英語高級口語辯論

① 英語口語重要英文辯論稿，給例子即可謝咯！

親。。你把上面的換一下就好了嘛 - -不過上面的有點點錯誤。。額 修改下。比方這樣的：
Grammar is important, but when it compares withs poken language, it is the root and leaves, spoken english is the root. By saying so, I don't mean tha we don't have to learn grammar,but first of all,we should have the root, that this to say practical ability is more important. nowadays, the society is a communicative one. people need to communicate with each other. when we talk with someone, what matters is that if you express yourselves well or not, but not if you are right in gramar or not.

② 英語口語辯論話題

Computers to students is good or bad (電腦對學生是好是壞 )
答！ Some good and some bad （有好也有壞）

③ 英語口語的辯論

不喜歡辨論的飄過.
只要有氣勢,在說什麼,很少人會在乎.
要的是辯論時的激情,激情!
注意語音語調,注意風度~~

④ 英語口語 辯論

不喜歡辨論的飄過.

只要有氣勢,在說什麼,很少人會在乎.
要的是辯論時的激情,激情!!!
注意語音語調,注意風度~~

⑤ 英語 口語辯論 請求幫助

What pops up in your mind when you are told to think of poverty? Poor people with baggy clothes suffering, malnutritioned children, and dirty refuges/shelters that can barely protect people from storms. But what image do you see when you are told to think of the life of a wealthy person? For example, when I think of the life of Bill Gates, all I can see is him sitting on a mountain full of dollars, smiling as happy as he can. Money makes people happy, because it fulfills our needs, taking away our worries.

⑥ 英語辯論賽

西方國家自古以來就有論辯的傳統。大家熟悉的古希臘三賢，也就是蘇格拉底、柏拉圖、亞里士多德，就擅長通過論辯修辭，來啟迪人們，思考哲學問題。這種影響也貫穿到了現代的生活。比如在美國，大到總統競選，小到一個活動的組織者，都要通過演講來打動支持者，通過辯論來駁倒競爭者，這樣才能獲得成功。

要參加英語辯論賽那麼就要提高個人的口語水平，在國內找外教一對一練習口語跟出國效果差不多，但費用會省很多。現在中國外國人很多，特別是一些大城市，如北京、上海等，外國人隨處可見。可以主動上去跟他們用英語交流，或者花錢找一個外教一對一專門陪練口語。

點擊藍字免費領取，阿西吧歐美外教試課：【https://www.acadsoc.com】跟著外教學習地道英語

阿西吧外教網，提供純正地道口，10000多位全球外籍教師團隊，來自美國、英國、菲律賓等國家，具有國際專業英語教學資格認證TESOL及各行業工作背景。根據中國學生的特點，甄選多年執教經驗的優秀外教給每一位學習者帶來互動式學習體驗，能夠採取各類有針對性的教學方式。

還有其他什麼學習問題，可以網路搜「阿西吧vivi老師」為您分析解答。

想要更多的英語學習資源，可以網路搜「阿西吧官網論壇」免費下載。

⑦ 英語口語辯論呀

1 經驗是用時間來積累，可以幫我們快速做出第一反應。have a rapid reaction
2經驗能鍛煉我們的綜合版實力，提高各種權能力。improve actually ability.
3積累更多的經驗，是生活中的一筆財富。experience means corns.

⑧ 在英語口語辯論賽中對我們有什麼收獲

獲得機會，鍛煉膽量，認識對手的長處，激發自我學習和進步，結識更多厲害的人

⑨ 英語口語辯論賽有用句型

你這個題目很寬泛。。有個英語辯論賽技巧的帖子，希望能對你有用 On Debating Clarity: Avoise of terms which can be interpreted differently by different readers.When we are talking to people who substantially agree with us we canuse such terms as "rednecks" or "liberals" and feel reasonably surethat we will be understood. But in a debate, we are talking to peoplewho substantially disagree with us and they are likely to put adifferent interpretation on such words. Evidence:Quoting an authority is not evidence. Quoting a majority opinion is notevidence. Any argument that starts with, "According to Einstein..." isnot based on objective evidence. Any argument that starts with, "Mostbiologists believe..." is not based on objective evidence. Saying, "TheBible says..." is not evidence. Authorities and majorities can be wrongand frequently have been. （歷屆辯論賽中出現最多的問題） Emotionalism: Avoidemotionally charged words--words that are likely to proce more heatthan light. Certainly the racial, ethnic, or religious hate words haveno place in rational debating. Likewise, avoid argumentum ad hominem.Personal attacks on your opponent are an admission of intellectualbankruptcy. Also, slurs directed at groups with whom your opponent isidentified are usually nonproctive. Try to keep attention centered onthe objective problem itself. There is a special problem when debatingsocial, psychological, political, or religious ideas because a person'stheories about these matters presumably have some effect on his ownlife style. In other words, rather than saying "and that's why you aresuch 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 hocwhich declares that because some event A happened and immediatelyafterward event B happened that event A was the cause of event B.(Iknew someone whose car stalled on the way to work. She would get outand open the hood and slam it and then the car would start. Singing asong would have been just as effective to allow time for a vapor lockto dissipate!) Also avoid the popular fallacy that correlation provescausation. People who own Cadillacs, on average, have higher incomesthan people who don't. This does not mean that if we provided peoplewith Cadillacs that they would have higher incomes. Innuendo(影射):Innuendois saying something pejorative about your opponent without coming rightout and saying it but by making more or less veiled allusions to somecircumstance, rumor, or popular belief. If you want to see someexcellent examples of innuendo, watch Rush Limbaugh. Politicians are,unfortunately, frequently guilty of using innuendo. It is an easy wayto capitalize on popular prejudices without having to make explicitstatements which might be difficult or impossible to defend againstrational attack. Besure of your facts. What is the source of your information? If it is anewspaper or a magazine, are you sure that the information hasn't been"slanted" to agree with that publication's political bias? Wherecrucial facts are concerned, it is best to check with more than onesource. Often international publications will give you a differentperspective than your hometown newspaper. Check to see whether the bookyou are using was published by a regular publishing company or whetherit was published by some special interest group like the John BirchSociety or a religious organization. These books cannot be trusted topresent unbiased evidence since their motivation for publishing is nottruth but rather the furtherance of some political or religious view. Understandyour opponents' arguments. It is good practice to argue with a friendand take a position with which you do not agree. In this way you maydiscover some of the assumptions your opponents are making which willhelp you in the debate. Remember that everybody thinks that hisposition is the right one, and everybody has his reasons for thinkingso. Do not impute ridiculous or malevolent ideas to your opponent. An example of this is the rhetorical statement, "Haveyou stopped beating your wife?" This imputes or presupposes that youropponent has beaten his wife. One frequently sees references byconservative speakers and writers to the idea that gay activists want"special privileges." This would be ridiculous if it were true. Itisn't true, but speaking as if it were true and well known to all isegregiously unfair to listeners or readers who may not be wellinformed. It is probably always wise to treat your opponent withrespect, even if he doesn't deserve it. If he doesn't deserve respect,this will probably soon become obvious enough. Regression to the mean(邏輯退化):Another source of error which occurs very frequently is the failure totake into account regression to the mean. This is a bit technical, butit is very important, especially in any kind of social or psychologicalresearch which depends upon statistical surveys or even experimentswhich involve statistical sampling. Rather than a general statement ofthe principle (which becomes more and more unintelligible as thestatement 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 mentallyretarded kids. So we give a thousand intelligence tests and select the30 lowest scoring indivials. 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? Notnecessarily! Suppose we want to show that smoking marijuana lowers theIQ. Well, we take the 30 highest scoring kids in our sample and givethem THC and test them again. We find a lower average IQ. Is this evidence that marijuana lowers the IQ? Notnecessarily! Any statistician knows that if you make some kind of ameasurement of some attribute of a large sample of people and thenselect the highest and lowest scoring indivials and make the samemeasurement again, the high scoring group will have a lower averagescore and the low scoring group will have a higher average score thanthey did the first time. This is called "regression to the mean" and itis a perfectly universal statistical principle. Thereare undoubtedly more points to be made here. Suggestions will begratefully received. Larry has made the following suggestions: · Apply the scientific method. （運用科學方法） · Cite relevant personal experience. （合理引用相關的個人經歷） · Be polite. （辯論過程中有禮待人） · Organize your response. (Beginning, middle, end.) （對你辯詞進行合理的組織） · Treat people as indivials. · 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