第十章格式和提纲

　　英国牛津式辩论和美国质询式辩论是最知名的辩论形式。前者强调正反双方在发表自己的言论的同时发起反击，后者有单独留出来的质询时间。本章第一部分讨论了这两种辩论形式。由于辩论时气氛紧张、言辞激烈，辩论的胜败往往在于能否在最短的时间内说服观众，抓住观众的注意力，因此，辩论的条理性非常重要。本章第二部分介绍了辩论双方应该怎样列出自己的辩论提纲。

　Formats of Debate辩论的格式

　　The various formats of academic debate have certain common elements: (1) Both sides must have an equal number of speakers; (2) both sides must have an equal amount of time; and (3) the affirmative must speak first and last.

　　The standard American procedure calls for what is known as university style debate. In this system, two persons form a team and usually debate both affirmative and negative sides during a tournament. The affirmative begins the debate by presenting a constructive, the first affirmative speech, which makes a case for adopting the resolution. The next speaker is the first negative, who is followed by the second affirmative, and finally, the second negative. Most tournaments also include cross-examination periods between each constructive speech. Without the cross-examination the format is often termed Oxford debate. With the cross-examination periods it is simply termed cross-examination debate or sometimes Oregon style. After a short pause, which is often omitted, the second negative constructive speaker is followed by the first negative rebuttal speaker. In the rebuttal speech, the speaker may attack the opponents- arguments in addition to defense, but may not introduce any new constructive arguments. The speakers then continue to alternate again with first affirmative rebuttal, second negative rebuttal, and finally, second affirmative rebuttal，including cross-examinations.

　Outlining the Debate辩论的提纲

　　Why Outlining the Debate

　　The reason why we should outline our debate is based on two considerations: the speaker and the audience.

　　The speaker. Within the above-mentioned time framework, the affirmative tries to compel the audience to agree that the resolution should be adopted. The support for the resolution means that either the audience should accept the affirmative team’s judgments, or it should agree the judgments suggested by the negative team. The negative attempts to prevent the affirmative from succeeding. Since time is limited in a debate, it is literally true that every moment counts. Time is precious to the speaker. No time can be wasted. If you waste a minute aimlessly repeating yourself, it is a minute that can never be made up in that debate.

　　The audience. A debate can be extremely confusing to an audience. Any human being who listens for forty-eight or sixty minutes to four other people arguing is probably going to be swamped by conflicting ideas. To the listener, there is too much time in a debate-that is, so many things are said during the debate that the listener finds it extremely difficult to keep track of what is going on.

　　Think and Speak in Outline Terms

　　For these two reasons-the speaker’s need for time and the audience’s saturation with it-it is imperative that every debate speaker know exactly what to try to do at every instant of the debate. This awareness of what is going on must be communicated to the listeners as well. Therefore, the first principle of successful debate speaking is: think and speak in outline terms.

　　In other words, debate speakers must know what the main ideas are in the debate so they can tell the audience what they are. Obviously, if the debaters do not know their own main arguments, they will never be able to recognize those of the opposition.

　　An affirmative outline. The easiest way to visualize this principle in practice is to see the entire debate as two outlines set alongside each other. To think in outline terms is to view the debate case in terms of its functional parts: issues, arguments, and evidence. For instance, in a debate on a particular policy proposition, the affirmative might outline part of their case as follows:

　　Issue:

　　Ⅰ. The present system of state and federal highways is inadequate, for:Argument:

　　A. United States highways are substandard for present needs, for:Evidence:

　　1. Specific supporting evidence

　　2. Specific supporting evidence

　　3. Specific supporting evidence

　　Argument:

　　B. Expansion under the present system is not adequate for future needs, because:Evidence:

　　1. Specific supporting evidence

　　2. Specific supporting evidence

　　3. Specific supporting evidence

　　4. Specific supporting evidence

　　Argument:

　　C. Present federal help is inadequate, for:

　　Evidence:

　　1. Specific supporting evidence

　　2. Specific supporting evidence

　　Argument:

　　D. Present highway programs do not provide work projects to alleviate unemployment, because:

　　Evidence:

　　1. Specific supporting evidence

　　2. Specific supporting evidence

　　3. Specific supporting evidence

　Summary总结

　　The Oxford debate format and the cross-examination format are the most well-known debate formats in which different aspects are emphasized. Due to the tension and high speech in a debate, catching the attention of the audience becomes significant. The clearer the speakers puts ideas sintos an outlining way, the more likely they could win the debate.