1705135646
13.2 Paraphrasing
1705135647
1705135648
One simple listening skill that debate students can and should practice is paraphrasing. Paraphrasing is simply restating someone else’s argument using your own words. A good paraphrase is not simply a repetition of the complete argument presented by the previous speaker, but is a concise summary of the major claim or position that the previous speaker presented. The goal of paraphrasing is not to change the intent of the message or to manipulate the message, but rather to provide a concise and accurate version of the original argument.
1705135649
1705135650
As a listening skill, paraphrasing is important. During the round, debaters should silently paraphrase as a way to take mental note of the various arguments that are being presented by other speakers. Paraphrasing is also important as a speaking skill because it is also the first element in refutation. As a component of refutation, the paraphrase should be more descriptive than evaluative. A complete point of refutation will, of course, also include evaluation and critique, but, at the stage of paraphrasing, the focus should be on providing a simple paraphrase that is a short summary of the argument that the previous speaker presented. As noted in Chapter 10, the first of the four-step process of refutation involves identifying the argument made by the other debater. That identification should be a simple paraphrase.
1705135651
1705135652
For instance, assume that a speaker makes the following argument:
1705135653
1705135654
China should not ban smoking in public places because it will lead to personal economic losses for some of our most vulnerable workers. Shopkeepers, tobacco factory workers, and workers on tobacco farms will all lose jobs or income. Since the livelihood of so many of our poorest workers is tied to the tobacco industry, we must reject any ban that will put those employees at risk.
1705135655
1705135656
In that case, a simple paraphrase of the argument would be as follows:
1705135657
1705135658
My opponent states that a ban on smoking in China will create economic losses for workers in selected occupations.
1705135659
1705135660
The paraphrase of the argument is neutral in tone because the goal here is simply to identify the specific argument for judges and the other debaters. Later in the debate, when referring to this same argument, the paraphrase can be even more succinct:
1705135661
1705135662
The opposition argues that economic losses will result from the proposed ban.
1705135663
1705135664
Debaters should avoid unnecessary details when paraphrasing during refutation. Debaters should avoid taking too much of their own speaking time summarizing the arguments for the other side. A good paraphrase in refutation is a short summary that lets the judges and audience members know which argument the speaker is addressing. However, debaters should avoid unnecessary details (such as repeating all the previous speaker’s evidence) since the majority of time in refutation should be spent on developing unique arguments for one’s own side in the debate.
1705135665
1705135666
After an argument has been paraphrased several times by different speakers throughout the round, a few key words, such as “economic loss,” are often sufficient to identify the argument in a point of summary or refutation. Also, a short keyword paraphrase such as “economic loss” is precisely the type of information that debaters should place in their notes about the round.
1705135667
1705135669
13.3 Flowing the Debate
1705135670
1705135671
With 56 minutes of speaking in a Worlds-Style debate, participants have the difficult task of tracking many arguments on both sides of the issue. Careful listening is an important first step. However, successful debaters and judges also have to develop methods for note taking; this process of note taking often is called flowing the debate. While no single method for flowing a debate exists, most techniques used by debaters offer some way of tracking both the contributions of individual speakers in the round and the development of the dialogue throughout the round. Specifically, flowing allows the note-taker to see how individual arguments are handled throughout the various waves of refutation during the round.
1705135672
1705135673
Debaters and judges can take several important steps to enhance their listening skills, to make them more proficient at flowing the debate, and to synthesize information. First, debaters need to listen for key ideas, patterns, transitions, and the other structural elements of each participant’s speech. Listen for signposts (words such as “first,” “second,” and “third”), transitions, main tag lines or titles for arguments, as well as previews and reviews of major arguments. Second, debaters need to pay attention to the supporting material. The different kinds of evidence that a speaker offers, whether that evidence consists of examples, analogies, statistics, or other types of supporting information, are all things to which debaters and judges must listen carefully. Supporting evidence often calls for responses in refutation, and debaters who do not listen carefully during a round will miss opportunities to advance their cases. Finally, synthesizing information involves getting a clear picture of the major arguments in addition to understanding some of the specific materials used to support the arguments.
1705135674
1705135675
Regardless of the method used to flow the debate, every debater needs some method for tracking each individual speaker’s contributions to the debate. In addition, debaters need to accurately track the contributions of the different teams and sides.
1705135676
1705135677
One technique that some debaters and judges employ is to use different colored pens for Government and Opposition arguments. For instance, a blue pen could be used to note all the Government arguments and a red pen could be used to track all the Opposition arguments.
1705135678
1705135679
Another common technique for distinguishing the arguments presented by both sides is the use of numbers to track the government arguments and letters to track the Opposition arguments. For instance, using the “numbers and letters” approach, as the debate progresses, each new argument presented by the government team gets a new number and each new argument by the Opposition gets a new letter. When a number appears on the flow in a space for an Opposition speaker that number means that the speaker was engaging in some refutation of that specific Government argument. In whip speeches, where no new arguments are allowed but points of crystallization and summary are expected, a different symbol such as a star can be used to track the crystallization and summary points (with the numbers and letters still in use to note specific arguments the whip speaker discussed in his or her summary). See Appendix A for a sample flow sheet using this particular approach.
1705135680
1705135681
Debaters should try to use the most efficient means of notation possible when flowing the arguments. For instance, if an opponent is making an argument about “economic loss,” a brief way to make note of this point on a flow sheet might be to write “econ” and follow this with a downward arrow to symbolize the “loss” part. Arrows are good shorthand symbols that can be easily used as substitutes for terms like “loss” and “increase,” and other symbols might also provide a means for making the process of flowing more efficient. As long as the debater or judge is able to clearly interpret the meaning of their symbols at a later time, any types of personal shorthand notation can and should be used to save time.
1705135682
1705135683
Finally, debaters must also be mindful of the importance of continued active listening. When flowing a debate, debaters may be tempted to stop listening closely when they start preparing their own speeches or note a response to a point made by their opponent. Debaters certainly do need to note their responses to information in order to provide clear refutation in both their own speeches and points of information. However, while the formulation of such responses is a fundamental debate skill, debaters must also learn to continue active listening throughout the debate. With sufficient practice, debaters can keep at least some level of focus on the listening process so that they do not miss key statements and pieces of evidence mentioned by the other speakers in the round.
1705135684
1705135686
13.4 Summary
1705135687
1705135688
In this chapter, listening is defined and presented as a key communication skill in debate. Debaters need good critical listening skills because the refutation on both sides of an argument requires good listening skills by all participants in the round.
1705135689
1705135690
Listening is also an important skill for judges and audience members. Most of the concepts related to listening from this chapter are highly applicable to training judges and preparing them to evaluate debates.
1705135691
1705135692
Overall, argumentation requires careful listening, good skills in paraphrasing, an ability to synthesize important information, and skills in note-taking. Through practice and an application of some of the principles discussed in this chapter, skills in listening can be developed and enhanced.
1705135693
1705135694
本章中，作者强调“倾听”是辩论的关键交流技巧。辩手们需要有效而批判地倾听，因为反驳对方的观点需要所有参与者拥有优秀的倾听技巧。
[
上一页 ]
[ :1.705135645e+09 ]
[
下一页 ]