英语高级口语辩论

① 英语口语重要英文辩论稿，给例子即可谢咯！

亲。。你把上面的换一下就好了嘛 - -不过上面的有点点错误。。额 修改下。比方这样的：
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 英语口语辩论话题

Computers to students is good or bad (电脑对学生是好是坏 )
答！ Some good and some bad （有好也有坏）

③ 英语口语的辩论

不喜欢辨论的飘过.
只要有气势,在说什么,很少人会在乎.
要的是辩论时的激情,激情!
注意语音语调,注意风度~~

④ 英语口语 辩论

不喜欢辨论的飘过.

只要有气势,在说什么,很少人会在乎.
要的是辩论时的激情,激情!!!
注意语音语调,注意风度~~

⑤ 英语 口语辩论 请求帮助

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 英语辩论赛

西方国家自古以来就有论辩的传统。大家熟悉的古希腊三贤，也就是苏格拉底、柏拉图、亚里士多德，就擅长通过论辩修辞，来启迪人们，思考哲学问题。这种影响也贯穿到了现代的生活。比如在美国，大到总统竞选，小到一个活动的组织者，都要通过演讲来打动支持者，通过辩论来驳倒竞争者，这样才能获得成功。

要参加英语辩论赛那么就要提高个人的口语水平，在国内找外教一对一练习口语跟出国效果差不多，但费用会省很多。现在中国外国人很多，特别是一些大城市，如北京、上海等，外国人随处可见。可以主动上去跟他们用英语交流，或者花钱找一个外教一对一专门陪练口语。

点击蓝字免费领取，阿西吧欧美外教试课：【https://www.acadsoc.com】跟着外教学习地道英语

阿西吧外教网，提供纯正地道口，10000多位全球外籍教师团队，来自美国、英国、菲律宾等国家，具有国际专业英语教学资格认证TESOL及各行业工作背景。根据中国学生的特点，甄选多年执教经验的优秀外教给每一位学习者带来互动式学习体验，能够采取各类有针对性的教学方式。

还有其他什么学习问题，可以网络搜“阿西吧vivi老师”为您分析解答。

想要更多的英语学习资源，可以网络搜“阿西吧官网论坛”免费下载。

⑦ 英语口语辩论呀

1 经验是用时间来积累，可以帮我们快速做出第一反应。have a rapid reaction
2经验能锻炼我们的综合版实力，提高各种权能力。improve actually ability.
3积累更多的经验，是生活中的一笔财富。experience means corns.

⑧ 在英语口语辩论赛中对我们有什么收获

获得机会，锻炼胆量，认识对手的长处，激发自我学习和进步，结识更多厉害的人

⑨ 英语口语辩论赛有用句型

你这个题目很宽泛。。有个英语辩论赛技巧的帖子，希望能对你有用 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. （历届辩论赛中出现最多的问题） 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(逻辑退化):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. （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 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