辩手角色分配
每个选手都有一个定位，每一个发言都有其特殊目的。下面列出的辩手角色描述具有借鉴作用，并非必须完全遵循。根据不同的辩论形式，辩手有时需要在完成本角色需要说明的部分之外，还要表述其它方面的观点，在正方支持辩题、反方驳斥辩题的基础上，发言结构仍需满足其它论证的需要。
除了辩论双方的第四辩手，其它所有辩手都需要提出自己的论点。除了”首相”，所有辩手都要反驳对方辩友的辩论。
“首相”或”正方领袖” 第一个发言选手的职责是展开辩题。对于整个辩论的前半部分起着至关重要的作用。所以合理的角度、适当的陈述都可以为整个辩论开个好头。
“反方领袖” 反方开篇陈述的目的在于，直接或间接地驳斥正方提出的（我觉得”案例”这个词用在这里不合适，但我没有更好的建议），或通过提出确凿的论据，反驳辩题。
“副首相” 辩手应该驳斥反方领袖的发言，并进一步加强”首相”提出的。
“反方第二领袖” 辩手应支持他/她的队友，答复对方辩手提出的疑问并且在驳论中添加新论点。
“正方成员” 辩手应该通过引入一个延展案例来支持正方开篇陈述队伍的立场。一个有力的延展案例应该提出一个与正方一、二辩手完全不同的自己的理论，同时此理论也对其产生支持。正方选手也可以反驳反方第二领袖提出的（观点？）。
“反方成员” 辩手应该支持反方一、二辩手的立场，并且必须引入新的延展。与正方辩手一样，反方辩手独特的延展案例应与反方一、二辩手提出的完全不同，但同时仍然在大方向上与他/她们的观点一致。反方辩手同样也可以直接或间接地反驳正方辩手的论述。
“正方总结” 辩手应该总结正方的论述和反方的反驳，除非是要反驳反方辩手的论述，否则正方总结不应再提出新的立论点。
“反方总结” 辩手应该总结反方的延展案例并且对整场辩论中每支辩论队的立场做出回应。反方总结不能提出新的立论点。
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.”
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
Prioritize the Arguments with the strongest presented first to prove global interdependence and growing common interest:
Argument 1 (1stSpeaker)
Social Arena --evidence, case studies, statistics, trend analysis, etc
Argument 2 (1stSpeaker)
Geopolitics --ditto
Argument 3 (2ndSpeaker)
Global Economics --ditto
3rd Speakers must not carry new arguments
Setting Opposition Case
Proposing “Status Quo”
“Why change when things are fine now …”
Offering a “Counter Proposal”
“Our plan works better than yours ….‟
Provide “Positive Objections”
“Yours does not work and will be harmful to…”
w** Opinion needs to have team line, split, prioritized arguments in 1stand 2ndSpeakers too!
Refutation Strategies
What are Rebuttals?
Arguments raised in response to Opinion‟s arguments. Comprises analysis of why Opinion is wrong, is consistent with own case, as well support/reinforce own team line
How 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
1. Factual Error: Your argument is factually wrong
“Your statistics/example/case studies are wrong
because ….”
2. Your argument is not supported by any evidence
“You merely asserted that ... without providing any relevant examples…”
3.The consequences of your argument are not
acceptable (morally, socially, etc)
“How could you ban smoking in pubs when it violates the right of the smoker and his friends to socialize together …”
4.Not Important: Your argument is correct but has little weight in this debate
“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 …”
5.Your argument is illogical –the conclusions do not follow from the premises
“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.”
6. Not Relevant/Irrelevant:
“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 ….”
7. Contradiction in Opponents‟ Arguments
Point 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.
8. Failure to perform roles/responsibilities declared PM: “ To totally destroy the Opposition and win today‟s debate, the Government will do the following 3 things:
Show that women are stronger than men
Show that women are smarter than men
Show that women are wiser leaders than men
To prove that women are true heroes of the New
Millennium.”
To 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
To break down the case of the opponents, it is not enough to rebut each/all/random arguments put forth by them.
Winning a debate will require you to systematically break down a team‟s case.
Here are the questions/points to consider
1 What is their approach to the case? Is it flawed? Why? 2 What tasks did they set themselves? Did they address them? What problems are there in the way they address them?
3 What is the general emphasis of the case? What assumptions are made? Can they be refuted?
4 What are the key arguments of the other side? How can they be shown to be flawed?
5.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.
**Do not try to shoot down all examples/arguments as there will not be enough time, and is unsystematic.
Point of Information（POI）
POIs are comments made by members directed at the speech of
the member holding the floor; POI should be brief, pertinent and
preferably witty. Points of order and points of personal privilege
are prohibited.
Offering & Responding to Points of Information (POIs)
A POI can be a Question or a
Statement/Clarification/Contradiction and should not take more than 15 seconds
Each Speaker is strongly encourage to Accept at least 2POIs
All 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
1.Promptness and Confidence in answering
2.Strength of the Response
3.Value of wit and humor
“please answer my question” “my dear friend”
We think this is tremendous waste of your words by always saying “my dear friends”, “please answer my questions” so bluntly.
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.
On Debating
Clarity: Avoid use of terms which can be interpreted differently by different readers. When we are talking to people who substantially agree with us we can use such terms as "rednecks" or "liberals" and feel reasonably sure that we will be understood. But in a debate, we are talking to people who substantially disagree with us and they are likely to put a different interpretation on such words.
Evidence: Quoting an authority is not evidence. Quoting a majority opinion is not evidence. Any argument that starts with, "According to Einstein..." is not based on objective evidence. Any argument that starts with, "Most biologists believe..." is not based on objective evidence. Saying, "The Bible says..." is not evidence. Authorities and majorities can be wrong and frequently have been. （历届辩论赛中出现最多的问题）
Emotionalism: Avoid emotionally charged words--words that are likely to produce more heat than light. Certainly the racial, ethnic, or religious hate words have no place in rational debating. Likewise, avoid argumentum ad hominem. Personal attacks on your opponent are an admission of intellectual bankruptcy. Also, slurs directed at groups with whom your opponent is identified are usually nonproductive. Try to keep attention centered on the objective problem itself. There is a special
problem when debating social, psychological, political, or religious ideas because a person's theories about these matters presumably have some effect on his own life style. In other words, rather than saying "and that's why you are such an undisciplined wreck" say,
"a person adopting your position is, I believe, likely to become an undisciplined wreck because ..."
Causality: Avoid the blunder of asserting a causal relationship with the popular fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc which declares that because some event A happened and immediately afterward event B happene
d that event A was the cause of event B. (I knew someone whose car stalled on the way to work. She would get out and open the hood and slam it and then the car would start. Singing a song would have been just as effective to allow time for a vapor lock to dissipate!) Also avoid the popular fallacy that correlation proves causation. People who own Cadillacs, on average, have higher incomes than people who don't. This does not mean that if we provided people with Cadillacs that they would have higher incomes.
Innuendo（影射）: Innuendo is saying something pejorative about your opponent without coming right out and saying it but by making more or less veiled allusions to some circumstance, rumor, or popular belief. If you want to see some excellent examples of innuendo, watch Rush Limbaugh. Politicians are, unfortunately, frequently guilty of using innuendo. It is an easy way to capitalize on popular prejudices without having to make explicit statements which might be difficult or impossible to defend against rational attack.
Be sure of your facts. What is the source of your information? If it is a newspaper or a magazine, are you sure that the information hasn't been "slanted" to agree with that publication's political bias? Where crucial facts are concerned, it is best to check with more than one source. Often international publications will give you a different perspective than your hometown newspaper. Check to see whether the book you are using was published by a regular publishing company or whether
it was published by some special interest group like the John Birch Society or a religious organization. These books cannot be trusted to present unbiased evidence since their motivation for publishing is not truth but rather the furtherance of some political or religious view.
Understand your opponents' arguments. It is good practice to argue with a friend and take a position with which you do not agree. In this way you may discover some of the assumptions your opponents are making which will help you in the debate. Remember that everybody thinks that his position is the right one, and everybody has his reasons for thinking so.
Do not impute ridiculous or malevolent ideas to your opponent. An example of this is the rhetorical statement,
"Have you stopped beating your wife?" This imputes or presupposes that your opponent has beaten his wife. One frequently sees references by conservative speakers and writers to the idea that gay activists want "special privileges." This would be ridiculous if it were true. It isn't true, but speaking as if it were true and well known to all is egregiously unfair to listeners or readers who may not be well informed. It is probably always wise to treat your opponent with respect, even if he doesn't deser
ve it. If he doesn't deserve respect, this will probably soon become obvious enough.
Regression to the mean(逻辑退化): Another source of error which occurs very frequently is the failure to take into account regression to the mean. This is a bit technical, but it is very important, especially in any kind of social or psychological research which depends upon statistical surveys or even experiments which involve statistical sampling. Rather than a general statement of the principle (which becomes more and more unintelligible as the statement becomes more and more rigorous) an example will be used.
Let's consider intelligence testing.
1. Perhaps we have a drug that is supposed to raise the IQ of mentally retarded kids. So we give a thousand intelligence tests and select the 30 lowest scoring individuals.
2. We then give these low scoring kids our drug and test them again.
3. We find that there has been an increase in the average of their IQ scores.
4. Is this evidence that the drug increased the IQ?
Not necessarily! Suppose we want to show that smoking marijuana lowers the IQ. Well, we take the 30 highest scoring kids in our sample and give them THC and test them again. We find a lower average IQ. Is this evidence that marijuana lowers the IQ?
Not necessarily! Any statistician knows that if you make some kind of a measurement of some attribute of a large sample of people and then select the highest and lowest scoring individuals and make the same measurement again, the high scoring group will have a lower average score and the low scoring group will have a higher average score than they did the first time. This is called "regression to the mean" and it is a perfectly universal statistical principle.
There are undoubtedly more points to be made here. Suggestions will be gratefully received. Larry has made the following suggestions:
•Apply the scientific method. （运用科学方法）
•Cite relevant personal experience. （合理引用相关的个人经历） •Be polite. （辩论过程中有礼待人）
•Organize your response. (Beginning, middle, end.) （对你辩词进行合理的组织） •Treat people as individuals.
•Cite sources for statistics and studies used.
•Literacy works. Break posts into sentences and paragraphs. •Read the post you are responding to. •Stay open to learning.
英语辩论赛常用语
A征求他人观点或意见的用语
I would be glad to hear your opinion of „ 我很乐意听听你对„„的意见。 Are you of the same opinion as I? 你与我的看法一致吗？
I was wondering where you stood on the question of „ 我想知道你对„„问题怎么看。
B引入自己的新观点或看法的用语 Another point is that „ 另一点是„„ Another way of looking at it is „ 看这个问题的另一个看法是„„ I forgot to say / tell you that„ 我忘记要讲„...
C就自己阐述的观点进行总结时的用语
That’s all I want to say. 我想说的就这些了。
Do you agree? I’m sure you agree. 你赞同吗？我相信你是赞同的。 D就对方阐述的观点进行总结时的用语 As you said„ 像你所说的那样„„ But didn’t you say that„？ 但是，难道你没说过„„吗？、
If I understood you correctly, you said that„ 要是我理解正确的话，你说过„„.
E如何礼貌地反对对方某一观点
I’m not sure really. Do you think so? Well, it depends. I‟m not so certain.
Well, I’m not so sure about that.
I’m inclined to disagree with that. No, I don’t think so really. F如何强烈反对对方某一观点 I disagree.
I disagree with you entirely. I‟m afraid I don‟t agree. I‟m afraid you are wrong there. I wouldn‟t accept that for one minute. You can't really mean that. You can‟t be serious.
对方辩友，my fellow debaters
开始的陈词
Honorable judges, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen..... 如果想要驳斥对方的逻辑，进行假设：according to your logic
You are missing the point！（你没有说重点！你没有围绕中心！即，他在钻洞子，这个时候他很有可能会说漏。注意，要用are，不能说成You're，因为这样语气，士气就没有了。）
You just don't understand what we talked about！（你根本就没有明白我们刚说了什么！即：误解了，曲解了）
You know what? You are straying from the main point！你知道吗？你已经跑题了！（也要注意，都用You are）
自由辩论的阶段，可以在他在说的时候，插进去，说“Wait！Wait！You just said„„，did you？”（当然这句话要用在，你发现对方说的不正确时~~）
You are generalizing what I asked！(你在以偏盖全！即：我要你回答这个，但对方你绕过去了！)
Please ask my question！（请不要回避我的问题！请你回答！！）
英语辩论赛常用句型
Honorable judges, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen.....
Ways to open a debate
To set the framework for our opinion, we believe it is necessary to state…
We would like to introduce our stand by giving the following definitions. …
In order to effectively debate this topic, we would like to propose….
A number of key issues arise which merit (deserve) closer examination.
We will elaborate one of the most striking features of this problem, namely…
In the first place we would like to make clear that…. The main argument focuses on….
1. Giving Reasons and offering explanations:
To start with…,
The reason why...,
That's why...,
For this reason...,
That's the reason why...,
Many people think....,
Considering...,
Allowing for the fact that...,
When you consider that...,
2. Asking for an opinion from the other party
I would be glad to hear your opinion of … 我很乐意听听你对……的意见。
Are you of the same opinion as me? 你与我的看法一致吗？
I was wondering where you stood on the question of … 我想知道你对……问题怎么看。
well…what do you think (about)
Do you agree? (don't you agree?)你同意吗?(你是不是同意?)
What's your view on the matter?就这件事你的看法呢? how do you see it?你怎么看它?
Let's have your opinion.让我们听听你的意见！ do you think that…?你认为…吗
3. Stating an opinion陈述观点
I think..., In my opinion..., I believe…
I'd like to point out that我想指出的是…
Speaking for myself站在自己的立场上说…
In my experience…根据我的经验…
I'd like to say this: …我会这样说…
I suppose...,
I'd rather..., I'd prefer...,
The way I see it...,
As far as I'm concerned...,就我而言，…
If it were up to me...,
I suspect that...,
I'm pretty sure that...,
It is fairly certain that...,
I'm convinced that...,
I honestly feel that…,
I strongly believe that...,
Without a doubt...,
While others may argue that…, Considering the current …,
It‟s safe to say that…,
In fact…, It‟s a fact that…,
A recent study has shown that…,
4. How to convince in a debate
The other team has tried to make some good points, however, they forgot to think about some very important
issues, namely….
We hear what the opposition are saying but we do not agree. We will prove to you…
That‟s one way to think about it, however,….
Their opinion may seem plausible at first glance, however, we would like to remind you of recent developments in this area. According to ….
At first sight, their argument seems to be true. But…. They unfortunately failed to reveal the truth of the matter,….
It is easy enough to make broad generalisation
about...like the other team just did, but in reality it is a very complex issue.
It is only a matter of time until it will become evident
that the other team‟s stand must fall due to the following reasons….
One must take into account that….
☆ Coming up with a new point:
Another point is that … 另一点是……
Another way of looking at it is … 看这个问题的另一个看法是……
I forgot to say / tell you that… 我忘记要讲…
5. Clarifying a point阐述观点
a. what I said was…我刚才说的是…
b. what I mean to say was…我的意思是说…
c. let me repeat what I said.让我重复我刚才所说的。 d. let me rephrase what I said.让我重申刚才所说的。 6. Concluding your own point of views
That‟s all I want to say. 我想说的就这些了。
Do you agree? I‟m sure you agree. 你赞同吗？我相信你是赞同的。
7. Concluding the points of the other side debater As you said… 像你所说的那样……
But haven‟t you said that…？ 但是，难道你没说过……吗？、 If I understood you correctly, you said that… 要是我理解正确的话，你说过…….
☆ How to Agree Strongly with an Opinion.
I couldn't agree more!
That's absolutely true!
Absolutely!
I agree with your point.
I'd go along with you there.
I'm with you on that.
That's just what I was thinking.
That's exactly what I think.
That's a good point.
That's just how I see it.
That's exactly my opinion.
That's a good point. 这个看法不错
I feel the same way.我也持同样的想法。
8. How to Half Agree with an Opinion.
Yes, perhaps, however ... Well, yes, but ... Yes, in a way, however ... Hmm, possibly, but ... Yes, I agree up to a point, however ... Well, you have a point there, but ... There's something there, I suppose, however. I guess you could be right, but ... Yes, I suppose so, however ... That's worth thinking about, but ...
9. Politely disagreeing
I don't think that...,
on the other hand… on the contrary… Hmm, I'm not sure you're right.
10. I'm inclined to disagree with that.
Don't you think it would be better..., I'd prefer... But what about..., 但关于…方面呢?
That can't be true那不可能是真的。
I'm afraid I don't agree...
Frankly, I doubt if..., considered... the fact that...
I can't possibly agree with you.我不可能同意你。
I hate to disagree with you，but…我不喜欢反对你，但…
all right，but don't you think…?好吧，但难道你不觉得… but that's different.但那是不一样的
While your statement is compelling, I believe you have not expressed the main point of the problem.
I understand your viewpoint, but it fails to consider... The problem with your point of view is that... ☆ strongly disagreeing
I disagree (with your idea).
I disagree with you entirely.
I‟m afraid I don‟t agree.
I wouldn‟t accept that for one minute.
You can't really mean that.
You can‟t be serious about that. .
You must be joking.
I wouldn't go along with you there.
It's possible you are mistaken about that.
11. Possible conclusions
To conclude, we must emphasise our opinion of…., therefore the other team‟s point of view can no longer be supported.
To sum up, our motion must stand, simply because during the debate we have shown….
This debate has made obvious that their opinion cannot stand since…..
The simple truth is…
conclusion that…
To draw a line under this debate, …
After careful consideration, we must conclude that…. I think we have agreed to disagree.我想我们有相同点和不同点。
Pay attention!
Avoid using absolute statements like Always, All, or Never. It‟s recommended to use these words instead: Almost all…,
Usually…,
Most of the time…,
Every now and then…,
Once in a while…,
Frequently…, Rarely…,
On occasion…, while keeping your opinions credible. Refrain from saying you are wrong. You can say your idea is mistaken.
Don't disagree with obvious truths.
Attack the idea not the person.
Use many rather than most.
Avoid exaggeration.
Use some rather than many.
The use of often allows for exceptions.
The use of generally allows for exceptions. Quote sources and numbers.
If it is just an opinion, admit it.
Do not present opinion as facts.
Smile when disagreeing.
Stress the positive.
You do not need to win every battle to win the war. Concede minor or trivial points.
Avoid bickering, quarreling, and wrangling. Watch your tone of voice.
Don't win a debate and lose a friend.
Keep your perspective - You're just debating. Opening proposition 正方
Prime minister, Deputy minister, Closing proposition Opening opposition 反方
Leader opposition, Deputy opposition, Closing opposition
辩手角色分配
每个选手都有一个定位，每一个发言都有其特殊目的。下面列出的辩手角色描述具有借鉴作用，并非必须完全遵循。根据不同的辩论形式，辩手有时需要在完成本角色需要说明的部分之外，还要表述其它方面的观点，在正方支持辩题、反方驳斥辩题的基础上，发言结构仍需满足其它论证的需要。
除了辩论双方的第四辩手，其它所有辩手都需要提出自己的论点。除了”首相”，所有辩手都要反驳对方辩友的辩论。
“首相”或”正方领袖” 第一个发言选手的职责是展开辩题。对于整个辩论的前半部分起着至关重要的作用。所以合理的角度、适当的陈述都可以为整个辩论开个好头。
“反方领袖” 反方开篇陈述的目的在于，直接或间接地驳斥正方提出的（我觉得”案例”这个词用在这里不合适，但我没有更好的建议），或通过提出确凿的论据，反驳辩题。
“副首相” 辩手应该驳斥反方领袖的发言，并进一步加强”首相”提出的。
“反方第二领袖” 辩手应支持他/她的队友，答复对方辩手提出的疑问并且在驳论中添加新论点。
“正方成员” 辩手应该通过引入一个延展案例来支持正方开篇陈述队伍的立场。一个有力的延展案例应该提出一个与正方一、二辩手完全不同的自己的理论，同时此理论也对其产生支持。正方选手也可以反驳反方第二领袖提出的（观点？）。
“反方成员” 辩手应该支持反方一、二辩手的立场，并且必须引入新的延展。与正方辩手一样，反方辩手独特的延展案例应与反方一、二辩手提出的完全不同，但同时仍然在大方向上与他/她们的观点一致。反方辩手同样也可以直接或间接地反驳正方辩手的论述。
“正方总结” 辩手应该总结正方的论述和反方的反驳，除非是要反驳反方辩手的论述，否则正方总结不应再提出新的立论点。
“反方总结” 辩手应该总结反方的延展案例并且对整场辩论中每支辩论队的立场做出回应。反方总结不能提出新的立论点。
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.”
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
Prioritize the Arguments with the strongest presented first to prove global interdependence and growing common interest:
Argument 1 (1stSpeaker)
Social Arena --evidence, case studies, statistics, trend analysis, etc
Argument 2 (1stSpeaker)
Geopolitics --ditto
Argument 3 (2ndSpeaker)
Global Economics --ditto
3rd Speakers must not carry new arguments
Setting Opposition Case
Proposing “Status Quo”
“Why change when things are fine now …”
Offering a “Counter Proposal”
“Our plan works better than yours ….‟
Provide “Positive Objections”
“Yours does not work and will be harmful to…”
w** Opinion needs to have team line, split, prioritized arguments in 1stand 2ndSpeakers too!
Refutation Strategies
What are Rebuttals?
Arguments raised in response to Opinion‟s arguments. Comprises analysis of why Opinion is wrong, is consistent with own case, as well support/reinforce own team line
How 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
1. Factual Error: Your argument is factually wrong
“Your statistics/example/case studies are wrong
because ….”
2. Your argument is not supported by any evidence
“You merely asserted that ... without providing any relevant examples…”
3.The consequences of your argument are not
acceptable (morally, socially, etc)
“How could you ban smoking in pubs when it violates the right of the smoker and his friends to socialize together …”
4.Not Important: Your argument is correct but has little weight in this debate
“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 …”
5.Your argument is illogical –the conclusions do not follow from the premises
“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.”
6. Not Relevant/Irrelevant:
“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 ….”
7. Contradiction in Opponents‟ Arguments
Point 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.
8. Failure to perform roles/responsibilities declared PM: “ To totally destroy the Opposition and win today‟s debate, the Government will do the following 3 things:
Show that women are stronger than men
Show that women are smarter than men
Show that women are wiser leaders than men
To prove that women are true heroes of the New
Millennium.”
To 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
To break down the case of the opponents, it is not enough to rebut each/all/random arguments put forth by them.
Winning a debate will require you to systematically break down a team‟s case.
Here are the questions/points to consider
1 What is their approach to the case? Is it flawed? Why? 2 What tasks did they set themselves? Did they address them? What problems are there in the way they address them?
3 What is the general emphasis of the case? What assumptions are made? Can they be refuted?
4 What are the key arguments of the other side? How can they be shown to be flawed?
5.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.
**Do not try to shoot down all examples/arguments as there will not be enough time, and is unsystematic.
Point of Information（POI）
POIs are comments made by members directed at the speech of
the member holding the floor; POI should be brief, pertinent and
preferably witty. Points of order and points of personal privilege
are prohibited.
Offering & Responding to Points of Information (POIs)
A POI can be a Question or a
Statement/Clarification/Contradiction and should not take more than 15 seconds
Each Speaker is strongly encourage to Accept at least 2POIs
All 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
1.Promptness and Confidence in answering
2.Strength of the Response
3.Value of wit and humor
“please answer my question” “my dear friend”
We think this is tremendous waste of your words by always saying “my dear friends”, “please answer my questions” so bluntly.
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.
On Debating
Clarity: Avoid use of terms which can be interpreted differently by different readers. When we are talking to people who substantially agree with us we can use such terms as "rednecks" or "liberals" and feel reasonably sure that we will be understood. But in a debate, we are talking to people who substantially disagree with us and they are likely to put a different interpretation on such words.
Evidence: Quoting an authority is not evidence. Quoting a majority opinion is not evidence. Any argument that starts with, "According to Einstein..." is not based on objective evidence. Any argument that starts with, "Most biologists believe..." is not based on objective evidence. Saying, "The Bible says..." is not evidence. Authorities and majorities can be wrong and frequently have been. （历届辩论赛中出现最多的问题）
Emotionalism: Avoid emotionally charged words--words that are likely to produce more heat than light. Certainly the racial, ethnic, or religious hate words have no place in rational debating. Likewise, avoid argumentum ad hominem. Personal attacks on your opponent are an admission of intellectual bankruptcy. Also, slurs directed at groups with whom your opponent is identified are usually nonproductive. Try to keep attention centered on the objective problem itself. There is a special
problem when debating social, psychological, political, or religious ideas because a person's theories about these matters presumably have some effect on his own life style. In other words, rather than saying "and that's why you are such an undisciplined wreck" say,
"a person adopting your position is, I believe, likely to become an undisciplined wreck because ..."
Causality: Avoid the blunder of asserting a causal relationship with the popular fallacy of post hoc ergo propter hoc which declares that because some event A happened and immediately afterward event B happene
d that event A was the cause of event B. (I knew someone whose car stalled on the way to work. She would get out and open the hood and slam it and then the car would start. Singing a song would have been just as effective to allow time for a vapor lock to dissipate!) Also avoid the popular fallacy that correlation proves causation. People who own Cadillacs, on average, have higher incomes than people who don't. This does not mean that if we provided people with Cadillacs that they would have higher incomes.
Innuendo（影射）: Innuendo is saying something pejorative about your opponent without coming right out and saying it but by making more or less veiled allusions to some circumstance, rumor, or popular belief. If you want to see some excellent examples of innuendo, watch Rush Limbaugh. Politicians are, unfortunately, frequently guilty of using innuendo. It is an easy way to capitalize on popular prejudices without having to make explicit statements which might be difficult or impossible to defend against rational attack.
Be sure of your facts. What is the source of your information? If it is a newspaper or a magazine, are you sure that the information hasn't been "slanted" to agree with that publication's political bias? Where crucial facts are concerned, it is best to check with more than one source. Often international publications will give you a different perspective than your hometown newspaper. Check to see whether the book you are using was published by a regular publishing company or whether
it was published by some special interest group like the John Birch Society or a religious organization. These books cannot be trusted to present unbiased evidence since their motivation for publishing is not truth but rather the furtherance of some political or religious view.
Understand your opponents' arguments. It is good practice to argue with a friend and take a position with which you do not agree. In this way you may discover some of the assumptions your opponents are making which will help you in the debate. Remember that everybody thinks that his position is the right one, and everybody has his reasons for thinking so.
Do not impute ridiculous or malevolent ideas to your opponent. An example of this is the rhetorical statement,
"Have you stopped beating your wife?" This imputes or presupposes that your opponent has beaten his wife. One frequently sees references by conservative speakers and writers to the idea that gay activists want "special privileges." This would be ridiculous if it were true. It isn't true, but speaking as if it were true and well known to all is egregiously unfair to listeners or readers who may not be well informed. It is probably always wise to treat your opponent with respect, even if he doesn't deser
ve it. If he doesn't deserve respect, this will probably soon become obvious enough.
Regression to the mean(逻辑退化): Another source of error which occurs very frequently is the failure to take into account regression to the mean. This is a bit technical, but it is very important, especially in any kind of social or psychological research which depends upon statistical surveys or even experiments which involve statistical sampling. Rather than a general statement of the principle (which becomes more and more unintelligible as the statement becomes more and more rigorous) an example will be used.
Let's consider intelligence testing.
1. Perhaps we have a drug that is supposed to raise the IQ of mentally retarded kids. So we give a thousand intelligence tests and select the 30 lowest scoring individuals.
2. We then give these low scoring kids our drug and test them again.
3. We find that there has been an increase in the average of their IQ scores.
4. Is this evidence that the drug increased the IQ?
Not necessarily! Suppose we want to show that smoking marijuana lowers the IQ. Well, we take the 30 highest scoring kids in our sample and give them THC and test them again. We find a lower average IQ. Is this evidence that marijuana lowers the IQ?
Not necessarily! Any statistician knows that if you make some kind of a measurement of some attribute of a large sample of people and then select the highest and lowest scoring individuals and make the same measurement again, the high scoring group will have a lower average score and the low scoring group will have a higher average score than they did the first time. This is called "regression to the mean" and it is a perfectly universal statistical principle.
There are undoubtedly more points to be made here. Suggestions will be gratefully received. Larry has made the following suggestions:
•Apply the scientific method. （运用科学方法）
•Cite relevant personal experience. （合理引用相关的个人经历） •Be polite. （辩论过程中有礼待人）
•Organize your response. (Beginning, middle, end.) （对你辩词进行合理的组织） •Treat people as individuals.
•Cite sources for statistics and studies used.
•Literacy works. Break posts into sentences and paragraphs. •Read the post you are responding to. •Stay open to learning.
英语辩论赛常用语
A征求他人观点或意见的用语
I would be glad to hear your opinion of „ 我很乐意听听你对„„的意见。 Are you of the same opinion as I? 你与我的看法一致吗？
I was wondering where you stood on the question of „ 我想知道你对„„问题怎么看。
B引入自己的新观点或看法的用语 Another point is that „ 另一点是„„ Another way of looking at it is „ 看这个问题的另一个看法是„„ I forgot to say / tell you that„ 我忘记要讲„...
C就自己阐述的观点进行总结时的用语
That’s all I want to say. 我想说的就这些了。
Do you agree? I’m sure you agree. 你赞同吗？我相信你是赞同的。 D就对方阐述的观点进行总结时的用语 As you said„ 像你所说的那样„„ But didn’t you say that„？ 但是，难道你没说过„„吗？、
If I understood you correctly, you said that„ 要是我理解正确的话，你说过„„.
E如何礼貌地反对对方某一观点
I’m not sure really. Do you think so? Well, it depends. I‟m not so certain.
Well, I’m not so sure about that.
I’m inclined to disagree with that. No, I don’t think so really. F如何强烈反对对方某一观点 I disagree.
I disagree with you entirely. I‟m afraid I don‟t agree. I‟m afraid you are wrong there. I wouldn‟t accept that for one minute. You can't really mean that. You can‟t be serious.
对方辩友，my fellow debaters
开始的陈词
Honorable judges, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen..... 如果想要驳斥对方的逻辑，进行假设：according to your logic
You are missing the point！（你没有说重点！你没有围绕中心！即，他在钻洞子，这个时候他很有可能会说漏。注意，要用are，不能说成You're，因为这样语气，士气就没有了。）
You just don't understand what we talked about！（你根本就没有明白我们刚说了什么！即：误解了，曲解了）
You know what? You are straying from the main point！你知道吗？你已经跑题了！（也要注意，都用You are）
自由辩论的阶段，可以在他在说的时候，插进去，说“Wait！Wait！You just said„„，did you？”（当然这句话要用在，你发现对方说的不正确时~~）
You are generalizing what I asked！(你在以偏盖全！即：我要你回答这个，但对方你绕过去了！)
Please ask my question！（请不要回避我的问题！请你回答！！）
英语辩论赛常用句型
Honorable judges, distinguished guests, ladies and gentlemen.....
Ways to open a debate
To set the framework for our opinion, we believe it is necessary to state…
We would like to introduce our stand by giving the following definitions. …
In order to effectively debate this topic, we would like to propose….
A number of key issues arise which merit (deserve) closer examination.
We will elaborate one of the most striking features of this problem, namely…
In the first place we would like to make clear that…. The main argument focuses on….
1. Giving Reasons and offering explanations:
To start with…,
The reason why...,
That's why...,
For this reason...,
That's the reason why...,
Many people think....,
Considering...,
Allowing for the fact that...,
When you consider that...,
2. Asking for an opinion from the other party
I would be glad to hear your opinion of … 我很乐意听听你对……的意见。
Are you of the same opinion as me? 你与我的看法一致吗？
I was wondering where you stood on the question of … 我想知道你对……问题怎么看。
well…what do you think (about)
Do you agree? (don't you agree?)你同意吗?(你是不是同意?)
What's your view on the matter?就这件事你的看法呢? how do you see it?你怎么看它?
Let's have your opinion.让我们听听你的意见！ do you think that…?你认为…吗
3. Stating an opinion陈述观点
I think..., In my opinion..., I believe…
I'd like to point out that我想指出的是…
Speaking for myself站在自己的立场上说…
In my experience…根据我的经验…
I'd like to say this: …我会这样说…
I suppose...,
I'd rather..., I'd prefer...,
The way I see it...,
As far as I'm concerned...,就我而言，…
If it were up to me...,
I suspect that...,
I'm pretty sure that...,
It is fairly certain that...,
I'm convinced that...,
I honestly feel that…,
I strongly believe that...,
Without a doubt...,
While others may argue that…, Considering the current …,
It‟s safe to say that…,
In fact…, It‟s a fact that…,
A recent study has shown that…,
4. How to convince in a debate
The other team has tried to make some good points, however, they forgot to think about some very important
issues, namely….
We hear what the opposition are saying but we do not agree. We will prove to you…
That‟s one way to think about it, however,….
Their opinion may seem plausible at first glance, however, we would like to remind you of recent developments in this area. According to ….
At first sight, their argument seems to be true. But…. They unfortunately failed to reveal the truth of the matter,….
It is easy enough to make broad generalisation
about...like the other team just did, but in reality it is a very complex issue.
It is only a matter of time until it will become evident
that the other team‟s stand must fall due to the following reasons….
One must take into account that….
☆ Coming up with a new point:
Another point is that … 另一点是……
Another way of looking at it is … 看这个问题的另一个看法是……
I forgot to say / tell you that… 我忘记要讲…
5. Clarifying a point阐述观点
a. what I said was…我刚才说的是…
b. what I mean to say was…我的意思是说…
c. let me repeat what I said.让我重复我刚才所说的。 d. let me rephrase what I said.让我重申刚才所说的。 6. Concluding your own point of views
That‟s all I want to say. 我想说的就这些了。
Do you agree? I‟m sure you agree. 你赞同吗？我相信你是赞同的。
7. Concluding the points of the other side debater As you said… 像你所说的那样……
But haven‟t you said that…？ 但是，难道你没说过……吗？、 If I understood you correctly, you said that… 要是我理解正确的话，你说过…….
☆ How to Agree Strongly with an Opinion.
I couldn't agree more!
That's absolutely true!
Absolutely!
I agree with your point.
I'd go along with you there.
I'm with you on that.
That's just what I was thinking.
That's exactly what I think.
That's a good point.
That's just how I see it.
That's exactly my opinion.
That's a good point. 这个看法不错
I feel the same way.我也持同样的想法。
8. How to Half Agree with an Opinion.
Yes, perhaps, however ... Well, yes, but ... Yes, in a way, however ... Hmm, possibly, but ... Yes, I agree up to a point, however ... Well, you have a point there, but ... There's something there, I suppose, however. I guess you could be right, but ... Yes, I suppose so, however ... That's worth thinking about, but ...
9. Politely disagreeing
I don't think that...,
on the other hand… on the contrary… Hmm, I'm not sure you're right.
10. I'm inclined to disagree with that.
Don't you think it would be better..., I'd prefer... But what about..., 但关于…方面呢?
That can't be true那不可能是真的。
I'm afraid I don't agree...
Frankly, I doubt if..., considered... the fact that...
I can't possibly agree with you.我不可能同意你。
I hate to disagree with you，but…我不喜欢反对你，但…
all right，but don't you think…?好吧，但难道你不觉得… but that's different.但那是不一样的
While your statement is compelling, I believe you have not expressed the main point of the problem.
I understand your viewpoint, but it fails to consider... The problem with your point of view is that... ☆ strongly disagreeing
I disagree (with your idea).
I disagree with you entirely.
I‟m afraid I don‟t agree.
I wouldn‟t accept that for one minute.
You can't really mean that.
You can‟t be serious about that. .
You must be joking.
I wouldn't go along with you there.
It's possible you are mistaken about that.
11. Possible conclusions
To conclude, we must emphasise our opinion of…., therefore the other team‟s point of view can no longer be supported.
To sum up, our motion must stand, simply because during the debate we have shown….
This debate has made obvious that their opinion cannot stand since…..
The simple truth is…
conclusion that…
To draw a line under this debate, …
After careful consideration, we must conclude that…. I think we have agreed to disagree.我想我们有相同点和不同点。
Pay attention!
Avoid using absolute statements like Always, All, or Never. It‟s recommended to use these words instead: Almost all…,
Usually…,
Most of the time…,
Every now and then…,
Once in a while…,
Frequently…, Rarely…,
On occasion…, while keeping your opinions credible. Refrain from saying you are wrong. You can say your idea is mistaken.
Don't disagree with obvious truths.
Attack the idea not the person.
Use many rather than most.
Avoid exaggeration.
Use some rather than many.
The use of often allows for exceptions.
The use of generally allows for exceptions. Quote sources and numbers.
If it is just an opinion, admit it.
Do not present opinion as facts.
Smile when disagreeing.
Stress the positive.
You do not need to win every battle to win the war. Concede minor or trivial points.
Avoid bickering, quarreling, and wrangling. Watch your tone of voice.
Don't win a debate and lose a friend.
Keep your perspective - You're just debating. Opening proposition 正方
Prime minister, Deputy minister, Closing proposition Opening opposition 反方
Leader opposition, Deputy opposition, Closing opposition