語言英語演講稿模板（6篇范文）

發(fā)布時間：2024-05-01 07:00:05 查看人數(shù)：70

語言英語演講稿模板

語言英語演講稿模板1

閱讀小貼士：模板1共計(jì)3077個字，預(yù)計(jì)閱讀時長8分鐘。朗讀需要16分鐘，中速朗讀21分鐘，在莊重嚴(yán)肅場合朗讀需要28分鐘，有198位用戶喜歡。

the english language 英語語言

mr. chairman, adjudicators, ladies and gentlemen,

good afternoon.

the arrival of the year 1999 has brought with a near perfect opportunity to take a look back at the last one thousand years, assess man’s successes and failures, and look forward with our predictions of the third millennium.

already this afternoon you’ve heard many assessments and you’ve heard a variety of predictions. a variety so vast, ranging from lewis carol’s depiction of celebratory life, to the irish celebration of death. so vast a variety that it’s difficult to find any common ground amongst the contestants here today. perhaps the only thing that we all share is that we are indeed discussing millennia, the old and the new and the turn of the millennium, and we’re all discussing it in the same language.

a few hundred years ago to have held an event like this it would have been imperative that we were all fluent in a number of different tongues, for the approach of combating the language barrier was simply to learn many different languages. of course people back then had an ulterior motive: that was to ensure that different languages held their different societies or positions, or as king charles v of spain put it, " i speak spanish to god, italian to women, french to men and german to my horse."

today our approach is somewhat different. instead of trying to vastly spread our verbal ability across the board, we’ve chosen rather to focus it, concentrating on our ability to master one particular language, the english language. time magazine recently suggested that by the turn of the millennium, english will be the lingua franca for one quarter of the world’s population. already today si_ty percents of the world’s television and radio broadcasts are produced and delivered in english. seventy percents of the world’s mail addressed in english. and it is the language of choice for almost every bite of computer data sent across the globe.

but why english? there are no clear linguistic reasons for its suggested global dominance, certainly the grammar is complicated, the spelling peculiar and the pronunciation eccentric, to say the very least. one would need only look through the dictionary to find the vast list of amusing parado_es in the english language—quicksand that works slowly, a bo_ing ring that is in fact square and a guinea pig that’s really neither from guinea nor is it a pig. doesn’t it seem odd that one can make amends but not one amend. or go through the annals of history but not one annal. the reason, ladies and gentlemen, is simple. english is strange, but no where near as strange as some of our alternatives.

perhaps i should give you a few idiomatic e_amples. in english we say "once in a blue moon". the italian choose instead "every death of a pope". irish doesn’t like our "drop dead", replacing it rather with the slightly more obscure "you should lie in the earth." and if you wanted to tell someone off in spanish our relatively obvious "go fly a kite" would be better served by the phrase "go fry asparagus". english’s primary advantage is that of fle_ibility. on the one hand it has the largest vocabulary of all modern languages, allowing us, as its users, to say e_actly what we want in e_actly the words we choose to use. on the other, globalization has insured the introduction of a business english, a sort of trimmed down variety of the language we’ve all come to know and love.

it’s interesting to know that the simple list of just ten words, words like "a", "and", "have" and "the", combined to form one quarter of all those ever used in modern communication. perhaps the real test is: will the global adoption of english as a master language insure the eradication of any misunderstandings that happen today? the answer is not as simple. russell hoven once asked: "how many people speak the same language even when they speak the same language?" but one can only hope that our only aim and our only chance of insuring that we communicate effectively with each other is to make sure that we do speak one universal language. in a thousand years time western clocks will hopefully have ticked onto the year 2999 and we can be assured that scientists, academics and futurists will convene, much like we’ve done today to look back at the third millenium and offer their predictions for the successes of the forth.

it’s impossible to imagine what they might say, impossible to imagine what technology they’ll have available or even which planet they’ll hold the meeting on. in fact, quite possibly the only thing we can say for sure is that they’ll be discussing the issues in one common universal language. and that will be the language of the third millennium. and that language without any doubt looks set to be english. thank you.

全世界的通用語言--英語

主席先生，諸位評判員，女士們，先生們：

下午好。

1999年的到來給我們帶來了一個回顧過去千年的好機(jī)會，評價人類的成與敗，展望第三個千年的前景。

今天下午大家已經(jīng)聽到了許多評價和不同的展望。這些評價和展望是如此之多，從劉易斯-卡羅對幸福生活的描繪，到愛爾蘭人的死亡慶典。這些評價和展望是如此之多，以致今天的比賽上很難發(fā)現(xiàn)任何相同之說。也許唯一的相同點(diǎn)就是我們的確在討論千年期，新千年，舊千年以及新舊之交，而且我們都在用同一種語言對論。

幾百年前，舉辦一次像這樣的活動是十分麻煩的，我們得流利地說許多種不同的語言，因?yàn)榭朔Z言障礙就是學(xué)習(xí)多種不同的語言。當(dāng)然，那時候的人們有一個心照不宣的觀念：不同的語言顯示著社會地位，就如西班牙國王查爾斯五世說的："我對上帝說西班牙語，對女人說意大利語，對男人說法語，對馬兒說德語。"

今天我們的目的有些不一樣。我們不用將學(xué)習(xí)精力分散于多種語言的學(xué)習(xí)上，而是集中在一種特別的語言——英語的掌握上?！稌r代》雜志最近說，在世紀(jì)之交，英語將會成為世界四分之一人口的通用語言。今天已經(jīng)有60%的電視和廣播在用英語制作和傳輸。70%的信件是用英語寫的。英語還是全球傳送的電腦資料的幾乎每個字節(jié)所選擇的語言。

但為什么是英語？對于它的全球化沒有明確的語言學(xué)的原因。誠然它的語法是復(fù)雜的，拼寫是獨(dú)特的，發(fā)音是古怪的。就拿最基本的說，只要查一，你就能發(fā)現(xiàn)一大串逗人的似非而是的雋語——quicksand反而慢騰騰，bo_ing ring 原來是方的，guinea pig不是來自幾內(nèi)亞，也不是豬。一個人可以說 "make amends"，但卻不能說 "one amend"，這不是很奇怪嗎？你可以翻閱一本史冊，但卻不能把"一本史冊"說成 "one annal"。其中的原因，女士們，先生們，是很簡單的，英語夠奇怪的了，但是對于另外一些說法就更奇怪了。

也許我該給大家舉出幾個成語例子。"千載難逢"用英語我們說"once in a blue moon" 。在意大利語中則成了"every death of a pope"。愛爾蘭人不喜歡把"死亡"說成 "drop dead"，而用 "you should lie in the earth"表達(dá)得更委婉。如果你想用西班牙語指責(zé)某人"放空頭支票"，那么最好是用 "go fry asparagus" ，而不是相對較直白地說 "go fly a kite"。英語最基本的優(yōu)勢在于它的靈活性。一方面，它有著所有現(xiàn)代語言中最豐富的詞匯表，允許我們這些使用者能用最恰當(dāng)?shù)脑~匯恰如其分地表達(dá)出我們的所想。另一方面，全球化使得商業(yè)英語的介入成為必然，一種我們都將能懂得和喜愛的簡化語言。

有意思的是，簡單的十個詞，如 "a", "and", "have" 和"the"，組合起來就是能形成現(xiàn)代交際中所用的詞匯的四分之一。也許真正的問題是，作為一種主要語言的英語的全球化真能消除今天的種種誤解嗎？答案并不是那么簡單。拉塞爾·霍文曾問道："即使是在說同一種語言，有多少人說的是相同的語言呢？"但有一點(diǎn)可以確定的是，確定我們相互之間能有效地溝通的唯一的目的和機(jī)會，就是我們在說同一種世界語。在一千年內(nèi)，西方的時鐘將滴答著走向2999年，我們也將肯定，科學(xué)家、學(xué)者和未來主義者將集合起來，就像我們今天所做的，回顧第三個一千年，并展望第四個一千年的輝煌成就。

他們將說些什么，將掌握什么樣的科技，將在哪個星球上開會，是無法想象的。實(shí)際上，我們唯一敢肯定的事情是，他們將用一種共通的世界語討論事務(wù)，這就是第三個一千年的語言。毫無疑問，這種語言即是英語。謝謝大家。

語言英語演講稿模板2

閱讀小貼士：模板2共計(jì)1628個字，預(yù)計(jì)閱讀時長5分鐘。朗讀需要9分鐘，中速朗讀11分鐘，在莊重嚴(yán)肅場合朗讀需要15分鐘，有256位用戶喜歡。

but why english? there are no clear linguistic reasons for its suggested global dominance, certainly the grammar is complicated, the spelling peculiar and the pronunciation eccentric, to say the very least. one would need only look through the dictionary to find the vast list of amusing parado_es in the english language?quicksand that works slowly, a bo_ing ring that is in fact square and a guinea pig that’s really neither from guinea nor is it a pig. doesn’t it seem odd that one can make amends but not one amend. or go through the annals of history but not one annal. the reason, ladies and gentlemen, is simple. english is strange, but no where near as strange as some of our alternatives.

語言英語演講稿模板3

閱讀小貼士：模板3共計(jì)7179個字，預(yù)計(jì)閱讀時長18分鐘。朗讀需要36分鐘，中速朗讀48分鐘，在莊重嚴(yán)肅場合朗讀需要66分鐘，有258位用戶喜歡。

英語演講稿：用肢體語言來塑造自己

so i want to start by offering you a free no-tech life hack, and all it requires of you is this: that you change your posture for two minutes. but before i give it away, i want to ask you to right now do a little audit of your body and what you"re doing with your body. so how many of you are sort of making yourselves smaller? maybe you"re hunching, crossing your legs, maybe wrapping your ankles. sometimes we hold onto our arms like this. sometimes we spread out. (laughter) i see you. (laughter) so i want you to pay attention to what you"re doing right now. we"re going to come back to that in a few minutes, and i"m hoping that if you learn to tweak this a little bit, it could significantly change the way your life unfolds.

so, we"re really fascinated with body language, and we"re particularly interested in other people"s body language. you know, we"re interested in, like, you know — (laughter) — an awkward interaction, or a smile, or a contemptuous glance, or maybe a very awkward wink, or maybe even something like a handshake.

narrator: here they are arriving at number 10, and look at this lucky policeman gets to shake hands with the president of the united states. oh, and here comes the prime minister of the — ? no. (laughter) (applause) (laughter) (applause)

amy cuddy: so a handshake, or the lack of a handshake, can have us talking for weeks and weeks and weeks. even the bbc and the new york times. so obviously when we think about nonverbal behavior, or body language -- but we call it nonverbals as social scientists -- it"s language, so we think about communication. when we think about communication, we think about interactions. so what is your body language communicating to me? what"s mine communicating to you?

and there"s a lot of reason to believe that this is a valid way to look at this. so social scientists have spent a lot of time looking at the effects of our body language, or other people"s body language, on judgments. and we make sweeping judgments and inferences from body language. and those judgments can predict really meaningful life outcomes like who we hire or promote, who we ask out on a date. for e_ample, nalini ambady, a researcher at tufts university, shows that when people watch 30-second soundless clips of real physician-patient interactions, their judgments of the physician"s niceness predict whether or not that physician will be sued. so it doesn"t have to do so much with whether or not that physician was incompetent, but do we like that person and how they interacted? even more dramatic, ale_ todorov at princeton has shown us that judgments of political candidates" faces in just one second predict 70 percent of u.s. senate and gubernatorial race outcomes, and even, let"s go digital, emoticons used well in online negotiations can lead to you claim more value from that negotiation. if you use them poorly, bad idea. right? so when we think of nonverbals, we think of how we judge others, how they judge us and what the outcomes are. we tend to forget, though, the other audience that"s influenced by our nonverbals, and that"s ourselves.

we are also influenced by our nonverbals, our thoughts and our feelings and our physiology. so what nonverbals am i talking about? i"m a social psychologist. i study prejudice, and i teach at a competitive business school, so it was inevitable that i would become interested in power dynamics. i became especially interested in nonverbal e_pressions of power and dominance.

and what are nonverbal e_pressions of power and dominance? well, this is what they are. so in the animal kingdom, they are about e_panding. so you make yourself big, you stretch out, you take up space, you"re basically opening up. it"s about opening up. and this is true across the animal kingdom. it"s not just limited to primates. and humans do the same thing. (laughter) so they do this both when they have power sort of chronically, and also when they"re feeling powerful in the moment. and this one is especially interesting because it really shows us how universal and old these e_pressions of power are. this e_pression, which is known as pride, jessica tracy has studied. she shows that people who are born with sight and people who are congenitally blind do this when they win at a physical competition. so when they cross the finish line and they"ve won, it doesn"t matter if they"ve never seen anyone do it. they do this. so the arms up in the v, the chin is slightly lifted. what do we do when we feel powerless? we do e_actly the opposite. we close up. we wrap ourselves up. we make ourselves small. we don"t want to bump into the person ne_t to us. so again, both animals and humans do the same thing. and this is what happens when you put together high and low power. so what we tend to do when it comes to power is that we complement the other"s nonverbals. so if someone is being really powerful with us, we tend to make ourselves smaller. we don"t mirror them. we do the opposite of them.

so i"m watching this behavior in the classroom, and what do i notice? i notice that mba students really e_hibit the full range of power nonverbals. so you have people who are like caricatures of alphas, really coming into the room, they get right into the middle of the room before class even starts, like they really want to occupy space. when they sit down, they"re sort of spread out. they raise their hands like this. you have other people who are virtually collapsing when they come in. as soon they come in, you see it. you see it on their faces and their bodies, and they sit in their chair and they make themselves tiny, and they go like this when they raise their hand. i notice a couple of things about this. one, you"re not going to be surprised. it seems to be related to gender. so women are much more likely to do this kind of thing than men. women feel chronically less powerful than men, so this is not surprising. but the other thing i noticed is that it also seemed to be related to the e_tent to which the students were participating, and how well they were participating. and this is really important in the mba classroom, because participation counts for half the grade.

so business schools have been struggling with this gender grade gap. you get these equally qualified women and men coming in and then you get these differences in grades, and it seems to be partly attributable to participation. so i started to wonder, you know, okay, so you have these people coming in like this, and they"re participating. is it possible that we could get people to fake it and would it lead them to participate more?

so my main collaborator dana carney, who"s at berkeley, and i really wanted to know, can you fake it till you make it? like, can you do this just for a little while and actually e_perience a behavioral outcome that makes you seem more powerful? so we know that our nonverbals govern how other people think and feel about us. there"s a lot of evidence. but our question really was, do our nonverbals govern how we think and feel about ourselves?

there"s some evidence that they do. so, for e_ample, we smile when we feel happy, but also, when we"re forced to smile by holding a pen in our teeth like this, it makes us feel happy. so it goes both ways. when it comes to power, it also goes both ways. so when you feel powerful, you"re more likely to do this, but it"s also possible that when you pretend to be powerful, you are more likely to actually feel powerful.

so the second question really was, you know, so we know that our minds change our bodies, but is it also true that our bodies change our minds? and when i say minds, in the case of the powerful, what am i talking about? so i"m talking about thoughts and feelings and the sort of physiological things that make up our thoughts and feelings, and in my case, that"s hormones. i look at hormones. so what do the minds of the powerful versus the powerless look like? so powerful people tend to be, not surprisingly, more assertive and more confident, more optimistic. they actually feel that they"re going to win even at games of chance. they also tend to be able to think more abstractly. so there are a lot of differences. they take more risks. there are a lot of differences between powerful and powerless people. physiologically, there also are differences on two key hormones: testosterone, which is the dominance hormone, and cortisol, which is the stress hormone. so what we find is that high-power alpha males in primate hierarchies have high testosterone and low cortisol, and powerful and effective leaders also have high testosterone and low cortisol. so what does that mean? when you think about power, people tended to think only about testosterone, because that was about dominance. but really, power is also about how you react to stress. so do you want the high-power leader that"s dominant, high on testosterone, but really stress reactive? probably not, right? you want the person who"s powerful and assertive and dominant, but not very stress reactive, the person who"s laid back.

so we know that in primate hierarchies, if an alpha needs to take over, if an individual needs to take over an alpha role sort of suddenly, within a few days, that individual"s testosterone has gone up significantly and his cortisol has dropped significantly. so we have this evidence, both that the body can shape the mind, at least at the facial level, and also that role changes can shape the mind. so what happens, okay, you take a role change, what happens if you do that at a really minimal level, like this tiny manipulation, this tiny intervention? "for two minutes," you say, "i want you to stand like this, and it"s going to make you feel more powerful."

so this is what we did. we decided to bring people into the lab and run a little e_periment, and these people adopted, for two minutes, either high-power poses or low-power poses, and i"m just going to show you five of the poses, although they took on only two. so here"s one. a couple more. this one has been dubbed the "wonder woman" by the media. here are a couple more. so you can be standing or you can be sitting. and here are the low-power poses. so you"re folding up, you"re making yourself small. this one is very low-power. when you"re touching your neck, you"re really protecting yourself. so this is what happens. they come in, they spit into a vial, we for two minutes say, "you need to do this or this." they don"t look at pictures of the poses. we don"t want to prime them with a concept of power. we want them to be feeling power, right? so two minutes they do this. we then ask them, "how powerful do you feel?" on a series of items, and then we give them an opportunity to gamble, and then we take another saliva sample. that"s it. that"s the whole e_periment.

so this is what we find. risk tolerance, which is the gambling, what we find is that when you"re in the high-power pose condition, 86 percent of you will gamble. when you"re in the low-power pose condition, only 60 percent, and that"s a pretty whopping significant difference. here"s what we find on testosterone. from their baseline when they come in, high-power people e_perience about a 20-percent increase, and low-power people e_perience about a 10-percent decrease. so again, two minutes, and you get these changes. here"s what you get on cortisol. high-power people e_perience about a 25-percent decrease, and the low-power people e_perience about a 15-percent increase. so two minutes lead to these hormonal changes that configure your brain to basically be either assertive, confident and comfortable, or really stress-reactive, and, you know, feeling sort of shut down. and we"ve all had the feeling, right? so it seems that our nonverbals do govern how we think and feel about ourselves, so it"s not just others, but it"s also ourselves. also, our bodies change our minds.

but the ne_t question, of course, is can power posing for a few minutes really change your life in meaningful ways? so this is in the lab. it"s this little task, you know, it"s just a couple of minutes. where can you actually apply this? which we cared about, of course. and so we think it"s really, what matters, i mean, where you want to use this is evaluative situations like social threat situations. where are you being evaluated, either by your friends? like for teenagers it"s at the lunchroom table. it could be, you know, for some people it"s speaking at a school board meeting. it might be giving a pitch or giving a talk like this or doing a job interview. we decided that the one that most people could relate to because most people had been through was the job interview.

so we published these findings, and the media are all over it, and they say, okay, so this is what you do when you go in for the job interview, right? (laughter) you know, so we were of course horrified, and said, oh my god, no, no, no, that"s not what we meant at all. for numerous reasons, no, no, no, don"t do that. again, this is not about you talking to other people. it"s you talking to yourself. what do you do before you go into a job interview? you do this. right? you"re sitting down. you"re looking at your iphone -- or your android, not trying to leave anyone out. you are, you know, you"re looking at your notes, you"re hunching up, making yourself small, when really what you should be doing maybe is this, like, in the bathroom, right? do that. find two minutes. so that"s what we want to test. okay? so we bring people into a lab, and they do either high- or low-power poses again, they go through a very stressful job interview. it"s five minutes long. they are being recorded. they"re being judged also, and the judges are trained to give no nonverbal feedback, so they look like this. like, imagine this is the person interviewing you. so for five minutes, nothing, and this is worse than being heckled. people hate this. it"s what marianne lafrance calls "standing in social quicksand." so this really spikes your cortisol. so this is the job interview we put them through, because we really wanted to see what happened. we then have these coders look at these tapes, four of them. they"re blind to the hypothesis. they"re blind to the conditions. they have no idea who"s been posing in what pose, and they end up looking at these sets of tapes, and they say, "oh, we want to hire these people," -- all the high-power posers -- "we don"t want to hire these people. we also evaluate these people much more positively overall." but what"s driving it? it"s not about the content of the speech. it"s about the presence that they"re bringing to the speech. we also, because we rate them on all these variables related to competence, like, how well-structured is the speech? how good is it? what are their qualifications? no effect on those things. this is what"s affected. these kinds of things. people are bringing their true selves, basically. they"re bringing themselves. they bring their ideas, but as themselves, with no, you know, residue over them. so this is what"s driving the effect, or mediating the effect.

so when i tell people about this, that our bodies change our minds and our minds can change our behavior, and our behavior can change our outcomes, they say to me, "i don"t -- it feels fake." right? so i said, fake it till you make it. i don"t -- it"s not me. i don"t want to get there and then still feel like a fraud. i don"t want to feel like an impostor. i don"t want to get there only to feel like i"m not supposed to be here. and that really resonated with me, because i want to tell you a little story about being an impostor and feeling like i"m not supposed to be here.

when i was 19, i was in a really bad car accident. i was thrown out of a car, rolled several times. i was thrown from the car. and i woke up in a head injury rehab ward, and i had been withdrawn from college, and i learned that my i.q. had dropped by two standard deviations, which was very traumatic. i knew my i.q. because i had identified with being smart, and i had been called gifted as a child. so i"m taken out of college, i keep trying to go back. they say, "you"re not going to finish college. just, you know, there are other things for you to do, but that"s not going to work out for you." so i really struggled with this, and i have to say, having your identity taken from you, your core identity, and for me it was being smart, having that taken from you, there"s nothing that leaves you feeling more powerless than that. so i felt entirely powerless. i worked and worked and worked, and i got lucky, and worked, and got lucky, and worked.

eventually i graduated from college. it took me four years longer than my peers, and i convinced someone, my angel advisor, susan fiske, to take me on, and so i ended up at princeton, and i was like, i am not supposed to be here. i am an impostor. and the night before my first-year talk, and the first-year talk at princeton is a 20-minute talk to 20 people. that"s it. i was so afraid of being found out the ne_t day that i called her and said, "i"m quitting." she was like, "you are not quitting, because i took a gamble on you, and you"re staying. you"re going to stay, and this is what you"re going to do. you are going to fake it. you"re going to do every talk that you ever get asked to do. you"re just going to do it and do it and do it, even if you"re terrified and just paralyzed and having an out-of-body e_perience, until you have this moment where you say, "oh my gosh, i"m doing it. like, i have become this. i am actually doing this."" so that"s what i did. five years in grad school, a few years, you know, i"m at northwestern, i moved to harvard, i"m at harvard, i"m not really thinking about it anymore, but for a long time i had been thinking, "not supposed to be here. not supposed to be here."

so at the end of my first year at harvard, a student who had not talked in class the entire semester, who i had said, "look, you"ve gotta participate or else you"re going to fail," came into my office. i really didn"t know her at all. and she said, she came in totally defeated, and she said, "i"m not supposed to be here." and that was the moment for me. because two things happened. one was that i realized, oh my gosh, i don"t feel like that anymore. you know. i don"t feel that anymore, but she does, and i get that feeling. and the second was, she is supposed to be here! like, she can fake it, she can become it. so i was like, "yes, you are! you are supposed to be here! and tomorrow you"re going to fake it, you"re going to make yourself powerful, and, you know, you"re gonna — " (applause) (applause) "and you"re going to go into the classroom, and you are going to give the best comment ever." you know? and she gave the best comment ever, and people turned around and they were like, oh my god, i didn"t even notice her sitting there, you know? (laughter)

she comes back to me months later, and i realized that she had not just faked it till she made it, she had actually faked it till she became it. so she had changed. and so i want to say to you, don"t fake it till you make it. fake it till you become it. you know? it"s not — do it enough until you actually become it and internalize.

the last thing i"m going to leave you with is this. tiny tweaks can lead to big changes. so this is two minutes. two minutes, two minutes, two minutes. before you go into the ne_t stressful evaluative situation, for two minutes, try doing this, in the elevator, in a bathroom stall, at your desk behind closed doors. that"s what you want to do. configure your brain to cope the best in that situation. get your testosterone up. get your cortisol down. don"t leave that situation feeling like, oh, i didn"t show them who i am. leave that situation feeling like, oh, i really feel like i got to say who i am and show who i am.

so i want to ask you first, you know, both to try power posing, and also i want to ask you to share the science, because this is simple. i don"t have ego involved in this. (laughter) give it away. share it with people, because the people who can use it the most are the ones with no resources and no technology and no status and no power. give it to them because they can do it in private. they need their bodies, privacy and two minutes, and it can significantly change the outcomes of their life. thank you. (applause) (applause

語言英語演講稿模板4

閱讀小貼士：模板4共計(jì)8931個字，預(yù)計(jì)閱讀時長23分鐘。朗讀需要45分鐘，中速朗讀60分鐘，在莊重嚴(yán)肅場合朗讀需要82分鐘，有187位用戶喜歡。

| 中英文演講稿 |

so, i"ll be speaking to you using language... because i can. this is one these magical abilities that we humans have. we can transmit really complicated thoughts to one another. so what i"m doing right now is, i"m making sounds with my mouth as i"m e_haling.

我們通過語言交流，因?yàn)槲铱梢哉f話。這是我們?nèi)祟悡碛械囊环N神奇能力，我們可以互相傳遞非常復(fù)雜的思想。我現(xiàn)在正在做的是，一邊呼氣，一邊用我的嘴巴發(fā)出聲音。

i"m making tones and hisses and puffs, and those are creating air vibrations in the air. those air vibrations are traveling to you, they"re hitting your eardrums, and then your brain takes those vibrations from your eardrums and transforms them into thoughts. i hope.

我在發(fā)出各種語調(diào)、嘶嘶聲、呼氣，而這些引起周邊的空氣振動。這些空氣振動傳到你那里，它們到達(dá)你的耳鼓，然后你的大腦會將你耳鼓接收到的振動轉(zhuǎn)化成思想。至少我希望是這樣的。

i hope that"s happening. so because of this ability, we humans are able to transmit our ideas across vast reaches of space and time. we"re able to transmit knowledge across minds. i can put a bizarre new idea in your mind right now. i could say, "imagine a jellyfish waltzing in a library while thinking about quantum mechanics."

我希望如此。正是因?yàn)檫@種能力，人類能夠?qū)⑽覀兊乃枷肟缭綍r間和空間，傳遞下去我們能夠?qū)⒅R互相傳遞。比如，我現(xiàn)在就可以給你傳遞一個奇怪的想法。我可以說，"想象一只水母在一個圖書館里一邊跳著華爾茲，一邊思考著量子力學(xué)。"

now, if everything has gone relatively well in your life so far, you probably haven"t had that thought before.

當(dāng)然如果大家的生活到目前為止都還比較順利的話，你之前應(yīng)該沒有這樣想過。

but now i"ve just made you think it, through language.

而我現(xiàn)在讓你們有了這個想法，正是通過語言做到的。

now of course, there isn"t just one language in the world, there are about 7,000 languages spoken around the world. and all the languages differ from one another in all kinds of ways. some languages have different sounds, they have different vocabularies, and they also have different structures -- very importantly, different structures.

當(dāng)然，世界上不是只有一種語言，全球有大約7000種語言。這些語言有著各式各樣的區(qū)別。有些語言有不同的發(fā)音，不同的詞匯，還有不同的結(jié)構(gòu)——不同的結(jié)構(gòu)很重要。

that begs the question: does the language we speak shape the way we think? now, this is an ancient question. people have been speculating about this question forever. charlemagne, holy roman emperor, said, "to have a second language is to have a second soul" -- strong statement that language crafts reality. but on the other hand, shakespeare has juliet say, "what"s in a name? a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." well, that suggests that maybe language doesn"t craft reality.

于是，我們會問：我們說的語言是否塑造了我們的思維方式?這其實(shí)是個很古老的問題。人們一直以來都在思考這個問題。神圣羅馬帝國的查理曼大帝曾說，"學(xué)會了第二種語言就擁有了第二個靈魂"——這是相信語言會創(chuàng)造現(xiàn)實(shí)。但另一方面，莎士比亞筆下的朱麗葉又說，"名字本來沒有意義，一朵玫瑰花換個名字也照樣芬芳。"這就指也許語言不能創(chuàng)造現(xiàn)實(shí)。

these arguments have gone back and forth for thousands of years. but until recently, there hasn"t been any data to help us decide either way. recently, in my lab and other labs around the world, we"ve started doing research, and now we have actual scientific data to weigh in on this question.

這些爭論已經(jīng)持續(xù)了幾千年。但一直以來，都沒有任何數(shù)據(jù)能夠幫助我們確定孰是孰非。最近，在我的實(shí)驗(yàn)室和全球其它一些實(shí)驗(yàn)室，我們開始做研究，現(xiàn)在我們有真實(shí)的科學(xué)數(shù)據(jù)，可以幫助回答這個問題。

so let me tell you about some of my favorite e_amples. i"ll start with an e_ample from an aboriginal community in australia that i had the chance to work with. these are the kuuk thaayorre people. they live in pormpuraaw at the very west edge of cape york. what"s coolabout kuuk thaayorre is, in kuuk thaayorre, they don"t use words like"left" and "right," and instead, everything is in cardinal directions: north, south, east and west.

讓我給大家舉一些我喜歡的例子。先從澳大利亞的一個土著社群開始，我有機(jī)會跟他們接觸過。他們是kuukthaayorre人，他們住在約克角城最西邊的pormpuraaw。kuukthaayorre人有意思的一點(diǎn)是，在這個土著文化里面，他們沒有"左"和"右"這樣的詞，所有的東西都是通過基本方向來表達(dá)的：東南西北。

and when i say everything, i really mean everything. you would say something like, "oh, there"s an ant on your southwest leg." or, "move your cup to the north-northeast a little bit." in fact, the way that you say "hello" in kuuk thaayorre is you say, "which way are you going?" and the answer should be,"north-northeast in the far distance. how about you?"

是的，我說的是"所有的東西"。比如，你可以說："哦，你西南方的那條腿上有一只螞蟻"，或者"把你的杯子往東北偏北邊移一下。"事實(shí)上，他們打招呼的方式也是："你往哪里去?"而回答會是："遠(yuǎn)處東北偏北處，你呢?"

so imagine as you"re walking around your day, every person you greet, you have to report your heading direction.

想象一下，你走在路上，你遇見每一個人都要報告一下你朝什么方向前進(jìn)。

but that would actually get you oriented pretty fast, right? because you literally couldn"t get past "hello," if you didn"t know which way you were going. in fact, people who speak languages like this stay oriented really well. they stay oriented better than we used to think humans could.

但這會讓你很快獲得方向感，不是嗎?因?yàn)槿绻悴恢滥闱靶械姆较虻脑挘氵B打招呼都沒法進(jìn)行。事實(shí)上，說這類語言的人他們的方向感非常好，遠(yuǎn)比我們以為人類可以做到的要好。

we used to think that humans were worse than other creatures because of some biological e_cuse: "oh, we don"t have magnets in our beaks or in our scales." no; if your language and your culture trains you to do it, actually, you can do it. there are humans around the world who stay oriented really well.

我們曾經(jīng)以為人類的方向感要比其他生物差，而我們也找了生物原因方面的借口："哦，我們沒有可以感測磁場的鳥嘴或魚鱗"。事實(shí)并非如此。如果你的語言和文化給了你這方面的訓(xùn)練，你是可以做到的。世界上有些人的方向感就非常好。

and just to get us in agreement about how different this is from the way we do it, i want you all to close your eyes fora second and point southeast.

為了確保我們大家都同意在這點(diǎn)上我們的思維方式有多大差異，請大家閉上眼睛，然后指向東南方。

keep your eyes closed. point. ok, so you can open your eyes. i see you guys pointing there, there, there, there, there... i don"t know which way it is myself --you have not been a lot of help.

先不要睜開眼睛，請指向東南方?，F(xiàn)在，你們可以睜開眼睛了。我看到你們有指向那兒、那兒、那兒、那兒的……我自己也不知道哪邊是東南方，你們也沒能幫到我。

so let"s just say the accuracy in this room was not very high. this is a big difference in cognitive ability across languages, right? where one group -- very distinguished group like you guys --doesn"t know which way is which, but in another group, i could ask a five-year-old and they would know.

暫且就說，在座的大家在這個問題上的準(zhǔn)確度不是很高。這就是不同語言之間的認(rèn)知能力的巨大差異，一群像在座的各位一樣非常優(yōu)秀的人分不清哪里是哪里，而如果換做另一群人，一個5歲的孩子也知道答案。

there are also really big differences in how people think about time. so here i have pictures of my grandfather at different ages. and if i ask an english speaker to organize time, they might lay it out this way, from left to right. this has to do with writing direction. if you were a speaker of hebrew or arabic, you might do it going in the opposite direction, from right to left.

人們思考時間的方式也非常不同。這里是幾張我的祖父在不同年齡段的照片。如果我讓一個英語使用者將它們按時間進(jìn)行排列，他們可以會這樣排，從左到右。這跟寫字的方向有關(guān)。如果你說的是希伯來語或阿拉伯語，你則可能會以相反的方向排列，從右到左。

but how would the kuuk thaayorre, this aboriginal group i just told you about, do it? they don"t use words like"left" and "right." let me give you hint. when we sat people facing south, they organized time from left to right. when we sat them facing north, they organized time from right to left. when we sat them facing east, time came towards the body.

那kuukthaayorre人——我剛才提到的土著民會怎么排呢?他們沒有"左"和"右"的概念。我來提示一下大家。當(dāng)我們讓他們面朝南方的時候，他們將時間順序從左向右排;當(dāng)面朝北方的時候，他們將時間順序從右到左排;當(dāng)他們面朝東方的時候，他們將時間從遠(yuǎn)到近排。

what"s the pattern? east to west, right? so for them, time doesn"t actually get locked on the body at all, it gets locked on the landscape. so for me, if i"m facing this way, then time goes this way, and if i"m facing this way, then time goes this way. i"m facing this way, time goes this way -- very egocentric of me to have the direction of time chase me around every time i turn my body. for the kuuk thaayorre, time is locked on the landscape. it"s a dramatically different way of thinking about time.

發(fā)現(xiàn)規(guī)律了么?從東到西，對嗎?因此對他們來說，時間跟身體的方向無關(guān)，而是跟地理有關(guān)。對我來說，如果我面向這邊，時間就是這樣走的;如果我面向這邊，時間就是這樣走的;如果我面向這邊，時間就是這樣走的——完全以我為中心，我每次一轉(zhuǎn)身，時間也要跟著我改變方向。對kuukthaayorre人來說，時間是跟地理有關(guān)的。這是一種思考時間的截然不同的方式。

here"s another really smart human trick. suppose i ask you how many penguins are there. well, i bet i know how you"d solve that problem if you solved it. you went, "one, two, three, four,five, si_, seven, eight." you counted them. you named each one with a number, and the last number you said was the number of penguins. this is a little trick that you"re taught to use as kids. you learn the number list and you learn how to apply it. a little linguistic trick.

再給大家說一個人類的聰明之處。假設(shè)我問你，這里有多少只企鵝，我敢說我知道你會怎么解決這個問題。你會"一二三四五六七八"地數(shù)過去。你讓每一只企鵝對應(yīng)一個數(shù)字，你念出的最后一個數(shù)字就是企鵝的總數(shù)。這是你小時候就學(xué)會了的技巧，你學(xué)會了數(shù)數(shù)，你也學(xué)會了怎么用它。這是一種語言學(xué)的技巧。

well, some languages don"t do this, because some languages don"t have e_act number words. they"re languages that don"t have a word like "seven" or a word like"eight." in fact, people who speak these languages don"t count, and they have trouble keeping track of e_act quantities. so, for e_ample, if i ask you to match this number of penguins to the same number of ducks, you would be able to do that by counting. but folks who don"t have that linguistic trick can"t do that.

但有些語言不是這樣的，因?yàn)橛行┱Z言沒有精確的數(shù)字詞匯。有一些語言是沒有比如"七"或者"八"之類的數(shù)字的。事實(shí)上，對那些使用沒有數(shù)字的語言的人來說，他們不會數(shù)數(shù)，計(jì)算精確的數(shù)量對他們來說是很難的。比如，如果我讓你把這么多的企鵝跟同一數(shù)量的鴨子匹配起來，你數(shù)一下就可以做到了。但對那些沒有這一語言特征的人來說卻無法做到。

languages also differ in how they divide up the color spectrum -- the visual world. some languages have lots of words for colors, some have only a couple words, "light" and "dark." and languages differ in where they put boundaries between colors. so, for e_ample, in english, there"s a word for blue that covers all of the colors that you can see on the screen, but in russian, there isn"t a single word.

語言的差異還體現(xiàn)在我們?nèi)绾畏直骖伾?，那些視覺的東西。有些語言有很多的顏色詞匯，有的則很少，就只有"淺色"和"深色"。這些語言差異體現(xiàn)在不同顏色之間的界限在哪里。比如，在英語里面，我們有藍(lán)色這個詞，它包含了你在屏幕上看到的所有顏色。但是在俄語里面，卻沒有這樣的一個詞。

in stead, russian speakers have to differentiate between light blue, "goluboy,"and dark blue, "siniy." so russians have this lifetime of e_perience of, in language, distinguishing these two colors. when we test people"s ability to perceptually discriminate these colors, what we find is that russian speakers are faster across this linguistic boundary. they"re faster to be able to tell the difference between a light and dark blue.

相反，俄語使用者要把淺藍(lán)色"goluboy"和深藍(lán)色"siniy"區(qū)別開來。所以俄語使用者一生都會在語言上區(qū)別這兩種顏色。當(dāng)我們測試人們辨別這些顏色的能力的時候，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)俄語使用者能夠更快地進(jìn)行這種概念切換，他們能夠更快地分辨淺藍(lán)色和深藍(lán)色。

and when you look at people"s brains as they"re looking at colors -- say you have colors shifting slowly from light to dark blue -- the brains of people who use different words for light and dark blue will give a surprised reaction as the colors shift from light to dark, as if, "ooh, something has categorically changed," whereas the brains of english speakers, for e_ample, that don"t make this categorical distinction, don"t give that surprise, because nothing is categorically changing.

當(dāng)你觀察人們在看這些顏色的大腦時，假設(shè)你給他們看從淺藍(lán)色到深藍(lán)色的漸變，那些用不同詞形容"淺藍(lán)"和"深藍(lán)"的人的大腦會在顏色從淺到深的轉(zhuǎn)換時表現(xiàn)出驚訝，仿佛"哦，某些事情發(fā)生了根本的變化"，而不做這種分辨的英語使用者的大腦則不會表現(xiàn)出驚訝，因?yàn)闆]發(fā)生什么根本的變化。

languages have all kinds of structural quirks. this is one of my favorites. lots of languages have grammatical gender; every noun gets assigned a gender, often masculine or feminine. and these genders differ across languages. so, for e_ample, the sun is feminine in german but masculine in spanish, and the moon, the reverse. could this actually have any consequence for how people think?

語言還有各種各樣的結(jié)構(gòu)特征。這個是我最喜歡的。很多語言都有語法上的詞性，每個名詞都有一個指定的詞性，通常是陽性或陰性。這些詞性在不同語言中有所不同。比如，太陽在德語中是陰性的，在西班牙語中則是陽性的，月亮則相反。那這會不會影響人們的思考方式呢?

do german speakers think of the sun as some how more female-like, and the moon somehow more male-like? actually, it turns out that"s the case. so if you ask german and spanish speakers to, say, describe a bridge, like the one here -- "bridge" happens to be grammatically feminine in german, grammatically masculine in spanish -- german speakers are more likely to say bridges are "beautiful," "elegant"and stereotypically feminine words. whereas spanish speakers will be more likely to say they"re "strong" or "long," these masculine words.

德語使用者會覺得太陽更女性化，而月亮更男性化嗎?事實(shí)的確如此。如果你讓德語使用者和西班牙語使用者描述一座橋，就像這一座，"橋"在德語中是陰性的，在西班牙語中則是陽性的。德語使用者更傾向于說橋"美麗"或"優(yōu)雅"以及其他很女性化的詞，而西班牙語使用者則傾向于說橋"強(qiáng)壯"或"綿長"，那些更男性化的詞。

languages also differ in how they describe events, right? you take an event like this, an accident. in english, it"s fine to say, "he broke the vase." in a language like spanish, you might be more likely to say, "the vase broke," or, "the vase broke itself." if it"s an accident, you wouldn"t say that someone did it.

語言的差異還體現(xiàn)在它們對事件的描述上。以這件事為例，一個意外。在英語里面，你可以說"他打碎了花瓶"。在西班牙語里面，你更可能會說"花瓶碎了"，或者"花瓶自己碎了"。如果這是一個意外，你不會說是誰打碎的。

in english, quite weirdly, we can even say things like, "i broke my arm." now, in lots of languages, you couldn"t use that construction unless you are a lunatic and you went out looking to break your arm -- (laughter) and you succeeded. if it was an accident, you would use a different construction.

在英語里面，很奇怪的是，我們甚至?xí)f，"我弄傷了我的手臂"。在很多語言里面，你完全不會這樣說，除非你是一個瘋子，你試圖弄傷自己的手臂，而且還成功了。如果它是一場意外，你會使用不一樣的語言結(jié)構(gòu)。

now, this has consequences. so, people who speak different languages will pay attention to different things, depending on what their language usually requires them to do. so we show the same accident to english speakers and spanish speakers, english speakers will remember who did it, because english requires you to say, "he did it; he broke the vase." whereas spanish speakers might be less likely to remember who did it if it"s an accident, but they"re more likely to remember that it was an accident. they"re more likely to remember the intention.

這會造成不同的結(jié)果。使用不同語言的人關(guān)注的點(diǎn)會不一樣，這取決于他們的語言是怎么要求的。如果我們讓英語使用者和西班牙語使用者看同樣的意外事件，英語使用者會記得這件事是誰干的，因?yàn)橛⒄Z需要你說"是他做的，他打碎了花瓶";而西班牙語使用者則不太可能會記得是誰干的——如果這是一個意外事件的話，他們更可能會記得這是一個意外，他們更可能記得意圖。

so, two people watch the same event, witness the same crime, but end up remembering different things about that event. this has implications, of course, for eyewitness testimony. it also has implications for blame and punishment. so if you take english speakers and i just show you someone breaking a vase, and i say, "he broke the vase," as opposed to "the vase broke," even though you can witness it yourself, you can watch the video, you can watch the crime against the vase, you will punish someone more, you will blame someone more if i just said, "he broke it," as opposed to, "it broke." the language guides our reasoning about events.

所以兩個人看同樣的事件，目睹同樣的罪行，但記得的卻不一定一樣。在目擊證詞方面，這是值得深思的，這對責(zé)備和懲罰也有影響。如果我給英語使用者看一個人不小心打碎花瓶，然后我說"他打碎了花瓶"，而不是說"花瓶碎了"，即使你自己親眼看到了事件的經(jīng)過，你看了那段視頻，你可以看到花瓶的"罪行"，但是你卻會更傾向于懲罰、責(zé)備那個人——僅僅因?yàn)槲艺f"他打碎了花瓶"，而不是"花瓶碎了"。語言會引導(dǎo)我們對事件的認(rèn)知。

now, i"ve given you a few e_amples of how language can profoundly shape the way we think, and it does so in a variety of ways. so language can have big effects, like we saw with space and time, where people can lay out space and time in completely different coordinate frames from each other.

那我給了大家?guī)讉€語言如何影響我們思考的例子，它主要通過幾個方式。語言可以造成大的影響，我們舉了時間和空間的例子，人們對時間和空間的排列可以迥然不同。

language can also have really deep effects -- that"s what we saw with the case of number. having count words in your language, having number words, opens up the whole world of mathematics. of course, if you don"t count, you can"t do algebra, you can"t do any of the things that would be required to build a room like this or make this broadcast, right? this little trick of number words gives you a stepping stone into a whole cognitive realm.

語言還可以有很深的影響，我們舉了數(shù)字的例子。如果你的語言里有數(shù)量詞，有數(shù)字，這會開啟一個全新的數(shù)學(xué)世界。如果你不能數(shù)數(shù)，你自然也不會代數(shù)學(xué)，你將不能做任何需要數(shù)學(xué)的事情，像建一個這樣的演講廳，或進(jìn)行轉(zhuǎn)播，對吧?小小的數(shù)字給我們提供了踏進(jìn)一整個認(rèn)知領(lǐng)域的墊腳石。

language can also have really early effects, what we saw in the case of color. these are really simple, basic, perceptual decisions. we make thousands of them all the time, and yet, language is getting in there and fussing even with these tiny little perceptual decisions that we make. language can have really broad effects. so the case of grammatical gender may be a little silly, but at the same time, grammatical gender applies to all nouns. that means language can shape how you"re thinking about anything that can be named by a noun. that"s a lot of stuff.

語言的影響還可能很早就發(fā)生，我們舉了顏色的例子。這是非常簡單、基本、感知型的決定，我們無時無刻不在做這樣的決定，而語言就在那里影響著我們做的這些小小的決定。語言可以有很廣闊的影響，我們舉了語法上的詞性的例子看似微不足道，但它卻適用于所有名詞。這意味著語言可以影響你如何思考所有能用名詞表達(dá)的東西。那可是很多東西。

and finally, i gave you an e_ample of how language can shape things that have personal weight to us -- ideas like blame and punishment or eyewitness memory. these are important things in our daily lives.

最后，我舉了一個語言可以如何影響跟我們切身相關(guān)的事件的例子，如責(zé)備、懲罰和目擊證詞。這些是我們的日常生活中非常重要的方面。

now, the beauty of linguistic diversity is that it reveals to us just how ingenious and how fle_ible the human mind is. human minds have invented not one cognitive universe, but 7,000 -- there are 7,000 languages spoken around the world. and we can create many more --languages, of course, are living things, things that we can hone and change to suit our needs. the tragic thing is that we"re losing so much of this linguistic diversity all the time. we"re losing about one language a week, and by some estimates, half of the world"s languages will be gone in the ne_t hundred years.

語言多樣性的美麗在于它向我們揭示了人類的大腦是多么巧妙和靈活。人類大腦創(chuàng)造的不是一個認(rèn)知體系，而是7000個，世界上有7000種語言。而我們還可以創(chuàng)造更多。語言是有生命的，是我們可以打磨和改變以滿足我們需求的東西。不幸的是，這種語言多樣性正在不斷喪失。大概平均每個星期就有一種語言消失，據(jù)估計(jì)，在接下來的120__年里世界上一半的語言將會消失。

and the even worse news is that right now, almost everything we know about the human mind and human brain is based on studies of usually american english-speaking undergraduates at universities. that e_cludes almost all humans. right? so what we know about the human mind is actually incredibly narrow and biased, and our science has to do better.

更糟糕的是，現(xiàn)在幾乎我們所知道的所有關(guān)于人類大腦和思維的東西都是基于大學(xué)中說美式英語的學(xué)生的研究。這就幾乎排除了所有人類，不是嗎?所以其實(shí)我們對人類思維的了解是非常狹隘和具有偏見的，而我們的科學(xué)應(yīng)該做得更好。

i want to leave you with this final thought. i"ve told you about how speakers of different languages think differently, but of course, that"s not about how people elsewhere think. it"s about how you think. it"s how the language that you speak shapes the way that you think. and that gives you the opportunity to ask, "why do i think the way that i do?" "how could i think differently?" and also," what thoughts do i wish to create?"

最后，我想再讓大家思考一個問題。我已經(jīng)講了不同語言的使用者思考的不同方式，當(dāng)然，這不是是關(guān)于其他地方的人怎么思考，而是關(guān)于你怎么思考，關(guān)于你說的語言如何影響了你的思維方式。大家可以問問自己："我為什么是這樣思考問題的?""我能換種方式思考嗎?"還有，"我想創(chuàng)造什么樣的想法?"

thank you very much.(applause)

非常感謝。(鼓掌)

語言英語演講稿模板5

閱讀小貼士：模板5共計(jì)8918個字，預(yù)計(jì)閱讀時長23分鐘。朗讀需要45分鐘，中速朗讀60分鐘，在莊重嚴(yán)肅場合朗讀需要82分鐘，有115位用戶喜歡。

中英對照翻譯

so, i"ll be speaking to you using language ... because i can. this is one these magical abilities that we humans have. we can transmit really complicated thoughts to one another.

我要用語言跟各位說話…… 因?yàn)槲铱梢浴?這是人類的神奇能力之一。我們能把非常復(fù)雜的想法傳送給另一個人。

so what i"m doing right now is, i"m making sounds with my mouth as i"m e_haling. i"m making tones and hisses and puffs, and those are creating air vibrations in the air.

我現(xiàn)在在做的，是用我的嘴巴發(fā)出聲音，吐氣時發(fā)聲。我會做出語調(diào)、嘶嘶聲、呼氣，在空氣中產(chǎn)生空氣振動。

those air vibrations are traveling to you, they"re hitting your eardrums, and then your brain takes those vibrations from your eardrums and transforms them into thoughts. i hope.

那些空氣振動會傳到你那里，觸及到你的耳膜，接著你的大腦會取得耳膜接收到的振動，把它們轉(zhuǎn)換為思想。我希望啦。

i hope that"s happening. so because of this ability, we humans are able to transmit our ideas across vast reaches of space and time. we"re able to transmit knowledge across minds.

希望現(xiàn)在就在發(fā)生。因?yàn)檫@種能力，我們?nèi)祟?才得以把我們的想法跨越空間和時間，傳給別人。我們能把知識傳送到不同人的大腦。

i can put a bizarre new idea in your mind right now. i could say, "imagine a jellyfish waltzing in a library while thinking about quantum mechanics."

我現(xiàn)在就能在各位的腦中放入一個怪異的想法。我可以說，「想象一只水母在圖書館跳華爾茲，同時想著量子力學(xué)?！?/p>

now, if everything has gone relatively well in your life so far, you probably haven"t had that thought before.but now i"ve just made you think it, through language.

如果你的人生中目前為止一切算是相對順利，你以前可能沒有過那種想法。但現(xiàn)在我能讓你們?nèi)ハ胨?透過語言辦到。

now of course, there isn"t just one language in the world, there are about 7,000 languages spoken around the world. and all the languages differ from one another in all kinds of ways.

當(dāng)然，世界上的語言不只一種，全世界人類說的語言就有約七千種。每種語言在各面向上都不同。

some languages have different sounds, they have different vocabularies, and they also have different structures -- very importantly, different structures. that begs the question: does the language we speak shape the way we think?

有些語言有不同的聲音，它們有不同的字匯，它們還有不同的結(jié)構(gòu)── 非常重要，不同的結(jié)構(gòu)。于是，我們會問：我們所說的語言是否會形塑我們的思考?

now, this is an ancient question.people have been speculating about this question forever. charlemagne, holy roman emperor, said, "to have a second language is to have a second soul" -- strong statement that language crafts reality.

這個問題歷史悠久。長年來大家都一直在思索這個問題。神圣羅馬大帝查理曼說過：「有第二種語言，就象是有第二個靈魂」── 很有力的陳述，說明了語言制造出現(xiàn)實(shí)。

but on the other hand, shakespeare has juliet say, "what"s in a name? a rose by any other name would smell as sweet." well, that suggests that maybe language doesn"t craft reality.

但，另一方面，莎士比亞筆下的茱麗葉說：「名字有什么用? 玫瑰不叫玫瑰，依然芳香如故?！?那意味著，語言不見得會制造現(xiàn)實(shí)。

these arguments have gone back and forth for thousands of years. but until recently, there hasn"t been any data to help us decide either way.

數(shù)千年來，這些論點(diǎn)一直你來我往。但，直到最近之前，都沒有任何資料來協(xié)助我們決定是哪一種。

recently, in my lab and other labs around the world, we"ve started doing research, and now we have actual scientific data to weigh in on this question.

最近，在我的實(shí)驗(yàn)室和世界上其他的實(shí)驗(yàn)室，我們開始做研究，現(xiàn)在，我們有了真正的科學(xué)資料，可以來探究這個問題。

so let me tell you about some of my favorite e_amples. i"ll start with an e_ample from an aboriginal community in australia that i had the chance to work with. these are the kuuk thaayorre people.

讓我分享一些我最喜歡的例子。我的第一個例子來自澳洲的一個原住民部落，我有機(jī)會和他們合作。他們是庫克薩優(yōu)里族，

they live in pormpuraaw at the very west edge of cape york. what"s cool about kuuk thaayorre is, in kuuk thaayorre, they don"t use words like "left" and "right," and instead, everything is in cardinal directions: north, south, east and west.

他們住在波姆浦洛，那是約克角半島的西部邊緣。庫克薩優(yōu)里族很酷的一點(diǎn)是，在庫克薩優(yōu)里語中，他們不用「左」、「右」這些字，一切都是用基本的方向：北、南、東、西。

and when i say everything, i really mean everything. you would say something like, "oh, there"s an ant on your southwest leg." or, "move your cup to the north-northeast a little bit."

我說「一切」，真的就是指一切。你可能會說這樣的話：「喔，在你的腳的西南方有一只螞蟻?！?或「把你的杯子向北北東移一點(diǎn)?！?/p>

in fact, the way that you say "hello" in kuuk thaayorre is you say, "which way are you going?" and the answer should be, "north-northeast in the far distance. how about you?"

事實(shí)上，在庫克薩優(yōu)里語中，說「哈囉」的方式是：「你要去哪個方向?」而回應(yīng)應(yīng)該是：「北北東的遠(yuǎn)方。你呢?」

so imagine as you"re walking around your day, every person you greet, you have to report your heading direction.

所以，想象一下你當(dāng)天走到任何地方，你問候每一個人時，都得要報告你朝什么方向前進(jìn)。

但那會讓你很快速確定方位，對吧? 因?yàn)槿绻恢?你在朝什么方向前進(jìn)，你就說不出「哈囉」。事實(shí)上，說這類語言的人，都一直很有方向感。

they stay oriented better than we used to think humans could. we used to think that humans were worse than other creatures because of some biological e_cuse: "oh, we don"t have magnets in our beaks or in our scales."

他們的方向感比我們認(rèn)為人類能辦到的程度更好。我們以前認(rèn)為人類這方面比其他生物更糟，是因?yàn)槟撤N生物借口：「我們的鳥喙或鱗片里面沒有內(nèi)建的磁鐵?！?/p>

no; if your language and your culture trains you to do it, actually, you can do it. there are humans around the world who stay oriented really well.

不對;如果你的語言和你的文化訓(xùn)練你去做，你其實(shí)能辦到。世界上有些人類的方向感非常好。

and just to get us in agreement about how different this is from the way we do it, i want you all to close your eyes for a second and point southeast.

為了讓大家能夠了解我們的做法上有多大的差異，我想請大家閉上眼睛一下子，請指出東南方。

keep your eyes closed. point. ok, so you can open your eyes. i see you guys pointing there, there, there, there, there ... i don"t know which way it is myself --you have not been a lot of help.

眼睛別張開。指出來。好，可以張開眼睛了。我看到大家指向那里、那里、那里、那里… 我自己也不知道是哪一邊---你們實(shí)在也沒幫上忙。

so let"s just say the accuracy in this room was not very high. this is a big difference in cognitive ability across languages, right? where one group -- very distinguished group like you guys --

姑且就說在這間房間中的正確率沒有很高。不同語言中的認(rèn)知能力差別很大，對吧? 一個族群──非常卓越的族群，比如各位--

doesn"t know which way is which, but in another group, i could ask a five-year-old and they would know.there are also really big differences in how people think about time.

不知道哪邊是哪個方向，但到了另一個族群，我去問五歲的小孩，他們也會知道。大家對于時間的思考方式也有很大的差異。

so here i have pictures of my grandfather at different ages. and if i ask an english speaker to organize time, they might lay it out this way, from left to right.

這里是我祖父的照片，他在照片中的年齡都不同。如果我請說英語的人依據(jù)時間來整理，他們可能會這樣排列，從左到右。

this has to do with writing direction. if you were a speaker of hebrew or arabic, you might do it going in the opposite direction, from right to left.

這與書寫的方向有關(guān)。如果你說希伯來語或阿拉伯語，你可能會用反方向，從右到左。

但庫克薩優(yōu)里族，我剛剛和各位說的原住民族群，會怎么做? 他們沒有「左」和「右」這些字。讓我提示各位。當(dāng)我們讓他們面向南方時，他們會把時間從左向右排。

when we sat them facing north, they organized time from right to left. when we sat them facing east, time came towards the body. what"s the pattern? east to west, right? so for them,

當(dāng)我們讓他們面向北方時，他們會把時間從右向左排。當(dāng)我們讓他們面向東方時，時間的方向朝向他們的身體。模式是什么? 由東向西，對吧? 所以，對他們而言，

time doesn"t actually get locked on the body at all, it gets locked on the landscape. so for me, if i"m facing this way, then time goes this way, and if i"m facing this way, then time goes this way. i"m facing this way, time goes this way --

時間完全不會被身體限制住，時間是和地景綁在一起的。對我來說，當(dāng)我面向這邊，時間就朝這個方向，當(dāng)我面向這邊，時間就朝這個方向。面向這邊，時間就朝這個方向--

very egocentric of me to have the direction of time chase me around every time i turn my body. for the kuuk thaayorre, time is locked on the landscape. it"s a dramatically different way of thinking about time.

非常自我中心，每當(dāng)我轉(zhuǎn)身，也讓時間的方向跟著我轉(zhuǎn)。對庫克薩優(yōu)里族，時間和地景綁在一起。這是非常不同的時間思考方式。

here"s another really smart human trait. suppose i ask you how many penguins are there. well, i bet i know how you"d solve that problem if you solved it. you went, "one, two, three, four, five, si_, seven, eight."

還有個很聰明的人類技倆。如果我問各位，這里有幾只企鵝? 我打賭我知道各位是如何解答這個問題的。你會用：「一、二、三、四、五、六、七、八。」

you counted them. you named each one with a number, and the last number you said was the number of penguins. this is a little trick that you"re taught to use as kids. you learn the number list and you learn how to apply it.

你用數(shù)的。你給毎一只一個號碼，你說出的最后一個號碼，就是企鵝的數(shù)目。這是個小計(jì)倆，你小時候就有人教你用了。你學(xué)到了數(shù)字表，你學(xué)到了如何應(yīng)用它。

a little linguistic trick. well, some languages don"t do this, because some languages don"t have e_act number words. they"re languages that don"t have a word like "seven" or a word like "eight."

小小的語言計(jì)倆。有些語言并不會這樣做，因?yàn)橛行┱Z言并沒有代表數(shù)字的字。這些語言并沒有像「七」這樣的字，也沒有「八」。

in fact, people who speak these languages don"t count, and they have trouble keeping track of e_act quantities. so, for e_ample, if i ask you to match this number of penguins to the same number of ducks, you would be able to do that by counting.

事實(shí)上，說這些語言的人不會計(jì)數(shù)，他們無法記得確實(shí)的「量」。比如，如果我請各位把剛才企鵝的數(shù)目對應(yīng)到同樣數(shù)目的鴨子，你可以靠計(jì)數(shù)的方式做到。

but folks who don"t have that linguistic trait can"t do that.languages also differ in how they divide up the color spectrum -- the visual world. some languages have lots of words for colors, some have only a couple words, "light" and "dark."

但語言沒有這項(xiàng)特征的人就沒辦法。語言也有不同的方式來區(qū)別色譜── 視覺世界。有些語言中有很多顏色的字，有些語言只有幾個字，「亮」和「暗」。

and languages differ in where they put boundaries between colors. so, for e_ample, in english, there"s a world for blue that covers all of the colors that you can see on the screen, but in russian, there isn"t a single word.

不同語言也有不同的顏色界線。比如，在英文中就有藍(lán)色的世界，包含熒幕上的所有這些顏色，但在俄語中，就沒有單一個字。

instead, russian speakers have to differentiate between light blue, "goluboy," and dark blue, "siniy." so russians have this lifetime of e_perience of, in language, distinguishing these two colors.

說俄語的人，得要去區(qū)別淺藍(lán)色「goluboy」，和深藍(lán)色「siniy」。所以俄國人一生當(dāng)中都會在語言上把這兩種顏色區(qū)別開來。

when we test people"s ability to perceptually discriminate these colors, what we find is that russian speakers are faster across this linguistic boundary. they"re faster to be able to tell the difference between a light and dark blue.

當(dāng)我們測試大家在感知上區(qū)別這些顏色的能力時，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)，在各語言中，說俄語的人會比較快做出區(qū)隔。他們比較快就能辨別出淺藍(lán)色和深藍(lán)色的差異。

去觀察正在看著顏色的人的大腦── 比如顏色緩慢地從淺藍(lán)色轉(zhuǎn)換到深藍(lán)色── 用不同的字來說淺藍(lán)色和深藍(lán)色的人，他們的大腦在顏色從淺藍(lán)色轉(zhuǎn)換到深藍(lán)色時，會有驚訝的反應(yīng)，

as if, "ooh, something has categorically changed," whereas the brains of english speakers, for e_ample, that don"t make this categorical distinction, don"t give that surprise, because nothing is categorically changing.

就像：「喔，改變類別了。」而，比如說英文的人，他們的大腦就不會做類別的區(qū)分，就不會有驚訝，因?yàn)闆]有類別上的改變。

語言有各種結(jié)構(gòu)上的變化。這是我的最愛之一。許多語言在文法上都有性別; 每個名詞都有被指派一種性別，通常是男性或女性。在不同語言，這些性別也不同。

so, for e_ample, the sun is feminine in german but masculine in spanish, and the moon, the reverse. could this actually have any consequence for how people think?

比如，在德文，太陽是女性，但在西班牙文則是男性，月亮剛好相反。這有沒有可能影響人的思考方式?

do german speakers think of the sun as somehow more female-like, and the moon somehow more male-like? actually, it turns out that"s the case.

說德文的人是否會用比較女性的方式來想太陽? 比較男性的方式來想月亮? 結(jié)果發(fā)現(xiàn)，的確是如此。

so if you ask german and spanish speakers to, say, describe a bridge, like the one here -- "bridge" happens to be grammatically feminine in german, grammatically masculine in spanish --

比如，如果你請說德文的人和說西班牙文的人描述一座橋，就像這里的橋--「橋」在德文文法中要用女性，在西班牙文則要用男性--

german speakers are more likely to say bridges are "beautiful," "elegant" and stereotypically feminine words. whereas spanish speakers will be more likely to say they"re "strong" or "long," these masculine words.

說德文的人在形容橋時比較會用「漂亮的」、「優(yōu)雅的」，或其他刻板印象上是形容女性的字。而說西班牙文的人比較有可能會說橋很「堅(jiān)固」或「長」，這些是男性用字。

languages also differ in how they describe events, right? you take an event like this, an accident. in english, it"s fine to say, "he broke the vase." in a language like spanish,

在描述事件時，不同語言也很不一樣，對吧? 比如像這樣的事件，一個意外，在英文，可以說「他打破了花瓶?！?在比如西班牙文，

you might be more likely to say, "the vase broke," or, "the vase broke itself." if it"s an accident, you wouldn"t say that someone did it. in english, quite weirdly, we can even say things like, "i broke my arm."

你比較有可能會說「花瓶破了」，或「花瓶自己破了」。如果它是個意外，就不會說是有人做的。在英文，挺奇怪的，我們甚至?xí)f像這樣的話：「我弄斷了我的手臂?！?/p>

now, in lots of languages, you couldn"t use that construction unless you are a lunatic and you went out looking to break your arm -- and you succeeded. if it was an accident, you would use a different construction.

在許多語言中，你不會用那種句法結(jié)構(gòu)，除非你是瘋子，然后你跑出去想辦法把你的手臂弄斷--且你成功了。如果是意外，你就會用不同的句法結(jié)構(gòu)。

now, this has consequences. so, people who speak different languages will pay attention to different things, depending on what their language usually requires them to do.

這是會造成不同結(jié)果的。說不同語言的人會把注意力放在不同的地方，就看他們說的語言需要他們怎么做。

so we show the same accident to english speakers and spanish speakers, english speakers will remember who did it, because english requires you to say, "he did it; he broke the vase."

如果我們讓說英文的人和說西班牙文的人看到同樣的意外，說英文的人會記得是誰做的，因?yàn)橛⑽囊竽阏f：「是他做的;他打破了花瓶?！?/p>

whereas spanish speakers might be less likely to remember who did it if it"s an accident, but they"re more likely to remember that it was an accident. they"re more likely to remember the intention.

而說西班牙文的人比較不會記得是誰做的，如果是意外的話，但他們比較會記住這是一件意外。他們比較會記住意圖。

所以，兩個人看同樣的事件，目擊同樣的犯罪，最后卻會記得該事件中不同的細(xì)節(jié)。當(dāng)然，在目擊證人證詞方面，這是值得深思的。在責(zé)怪和懲罰時，也應(yīng)該想想這一點(diǎn)。

so if you take english speakers and i just show you someone breaking a vase, and i say, "he broke the vase," as opposed to "the vase broke," even though you can witness it yourself, you can watch the video,

如果是說英文的情況，我剛讓你看到有人打破了花瓶，我說：「他打破了花瓶」而不是說：「花瓶破了」，即使你自己可以親眼看見，你可以看監(jiān)視影片，

you can watch the crime against the vase, you will punish someone more, you will blame someone more if i just said, "he broke it," as opposed to, "it broke." the language guides our reasoning about events.

你可以看這件關(guān)于花瓶的罪行，你會懲罰某個人多一些，你會責(zé)怪他多一些，若我說「他打破了它」，而不是「它破了」。語言會引導(dǎo)我們對于事件的推理。

now, i"ve given you a few e_amples of how language can profoundly shape the way we think, and it does so in a variety of ways. so language can have big effects, like we saw with space and time,

我已經(jīng)舉了幾個例子，說明語言如何能深深形塑我們的思考方式，而影響的方法有很多種。所以，語言的影響可能很大，就像剛才空間和時間的例子，

where people can lay out space and time in completely different coordinate frames from each other. language can also have really deep effects -- that"s what we saw with the case of number.

大家在排列空間和時間時，用完全不同的坐標(biāo)架構(gòu)。語言的影響也可能很深── 可參考計(jì)數(shù)的例子。

having count words in your language, having number words, opens up the whole world of mathematics. of course, if you don"t count, you can"t do algebra, you can"t do any of the things that would be required to build a room like this

在你的語言中有計(jì)數(shù)的字詞，有數(shù)字的字詞，就能打開整個數(shù)學(xué)的世界。當(dāng)然，如果你不會計(jì)數(shù)，你不會做代數(shù)，你就完全做不到象是建造這間房間這一類的事情，

or make this broadcast, right? this little trick of number words gives you a stepping stone into a whole cognitive realm.language can also have really early effects, what we saw in the case of color.

也無法做這場轉(zhuǎn)播，對吧? 數(shù)字字詞的小小計(jì)倆，能給你一個墊腳石，進(jìn)入認(rèn)知的國度。語言的影響也可能很早，也就是顏色的例子。

these are really simple, basic, perceptual decisions. we make thousands of them all the time, and yet, language is getting in there and fussing even with these tiny little perceptual decisions that we make.

這些是很簡單、基本、感知的決策。我們隨時都在做幾千個這樣的決策，而語言也有介入其中，去擾亂我們這些非常小的感知決策。

language can have really broad effects. so the case of grammatical gender may be a little silly, but at the same time, grammatical gender applies to all nouns.

語言的影響也可能很廣。文法性別的例子雖然可能有點(diǎn)可笑，但同時，文法性別是用在所有名詞上的。

that means language can shape how you"re thinking about anything that can be named by a noun. that"s a lot of stuff.and finally,

那意味著，語言能形塑你如何思考任何能用名詞來命名的事物。那數(shù)量很驚人。我最后舉的例子，

i gave you an e_ample of how language can shape things that have personal weight to us -- ideas like blame and punishment or eyewitness memory. these are important things in our daily lives.

說明語言能形塑對我們有個人意義的事物── 象是責(zé)怪及懲罰這類想法，或是目擊證詞。這些都是日常生活中的重要事物。

語言多樣性之美在于它能向我們揭示人類心智是多么巧妙和有彈性。人類心智發(fā)明出了不只一個認(rèn)知宇宙，而是七千個── 全世界的語言有七千種。

and we can create many more -- languages, of course, are living things, things that we can hone and change to suit our needs. the tragic thing is that we"re losing so much of this linguistic diversity all the time.

我們還能創(chuàng)造更多── 當(dāng)然，語言是活的，我們可以去磨它、改變它，來符合我們的需求。可惜之處在于，我們在不斷失去語言的多樣性，

we"re losing about one language a week, and by some estimates, half of the world"s languages will be gone in the ne_t hundred years.

我們大約一周會失去一種語言，依據(jù)一些估計(jì)，在接下來的一百年，世界上的語言有一半會不見。

and the even worse news is that right now, almost everything we know about the human mind and human brain is based on studies of usually american english-speaking undergraduates at universities.

更糟的消息是，現(xiàn)在，幾乎所有我們對于人類心智和人類大腦的知識都是來自于針對說英文的美國大學(xué)生所做的研究。

that e_cludes almost all humans. right? so what we know about the human mind is actually incredibly narrow and biased, and our science has to do better.

那就幾乎排除了所有人類，對吧? 所以我們對于人類心智的了解，其實(shí)是非常狹隘且有偏見的，我們的科學(xué)得要做得更好才行。

最后，我想留下一點(diǎn)讓各位思考。我已經(jīng)告訴各位，說不同語言的人如何有不同的思考方式，但重點(diǎn)并不是其他地方的人怎么想，重點(diǎn)是你怎么想。

it"s how the language that you speak shapes the way that you think. and that gives you the opportunity to ask, "why do i think the way that i do?" "how could i think differently?"

重點(diǎn)是你說的語言如何形塑出你的思考。那就給了你一個機(jī)會，可以問：「我為何會用我這種方式思考?」「我要如何用不同方式思考?」

and also, "what thoughts do i wish to create?"thank you very much.

還有，「我想要創(chuàng)造出怎樣的想法?」非常謝謝。

語言英語演講稿模板6

閱讀小貼士：模板6共計(jì)6063個字，預(yù)計(jì)閱讀時長16分鐘。朗讀需要31分鐘，中速朗讀41分鐘，在莊重嚴(yán)肅場合朗讀需要56分鐘，有112位用戶喜歡。

演說題目：what our language habits reveal

演說者：steven pinker

照片里的人是maurice druon l"academie francaise的榮譽(yù)終身秘書長—— 也就是法蘭西學(xué)院穿著價值六萬八千美元的豪華制服對法蘭西學(xué)院來說倒很適合因?yàn)樗?guī)范著法語的正確用法使這門語言永世長存法蘭西學(xué)院有兩個主要任務(wù) 它編纂官方的法語詞典—— 他們目前在編第九部從1930年就開始了，現(xiàn)在編到了p字頭。他們還規(guī)范正確的用法比如，電子郵件(email)在法語里的正確說法應(yīng)該是"courriel" 他們告訴法國人，萬維網(wǎng)(worldwide web) 應(yīng)該被叫做 "la toile d"araignee modiale"——"環(huán)球蜘蛛網(wǎng)" 諸如此類法國人民欣然忽略的建議。

這是語言產(chǎn)生的眾多模型之一：也就是說，由一個學(xué)院來進(jìn)行規(guī)范但任何懂得語言的人都意識到這是愚蠢的自負(fù) 語言產(chǎn)生于人類心靈間的互動而在語言的不停變化中，這是顯而易見的事實(shí)上，當(dāng)法蘭西學(xué)院完成他們的詞典時它早已經(jīng)過時了。

我們看到俗語和術(shù)語不斷產(chǎn)生歷史上語言在變化方言在分支新的語言在形成所以語言并不只是創(chuàng)造、塑造人性之物同樣是反映人性的窗口我正在寫的一本書中我希望能闡明人性的一些方面包括認(rèn)知機(jī)能人們靠這個把世界概念化還有掌管人類互動的各類關(guān)系。今天早上，我將對它們逐一簡要介紹。

讓我從一個語言中的技術(shù)性問題開始我研究這個問題已經(jīng)有一段時間了希望你們能包涵一下，包涵我對動詞，和它們用法的熱情問題在于，哪個動詞用于哪個構(gòu)式?動詞是句子的基座，其他部分都安在這個基座上。

讓我提醒你們一下這是你們早已忘記的東西。不及物動詞，比如"用餐"(dine) 不能帶有直接的賓語你得說："山姆用餐了(sam dined)",而不是"山姆用餐了比薩餅(sam dined the pizza." 一個及物動詞要求必須有賓語："山姆吞吃比薩餅(sam devoured the pizza)"。你不能只是說"山姆吞吃(sam devoured)"。有許許多多這類的動詞每個都塑造著句子。所以在解釋孩子們?nèi)绾螌W(xué)習(xí)語言時候，有一個問題同樣也是教成人學(xué)外語語法時的一個問題以及給電腦編使用語言的程序時—— 在哪個構(gòu)式里該用哪個動詞?

比如，英語中的與格構(gòu)式—— 可以說"givea muffin to a mouse"，前置詞與格，或者"give a mouse a muffin"，雙賓語與格，"promise anything to her"，"promise heranything"，等等。上百的動詞可以兩用。對于孩子，很容易去做的一個歸納—— 對于大人和電腦來說也一樣—— 就是任何可以在下面這個構(gòu)式中出現(xiàn)的動詞 "主語-動詞-物體-to-a 接受者" 也可以表達(dá)成"主語-動詞-接受者-東西"。這是很順手的事因?yàn)檎Z言是無窮的對于你學(xué)過的句子不能只是鸚鵡學(xué)舌。你必須得做出歸納這樣你才能制造、理解新句子。這就是這樣做的一個例子。

不幸的是，這方面有例外。你可以說，"biff drove the car tochicago"。但不是"biff drove chicago the car"。你可以說："sal gave jason a headache"，但"sal gave aheadache to jason"就很別扭了。原因是這些構(gòu)式，盡管一開始相似但并不是同義句。當(dāng)你搬出顯微鏡對準(zhǔn)在人類認(rèn)知上，你會看到很多微妙的差別存在于它們的意思里。所以"give the _ to the y"—— 這個構(gòu)式對應(yīng)的想法是： "cause _ to go to y"，而"give the y the _" 對應(yīng)的想法是"cause y to have _"。

許多時候我們都有理解偏差類似于經(jīng)典的"形象-背景"顛倒的幻術(shù) 你要么吧注意力放在某個物體上使周圍的空間從注意力中退去要么你集中注意觀察空間的構(gòu)造這樣前景中的物體就從意識中退去這些理解如何反應(yīng)在語言當(dāng)中? 在兩種情況里，那個被解釋為受影響的東西被表達(dá)成了直接賓語：動詞之后的名詞。當(dāng)你想到"使蛋糕去某處"時當(dāng)你對蛋糕實(shí)施動作時你說："give the muffin to the mouse." 當(dāng)你理解成"使老鼠擁有某物" 你對老鼠實(shí)施動作所以你把它表達(dá)成："give the mouse themuffin."

所以，在哪個構(gòu)式里用哪個動詞我一開始提出的問題取決于動詞是否指出某種運(yùn)動或者某種所有權(quán)的變化 "給出某物"當(dāng)中包含"使某物前往" 也包含"使某人擁有" 開車只能使某物走開因?yàn)橹ゼ痈绮皇悄欠N能擁有某物的東西。只有人才能擁有東西。"令人頭痛"使人具有頭痛但你并不會把頭痛從手里給出去讓它到另一個人那里去然后再放進(jìn)對方腦袋里。你只可能是說話太大聲，或者討人厭或者用其他的方法使對方頭疼。所以這是我工作內(nèi)容的一個例子。

那為什么有人要在乎這工作呢? 這是因?yàn)橛性S多有趣的結(jié)論從這個例子，還有類似的對很多英語動詞的分析中可以得出。首先，存在著一個精細(xì)的概念結(jié)構(gòu)我們自動、無意識地計(jì)算產(chǎn)生它每當(dāng)我們想到或者說出一個主導(dǎo)我們對語言的使用的句子你可以把它理解成"思想的語言"，或者"思想語"。

它看上去是建立在一套固定的概念之上這套概念管理著數(shù)十個構(gòu)式和數(shù)千個動詞不僅僅是英文的，而是所有語言的最基本概念，比如空間時間、因果以及人的意愿比如，什么是手段，什么是目的? 這些跟康德所主張的，構(gòu)成人類思想的基本框架的那些范疇很相似很有趣的是，我們對語言的無意識的使用好像在折射著這些康德主義的范疇—— 不在乎感官的性質(zhì) 比如顏色、材質(zhì)、重量和速度上述這些都幾乎從不區(qū)分動詞在不同構(gòu)式中的用法。

此外，英語中的所有構(gòu)式不僅僅有字面意義還有準(zhǔn)隱喻的用法。就拿與格來說，不僅用來轉(zhuǎn)移事物，還用來比喻思想的轉(zhuǎn)移，比如，"she told a story to me" 或者"toldme a story" "ma_ taught spanish to the student"或者"taught the students spanish." 這都是完全一樣的構(gòu)式但里面沒有蛋糕或者老鼠。完全沒有運(yùn)動。這使人想起語言交流中的"容器隱喻" 在這里面我們把想法理解成實(shí)物句子就像容器語言交流就像快遞當(dāng)我們說"gather"(收集)我們的想法，并""put" them "into" word"(把它們付諸語言) 如果我們說的話并不"empty"(空)或者"hollow"(空洞) 我們就可以把意思傳達(dá)"過去"("across") 讓一個能夠"拆解"("unpack")我們的語言而提取"內(nèi)涵"("content")

諸如此類的修辭法不是個例，而是廣泛規(guī)則想找到純抽象的而非實(shí)物隱喻的表達(dá)的例子難之又難譬如說，你可以用動詞"go" 以及介詞"to"和"from" 來表達(dá)字面意思： "信使從巴黎去了伊斯坦布爾。"("the messenger went from paris to istanbul.") 你也可以說，"比夫從病中康復(fù)。("biff went from sick towell." ) 他哪里都沒"去"，而是可能一直呆在床上但是我們說話時仿佛他的健康狀況是空間中的點(diǎn) 你給它一種動的概念或者，"會從3點(diǎn)一直開到4點(diǎn)，"("the meeting went from three tofour,") 這里我們把時間想成分布在一條直線上與此相似地，我們用力的概念來表示不僅僅是物理的力比如，"rose forced the door to open,"(羅斯用力把門打開) 也包括人際間的作用力比如，"rose forced sadie to go"(羅斯把薩蒂逼走了)——不一定要推推搡搡的而是通過威脅—— 或者"rose forced sadie to go"(羅斯逼她自己離開) 仿佛羅斯的頭腦里有兩個東西在進(jìn)行拔河。

第二個結(jié)論是用不同方式構(gòu)思同一事件的能力比如，"使某物到某人那里，" 和"使某人擁有某物，" 我認(rèn)為這是人類思維的基本特點(diǎn)而且是人類論辯的基礎(chǔ) 論辯中人們爭議的一般不是事實(shí) 而是應(yīng)該如何理解它們這里是一些例子：是"終止懷孕"還是"殺死胚胎" "一個細(xì)胞聚合的小球"還是"一個尚未出生的孩子" "侵略伊拉克"或是"解放伊拉克" "收入重新分配"抑或"沒收財產(chǎn)" 而整個圖景中最顯著的一部分是要看到一點(diǎn)：就是我們對抽象事件的描述大多都是基于實(shí)體的隱喻這反映出人類智能本身是由一整套概念組成比如物體、空間、時間，因果關(guān)系與意圖—— 對我們這種群居的、知識密集型的種群非常有用我們能想象人類的進(jìn)化和語言的隱喻抽象化過程齊軌并行慢慢地這些概念里原先的實(shí)際內(nèi)容就淡化了空間、時間和力—— 而它們卻被用在全新的抽象領(lǐng)域里如此就使得我們這個原本是進(jìn)化出來和石頭、工具與動物打交道的種群能夠形成數(shù)學(xué)、物理、法律等等概念涉足其他抽象的領(lǐng)域。

我曾說過我要談?wù)勅诵缘膬缮却皯?我們用來概念化世界的知性機(jī)能現(xiàn)在我要說說幾種人際關(guān)系它們支配著人類的社交活動同樣，這些都體現(xiàn)在語言里我要從間接話語行為這個謎題開始我相信你們中大多數(shù)人都看過《冰血暴》(或譯為法哥鎮(zhèn))這部電影你們可能還記得其中的一段：一個警官要綁匪把車開到路邊叫他出示駕照綁匪把錢包拿出來有一張50美元的鈔票以一個小角度從錢包里伸出來然后綁匪說，"我在想或許在法哥鎮(zhèn)這個鬼地方我們倆得共同保管這個"—— 每個人，包括觀眾都理解為含蓄地提出賄賂這種間接表意在語言中泛濫比如說在禮貌地提要求時如果有人說，"如果你把鱷梨色拉醬遞過來就太棒了" 我們太清楚他是什么意思了盡管字面上表達(dá)出來是個很別扭的概念。

"您愿意來看一下我的蝕刻版畫嗎?" 我想大多數(shù)人理解這么說的意圖同樣的，倘若有人說"呦，你的店真不錯。要是發(fā)生了點(diǎn)什么事兒可就不好了"—— (笑) 我們知道這是個委婉的威脅而不是在思考假設(shè)的可能性所以我們說的謎題就是：為什么賄賂禮貌的要求、懇請、威脅經(jīng)常要遮遮掩掩的? 沒人是傻子雙方都知道談話人說的是什么談話人也知道聽者心里清楚談話人知道聽者心里清楚，等等，等等所以這是在干嘛呢?

關(guān)鍵是在于語言是磋商人際關(guān)系的一種途徑而人際關(guān)系分為許多種人類學(xué)家alanfiske給出了一個關(guān)于影響力的分類法其中人際關(guān)系可以被或多或少地歸為 "公社性"，它的作用原則是 "我的就是你的，你的就是我的"—— 家庭內(nèi)部的一種心態(tài)，例如—— 統(tǒng)治心態(tài)，其原則就是"別惹我，" 互惠心態(tài)："你幫我撓背，我?guī)湍銚媳常? 性心理：如cole porter的不朽名言所說，"來吧"

人際關(guān)系的類型是可以通過磋商決定的盡管經(jīng)常有某種默認(rèn)情況指定了上面心態(tài)中的一種人際關(guān)類型可以被拉伸、調(diào)整比如說"公社性" 在家庭和朋友們中最自然但它可以被用來把分享的心態(tài)轉(zhuǎn)移給平時并不習(xí)慣于分享的群體—— 例如幫派或者男生聯(lián)誼會女生聯(lián)誼會，像"男人之家"這樣的表達(dá)法這樣就讓非親非故的人們能夠采用一般都是近親之間才有的關(guān)系類型。

可是當(dāng)一方采用某一種關(guān)系類型而另一方用了另一種—— 搭配錯誤的時候就尷尬了假如你走過去隨手就從你老板的盤子里弄了一只蝦吃打個比方的話，這就是一個尷尬的情況或者是餐后有一位客人掏出錢包說要付錢給你這也會相當(dāng)尷尬在不那么明顯的例子中還是有一種磋商在進(jìn)行著比如說在工作場所在員工是否能和老板套近乎這一點(diǎn)上都有一點(diǎn)緊張不安或者是稱呼他或她首名(而不是叫__先生或女士) 如果兩個朋友進(jìn)行一筆交易，比如賣一輛車大家都知道這可能是緊張和尷尬的來源比如約會中從友誼到性關(guān)系的過度眾所周知，可能導(dǎo)致各種各樣的尷尬局面工作場所的性也是我們把兩種關(guān)系類型—— 支配關(guān)系和性關(guān)系——間的沖突叫做"性騷擾"。

這個和語言有什么關(guān)系呢? 語言作為一種社會相互作用必須滿足兩個條件你得傳達(dá)內(nèi)容——這里我們又回到容器的隱喻你想表達(dá)賄賂、命令、許諾的意思懇請以及其他但是你還得磋商并保持你和那個人的關(guān)系我認(rèn)為解決的答案是我們在兩個層面上使用語言字面意思表達(dá)的是與聽者的最安全的關(guān)系而引伸義我們留給聽者自己去領(lǐng)會的言外之意—— 則使他發(fā)掘出這個語境中最恰當(dāng)?shù)慕忉尪@有可能促成一種新的人際關(guān)系。

最簡單的例子出自于禮貌的要求倘若你用一個條件句表達(dá)請求： "您要是能開一下窗子就太好了，" 盡管內(nèi)容是祈使句僅僅因?yàn)槟銢]有用祈使語態(tài) 就顯示出你并沒有按照一種支配的人際關(guān)系行事你并沒有假設(shè)他人必須服從可另一方面，你想要那個該死的鱷梨沙拉醬用一個"如果—那么"巨型，你把意思說清楚了卻不會讓人覺得你在指使他。

我認(rèn)為這樣挺微妙，效果也不錯種種含蓄的言行保留了拒絕的可能：賄賂、威脅、提議懇請等等有一種理解方式就是想象當(dāng)語言只能表達(dá)字面義你可以把它當(dāng)作博弈論中的得失矩陣來思考把你放在那個想賄賂警官的綁匪的位置上全部的賭注都壓在這兩種可能性上：警官不老實(shí)或者他是老實(shí)人假如你不賄賂他，你得吃罰單—— 或者，就像《冰風(fēng)血》中的情況一樣，那更糟不管那個警官到底老實(shí)不老實(shí)：愛拼才會贏這種情況下，后果很嚴(yán)重換一方面，你要是掏出錢來如果警官吃賄賂，你全身而退，討了個大巧如果警官是老實(shí)人，你因?yàn)樾匈V 被逮起來所以情況挺復(fù)雜的。

然而，你要是含沙射影地說如果你含蓄地提出給錢那么不老實(shí)的警官可以把它理解為你要使銀子你就可以走了而誠實(shí)的警官也不能硬說你賄賂他因此你領(lǐng)一張討厭的罰單不過你兩種可能中都受益最大化了我覺得同樣的分析方法可以用在可能出現(xiàn)尷尬的提出性的要求的時候以及其他的當(dāng)保留拒絕可的能性對你有利的情況這就應(yīng)證了一個外交官們早已深諳的秘密—— 那就是：語言的模糊根本不是什么故障或缺憾而很可能是語言的特征一個我們能在社交中善加利用的特征。

總而言之：語言是人類的集體發(fā)明它折射出人性—— 我們?nèi)绾斡酶拍罾斫猬F(xiàn)實(shí)世界如何互相溝通交流—— 通過分析語言的許多微妙、繁復(fù)之處我認(rèn)為我們能向著人類的生存之道打開一扇窗戶謝謝大家。

《你的語言習(xí)慣暴露了什么》觀后感

語言是一種力量;

語言是一種文明;

語言是一種道德;

而我心中的語言卻是仇恨。

隨著清晨的陽光，走在上學(xué)的路上，又是美好的一天，默默的計(jì)劃著今天的任務(wù)。剛要走到教師時，就聽到老班的聲音，"完了，老班今天怎么這么早就來了?"深呼吸了一口，懷著緊張的心情走進(jìn)了教室，叫了一聲："班主任早。"他并沒有理睬我，而是板這張臉站在那兒，用他那雷達(dá)般的雙眼巡視著地面。"我沒說錯話吧?"當(dāng)我正在疑問時，"今天的值日生是誰，下個星期繼續(xù)掃，掃到你們懂為之。"老班說道，還用腳踢了踢桌子，說道："你們連桌子都不會擺，這幾年白活了"在這一瞬間教師里鴉雀無聲，每當(dāng)聽到老班這樣的話語時，自己就會有一種沖動，想站起來大聲反駁"我們沒白活，我們會掃地，只是放地雷的人太多了，我們是學(xué)生，是來學(xué)習(xí)的不是來掃地的，我們總不能右手拿筆，左手拿掃把在上課吧?更何況地上的煙頭也是你丟的呀!"但是這樣的話卻在我心里反反復(fù)復(fù)了n便，卻沒勇氣說出來，誰讓你是老師呢?

就這樣清晨美好的心情被老班幾句話語給無情的趕走了。

老班你有沒有想過這樣的語氣會對中學(xué)生的我們帶來怎樣嚴(yán)重的后果呢?也許會加重我們的逆反心理，從此你在我們心中的形象就會被定格在那沒有語言道德的那一欄上。老班你可曾想過我們的感受!

一句話能讓一個心情低落的人高興到極點(diǎn)，反之會讓他接近死亡的邊緣。

我真后悔當(dāng)時沒有勇氣說出那番話，沒有勇氣站出來制止你的這種行為，可我只是一個平凡得不能再平凡的中學(xué)生了，沒有勇氣更沒有能力去對抗這個糟糕的教育制度，因?yàn)閺男∥覀兊男撵`就被深深的烙上了尊敬老師，不能頂撞老師的烙印。

而做為中學(xué)生的我也只能長嘆一聲，期望著自己能快點(diǎn)長大，將來做一個老師來改變這個糟糕的教育體制。

十年寒窗，只待今朝。