2016年英语专八真题听力-附原文和答案

三部分：听力试题选项、听力原文、答案

一、听力试题选项

PARTI  LISTENING COMPREHENSION   [25 MIN]

SECTION A MINI-LECTURE

In this section you will hear a mini-lecture. You will hear the mini-lecture ONCE ONLY.

While listening to the mini-lecture, please complete the gap-filling task on ANSWER SHEET ONE and write NO MORE THAN THREE WORDS for each gap. Make sure the word(s) you fill in is (are) both grammatically and semantically acceptable. You may use the blank sheet for note-taking.

You have THIRTY seconds to preview the gap-filling task.

Now listen to the mini-lecture. When it is over, you will be given THREE minutes to check your work.

SECTIONB INTERVIEW
In this section you will hear ONE interview. The interview will be divided into TWO parts. At the end of each part, five questions will be asked about what was said. Both the interview and the questions will be spoken once only. After each question there will be a ten-second pause. During the pause, you should read the four choices of A, B, C and D, and mark the best answer to each question on ANSWER SHEET TWO.

You have THIRTY seconds to preview the questions.
Now listen to Part One of the interview. 

二、听力原文

【Mini-lecture】

Models for Arguments

Good morning, everyone.

My name is David and I am good at arguing.

So welcome to our introductory lecture on argumentation.

Why do we want to argue?

Why do we try to convince other people to believe things that they don't want to believe.

And is that even a nice thing to do?

Is that a nice way to treat other human being, try and make them think something they don't want to think?

Well, my answer is going to make reference to three models for arguments.

The first model --- let's call this the dialectical model--- is that we think of arguments as war.

And you know what that's like.

There is a lot of screaming and shouting and winning and losing.

And that's not really a very helpful model for arguing, but it's a pretty common and fixed one.

I guess you must have seen that type of arguing many times--- in the street, on the bus or in the subway.

Let's move on to the second model.

The second model for arguing regards arguments as proofs.

Think of a mathematician's argument.

Here's my argument.

Does it work? Is it any good? Are the premises warranted?

Are the inferences valid? Does the conclusion follow the premises?

No opposition, no adversariality--- not necessarily any arguing in the adversarial sense.

And there's a third model to keep in mind that I think is going to be very helpful, and that is arguments as performances.

Arguments has been in front of an audience.

We can think of a politician trying to present a position, trying to convince the audience of something.

But there's another twist on this model that I really think is important;

namely, that when we argue before an audience, sometimes the audience has a more participatory role in the argument;

that is, you present your arguments in front of an audience who are like juries that make a judgment and decide the case.

Let's call this model the rhetorical model, where you have to tailor your argument to the audience at hand.

Of those three, the argument as war is the dominant one.

It dominates how we talk about arguments, it dominates how we think about arguments,

and because of that, it shapes how we argue, our actual conduct in arguments.

We want strong arguments, arguments that have a lot of punch, arguments that are right on target.

We want to have our defenses up and our strategies all in order.

We want killer arguments. That's the kind of argument we want.

It is the dominant way of thinking about arguments.

When I'm talking about arguments, that's probably what you thought of, the adversarial model.

But the war metaphor, the war paradigm or model for thinking about arguments, has, I think, negative effects on how we argue.

First, it elevates tactics over substance.

You can take a class in logic argumentation.

You learn all about the strategies that people use to try and win arguments and that makes arguing adversarial; it's polarizing.

And the only foreseeable outcomes are triumph, glorious triumph, or disgraceful defeat.

I think those are very destructive effects, and worst of all, it seems to prevent things like negotiation and collaboration.

Um, I think the argument-as-war metaphor inhibits those other kinds of resolutions to argumentation.

And finally, this is really the worst thing, arguments don't seem to get us anywhere; they're dead ends.

We don't get anywhere.

Oh, and one more thing. That is, if argument is war, then there's also an implicit aspect of meaning, learning with losing.

And let me explain what I mean. Suppose you and I have an argument.

You believe a proposition and I don't. And I say, "Well, why do you believe that?"

And you give me your reasons. And I object and say, "Well, what about...?"

And you answer my objection.

And I have a question: "Well, what do you mean?

How does it apply over here?" And you answer my question.

Now, suppose at the end of the day,

I've objected, I've questioned, I've raised all sorts of questions from an opposite perspective and in every case you've responded to my satisfaction.

And so at the end of the day, I say, "You know what? I guess you're right."

Maybe finally I lost my argument.

But isn't it also a process of learning?

So you see arguments may also have positive effects.

So, how can we find new ways to achieve those positive effects?

We need to think of new kinds of arguments.

Here I have some suggestions.

If we want to think of new kinds of arguments, what we need to do is think of new kinds of arguers, people who argue.

So try this:

Think of all the roles that people play in arguments.

There's the proponent and the opponent in an adversarial, dialectical argument.

There's the audience in rhetorical arguments.

There's the reasoner in arguments as proofs.

All these different roles.

Now, can you imagine an argument in which you are the arguer, but you're also in the audience, watching yourself argue?

Can you imagine yourself watching yourself argue?

That means you need to be supported by yourself.

Even when you lose the argument, still, at the end of the argument,you could say, "Wow, that was a good argument!"

Can you do that? I think you can.

In this way, you've been supported by yourself. Up till now, I have lost a lot of arguments.

It really takes practice to become a good arguer, in the sense of being able to benefit from losing,

but fortunately, I've had many, many colleagues who have been willing to step up and provide that practice for me.

OK. To sum up, in today's lecture, I have introduced three models of arguments.

The first model is called the dialectical model.

The second one is the model of arguments as proofs.

And the last one is called the rhetorical model, the model of arguments as performances.

I have also emphasized that, though the adversarial type of arguments is quite common, we can still make arguments produce some positive effects.

Next time I will continue our discussion on the process of arguing.

M: Good evening, everybody. Today we are pleased to have invited Maggie Shorts from Harvard University to tell us her feeling of studying together with her mom. Well, Maggie.

W: Thanks. I'm happy to meet you all.

M: Maggie, are you and your mom studying the same major at the university?

W:Not really. She is studying in law school and I'm studying journalism. So, you see she is a graduate student while I am an undergraduate. Since we study at the same time and hers is a four-year night program, our school schedules are synched.

M: Which means?

W: We follow the same schedules of study. We take our exams during the same busy weeks and experience similar relief at the end of December and May. Last spring, we compared notes on our cover letters and interviews for our job applications. Last June, as we were both preparing for our summer internships, my mother and I traded fashion advice. Presently, we will probably graduate within days of each other.

M: Interesting. Then you must have a lot in common at study.

W: You bet. As students, we've shared study habits (take notes by hand), general truths (You can't avoid having a few bad professors), and encouraging platitude(like, it's okay! No one will care how you did on your "Science of Cooking"or "Constitutional Law" midterm!). Where she's listened to my complaints about freshman-year roommates and dining-hall food, I've helped her buy textbooks online and wished her luck in moot-court practice. Occasionally, we've even studied together. When Mom came to visit during Freshman Parents Weekend, I took her into the libraries on the pretext that she was on the library tour. We sat side by side in the big open room on the first floor, she diligently taking notes on a huge red volume that she had lugged from New York City on the train, I casually reading about Greek myths.

M: What do you think is the biggest advantage of having a parent studying together with you?

W: I know that my mother has felt the frustration of a paper that won't write and the excitement of mastering a difficult topic. I don't need to explain my elaborate theory that I am a "bad test-taker", she's said the same thing about herself. And talking with her is a good way to get perspective on those occasional hurdles that crop up in college. Although we are both taking a substantial course load, Mom is also working a full-time job in the financial industry. That urges me to study harder, so I should say encouragement.

M: Any disadvantages then?

W: Well, sometimes I wonder whether we are getting a little too involved in each other's scholastic lives. This usually occurs to me about twice a year, when my mother calls to inform me of her grades. Once, she reached me in the middle of a date ("I got my first A! Aren't you going to congratulate me?"), and often, when the news has been disappointing, I haven't known how to respond. Last fall, I was chastised for passing along a speculative tidbit I had heard in the dining hall--- that, because of grade inflation, GPAs once considered good might be viewed with new scrutiny. "Jane has informed me that 'B is the new F,'" Mom announced at Thanksgiving. I didn't know what to say to comfort her.

M: I see. Is the phenomenon of parent and kids studying together at university a rare case?

W: I am afraid not. Changing careers later in life is no longer a rarity, so it is not uncommon for students and their parents to be toying with big decisions at the same time. Class surveys indicate that the majority of Harvard alumni have shifted directions when it comes to their careers. With the financial collapse of 2008, such shifts have become more widespread. Students have seen their family members lose jobs or change them. Gone is the time when you start out at a company and work there for the rest of your life.

M: So your mom started study again just because she wanted to change her career?

W: Yes, she used to be in the real estate industry but now she wants to be a lawyer.

M: Does her experience affect you somewhat?

W: Certainly. Freshman Week, in one of the welcoming speeches, our dean mentioned that many of us might have grown up thinking that "doctor, lawyer, teacher" were our only option. She urged us to stick to our dream. But later I realized talking about passions is one thing--- actually following them is another. By the time I started to think about what professional directions I might want to take, I had heard "The average American changes careers seven times" so often that it was hard not to become numb to its message. The last thing that the enthusiastic Harvard student wants to do is to imagine moving from job to job until she lands somewhere by chance, especially when the economy is so uncertain. My mom can serve as a good example. Even if she graduated from Harvard herself as a brilliant student, she has to make alterations of her career.

M: So, is your mom actually happy studying with younger students?

W: Hard to say. Frustration is routine for older students, you know, who have to learn how to study all over again. Mom once described the experience of taking classes with students half her age after 30 years in the workforce: "What's most challenging is that you come into class knowing how to make a cake--- but you're all there to make omelets."

M: A kind of wasting time?

W: Exactly.

M: Do you think your mom has played an important role in shaping your idea of what kind of person you want to be?

W: Absolutely. Harvard offers many resources for students who want to figure out where their future lies. Advisers, tutors, and OCS keep their doors open to help undergraduates embark on this kind of discovery. One can't find one's passions in a booklet on summer internships or a list of possible career paths. It's a gradual process that involves sharing thoughts and then coming back to them; a discussion that doesn't always have its end goal in mind. In the course of my time at Harvard, it has been just such a give-and-take --- with professors, with friends, and with my mother --- that has slowly shaped my ideas of who I might want to be. I really cherish the time she spent together with me at university.

M: Well, Maggie. Thank you very much for staying with us today.

W: My pleasure.

SECTION A MINI-LECTURE 

1. the dialectical model 2. common and fixed 3. premises 

4. opposition/arguing 

5. arguments as performances/the rhetorical model 6. participating 7. convince 8. how we argue 9. tactics 

10. negotiation and collaboration 11. they’re dead ends 12. learning with losing 13. questions 

14. achieve positive effects 15. be self-supported 

SECTION B  INTERVIEW 

1. What is the topic of the interview?  

答案：C. Maggie’s view on studying with Mom. 

2. Which of the following indicates that they have the same study schedule?

答案：A. They take exams in the same weeks. 

3. What do the mother and daughter have in common as students? 

答案：D. Taking notes by hand. 

4.  What is the biggest advantage of studying with Mom? 

答案：D. Encouragement. 

5.  What is the biggest disadvantage of studying with Mom? 

答案：A. Thinking of ways to comfort Mom. 

6. Why is parent and kids studying together a common case? 

答案：A. Because parents need to be ready for new jobs. 7. What would Maggie’s Mom like to be after college? 

答案：C. Lawyer. 

8. How does Maggie’s Mom feel about sitting in class after thirty years? 

答案：D. Frustrated. 

9. What is most challenging for Maggie’s Mom? 

答案：C. To accept what is taught. 

10. How does Maggie describe the process of picking out one's career path? 

答案：B. Gradual.