Unit 3: Line of Reasoning and Methods of Development
AP English Language and Composition Topic 3 5:57 English narration · English + 中文 subtitles burned in
Chapters
Transcript
Unit 3 is where the course stops being about parts and starts being about structure, and here is the test that tells you whether you have any.
第三单元 是这门课从谈"部件" 转为谈"结构"的地方， 而这里有一个检验， 能告诉你自己是否有结构。
Take your essay and ask whether the paragraphs could be shuffled without loss.
把你的文章拿来， 问一句： 这些段落打乱顺序 会不会有任何损失？
If they could, the essay has no line of reasoning.
如果不会， 这篇文章就没有推理线索。
It has a list.
它只有一份清单。
A line of reasoning is the path an argument takes from where it starts to what it proves, and a list does not have one.
推理线索是论证 从起点通往它所要证明之处的路径， 而清单没有这样的路径。
Identifying claims and evidence comes first.
先是辨认主张与证据。
First, four claims about how evidence gets into an argument properly.
先看关于证据 如何恰当进入论证的四条说法。
Effective use of evidence uses commentary to establish a logical relationship between the evidence and the claim.
有效地使用证据， 要用评述 在证据与主张之间 建立逻辑关系。
Writers introduce source material using commentary to integrate it into their line of reasoning — so commentary comes before as well as after.
作者用评述引入源材料， 把它整合进自己的推理线索， 所以评述既在后面，也在前面。
Synthesis requires consideration, explanation and integration of others' arguments into one's own.
综合要求 对他人的论证 加以考量、解释并整合进自己的论证。
And writers must acknowledge the words, ideas, images and texts of others through attribution and citation.
而作者必须通过归属与引用， 承认他人的语句、观念、 图像与文本。
Now the change from Unit 2: commentary has two jobs, not one.
现在是与第二单元相比的变化： 评述有两项工作，不是一项。
It introduces the evidence into the reasoning, and it explains the relationship afterwards.
它把证据引入推理， 并在之后解释这一关系。
A paragraph that does both reads: claim; a sentence positioning the evidence; the evidence, embedded; commentary establishing the logical relationship; the link onward.
同时做到两者的段落是这样的： 主张； 一句为证据定位的话； 被嵌入的证据； 建立逻辑关系的评述； 通向下文的连接。
The sentence before the quotation is doing as much work as the one after it, and most students write neither.
引文之前的那句话 与之后的那句话 做的工作一样多， 而多数学生两句都不写。
Then describing the line of reasoning.
然后是描述论证脉络。
The CED allows two arrangements, and both are valid.
课程大纲允许两种安排， 两种都成立。
Writers may lead readers through a line of reasoning and then arrive at a thesis — the argument builds to its claim.
作者可以先带读者 走完一条推理线索， 然后抵达论点， 论证一路建构到它的主张。
Or writers may express a claim and then develop a line of reasoning to justify it — the argument declares and then defends.
或者作者可以先表明主张， 再展开推理线索为它辩护， 论证先宣告，再防守。
Whichever order is used, the same requirements hold.
无论用哪种顺序， 同样的要求都成立。
Writers explain their reasoning through commentary that connects chosen evidence to a claim, and commentary explains the significance and relevance of evidence in relation to the line of reasoning.
作者通过 把所选证据与主张相连的评述 来说明自己的推理， 而评述要说明证据 相对于推理线索的 意义与相关性。
The sequence of paragraphs in a text reveals the argument's line of reasoning — which is the practical tool for reading.
文本中段落的顺序 揭示了论证的推理线索， 这是阅读时的实用工具。
To find a writer's reasoning, write one sentence per paragraph and read the list.
要找出作者的推理， 就为每一段写一句话， 然后读这份清单。
And flaws in a line of reasoning may render an argument specious or illogical.
而推理线索中的缺陷 可能使论证似是而非或不合逻辑。
The test is whether the sources are integrated into the writer's own claim, rather than summarised in sequence.
判断的标准是：这些材料有没有被整合进作者自己的主张里， 而不是被按顺序复述一遍。
One consequence deserves its own moment, because it decides Question 1.
有一个后果值得单独说， 因为它决定第一题。
The word integration rules out a paragraph that simply summarises each source in turn.
"整合"这个词 排除了那种 依次概述每份材料的段落。
A paragraph per source is the classic low-scoring shape: it produces an essay in which the sources have been read but no argument has been made.
一份材料一个段落 是经典的低分结构： 它写出的文章里， 材料被读过了， 但没有提出任何论证。
Integration means your claim comes first and the sources arrive inside it as evidence, several at a time where they agree or disagree.
整合意味着 你的主张先出现， 材料作为证据出现在主张内部， 在它们相合或相斥的地方 一次带进来好几份。
And whichever way you use them, you must acknowledge the words, ideas, images and texts of others through attribution and citation.
而无论你怎样使用它们， 都必须通过归属与引用， 承认他人的语句、观念、 图像与文本。
And recognizing methods of development.
再是辨认展开方法。
Methods of development are common approaches writers use to develop and organise the reasoning of an argument.
展开方法 是作者用来展开并组织 论证推理的常见做法。
The CED's list is narration, cause-effect, comparison-contrast, definition and description, and this unit treats the first two.
课程大纲的清单是 叙述、因果、比较对照、 定义与描写， 本单元处理前两种。
Developing through narration: writers offer details about real-life experiences and reflections on them.
通过叙述展开： 作者提供关于真实生活经历的细节， 以及对这些经历的反思。
The reflection is what makes narration an argument rather than a story — an anecdote with no reflection has supplied no reasoning.
反思正是让叙述 成为论证而不是故事的东西， 没有反思的轶事 没有提供任何推理。
Developing through cause-effect: writers present a cause and then assert the effects or consequences of that cause, or begin from an effect and trace it back.
通过因果展开： 作者提出一个原因， 然后断言它的结果或后果， 或者从一个结果出发往回追溯。
And choosing a method is a rhetorical decision, not a stylistic one.
而方法的选择 是修辞决定，不是文体决定。
Narration works when the audience needs to feel the situation before they will accept a claim about it.
当受众需要先"感受"到情境 才肯接受关于它的主张时， 叙述才起作用。
Cause-effect works when the audience already accepts the facts but not the connection between them.
当受众已经接受事实 但不接受事实之间的联系时， 因果才起作用。
For your own essays, the useful discipline is to decide the order of your claims before writing any of them.
对你自己的文章来说， 有用的做法 是在动笔写任何一段之前 先决定主张的顺序。
Then test the draft by asking of each paragraph: why does this come after the one before it?
然后检验草稿， 对每一段问： 它为什么排在前一段之后？
If the only answer is "it is another thing I know about the topic", the structure is a list and the reasoning point is at risk.
如果唯一的答案是 "这是我关于这个题目知道的另一件事"， 那么结构就是一份清单， 推理这一分就处在危险之中。
That question takes a minute and it is the difference between an essay with a shape and an essay with a word count.
这个问题花不了一分钟， 而它正是 一篇有形状的文章 与一篇只有字数的文章 之间的区别。
Three marks students give away on the exam.
考试里学生丢掉的三种分。
First, commentary has two jobs — introducing evidence and explaining the relationship — so write both sentences, and never skip the second.
第一，评述有两项工作—— 引入证据，以及解释关系—— 所以两句都要写。
Second, a paragraph per source is the classic low-scoring shape.
第二，一份材料一个段落， 是典型的低分形态。
Third, an anecdote with no reflection has supplied no reasoning, only a story.
第三，没有反思的轶事 只讲了一个故事，没有推理。
Examiners reward the line of reasoning, not a list of facts.
阅卷者奖励的是推理线索， 不是一份事实清单。
Five things to carry out.
带走五件事。
First, commentary has two jobs — write both sentences.
第一，评述有两项工作， 两句都要写。
Second, synthesis means integration, not a paragraph per source.
第二，综合意味着整合， 不是一份材料一个段落。
Third, to find a line of reasoning, summarise each paragraph in one sentence and read the list.
第三，要找出推理线索， 就为每一段写一句话， 然后读这份清单。
Fourth, ask of your own paragraphs why each follows the one before.
第四，对自己的段落问一句： 它为什么排在前一段之后？
Fifth, narration needs reflection, and a method of development is chosen for a rhetorical reason.
第五，叙述需要反思， 而展开方法的选择 要有修辞上的理由。