from BBC Learning English.

來自BBC學習英語。

I'm Neil. And I'm Sam.  

我是尼爾。而我是山姆。

'Friends, Romans, countrymen,

'朋友，羅馬人，同胞。

lend me your ears!' Do you

借給我你的耳朵！'你是否

know where these famous words

知道這些名言在哪裡

are from, Sam? I think that's a speech by

是來自，山姆？我想這是一個演講，由

Marc Antony in William

馬克-安東尼在威廉

Shakespeare's play, Julius Caesar. Wow, I'm impressed! Caesar has

莎士比亞的戲劇《凱撒大帝》。哇，我印象很深凱撒有

been assassinated and Marc Antony

被暗殺，馬克-安東尼

tries to persuade the crowd

試圖說服民眾

to find his killers. Using words to persuade people,

以找到殺他的人。用語言來說服人們。

giving them a good reason to do

給他們一個好的理由來做

what you say, or to accept your

你所說的，或接受你的

argument, is known as

參數，被稱為

'rhetoric'. In this programme,

'修辭'。在這個節目中。

we'll be hearing all about

我們將聽到所有關於

rhetoric and of course learning

修辭，當然還有學習

some related vocabulary as well. The art of rhetoric started

一些相關的詞彙也是如此。修辭的藝術始於

with the ancient Greek

與古希臘

philosophers. Later, during

哲學家們。後來，在

the Roman republic, politicians

羅馬共和國，政治家

and statesmen used rhetoric in

和政治家們將修辭學用於

speeches given to crowds in

向民眾發表的演講

the public square. Although technology has

公共廣場。儘管技術已經

transformed the way we

改變了我們的方式

communicate since then, the

溝通以來，。

art of rhetoric is still

修辭的藝術仍然是

alive today. Modern

活在今天。現代

politicians may prefer

政治家們可能更喜歡

Twitter to the public square,

推特到公共廣場。

but they still use persuasive

但他們仍然使用說服性的

language, including

語言，包括

soundbites - short sentences

音節--短句子

or phrases giving a message

或給予資訊的短語

in an easy to remember way. We'll hear more soon but

以一種易於記憶的方式。我們很快會聽到更多消息，但

first I have a question for

首先我有一個問題要問

you, Sam. Roman politicians

你，山姆。羅馬政治家

used many rhetorical tricks

運用了許多修辭手法

to persuade people including

來說服人們，包括

the argumentum ad hominum

人言可畏

which was an attack on their

這是對他們的攻擊

opponent's moral character.

對手的道德品質。

Another was called the

另一個被稱為

argumentum ad baculum - but

辯證法 - 但是

what did it mean? Was it: a) an argument based on

它是什麼意思？它是：a）一個基於

logic? b) an argument based

邏輯？ b）一個基於

on emotion? or c) an argument based on

或 c) 基於以下的論點

the stick? Well, to persuade someone

棍子？好吧，為了勸說某人

your argument needs to be

你的論點需要是

logical, so I'll say a). OK, we'll find out the

符合邏輯，所以我說a)。好的，我們會發現

answer later. Whether you

以後再回答。無論你

want someone to vote for

希望有人能夠投票給

you, or to buy what

你，或購買什麼

you're selling, rhetoric

你的銷售，修辭

can make your message

可以使你的資訊

persuasive. During his

有說服力。在他

career in the adverting

在廣告業的職業生涯

industry, Sam Tatum

行業，山姆-塔特姆

learned a lot about

瞭解了很多關於

persuading people.

勸說人們。

Here he explains the many

在這裡，他解釋了許多

uses of rhetoric to BBC

對BBC使用修辭

World Service programme,

世界服務方案。

The Why Factor. Rhetoric is persuasive

為什麼的因素。修辭是有說服力的

language. We use it rally,

語言。我們在集會上使用它。

to simplify the complex,

來簡化複雜的事情。

to inspire and influence.

啟發和影響。

It's important, I think,

這很重要，我想。

to identify what strategies

以確定哪些戰略

might be influencing us

可能會影響到我們

more than we think.

比我們想象的要多。

By understanding the power

通過了解權力

of language in shaping

語言在形成過程中的作用

perceptions, we can

感知，我們可以

start to see, 'I'm

開始看到，'我是

wondering why people are

想知道為什麼人們在

looking to be so concrete.

看上去是那麼具體。

Are we trying to pull the

我們是不是想把

wool over our eyes on

遮住我們的眼睛

something that's more

的東西，更

far complex than we

遠比我們複雜

actually state?' As well as persuading

實際上的狀態？除了勸說

people, Sam Tatum says

人，山姆-塔特姆說

rhetoric can be used to

修辭可以用來

rally - to bring people

召集人--帶著人們

together in support of

一起支持

a common goal. A recent

一個共同的目標。最近的一次

example of this is the

這方面的例子是

way politicians called

政治家們稱

the coronavirus our 'enemy'. The words politicians choose,

冠狀病毒是我們的 "敵人"。政治家們選擇的詞語。

and the way they use them,

以及他們使用它們的方式。

can influence us more than

對我們的影響超過了

we think. Sam Tatum says

我們認為。薩姆-塔特姆說

we should question whether

我們應該質疑是否

political rhetoric is

政治言辭是

trying to pull the wool

欲擒故縱

over our eyes, an

在我們的眼睛上，一個

informal way of saying

非正式的說法

trick or deceive us. But in the age of 24-hour

騙取或欺騙我們。但在24小時的時代

news updates and non-stop

新聞更新和不間斷的

Twitter, has the skill

推特，有技能

of making a thoughtful

做出深思熟慮的

argument been lost?

爭論已經失去了意義？

Here's Kendal Phillips,

這裡是肯德爾-菲利普斯。

professor of political

政治學教授

philosophy at Syracuse

錫拉丘茲大學的哲學

University, speaking to

大學，對

BBC World Service's,

英國廣播公司世界服務部的。

The Why Factor. It's hard to analyse

為什麼的因素。這很難分析

the argument or reasoning of

的論點或推理。

a tweet, 'cos 280 characters

一條推特，因為280個字符

is not a way for me to

不是我的一種方式

lay out a logical argument

陳詞濫調

with a major premise, a minor

有大前提，有小前提

premise and a conclusion,

前提和結論。

it's much easier to just

更加容易的是，只是

use a two-word phrase or

用兩個字的短語或

a hashtag that usually

一個標籤，通常是

ends up adding to that

結果是增加了

kind of polemical division

爭論性的劃分

between my side

在我身邊

and their side. Global problems involve

和他們的身邊。全球性問題涉及

complex issues which cannot

複雜的問題，不能

be solved in 280 letters,

在280封信中得到解決。

the maximum length of a tweet

鳴叫的最大長度

allowed by Twitter.

由Twitter允許。

According to Professor Kendal,

根據肯德爾教授的說法。

we need logical arguments

我們需要邏輯性的論證

containing a premise -

包含一個前提--

something which you think

你認為的東西

is true and you use as

為真，並且你用作為

the basis for developing

發展的基礎

your idea, and a conclusion -

你的想法，和一個結論 -

your decision or plan of

你的決定或計劃的

action based on carefully

在仔細研究的基礎上採取行動

considering all

考慮到所有

the relevant facts. For example: climate change

相關的事實。例如：氣候變化

is damaging the planet -

正在破壞地球 -

that's a premise; therefore,

這是一個前提；是以。

we should act to stop it -

我們應該採取行動來阻止它

that's a conclusion. Few issues are simply black

這是一個結論。很少有問題是簡單的黑色

and white though, and this

和白色，但這

is a problem because Twitter

是一個問題，因為Twitter

debates are often polemical -

辯論往往是爭論性的 -

argued very strongly either

爭論得非常激烈，要麼

for or against a particular

支持或反對某一特定

opinion or idea. If you believe passionately

觀點或想法。如果你熱情地相信

in something, you need to

在某些方面，你需要

explain it to people in

向人們解釋它在

a way they understand, and

以他們理解的方式，並

in ancient times rhetoric

古代修辭

also meant building bridges

也意味著建立橋樑

between people and finding

人與人之間，找到

common ground. Like those

共同點。像那些

Romans you mentioned, Neil. Yes, in my question I asked

你提到的羅馬人，尼爾。是的，在我的問題中我問道

Sam for the meaning of

琛琛的意思是

term, argumentum ad baculum. I guessed it was an argument

術語，argumentum ad baculum。我猜這是一個論點

based on logic. Which was the wrong answer,

基於邏輯。這是個錯誤的答案。

I'm afraid. In fact,

我很害怕。事實上。

argumentum ad baculum

辯論會

means the argument with

指的是參數與

a stick, or in other words,

一根棍子，或者換句話說。

hitting somebody with a

打人

stick until they agree

粘到他們同意為止

with you! I guess that's

和你在一起!我想這是

one way to win an argument.

贏得爭論的一種方式。

OK, let's recap the

好吧，讓我們回顧一下

vocabulary from the programme,

方案中的詞彙。

starting with a soundbite -

從一個聲音開始 -

a short sentence or phrase

短句或短語

designed to stick

為 粘住

in the memory. When people rally together,

在記憶中。當人們團結起來的時候。

they unite to support

他們聯合起來支持

a common goal. To pull the wool over

一個共同的目標。掩耳盜鈴

someone's eyes means

某個人的眼睛意味著

to trick someone. Logical arguments contain

來欺騙別人。邏輯性論證包含

a premise - a truth used

前提--使用的真理

as the basis for

為基礎的

developing an argument,

形成一個論點。

and a conclusion - a

和一個結論--一個

decision based on

決定的依據是

carefully considering all

仔細考慮所有

the relevant facts. And finally, polemical

相關的事實。最後，論戰式

means strongly attacking

指強烈攻擊

or defending an opinion or

或為某一意見辯護或

idea. But there's no

想法。但沒有

arguing the fact that

爭論的事實是，

once again our six

再一次，我們的六

minutes are up!

時間到了!

Goodbye for now! Bye!

暫時再見!再見！