2019专八听力-真题解析

2019 专八听力-真题解析

Mini-lecture

Body Language and Mind

Introduction

Body language reveals who we are.

Nonverbal expressions of (1)

• feeling powerful : (2)

----e.g. attention with arms up in a V sign

• feeling powerless: (3) _

----e.g. refusing to bump into the person nearby

• people’s behavior tends to become (4) in a high-and low-power situation.

----people don’t mirror each other.

• MBA students exhibit the full range of power nonverbal.

----e.g. students with power have strong desire for (5) .

• power nonverbal are also related to (6) .

Relationship between (7)

• the powerful are more (8)

• hormones differ with (9)

• an experiment:

----procedures:

----adopting high- or low-power poses and completing items

----being given (10)

----having saliva tested

----results:

----(11) : much higher with high

-power people

----an increase in (12) in low

-power people

----hormonal changes: making brain (13)

Conclusion

• Behavior can (14)

• Before getting into stressful situations

----get your brain ready to (15)

1

参考答案：

1. power and dominance

2. expanding// opening up

3. closing up

4. complementary

5. dominance

6. gender

7. bodies and minds

8. assertive, confident, optimistic

9. level of power

10. opportunities to gamble

11. risk tolerance// dominance hormone

12. stress hormone

13. assertive, confident, stress-reactive

14. change outcomes

15. do the best

原文：

Body Language and Mind

Good morning, everyone. In today’s lecture, I’d like to focus on how our body language reveals

who we are. We’re really fascinated with body language, and particularly interested in other

people’s body language. You know, we’re sometimes interested in an awkward interaction, or a

smile, or a contemptuous glance, or maybe a very awkward wink, or handshake.

So what kind of body language am I talking about? (1) I am interested in power dynamics----

that is the nonverbal expressions of power and dominance. And what are nonverbal expressions

of power and dominance? Well, this is what they are. (2) In the animal kingdom, nonverbal

expressions of power and dominance are about expanding. So you make yourself big, you stretch

out, you take up space and you’re basically opening up. And… and humans do the same thing.

So they do this when they’re feeling powerful in the moment. And this one is especially

interesting because it really shows us how universal and old these expressions of power are. For

example, when athletes 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 are up in the V sign, the chin is slightly lifted. (3) But

what do we do when we feel powerless? We do exactly the opposite. We close up.

We make ourselves small. We don’t want to bump into the person next to us. And this is what

happens when you put together high and low power. (4) So what we tent to do when it comes to

power is that we complement the other’s nonverbal. What I mean is if someone is being really

powerful with us, we tend to make ourselves smaller. We don’t mirror them. We do the opposite.

I’m watching this behavior in the classroom, and guess what I have noticed. (5) I notice that

MBA students really exhibit the full range of power nonverbal. They get right into the middle of

the room before class ever starts, like they really want to occupy space. When they sit down,

they’re sort of spread out. They raise their hands high. You have other people who are virtually

collapsing when they come in.

As soon as they, I mean other people, come in, you see it on their faces and their bodies, and

they sit in their chair and they make themselves tiny, and they will not fully stretch their arms when

2

they raise their hands. I also notice another interesting thing about this. (6) It seems women are

much more likely to do this kind of thing than men. I mean women are more likely to make

themselves small. Women feel chronically less powerful than men, so this is not surprising.

(7) The second question concerns our minds. 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 do I mean? 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?

(8) 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. They take more risks. So there are a lot of differences between

powerful and powerless people. (9) Physiologically, there also are differences on two key hormones:

one is dominance hormone, and the other is stress hormone.

What we find is that powerful and effective leaders have high dominance hormone and low

stress hormone. What does it mean? That means power is also about how you react to stress.

Once we did an experiment. We decided to bring people into the lab and run that little

experiment. These people adopted, for two minutes, either high-power poses or low-power poses.

We, for two minutes, say, “You need to do this or this.” And we also want them to be feeling power.

So after two minutes we will ask them “How powerful do you feel?” on a series of items, (10)

and then we give them an opportunity to gamble. Before and after the experiment, we take their

sample of saliva for a hormone test. That’s the whole experiment.

(11) And this is what we have found ---- risk tolerance, which is 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, it’s down to only 60 percent, and that’s a pretty significant difference.

Here’s what we find on dominance hormone. (11) From their baseline when they come in, high-

power people experience about a 20-percent increase, and low-power people experience about a

10-percent decrease. So again, two minutes, and you get these changes. (12) Concerning stress

hormone, high-power people experience about a 25-percent decrease, and the low-power people

experience about a 15-percent increase. (13) Once again, two minutes lead to these hormonal

changes that configure your brain to basically be either assertive, confident or really stress-reactive,

and, you know, feeling sort of shut down. And we’ve all had that feeling, right? So it seems that

our nonverbals do govern how we think and feel about ourselves.

Also, our bodies change our minds. So, power posing for a few minutes really changes your

life in meaningful ways.

When I tell people about this, that our bodies change our minds and our minds can change

our behavior, (14) and our behavior can change our outcomes, they say to me, “I don’t believe that.

It feels fake. Right?” So I said, “fake it till you make it” I’m going to live you with this.

(15) Before you go into the next stressful evaluative situation, for example, a job interview, for

two minutes, try doing this, in the elevator, or at your desk behind closed doors and say to yourself

“That’s what I want to do.” Configure your brain to do the best in that situation. Get your

dominance hormone up, and get your stress hormone 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 managed to say who I am and show who I am.

To sum up, today, we talk about the “nonverbal expressions of power and dominance” and

3

the strong effects of the change of behavior. I suggest you try power posing, which is simple but

will significantly change the outcomes of your life. OK, next time we are going to discuss the social

functions of body language.

Conversation or Interview

1. A. Environmental issues.

B. Endangered species.

C. Global warming.

D. Conservation.

2. A. It is thoroughly proved.

B. It is definitely very serious.

C. It is just a temporary variation.

D. It is changing our ways of living.

3. A. Protection of endangered animals’ habitats.

B. Negative human impact on the environment.

C. Frequent abnormal phenomena on the earth.

D. The woman’s indifferent attitude to the earth.

4. A. Nature should take its course.

B. People take things for granted.

C. Humans are damaging the earth.

D. Animals should stay away from zoos.

5. A. Objective. B. Pessimistic.

C. Skeptical. D. Subjective.

Questions：

1. What do the speakers mainly talk about?

2. What does the woman think of global warming?

3. What is the man mainly concerned about?

4. What do the speakers both agree on the topic?

5. What is the woman’s attitude toward the topic?

原文：Conversation One

M: Hey, Cathy, did you read this article in the National Geographic? I can't believe how much man

is changing the planet.

W: Yeah, I had a look at it. (5)Quite interesting I suppose if you believe that sort of thing.

M: What? What do you mean, "if you believe that sort of thing"? Are you saying you don't believe

that we are damaging the planet?

W: (5)To be honest, Matt, not really.

4

M: What are you saying? Are you saying global warming isn't a fact, deforestation isn't a fact, the

greenhouse effect isn't actually happening?

W: Hey, calm down Mark. (5)I just think too many people take these things as being definitely true

without knowing all the facts.

M: You really don't think global warming is happening. You know they've said sea levels are going

to rise by quite a few meters over the next fifty to a hundred years.

Weather conditions are getting worse all over the world. Can you remember how many big

hurricanes there have been in the United States over the last few years? I think evidence is all

around us.

W: (2) I don't think we have enough information to be honest. We've only been measuring these

things for around two or three hundred years. We have no idea what was happening 50,000 years

ago. For all we know, this is just a natural blip in the whole climate cycle. I don't think we should

change how we're living just because of twenty years of abnormal measurements.

M: (3) And don't you think all the other effects we're having on the planet are destructive?

W: What do you mean?

M: I mean, like, deforestation, overpopulation, threatening the existence of many endangered

animals, pollution of the air and I mean, I could go on if you want!

W: No, no...I understand what you're saying and, yes, (4) it's true that there are several problems

worldwide caused by human influence. I think the destruction of the Amazon rainforest is really

dangerous and it's something we could live to regret. I read somewhere that they were considered

to be the "lungs of the planet" and there we are happily chopping it all down.

And it would be a shame to lose some of those animals that may become extinct, you know, like

the rhino or the panda. But I think we shouldn't interfere with nature. If they are going to become

extinct, then we have to allow nature to take its course.

M: You've just contradicted yourself in two sentences, Kate. First you said it's bad that we're

interfering with nature by destroying the rainforest and then

…

W: That's not the same thing!

M: Well, of course it is! The only reason 99% of these animals are endangered is precisely because

WE are threatening their habitats, either by chopping it down as you say or by expanding towns

and farming into areas where these animals normally live and hunt. You can't destroy an animal's

habitat and then turn around and say we can't interfere with nature to save it.

W: I don't think having twenty panda cubs in zoos around the world is a very smart way to save an

animal. It's totally artificial and is cruel to the animals involved.

M: I would go along with that, yes. The real solution is to save the animal's original habitat…

6. A. Teachers’ resistance to change.

B. Students’ inadequate ability to read.

C. Teachers’ misunderstanding of such literacy.

D. Students’ indifference to the new method.

7. A. Abilities to complete challenging tasks.

B. Abilities to learn subject matter knowledge.

C. Abilities to perform better in schoolwork.

D. Abilities to perform disciplinary work.

5

8. A. Recalling Specific information.

B. Understanding particular details.

C. Examining sources of information.

D. Retelling a historical event.

9. A. Engaging literacy and disciplinary experts in the program.

B. Helping teachers understand what disciplinary literacy is.

C. Teaching disciplinary discourse practices by literacy teachers.

D. Designing learning strategies with experts from both sides.

10. A. To argue for a case.

B. To discuss a dispute.

C. To explain a problem.

D. To present details.

Questions：

6. According to the woman, what is the biggest problem in teaching disciplinary literacy?

7. What does disciplinary literacy really mean?

8. What would a more disciplinary assessment ask students to do?

9. Which is the best practice in teacher training institutions to

promote disciplinary literacy teaching?

10. What is the purpose of the interview?

原文：Conversation Two

M: Cyndie, you've been doing research on disciplinary literacy for about 20 years now. In that

time, you've probably been asked just about everything possible. What question comes up most

often these days?

W: That's easy. We're doing better convincing teachers that disciplinary literacy is worth teaching,

but they still are hesitant about their students' reactions. A teacher said to me recently, "I have

enough trouble getting my kids to read a textbook chapter. How would I ever motivate them to

read in a disciplinary way?"

M: Is that a real question or is it just a mask for teacher resistance?

W: I think it‘s a real question, and in fact, it’s also our biggest problem, (6) because many teachers

still don't understand the distinctions between content area reading and disciplinary literacy.

M: What is disciplinary literacy anyway? You said that's different.

W: Disciplinary literacy doesn't promise to make someone a better student. It invites students to

join the disciplinary field itself. It's a kind of invitation to join a club.

M: Does it mean it invites students to join the "history club" by reading like a historian or the

"science club" by reading like a scientist.

W: Right, but it goes beyond that. It says, “We want you to join us. We want to share with you our

cognitive secrets, our way of thinking about the world, and how we solve problems. We want to

count you as one of us.” In doing that, it both holds out the promise of affiliation, (connecting with

others is a big motivator), and (7) the promise of greater competency with challenging tasks -- not

competency in being a kid or a student, but competency in being successful with the kinds of things

6

that adults do.

M: What about assessment? How do we test disciplinary literacy?

W: There aren't any standardized disciplinary reading or writing tests yet, but one can easily

imagine how classroom assessments could change in the future as instruction becomes

more disciplinary in focus.

M: Past assessments in history, literature, or science have aimed to find out if students had

mastered particular information. Questions about content would certainly still have a place

in disciplinary literacy since knowledge matters in disciplinary literacy too. But what would a

more disciplinary assessment look like?

W: I think a more disciplinary assessment would seek to find out whether students are interpreting

such information in a sophisticated way according to the traditions of that discipline. For example,

a disciplinary test in history might ask not only what we know about a historical event, (8) but how

we know about it -- students would be questioned about the source of the information, the

reliability of the source, and how the information matches with information from other sources. In

cases where the information is contradictory, the assessment might ask students to determine

whose account was more credible, requiring students to weigh evidence using the same kinds of

criteria that historians use.

M: Uhmm. That sounds interesting.

W: Or a literature assessment might ask students to engage in deeper interpretation than in the

past. Instead of asking about the theme of a story, for example, an assessment might ask students

to determine alternative themes and to decide --based on text evidence -- which one the author

seemed most sympathetic to. In other words, it would ask the student to participate in the reading

more as a literary critic than a student.

M: How should we prepare teachers to teach disciplinary literacy in teacher training institutions?

W: So far, teacher training institutions haven't done a very good job of helping subject matter

teachers understand the discourse practices of their disciplines; so those practices often remain

implicit, untaught.

M: I agree with that. But have you seen any good examples?

W: Sure, there are some examples of programs that do make disciplinary literacy practices explicit.

(9)The best of these programes, in my opinion, are the result of literacy and disciplinary experts

collaborating to determine what these practices are and then engaging students in them.

7