シャドーイング練習: The day you died (and didn't notice) - 動画で英語スピーキングを学ぶ

練習モードを選ぶ

各モードは全画面の練習ルームで開きます。

102 文

文が短すぎたり長すぎる場合は、Editをタップして調整してください。

I died when I was 22 years old.

That was when I moved to Oxford and when I think back to my childhood, my upbringing and my family, I think that that was the moment that I died.

Sometimes I even grieve the younger Johnny.

I miss my house, my school and my dog called Lily.

I miss my parents even though they are both still alive because that life is gone.

That Johnny is dead.

This is a view known as episodism and it goes back to the philosopher Galen Strawson and his work against narrativity.

Episodism is when you have no sense

that who you were in the past is the same as who you are right now.

It is not saying that there is no self but rather that life is divided into a series of different selves.

There is no connecting fibre between these selves and any narrative

or story that we build that tries to do so will always be insufficient and artificial.

Who you are now is a detailed, coherent and individual personality.

Sure there will be bits and bobs that overlap such as your music preferences

or even people who might be here today who were once there in the past.

But the sense of now is defined by these essential and all-consuming elements or pillars.

and when these pillars change your sense of self will change as well it will essentially cease to be

and so then you are reincarnated as a new person for many the idea

that they are a perpetually written story is a kind of comfort we're told by psychologists like oliver sacks

that each of us constructs and lives a narrative and

that narrative is then our identity but for the episodic person and that doesn't make any sense.

The episodic sees their life in terms of these discrete blocks that overlap a bit, but they have no meaning overall.

Strawson makes a distinction between a human being and a self.

I know that I am the same biological entity that went skateboarding with Sam Leatt when I was nine years old.

But as a self, the person talking to you now and having these thoughts in my head, I know I wasn't there.

The writer Henry James once remarked that he thought his earlier masterpieces were written by somebody else entirely.

And Marcel Proust wrote that we are a series of cells which die one after the other.

I feel like a completely different person today as the person who went skateboarding with Sam Liat.

So are you an episodic person or are you a narrative kind of thinker?

Well, episodism is defined by three feelings or beliefs.

Let's go through them and see if they relate to you.

First, there is this lack of persistence.

The episodic does not see themselves as something that was there in the past or will be there even in the future.

For example, I'm well aware that I will one day be old, Greg, and I'll find it hard to get out of a chair.

I'll look back at now and think, wow, so much has changed.

Life has changed completely.

And there are past episodes which feel the same.

I feel completely disconnected to who I once was.

Second, there is temporal displacement.

While an episodic will possess certain factual from the inside memories, they do not feel that those memories apply to who you are now.

So for example, I remember my grandparents' house.

I remember playing an open presence and eating creamed corn.

But that happened to a different person.

That happened to childhood Johnny.

When I think back to some of my best friends at school and university, I remember them fondly, but that wasn't me.

It's not the same person who does mini philosophy right now.

And then third, there is the present focus.

The episodic is by definition more located in the now, and they identify more with their current values, their current thoughts, and their current environment.

For example, I am defined by my children, I'm defined by my family, I'm defined by the village I live in now and the projects I'm doing right here.

If none of this resonates at all then you are probably not an episodic person and according to Strawson the opposite kind,

the narrative kind, is somebody called the diachronic.

They will see their lives as a long-term continuous stretch and will often view the episodic life as chilling or even empty.

They'll wonder how How can you have any sense of loyalty?

How can you have any identity at all if you are just this collection of disconnected blobs?

Strawson argues that in a lot of academia, in psychology and even medicine, the diachronic or the narrative view is the dominant one.

It says that to be a full person you have to be narrative

and this is what Strawson calls the psychological narrativity thesis, that we do live our lives as stories.

But the problem is

that this can then spill out into an ethical narrativity thesis where we say

that we ought to live our lives as stories, and the episodic person is somehow a half person.

Philosophers like Charles Taylor have argued

that making sense of ourselves requires us to understand our lives as a kind of unfolding story.

Some people go further and suggest that you only have a true identity by forming an autobiographical narrative.

Without it you aren't developing fully as a person because they see a good life in terms of a quest.

If anybody has ever sat through a self-help lecture talking about your journey

or if you ever heard a friend talking about growth you will appreciate how dominant the diachronic narrative view really is.

But is this actually how everybody works?

Strawson argues that this narrative outlook is often a product of an intellectual fashion,

and the misplaced confidence of people who generalise their own experience as being the recipe for the entire human race.

But the diachronic view is not necessarily the case, nor has it always been the case.

For example, the French philosopher Michel de Montaigne claimed

that his memory was so poor that he could hardly find a trace of himself in the past, something that I can relate to as well.

The Earl of Shaftesbury once said that he lived only for the now

and he didn't care if he became 20 successive selves.

Writers like Virginia Woolf felt their life existed in his brilliant and disjointed flashes rather than as a linear plot.

For these people, the idea of a quest or a single unified narrative isn't a requirement for a good life.

In fact, it's a gross hindrance to self-understanding at all.

Strawson argues that this dominant narrativity thesis is a problem.

It might even be dangerous.

Because Strawson thinks that the more you try to turn your life into a good story, the more you are forced to engage in what he calls revision.

Narrative people often become virtuoso novelists.

They unconsciously delete, edit, and reorder their past to make it cohere.

And as Nietzsche famously put it, I have done that, says my memory, but I cannot have done that, says my pride.

Eventually memory surrenders to what you want it to say, you stop caring or focusing on the facts,

and you spend your time engaging in a kind of cognitive bias that constructs a perfect and moral saintly self.

For Strawson, revision takes two forms.

First is the charged form, and this is when it is motivated by pride, by shame, or the need for self-love.

is a kind of ego protection.

And second there is the uncharged form, which is simply a kind of form-finding tendency that tries to fill in the gaps of an often faulty memory.

In other words, we make up stories and even memories to bridge the part of ourselves that we cannot remember.

Every time we retell our past, we shift further and further away from the facts.

Recent neurophysiological research shows that the very act of conscious recall brings an alteration of the memory itself.

The narrative person in their ham-fisted breaking

and making reconstruction of their daily experiences is often drifting further and further away from the truth of their actual being.

The episodic by contrast doesn't need a story to be moral or responsible or even necessarily coherent.

Montaigne was famous for his deep loyalty and friendship despite claiming to have no memory of the past shared experiences.

Friendship for the episodic is shown in how one is in the present.

It's how you and I relate right now.

So do you think your life is defined by episodes

100

or do you think there is one long overarching narrative which connects who you are?

101

Is the luxury or the habit of a life story actually a trap

102

that keeps you from the beauty of being in the moment.

アプリをダウンロード

流暢に話すために必要なすべて

AI発音採点文ごとに採点

IPA練習すべての音をマスター

単語学習自分の単語帳を作る

単語ゲーム遊びながら覚える

QRをスキャン

Download on theApp Store Get it onGoogle Play

同じチャンネル

117

FOR YOU

このレッスンの語彙とスピーキングのポイント

このC1レベルのスピーキングレッスンは、動画「The day you died」を教材にしています。繰り返し出てくる語は次のとおりです：narrative, episodic, Strawson, self, defined。この動画には、シャドーイング用の文が102文、単語が1508語あります。音声の長さは8:42です。話す速さは1分あたり約173語で、日常会話に近い自然なペースです。英語の頻出3,000語に含まれる単語は80%だけなので、語彙は難しめです。

この動画の重要語彙

動画の中で特に難しい単語15語を、発音と意味つきで紹介します。

単語	発音	意味
diachronic 形容詞	/daɪ.əˈkɹɑnɪk/	通時的
philosopher 名詞	/fəˈlɑsəfɚ/	哲学者
thesis 名詞	/ˈθisɪs/	テーゼ, 論題
skateboard 名詞	/ˈskeɪt.bɔɹd/	スケートボード
pillar 名詞	/ˈpɪlɚ/	柱
revision 名詞	/ɹəˈvɪʒ.ən/	復習
construct 動詞	/ˈkɑn.stɹʌkt/	建設する, 建てる
grandparent 名詞	/ˈɡɹæn(d)pɛəɹənt/	祖父母
hindrance 名詞	/ˈhɪndɹəns/	邪魔, 支障
misplace 動詞	/mɪsˈpleɪs/	置き忘れる
retell 動詞	/ɹiˈtɛl/	再び語る
thinker 名詞	/ˈθɪŋ.kɚ/	思想家
unfold 動詞	/ʌnˈfoʊld/	広げる
upbringing 名詞	/ˈʌpˌbrɪŋɪŋ/	教養
virtuoso 名詞	/ˌvɝ.t͡ʃuˈoʊ.soʊ/	名人, ヴィルトゥオーゾ

この動画の文法

話し手がよく使っている文型を、動画の実際の表現とともに紹介します。

文型	動画での表現
受動態 be + 過去分詞 — 誰がするかより、何が起きるかに焦点を当てる	is divided · is defined · are reincarnated
現在完了形 have/has + 過去分詞 — 過去の出来事が今も関係している	has changed · have argued · has ever sat
関係詞節 who / which + 節 — 人や物について情報を加える	people who might · person who went · person who does

注意したい発音

話し手はI'm, doesn't, I'llなど、短縮形や弱形を15回使っています。聞こえたとおりの短い形で発音しましょう。

「th」の音: thesis /ˈθisɪs/, thinker /ˈθɪŋ.kɚ/, ethical /ˈɛθɪkəl/
「sh」と「zh」の音: revision /ɹəˈvɪʒ.ən/, alteration /ɔl.tɚˈeɪ.ʃən/, unconsciously /ˌʌnˈkɑnʃəsli/, insufficient /ɪnsəˈfɪʃənt/, reconstruction /ˌɹiːkənˈstɹʌkʃən/
長い単語（アクセントの位置に注意）: episodic /ˌɛp.ɪˈsɒd.ɪk/, diachronic /daɪ.əˈkɹɑnɪk/, philosopher /fəˈlɑsəfɚ/, alteration /ɔl.tɚˈeɪ.ʃən/, autobiographical /ˌɑtoʊˌbaɪəˈɡɹæfəkəl/

この動画での練習方法

まず声を出さずに動画を最後まで聞き、知らない単語をメモします。
まず0.75倍速で一文ずつシャドーイングし、慣れてきたら通常の速度に戻します。
自分の声を録音して元の音声と比べます。diachronic, philosopher, thesisなどの単語に特に注意しましょう。

シャドーイングとは？英語上達に効果的な理由

シャドーイング（Shadowing）は、もともとプロの通訳者養成プログラムで開発された言語学習法で、多言語習得者として知られるDr. Alexander Arguelles によって広く普及されました。方法はシンプルですが非常に効果的：ネイティブスピーカーの英語を聞きながら、1〜2秒の遅延で声に出してすぐに繰り返す——まるで「影（shadow）」のように話者を追いかけます。文法ドリルや受動的なリスニングと異なり、シャドーイングは脳と口の筋肉が同時にリアルタイムで英語を処理・再現することを強制します。研究により、発音精度、抑揚、リズム、連音、リスニング力、そして会話の流暢さが大幅に向上することが確認されています。IELTSスピーキング対策や自然な英語コミュニケーションを目指す方に特におすすめです。

シャドーイングのやり方: ステップ別の完全ガイドを読む →

シャドーイング練習: The day you died (and didn't notice) - 動画で英語スピーキングを学ぶ

練習モードを選ぶ

アプリをダウンロード

同じチャンネル

Arguments for God: The Fine Tuning Argument

Shakespeare: Hamlet

Why you should "steel man" other people

Some brains are built for philosophy. Is yours?

Why you can't quit social media (and the Romans knew it)

One of the cruellest things to tell any child

Every monster you fear is really you

The 4 moments that will change your life

3 philosophy classics that are better than self-help books

“But you did it first!”: A defense of the whataboutism

The “Nietzsche Thesis”: Why we don’t really care about truth

おすすめ動画

A Ramble about Identity, Past & Present

Don't Despair

The True Meaning Of Life (Animated Cinematic)

How to Stop Feeling Nostalgic for an Ex

The Stoic Lesson of Marcus Aurelius' Crumbling Statue

Steve Jobs Famous 2005 commencement speech at Stanford University

Why We Can't Save Those We Love

the person i want to be is not the person i am

You Are Not Behind

Why Do You Lose Track of Time When You’re Having Fun?