way in which both teams approach that ‘point of Clash’. The Reply Speech should also give an ‘optimistic overview’ of the general approach to the debate by both sides and focus on the relative merits of the case by the side Replying, and the relative weaknesses in the case of the opposing team.

wAll speakers should develop ‘positive matter’ in advancing their respective cases. While an Opposition team may win by demonstrating that the Government has not proved the motion true, they should not rely purely on their rebuttal of the Government case and will likely benefit from presenting positive matter in opposition to the motion.

MANNER  辩论风格

a) Vocal Style: Volume, clarity, pronunciation, pace, intonation, fluency, confidence, and authority.
b) Language: Conversational.
c) Use of notes: Should not distract, should not be read.
d) Eye Contact: With audience.
e) Gesture: Natural, appropriate.
f) Sincerity: Believability.
g) Personal Attacks: (derogatory comments are not to be tolerated).
h) Humor: Effectiveness, appropriateness.

METHOD  辩论方法
The major influence on an adjudicator must be: ‘Is the speaker’s and team’s Method EFFECTIVE in advancing the case?’

a) Organization: The structuring of individual arguments and ordering of collective arguments in the speeches .
b) Issue Selection: The identification of relevant points of clash in the round.
c) Perspective: The ability to explain the relevance of individual arguments to the motion being argued.
d) Refutation: The willingness and ability to engage and critique the points offered by the opposing team.
e) Teamwork: The degree to which the members of a team work together to collectively advance a strategy.

How to Choose Motions?
Prioritization of 3 Motions Given Based on:
a) Knowledge Resource of Team members
How much do we know of this issue?
b) Debating Positions of Your Team
What advantage will we have with this motion as Government/Opposition team?
c) Knowledge of Opposing Team’s status
What are the strengths/weaknesses of our Opponents in this debate?

Case Construction involves:
Defining the Motion & Creating Arguments that support it:
Defining the Motion means
a) Clearly stating meanings of “key terms”
E.g. “This House believes that professional athletes are good role models for Chinese youth.”

b) Establish Team Line (Base Line) & Split:
Motion
(THBT the world is a global village)
Team Line/Base Line/Stance
Because of the existence of interdependence and common interest
Spilt/Case Division
This is true in the a) social arena, b) geopolitical realm and c) economic sphere

c) Creating Arguments that support it
wPrioritize the Arguments with the strongest presented first to prove global interdependence and growing common interest:
wArgument 1 (1stSpeaker)
wSocial Arena --evidence, case studies, statistics, trend analysis, etc
wArgument 2 (1stSpeaker)
wGeopolitics --ditto
wArgument 3 (2ndSpeaker)
wGlobal Economics --ditto
w3rd Speakers must not carry new arguments

Setting Opposition Case
wProposing “Status Quo”
“Why change when things are fine now …”
wOffering a “Counter Proposal”
“Our plan works better than yours ….’
wProvide “Positive Objections”
“Yours does not work and will be harmful to…”
w** Oppn needs to have team line, split, prioritized arguments in 1stand 2ndSpeakers too!

Refutation Strategies

wWhat are Rebuttals?
    Arguments raised in response to Oppn’s arguments. Comprises analysis of why Oppn is wrong is consistent with own case, as well support/reinforce own team line
wHow to do it?
State what argument is rebutted, explain flaw(s) in argument, support it with evidence. examples, case studies, and finally linking it relevantly to your side of the topic.

Rebutting Parts of Arguments

w1 Factual Error: Your argument is factually wrong
“Your statistics/example/case studies are wrong because ….”
w2. Your argument is not supported by any evidence
“You merely asserted that ... without providing any relevant examples…”
w3.The consequences of your argument are not acceptable (morally, socially, etc)
w“How could you ban smoking in pubs when it violates the right of the smoker and his friends to socialize together …”
w4.Not Important: Your argument is correct but has little weight in this debate
w“Your policy helps on the minority, the smokers, but what about the majority of the non-smokers who have to inhale second-hand smoke in pubs …”
w5.Your argument is illogical –the conclusions do not follow from the premises
w“You claim that banning cigarette advertisements on TV will cause more young people to smoke as it makes smoking more mysterious and enticing, like a forbidden fruit, but I submit to you that the opposite is more likely to be true: banning a steady stream of advertisements depicting smoking as glamorous/attractive will REDUCE the number of young people who smoke.”
w6. Not Relevant/Irrelevant:
w“The fact that smoking causes cancer is not relevant to this debate because the issue at hand is the right of individual citizens to make informed choices concerning their own personal health ….”
w7. Contradiction in Opponents’ Arguments
wPoint out that the speakers/team are not clear about their own case. To be able to catch the opponents contradicting themselves requires good tracking skills, that is, skills in good note-taking and Active Listening.
w8. Failure to perform roles/responsibilities declared
wPM: “ To totally destroy the Opposition and win today’s debate, the Government will do the following 3 things:
wshow that women are stronger than men
wshow that women are smarter than men
wshow that women are wiser leaders than men
wto prove that women are true heroes of the New Millennium.”
wTo damage the opponents, point out their failure to cover the areas they promised to go over in the PM’s speech.

Rebutting the Case as a Whole

wTo break down the case of the opponents, it is not enough to rebut each/all/random arguments put forth by them.
wWinning a debate will require you to systematically break down a team’s case.

Here are the questions/points to consider

w1 What is their approach to the case? Is it flawed? Why?
w2 What tasks did they set themselves? Did they address them? What problems are there in the way they address them?
w3 What is the general emphasis of the case? What assumptions are made? Can they be refuted?
w4 What are the key arguments of the other side? How can they be shown to be flawed?
w5.Focus on identifying the key issues/arguments which are used to support the case of the opponents and then systematically breaking them down by showing that they cannot stand up to scrutiny.

w**Do not try to shoot down all examples/arguments as there will not be enough time, and is unsystematic.
Point of Information（POI）
wPOIs are comments made by members directed at the speech of
wthe member holding the floor; POI should be brief, pertinent and
wpreferably witty. Points of order and points of personal privilege
ware prohibited.

Offering & Responding to Points of Information (POIs)
wA POI can be a Question or a Statement/Clarification/Contradiction and should not take more than 15 seconds
wEach Speaker is strongly encourage toAccept at least 2POIs
wAll team members should try to give POIs without being disruptive

How POIs offered are judged

w1.The threat they pose to the strength of the argument of the debater,
w2.Value of its wit and humour

How POIs taken are judged
w1.Promptness and Confidence in answering
w2.Strength of the Response
w3.Value of wit and humour
“please answer my question” “my dear friend”
wWe think this is tremendous waste of your words by always saying “my dear friends”, “please answer my questions” so bluntly.

考核要求及标准

w辩论技巧：辩手语言是否流畅，说理、分析是否透彻，反驳和应变能力是否强，说服力和逻辑性是否强。
w内容：论点和论据内容是否正确、充实，引用资料和实例是否恰当。
w风度和幽默感：辩手的表情、动作是否恰当，是否有风度及幽默感。
w自由辩论：各队在自由辩论中的识辩能力、说明能力和逻辑性是否强，接句是否合适，回答是否中肯，反驱是否有力、有理，反应是否机敏，用语是否得体
w整体合作：全队各辩手的论点是否一致，结构是否完整，队员之间的配合、合作是否默契。
w个人表现：全队每个辩手的参与度如何，全队辩手的整体实力是否强。
附：上交辩论素材形式模版
Topic：World Governments Should Conduct Serious Campaigns Against Smoking

The argument : key words
1. Definite link: smoking and bronchial troubles, heart disease, lung cancer.
2. Governments hear, see smell, no evil.
3. A few governments: timid measures.
4. E.g. Britain: TV advertising banned; nation’s conscience appeased; cancerous death.
5. Official reactions to medical findings: lukewarm.
6. Tobacco: source of revenue. E. g. Britain: tobacco tax pays for educations.
7. A short- sighted policy.
8. Enormous sums spent fighting the disease; lives lost.
9. Smoking should be banned altogether.
10. We are not ready for such drastic action.
11. But governments, if really concerned, should conduct aggressive anti-smoking campaigns.
12. The tobacco industry spends vast sums on advertising.
13. Advertising: insidious, dishonest.
14. Never shown pictures of real smokers coughing up lungs, only virile young men.
15. Smoking associated with great open-air life, beautiful girls, togetherness, Nonsense!
16. All advertising should be banned; anti-smoking campaign conducted.
17. Smoking should be banned in public places.
18. Young people should be warned, dire consequences.
19. Warning, death’s head, included in every packet.
20. Governments should protect us from ourselves.

The counter-argument key words
1.        There are still scientists who doubt smoking / cancer link.
2.        People who don’t smoke should keep quiet.
3.        Smoking brings many psychological benefits:
4.        Relieves stresses of everyday life: provides constant consolation.
5.        E. g. we smoke when taking exams, worried, bereaved, etc.
6.        Associated with good living social contacts made easier.
7.        Smoking is very enjoyable: relaxing, e.g. with a cup of coffee; after a meal, etc.
8.        It’s absurd to suggest we ban it after so many hundreds of years.
9.        Enormous interests involved: governments, tobacco growers, tobacco industries, retail businesses.
10.     Tax apart, important source of income to many countries: e.g. USA, Rhodesia, Greece, Turkey.
11.     People should be free to decide, not bullied by governments; banning is undemocratic.
12.     The tobacco industry spends vast sums on medical research.
13.     Improved filters have resulted; e.g. Columbia University.
14.     Now possible to smoke and enjoy it without danger.
 6.11 语言反应训练
 英语绕口令训练
1.         A big black bug bit a big black bear, made the big black bear bleed blood.
2.         A flea and a fly flew up in a flue. Said the flea, "Let us fly!" Said the fly, "Let us flee!" So they flew through a flaw in the flue.
3.         A tidy tiger tied a tie tighter to tidy her tiny tail.
4.         A writer named Wright was instructing his little son how to write Wright right. He said: "It is not right to write Wright as 'rite'---try to write Wright aright"
5.         Betty Botter had some butter, "But," she said, "this butter's bitter. If I bake this bitter butter, it would make my batter bitter. But a bit of better butter -- that would make my batter better."
6.         Bill's big brother is building a beautiful building between two big brick blocks.
7.         He thrusts his fists against the posts and still insists he sees the ghosts.
8.         How much wood would a woodchuck chuck if a woodchuck could chuck wood? He would chuck, he would, as much as he could, and chuck as much wood as a woodchuck would if a woodchuck could chuck wood
9.         I thought a thought. But the thought I thought wasn't the thought I thought I thought.
10.     If you notice this notice you will notice that this notice is not worth noticing.
11.     If a shipshape ship shop stocks six shipshape shop-soiled ships, how many shipshape shop-soiled ships would six shipshape ship shops stock?
12.     Sarah sitting in her sitting room, all she does is sits and shifts, all she does is sits and shifts.
13.     She sells seashells by the sea shore. The shells she sells are surely seashells. So if she sells shells on the seashore, I'm sure she sells seashore shells.
14.     Three gray geese in the green grass grazing. Gray were the geese and green was the grass.
15.     While we were walking, we were watching window washers wash Washington's windows with warm washing water.
16.     A Finnish fisher named Fisher failed to fish any fish one Friday afternoon and finally he found out a big fissure裂缝in his fishing-net.
17.     Where is the watch I put in my pocket to take to the shop because it had stopped?
18.     Mr. Cook said to a cook: "Look at this cook-book. It's very good." So the cook took the advice of Mr. Cook and bought the book.
19.     How much dew would a dewdrop drop if a dewdrop could drop dew?
20.     Sandy sniffed sweet smelling sunflower seeds while sitting beside a swift stream.
英语单词描述训练
目的：锻炼学生的语言表达能力、接受能力和理解能力
television；fridge；policeman；umbrella；doctor；housewife；taxi；subway；red；black；blue；cup；flower；……
故事接龙
目的：锻炼学生用英语思维、组织语言、表达思想的能力
?    One day, I saw a girl on a bus...
?    The animals in the forest are holding a meeting...
?    I saw a woman in a car accident...
用所给词汇讲故事
目的：锻炼学生的反应能力、逻辑能力、和语言表达能力
?    flower, butterfly, cry
?    frog, cloud, horse
?    boy, death, laugh
?    TV, president, writer
 个人对抗辩论赛辩题
 1.       If I were the Dean of Foreign Languages Department…
2.       Planes, Cars, bicycles, or on foot, which do you prefer?
3.       If I were a reporter, I’d like to cover entertainment news, international news, domestic news, or documentaries.
4.       If I were a writer, I would focus on … in my novels in this Wenchuan Earthquake.

辩论赛和辩论两者的参评标准是不一样的
辩论赛是三方的事：正方，反方还有裁判。我们说一个队伍赢了是因为裁判说他们赢了（裁判判罚无法改变），然而裁判评判过程当中会综合的考虑到各种因素：双方论点的厉害程度；某方观点能否击倒对方；两人配合是否默契；时间分配是否合理；辩手自身的口才；裁判个人的情感主观因素......我们自己作为辩手的并不希望对方能够接受我们的观点，而是期盼能打动裁判。为了获取最终的胜利，我们可以使用语言当中的各种技巧，心理学中的技巧等等。
辩论， 是两方的事。它的评判标准是谁的方案（观点）更能够符合事实，更能解决问题谁就获胜（这是理论上的），它的评判是相当客观的。实际中辩论的结果也是多种多样：一胜一负；双方各有道理，博采众长，采用两者结合的优化方案－－双赢；两者皆输（即两方答案均不正确）。
l    辩论赛和辩论所给予参与者的机会和时间不同
比赛要具有可观赏性，这就要有时间控制；辩论则相对来说没有时间限制，你可以随着研究的深入不断提出新的证据来支持自己的观点，可以四处请教高人来为自己出谋划策，你可以修改自己口误说错的话等等。
l    辩论赛和辩论参与者的策略方法不同
在真正的辩论比赛当中，无论对方说的多么有道理，即便连