UNIT 4. Informational style.

Television

Television now plays such an important part in so many people's lives but it is essential for us to try to decide whether it is a blessing or a curse. Obviously television has both advantages and disadvantages but do the former outweigh the latter.

In the first place television is not only a convenient source of entertainment but also a comparatively cheap one. For a family of four, for example, it's more convenient as well as cheaper to sit comfortably at home with practically unlimited entertainment available than to go out in search of amusement elsewhere. There is no transport to arrange, they don't have to find a baby-sitter, they do not have to pay for expensive seats at the theater, the cinema, the opera, or the ballet, only to discover, perhaps, that the show is a rotten one. All they have to do is turn knob and they can see plays, films, operas and shows of every kind not to mention political discussions and the latest exciting football match.

Some people, however, maintain that this is precisely where the danger lies -

the television viewers need do nothing he does not even use his legs, he takes no initiative, he makes no choice and exercises no judgment; he is completely passive and has everything presented to him without any effort on his part.

Retelling

In this day and age many people watch television; many people watch too much television. There are advantages in the progress of the television. Some of these advantages are practical ones. People can stay at home, and don't have to pay a lot of money to go out to the ballet or the theatre. Also with people who have children there are practical advantages, they don't have to find a baby-sitter.

But in my opinion some of the disadvantages may well be said to outweigh the advantages. People become very passive they are so used to sitting in front of the television, but they don't take any initiative to do anything else, or to create their own amusement and this leads to declining such thing... er... music, people... er... playing musical instruments or providing their own entertainment. I think, or, the British apathy in some ways is largely due to the overtendency to watch television and to become absorbed in it.

Thumbing a Lift

To hitchhike successfully in any country you must be able to do two things: attract attention and at the same time convince the driver at a glance that you don't intend to rob or murder him. To fulfill the first requirement you must have some mark just to distinguish you at once from all other hitch-hikers. A serviceman, for instance, should wear his uniform, a student his scarf. In a foreign country an unmistakable indication of you own nationality will also arrest the driver's attention.

When I hitch-hiked nine thousand and five hundred miles across the United States and back recently, I wore a well-tailored suit, a bowler-hat and a trench-coat and carried a pencil-thin rolled black umbrella. My suitcase was decorated with British flags. Having plenty of luggage, moreover, I was not likely to be suspected of being a dangerous lunatic. I then had to get across to the driver the idea that I was a bona fide traveller and needed to get somewhere cheaply.

But even with careful preparation you must not assume that the task will be easy. You should be prepared to wait a little for there are drivers who confess to a fierce prejudice against, not to say hatred of hitch-hikers and would no more pick up a hiker than march from Aldermaston to London. In America my average wait was half an hour and my longest two hours, but I have heard of people waiting all day. They presumably took less pain to make themselves conspicuous. Nor must you assume that all the drivers who stop for you are nice normal people. On one occasion, I found myself driving with two boys of about nineteen, who turned out to be on the run from the police and were hoping to use me as an alibi. There are also lesser risks: you may find yourself in the car of a fascist fanatic, a Mormon missionary or just a bad driver. You can not tell, of course, until you are in the car, but you soon learn the art of the quick excuse that gets you out again.

If the hitch-hiking the United States will remember that he is seeking the indulgence of drivers to give him a free ride and is prepared to give in exchange, entertainment and company and not go to sleep he will come across the remarkable, almost legendary hospitality of the Americans of the West. It will also help if he can drive - I think that I drove myself about four thousand and five hundred miles, of those nine thousand and five hundred miles, I hitch-hiked in the States.

Hitch-hiking

Hitch-hiking seems to be a rather controversial subject. Some people say it's

extremely dangerous and advise you never to hitch-hike. Others say “Why not? It's a very cheap method of travelling, and certainly, if you are a student it's very, very useful”. In my experience hitch-hiking has been both easy and difficult. In England, for example, I think it's very easy to hitch-hike. In general, lorry drivers will always stop for you and pick you up. In any way, in England distances between towns are not very great and, in my opinion, not so many dangers on a short journey I've always tried to hitch-hike with a friend, whenever possible a male, for protection, of course, and... er... talking to drivers who pick up hitch-hikers, they seem to prefer to pick up two... er... preferably - a boy and a girl together.

I've spoken a bit about England, I have also hitch-hiked in France, I think I saw a different attitude there, and, in fact, it's not encouraging to hitch-hike, and more than once I've been stopped by a policeman and asked to show my passport and give an excuse for why I was hitch-hiking. And m general, I find it is not so easy either to get lifts in France; people appear to be more suspicious, but I think, generally, if you make yourself conspicuous either as a student by wearing your University scarf or some obvious means of identification, I think the chances are quite, quite high of getting a lift.

The English Character

The national character of the English has been very differently described, but most commentators agree over one quality, which they describe as fatuous self-satisfaction, serene sense of superiority or insular pride. English patriotism is based on a deep sense of security. Englishmen as individuals may have been insecure, threatened with the loss of a job, unsure of themselves, or unhappy in many ways but as a nation they have been for centuries secure, serene in their national successes. They have not lived in a state of hatred of their neighbours as Frenchmen or Germans have other lived. This national sense of security hardly threaten ed by the Armada or by Napoleon, or by the First World War, has been greatly weakened by the Second World War and by the invention of atomic bomb.

Retelling

As English people were often accused of being very insular, very proud and very self-satisfied, perhaps, praps even fatuous about our self-satisfaction, I think, this is praps a just thing to say about English people because of our geographical position. We are on an island because of this position we feel very secure, we’ve been secure from attacks we haven’t even been threatened or not... er... not completely threatened by such things as the Armada or by attacks of Napoleon.

This perhaps makes us rather reserved as a nation. But with the advent of the 2^nd World War... er... perhaps our pride has been crushed slightly, praps we realized that we are vulnerable in fact and especially now, I think, with the  European Economic Community, the Common Market, we’ve been forced to open our door to Europe, we’ve travelling more and I think, perhaps, some of our reserve is being... is being washed away. I hope so anyway.

Meals

     Personally I have only two meals a day. I don’t really like breakfast. I find it fills me up too much firstly in the morning. But on Sunday I get up later, I decide to sit down to traditional English breakfast my favourite being sausages, bacon, a fried egg or a scrambled egg…er…a grilled tomato and some mushrooms. And after such a big breakfast I don’t often eat untill the evening.

  And during a week I usually have a snack for lunch: a few sandwiches and a drink or maybe a piece of fruit. And in the evening I enjoy cooking. So I take my time and ook a nice mealeven if it is a particular lunch. At the weekends I like to go home because my mother cooks wonderful meals and it’s nice to sit down with the family and enjoy a nice meal which already has been prepared.

***

It’s true to say and useful to begin with a comment about the names that people give to meals. Because the way you describe the meal, a name given to it, depends probably on where you live and it is not a fashionable talk about class system, about the class you come from.

    Breakfast is very simple. Everybody has breakfast at 6.30 in the morning.

    The next meal is more difficult. In school you will always have how they call it a dinner ticket. Before we have to pay for our meals everyday in cash we used to buy dinner tickets at the beginning of a week. And that was called the 12 o’clock - 1 o’clock meal.

However at the same time we were talked of the proper name for this meal for not dinner but luncheon or lunch. So they talk that we should call it lunch though they have a dinner ticket.

   The evening main meal is then dinner. Although some people would call it tea. That means two mild meals in between they…er…might have a small meal at 4 o’clock. It should be also called tea which should be to drink tea and perhaps sandwiches and cakes.

    And you might have a supper before you go to bed, which would be perhaps at 10 o’clock or whenever and again it’d be a light meal, a drink, perhaps, or milk drink.

   Any people wouldn’t have supper and they wouldn’t have tea either. They don’t have three meals. My meals when I try not to have breakfast because normally when I have breakfast I have bread and jam and too much of them. But I normally do have breakfast because I can’t resist temptation.

  I try to have a reasonably filling meal in the evening and try to get vegetables to cooking myself because it’s very easy. It’ll be other vegetables and it’ll be all the protein, all the nutrition that goes with them.

   Er…I cook for myself when I have to, but I’d not rather eat out, eat out in the restaurant when I can afford to, when I have times to do that. Er… my parents never have lunch, never have breakfast; they only have an evening meal which I find very uneasy for me. It makes problems for me partly because it means I have to make my own breakfast, my own lunch when I’m rather lazy.

  But also I feel a bit guilty when I’m pushing food into my mouth…er…all times of the day when I don’t eat anything at all.

Health service

 The health service in Britain today faces great substantial problems. Many these problems arise from the distinctional health service which exists in education also between private health care and public health care. For about a century now in Britain we’ve had a national health service or sending which id the same sort of thing. Um…really after the Second World War actually and this means that people can receive almost everything they need from the health service, we are paying for it.

However, people may if they wish pay for private health care which means that they will get…um…perhaps a room of their own…and…they may not have to wait so long in a queue for most important and…let’s say…popular operations. And the problem at the moment as far as I can tell you that more and more people are making use of private care and are increasingly disinclined to pay for the public health service which they don’t use.

Um…the nursing profession is facing the great problems today. Nursing profession is one which is by definition a caring profession, it’s stuffed by people who work there not because of the money, and that’s important because they receive very little money but because they really care about people and in particular about people with health problems.

And the nurses in Britain are feeling as far as I can tell you caressingly that the Government is exploiting their care for their patients by giving them less and less money. So, there have been over the last year for the first time of British history strikes and incidents, when they actually refused to work. Not in such a way as people’s lives are in danger but some things to make it very clear in action that they are determined to change for cure in a nursing sector.

The system of health caring in England is very straight forward, for each number of…each section of the population there is one general practitioner and normally general practitioners work together in the practice of two and three. And if I have any medical problems at all whether it’s physical health or mental health I go to my general practitioner. And in many cases out of turn he can take care of the problem himself and often he will have his own supply of medicine which he can give to me at the surgery.

However, there are obviously times when he hasn’t the skill, the experience to deal with my problem. And he will recommend me to a specific specialized doctor…the doctor that would be a …will be specialized skill…So, if a doctor can’t cope with it himself he will refer me to a consultant. Consultant…he may be a dermatologist or a surgeon or an ENT-consultant (ear-nose-and-throat consultant). Often the consultants work in hospitals, so from a doctor I may have to go to hospital. And just repeat, even if I have a mental problem normally the procedure is that I go to my general practitioner and he will refer to a mental health consultant.

So, the idea is that you always get your general practitioner and he is someday familiar to you and to your family. And normally all the members of one family will go to one general practitioner, to their own GP.

At this point and time most people in England don’t have medical insurance and so that we don’t have to worry about… we don’t have to worry about being run over on the road as people in America have to do because in England you receive Emergency health care free of charge. You’ll be sent to a state hospital whereas what happens in America is that you must be insured. And even if you have an accident and you are run over you still have to pay for that. So you would have been more careful when you are crossing the road.

UNIT 5. Academic style

Phrases Used at Classes

1. for this reason, emphasis should be given to...

2. In other words...

3. In addition...

4. In the case of English...

5. If we are to examine...

6. Our primary concern will be...

7. It is well to remember...

8. The lecture is primarily concerned with...

9. I'd like to remind you first of all, listeners, about...

10. And we must leave because our time is up...

11. In our next talk we shall have...

12. Is that quite clear, listeners?

13. I expect some of the listeners are asking themselves what happens...

14. Last time, you may remember, listeners, we spoke about...

15. There's quite a lot more to say about, the... but we shall leave it until next time

16. And now our time is up… In our next talk we shall show you some of the ways which... Good-bye until then...

17. There are three points I'd like to make...

18. I propose to divide this course of lecturers into three main sectors

19.1 could just point out, right at the beginning...

20. Now, by way of introduction. I'd like to try and give some indication of how...

21. Now, is my next lecture I hope to demonstrate in detail... as we might call it...

22. Well, the first consequence, I suppose, is that the importance of...

23. But in addition to this...

24. But there's another thing to notice here too

25. My idea is this.

26. So we must add that to our rule as well

27. Are you with me?

28. Am I too fast?

29. As it’s clear from the handouts…

30. Suppose I just say a few sentences.

Lesson 1

Miss Tooley: How do you think we ought to start?

J. D. O'Connor: My idea is this. Suppose we just say a few ordinary sentences. After that we'll go back again and notice how we've said them, and what sort of tunes we've used, and then we'll try to make some clear and general rule about them.

T. Yes, that's a good idea. Now the first thing I said was this: «How do you think we ought to start?» I wonder if the listeners can hear the tune? «How do you think we ought to start?»

O'C. You see, listeners, that sentence starts on a fairly high note and it continues on that same note until it reaches the word «ought». Just listen.

T. How - How do you think we - How do you think we ought to start?

O'C. Like that, you see. The word «ought» is said on a slightly lower note and the sentence continues on that lower note until it gets to the very last syllable.

T. How do you think we ought to start?

O'C. Again you see, the word «start» is on a slightly lower note and not only that, it falls as you say it: «start – start».

T Yes, it does. It falls right down to the bottom of my voice, listen: «How do you think we ought to start?»

O'C. So the sentence is really in three parts corresponding to the number of stressed syllables: «how», followed by four weak syllables; then «ought» followed by one weak syllable and lastly, «start», followed by nothing at all.

T. «How do you think we - ought to - start?»

O'C. We can make a good rule out of that; in sentences like this, the first stressed syllable and any weak or unstressed syllables following it, are said on a fairy high note; the second stressed syllable and any more weak syllable after that, are said with a slightly lower note, and the same with the third and the fourth, and so on, until you come to the last stressed syllable of all which not only begins on a lower note than in the previous one but also falls right down until it can scarcely be head at all. Well, now we must go back to the beginning and see if our rule works for some of our other sentences.

T. You said, I remember; «My idea is this». My idea is this. That's exactly the thing, isn't it?

O'C. Yes. «My» is on a high note followed by a weak syllable, «idea» is on a slightly lower note, also followed by a weak syllable and «this» is the lowest still and falls right down. My idea is this. My idea is this.

T. Then after that you used a rather longer sentience. You said: «suppose we just say a few ordinary sentences.

O'C. Suppose we just say a few ordinary sentences. Well, this one too although it's longer than the others still follows our rule exactly. It starts quiet high on the

second syllable of the word «suppose» and falls in steps until it gets to the last stressed syllable «sen» in the word «sentences» which falls right down to the bottom: «Suppose we just say a few ordinary sentences».

T. But in this sentence there was a weak syllable right at the beginning, the first syllable of the word «suppose»; and I noticed you've said it on a rather lower note than the rest of the word; like this: «suppose», «suppose...»

O'C. That's right, and we can add that to our rule. Any weak syllables before the first stressed syllable are said on a fairy low note. Suppose... Suppose... Suppose we just say a few ordinary sentences.

T Good. But there's another thing to notice here too. Right at the end, after the last stressed syllable, there were two more weak syllables, the two syllables at the end of the word «sentences» «tences».... What happens to these, after the previous syllable has fallen so low?

O'C. Well, just listen: «a few ordinary sentences», «a few ordinary sentences?”

T. Do you hear that, listeners? Those last two weak syllables are said on a very low note Indeed. Very low. As low as possible in fact.

O'C. So we must add that to our rule as well. All weak syllables after the last stressed syllable are said on a very low note, as low as possible.

T I think our rule is complete now, isn't it?

O'C. Yes, I think it is. But we must tell the listeners now what kinds of sentences are said in this way - with this tune.

T Oh, yes, that's most important. Well, firstly, any normal, straight-forward statement, like «My idea is this», or «Suppose we just say a few ordinary sentences».

O'C. Normal statements, yes, that's one class. Then we have questions like: «How do you think we ought to start?»

T But you don't mean ail kinds of questions, do you?

O'C. No. Only those questions which start with an interrogative word like: «How» or «What» or» «Why» or «When» or any of the others. You see, there's another kind of question, which we shall deal with later, in which this tune is not used. So be sure to remember: Questions which begin with an interrogative word».

T. That's two kinds of sentence said with this tune. Next we have commands, orders, like «Shut the door! Come and see me tomorrow».

O'C. Yes, commands. That's three categories. And the fourth and last category is interjections, exclamations; things like this «Good Heavens! What a splendid sight!»

T. I'll just repeat these categories for you, listeners. First, ordinary, normal statements; second, questions beginning with an interrogative word: “what” «why», «how», «when» and so on; third, commands and orders; and fourth and last interjections or exclamations.

O'C. All these types of sentences are said with the tune we have been discussing. High on the first stressed syllable and falling in steps to the last stressed syllable, which dives deep down. We'll call it the «glide down” because that's what it does - it glides gradually down.

T. The «glide down». Right, but our time is up now. In our next talk we'll have we’ll havemore to say about the tunes in English. So, good-bye until then.

Lesson 3

J. D. O'Connor: I'd like to remind you first of all, listeners, about the tune we discussed last time, the High jump. It is used in statements, commands and exclamations, and in questions beginning with an interrogative word like «Who» or “What» or «When» and so on; but it's only used when one particular word of any of these sentences is specially emphasised - specially picked out as the most important word in the sentence - for reasons of contrast or contradiction, or a desire to make this word clearly understood.

Miss Tooley: Now we said last time that the emphasised word has its stressed syllable beginning on a very high note, and falling quickly right down to the bottom of the voice. And all the syllables after this jump down are said on this very low note.

O'C. Well, now, today we're going to take an ordinary sentence and show you how any word in it may be emphasised, and how the tune changes and how the change in the also changes the meaning. The sentence we've chosen is this:

T I saw my friend yesterday. I saw my friend yesterday:

O'C. Said, in that case, in the ordinary way with a glide down. But now listen to the same sentence with the first word «I», emphasised.

T I saw my friend yesterday. I saw my friend yesterday.

O'C. As I said, the word «I» starts on a high note and falls, quickly.

T. I.I.

O'C. And everything after that word, in this case all the rest of the sentence, is on a very low note.

T. I saw my friend yesterday I saw my friend yesterday.

O'C. And this tune, with a high jump on “I” means: it was I and no one else who saw my friend. But it is not necessary to say all those words because the tune gives exactly that meaning to the one word, «I». For instance, if someone asked you this question: Who saw your friend yesterday? You might reply:

T. I saw my friend yesterday.

O'C. And now the same sentence with the second word, «saw», emphasised.

T I saw my friend yesterday I saw my friend yesterday.

O'C. This time the high jump is on «saw» and once again everything following that word is on a low note.I saw my friend yesterday.

O'C. The word «I» before the high jump, is on a rather low note, in order to make the emphasised word stand out all the more.

T. I saw my friend yesterday

O'C. And this time the meaning is this: I saw my friend -1 didn't speak to him on the telephone or have a letter from him - I actually saw him: but again the high jump saves you the trouble of a long explanation.

T Mightn't it be a good idea to lot the listeners hear the sentence once again in the normal way, with a glide down, so that they can hear the difference between that and the high jump?

O'C. Yes, it certainly would. Listen carefully.

T I saw my friend yesterday. I saw my friend yesterday.

O'C. And now with a high jump on the word «my», meaning that it was my friend, not yours or his or hers, but my friend that I saw.

T I saw my friend yesterday. I saw my friend yesterday

O'C. Once again «I» and «saw» are on a rather low note and so, of course, are all the words after the high jump too.

T I saw my friend yesterday

O'C. And now with the emphasis on the word «friend». This means that it wasn't any enemy or some strange person I saw, but my friend.

T I saw my friend yesterday, I saw my friend yesterday

O'C. Now that you have three words before the high jump, and they can be treated in two ways. Firstly, they may all be said on a low note, as before.

T. I saw my friend.......... I saw my friend...

O'C. In this case nothing in the sentence is prominent but «friend». Everything else is relatively unimportant, and therefore on a low note. But you may begin the sentence like a glide down, giving a stress, and therefore a fairly high note, to the word «saw». Like this:

T I saw my friend yesterday I saw my friend yesterday

O'C. In which case «friend» is still very prominent, but «saw» also receives a little more sentence than in the first case. Now lot's go on to the last word «yesterday».

T I saw my friend yesterday I saw my friend yesterday

O'C. Not today, you see, and not a week ago, but yesterday. And the preceding words may be said either like a glide down.

T. I saw my friend yesterday

O'C. Or on a low note, to give extra prominence to «yesterday».

T I saw my friend yesterday. I saw my friend yesterday.

O'C. So you see, one sentence maybe treated in a number of ways, and any word may be said with the high jump, according to the exact meaning which you wish to convey

T It is also possible, listeners, to have a sentence containing two high jump, if there are two words which are especially important and must be emphasised.

O'C. Yes, that's quite true. Suppose that someone says to you: «Did you speak to your friend on the telephone today?» You might reply: T. No, but I saw him yesterday. No, but I saw him yesterday.

O'C. In which «saw» has a high jump, because you didn't write to him or telephone him, you sow him, and «yesterday» has a high jump also, because you want to make it clear that this happened yesterday and not today. All the other words in the sentence are in low note, to make the two specially important words very prominent.

T. No, but I saw him yesterday. O'C. And there we must leave the high jump, because our time is up. In our next talk we shall have a new tune for you to learn about. So good-bye until then.

T. Good-bye.