쉐도잉 연습: The Lie You Tell Every Day - 영상으로 영어 말하기 배우기

연습 모드 선택

각 모드는 전체 화면 연습실로 열립니다.

310 문장

문장이 너무 짧거나 길면 Edit를 눌러 조정하세요.

You've told a lie today.

Probably more than one.

Not the kind you'd ever feel guilty about.

The small kind.

You agreed with a friend, even though you thought he was wrong.

You laughed at a joke that wasn't funny.

You said the food at a dinner party was great, even though it wasn't.

You went along to get along.

We all do this without thinking.

It feels like politeness, like keeping the peace.

But what if I told you this behavior has enormous consequences.

It's what determines whether your company hires the right candidate.

It's what allows extremists to dominate our politics.

And it's the same behavior that almost overnight brought down the Berlin Wall.

Thousands of East Germans came across the border today, perhaps more than a hundred thousand.

So many that border police lost count.

Today we're going to talk about a phenomenon that hides in every conversation, every workplace, every country in which you've ever lived.

It's called preference falsification.

Once you see how it works, you'll start to spot it everywhere, including in yourself.

We begin somewhere ordinary, a Friday night get -together with friends.

This story comes from Timur Koran.

He explores the gap between what people privately believe and what they say out loud.

He says the smallest version of this gap shows up in get -togethers with friends.

Sometimes when we go over to friends, we have to jointly decide what we're going to do together.

And sometimes it so happens that the group perceives that everyone wants to watch a movie when actually no one does,

or few do.

So people, to appear cooperative, say that they would like to watch a movie.

Maybe you've experienced this.

It's been a long week.

You're tired.

You don't want to commit to two -hour movie

but you don't see anything and neither does anyone else

and everybody ends up leaving the event dissatisfied

or less satisfied than they could have been they've watched a movie

when none of them really wanted to spend the evening

that way everyone goes home thinking they were the only one who didn't want to be there

and the cost is bigger than a wasted evening

the host now thinks the group loves movie nights so the next time everyone gets together they plan another one.

And no one will be brave enough to say, I never wanted to watch the first movie.

Please, God, not another one.

The lie doesn't disappear when the night ends.

It compounds.

Now turn the volume up.

Move from that get -together with friends to a workplace.

A few decades ago, Timur was a professor at the University of Southern California.

The economics department was under pressure to hire more women onto the faculty.

Most of his colleagues were on board, at least in public.

But in private, different conversations were happening.

There was a sense that if we limited ourselves to looking at women

or had decided in advance to hire a female candidate, that we might be making a mistake.

Notice what's been lost.

If a department has real concerns about a hiring process, those concerns are useful to hear they might lead to better policy,

a better search, a better hire.

But the concerns never make it into the room.

They die in private.

And the department makes its decision with an incomplete picture of what people really think.

Timur has a name for what's happening in moments like these.

I mentioned this at the start of the video.

Preference falsification.

Preference falsification is the form of lying,

but one aimed at disguising your true preference and also the information that underlies

that preference preference falsification is broader than self -censorship self -censorship

means staying quiet preference falsification can mean entering the conversation

and touting a belief you don't actually support you become an ambassador for a position

that you privately reject this is everywhere in our personal

and professional lives it's also woven into the fabric of the nations in

which we live to see this phenomenon at work we have to travel back in time to East Germany under communism.

For decades, the East German regime appeared to be one of the most ideologically unified governments on Earth.

Public surveys showed loyalty.

The dissidents who did exist were a tiny, hounded minority.

By every visible measure, East Germans believed in their system.

And then, in 1989, the Berlin Wall came down.

The barrier that had separated

East and West Germany for decades? it was gone.

And almost overnight, East Germans discovered that almost nobody believed in what that wall stood for.

Before the wall came down,

East Germans were almost unanimously supporting the prevailing regime.

There were very, very few dissidents.

After The wall came down.

Very few people would actually admit to having been sincere supporters of the regime that fell.

It became hazardous to admit that one sincerely believed in the regime.

The same pattern played out across

Eastern Europe as the Cold War ended.

Timur tells a story about a New York Times reporter who

went to Prague to talk to communist supporters of the old regime.

Well, I went looking for communists and I couldn't find a communist anywhere.

And people who had made a career by rising in the Communist Party,

running communist organizations, they were now all saying that they were not really communists at any point,

that they were simply playing along in order to advance, in order to feed their children,

in order to have a roof over their head.

Sit with that for a second.

For 40 years, an entire society had been performing belief in something that when the pressure lifted, almost no one actually endorsed.

The true believers had mostly been acting.

They were so good at it that even the people running the country couldn't tell the difference between sincere loyalty and performance.

This is the same phenomenon that we saw in that movie night scenario, just at a much larger scale with much bigger stakes.

There's an important point to be made here.

Once the Berlin Wall fell and all the communists declared that they had been capitalists all along, preference falsification did not disappear.

It was like a pendulum, but now on the other side.

To say that you were a communist

100

while everyone around you sang the praises of the free market would leave you feeling out of step.

101

Even if you missed the old regime, you now said you didn't.

102

preference falsification had changed sides.

103

So how does a regime get tens of millions of people to outperform the same lie at the same time?

104

In authoritarian regimes, where it's especially dangerous to step out of line, the answer, of course, is violence.

105

Or to be more precise, the threat of violence.

106

Timur Koran says that history has shown us

107

that you don't actually need to imprison many people to get them to toe the line.

108

You just need to imprison the right people in front of an audience.

109

In 2013, North Korea's supreme leader,

110

Kim Jong -un, had his own uncle dragged out of a major political gathering in front of hundreds of party officials.

111

After a short trial with a foregone conclusion, the uncle was executed.

112

This morning, North Korea is reeling.

113

Its supreme leader, Kim Jong -un, completed a stunning power play Thursday against his uncle.

114

North Korea's news agency announced the regime's number two man was executed for trying to overthrow the government.

115

Kim could have done this quietly, arrested his uncle at home, held the trial in secret, buried the story.

116

Instead, he chose theater.

117

One of its effects was to make

118

North Korea's dictator signal that absolutely anyone could be punished and punished severely for disloyalty.

119

If Kim can execute a relative and do so without any due process,

120

he could do this to anyone.

121

The Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein used the same playbook decades earlier.

122

In one of the party congresses, he identified somebody in the audience,

123

had them dragged out and shot in the hallway and the entire party congress heard the shot and nobody made a move.

124

Nobody made a move.

125

The point of the public execution was not just to scare the victims, allies, and family.

126

It demonstrated in front of every powerful person in the room

127

that no one would step up to defend you if you stepped out of line.

128

Once that principle is demonstrated, you don't need to engage in violence very often.

129

People carry around the sound of that gunshot in the hallway.

130

They censor themselves before anyone tells them to.

131

From this point on, it isn't the regime that keeps preference falsification spreading.

132

It's everyone else.

133

In 1977, a Czech pleric named Václav Havel and a small group of friends signed a document called Charter 77.

134

It asked the Czechoslovakian government to honor the human rights agreements it had already signed.

135

From the outside, it seemed like a modest request.

136

But the government launched a campaign of vilification against the signers.

137

Newspapers condemned them.

138

Schoolchildren wrote letters denouncing them.

139

And then friends stopped speaking to them.

140

People who knew Vaclav Havel would see him coming and cross to the other side of the street.

141

The system perpetuates itself by turning the victims into victimizers.

142

And everyone becomes complicit in this system of oppression,

143

which also creates a great deal of guilt in people.

144

One of the reasons why Vaclav Havel's friends would move to the other side of the road

145

when they saw him coming is that it gave them pain to have to ignore Vaclav, not say hello to him.

146

Picture that for a second.

147

You see your old friend walking toward you on the sidewalk.

148

You agree with the document he just signed.

149

You may have wanted to sign it yourself, but you see how everyone else is treating your old friend.

150

So you cross the street.

151

Because if someone sees you nod hello, what might they do to you?

152

Could you lose your job, your apartment, your child's spot at that nice school?

153

Each person who crosses the street makes the next person more likely to cross the street themselves.

154

Every act of conformity becomes a small weight pressing down on everyone else who sees it.

155

The regime doesn't even need to do that much to get you to conform.

156

Ordinary citizens are now doing the heavy lifting.

157

You might be tempted to think that this is something that happens only in other places, in countries ruled by dictators.

158

In the United States, we have a free press.

159

We have a constitution.

160

People say what they want.

161

But recent surveys show a majority of Americans, on both the left and the right, are afraid to share their political views openly.

162

They worry about losing jobs, friendships, business contacts.

163

The fear of social punishment doesn't require a gulag.

164

It just requires a workplace and a Slack channel.

165

This fear that ordinary people feel, it's arguably even more amplified for politicians.

166

Timur points to an example from Donald Trump's primary campaign in 2015 and 2016.

167

Trump didn't just argue with his rivals.

168

He insulted their wives.

169

He mocked their fathers.

170

He even mocked

171

Senator John McCain for having been a prisoner of war in Vietnam.

172

Many observers, Timur included, expected that the McCain attack would be the moment that

173

Trump's campaign collapsed.

174

Instead, he went up in the polls.

175

Through those insults and attacks,

176

Trump was sending in 2016 that if you crossed him, no matter who you were,

177

you would get attacked and he would try to destroy your reputation and that his followers would join in attacking you.

178

And it was very important that he demonstrate that nobody was immune to this.

179

He has attacked leading commentators on Fox News who have been among his supporters.

180

He's tried to destroy their reputations.

181

He's insulted them.

182

The message he sends by doing that is very similar to the message

183

North Korea's dictator sent when he had his uncle executed in plain sight.

184

Senator Bob Corker, one of the few

185

Republicans who openly broke with Trump, put it bluntly when his colleagues refused to vote for a trade amendment that they privately supported.

186

I bet that 95 % of the people on this side of the aisle support intellectually this amendment.

187

And a lot of them would vote for it if it came to vote.

188

But no, no, no. Gosh, we might poke the bear.

189

If the president gets upset with us, then we might not be in the majority.

190

And so let's don't do anything that might upset the president.

191

95 % of his colleagues may have agreed with him in private.

192

In public, zero.

193

There's a more recent example.

194

In Donald Trump's second presidential term, as the Republican Party was facing headwinds going into the 2026 midterms, Trump demanded that

195

Republican state legislatures draw up new electoral maps.

196

I've long thought that the practice of gerrymandering is disgusting and absurd.

197

Instead of people selecting their leaders, politicians are selecting their voters.

198

Some state legislators in Indiana refused to go along with Trump.

199

They stood on principle.

200

In the next state election, Trump backed primary challengers and got rid of most of those pesky legislators.

201

Why would a president spend so much money and take the time to get involved in local state elections?

202

It sent a message, cross me and I'll come after you.

203

I will derail your political future.

204

This isn't just a right -wing phenomenon.

205

The same machinery operates on the left.

206

In 2020, California, one of the most progressive states in the country, voted on Proposition 16.

207

The measure would have restored affirmative action in state government and public universities.

208

It was endorsed by Kamala Harris, by Gavin Newsom, by virtually every prominent democratic institution in the state, by every public signal you could read,

209

it was going to pass easily.

210

It lost, by a wide margin, in a deep blue state.

211

Affirmative action, whether it's racial affirmative action or gender -based affirmative action,

212

it has generally been unpopular even in heavily democratic states states this is what we find

213

when we poll people giving them anonymity in public though especially

214

in heavily democratic states many people pretend that they support it

215

and the extent of preference falsification is especially high among educated people among corporate leaders in academia in journalism.

216

And so because they strongly support affirmative action,

217

we get the sense that this is a widely supported policy measure.

218

But in fact, it is not.

219

Pundits on TV and executives at conferences give you one answer.

220

A private vote on a ballot gives you a completely different answer.

221

Once you start looking for preference falsification,

222

you start to notice a strange thing it's everywhere in plain sight often hidden inside something that looks completely innocent

223

like comedy for decades harvey weinstein was one of the most powerful producers in hollywood he could make

224

or break careers and as we've learned since then it was an open secret

225

that he was a sexual predator occasionally that secret would leak out into public view

226

this is from the sitcom 30 rock don't do it jaymo

227

you don't want to mess with weird out oh please I'm not afraid of anyone in show business.

228

I turned down intercourse with Harvey Weinstein on no less than three occasions.

229

Out of five.

230

And in 2013, at an Oscar nomination ceremony, Seth MacFarlane told this joke.

231

The 2012 nominees for Best Performance by an Actress in a Supporting Role are Sally Field in Lincoln,

232

Anne Hathaway in Les Miserables, Jackie Weaver in Silver Linings Playbook,

233

Helen Hunt in The Sessions and Amy Adams in The Master Congratulations,

234

you five ladies no longer have to pretend to be attracted to Harvey Weinstein Did you hear that laughter?

235

Everyone got it

236

Humor is used in repressive societies

237

and in contexts where people feel constrained in what they can say

238

or to signal that one is aware of certain contradictions without taking ownership of the preferences being expressed

239

or the facts being pointed to.

240

In laughing, they signal that they understand what is being communicated, but don't have to take ownership for it.

241

This is the role the court jester used to play.

242

Of all the people in the medieval royal court, only the jester could speak truth to the king,

243

because everyone agreed in advance that it wouldn't count.

244

If you want to know where a society's taboos are, watch its comedians.

245

They are the ones poking at those unspoken truths, forcing us to see them.

246

It's clear that in many environments, preference falsification can be a dangerous phenomenon.

247

But in your personal life, is preference falsification always such a bad thing?

248

After all, it keeps the peace with your friends.

249

It smooths over disagreements at work.

250

Even at a national level, preference falsification can hold together political coalitions that would otherwise tear themselves apart.

251

Isn't going along to get along the price we pay for civilization?

252

Timur would say yes and no. Yes, because imagine what would happen if everyone said exactly what they were thinking all the time.

253

Social life would be unbearable.

254

Friendships would implode.

255

Work colleagues would be at each other's throats.

256

There's a reason we tell people their haircut looks fine.

257

But the answer is also no, because the cost of large -scale preference falsification is simply enormous.

258

One of the huge costs is that we can't have an informed debate.

259

All sorts of ideas that might prove very useful don't get expressed.

260

A society that is silently lying to itself cannot course correct.

261

Good ideas with rough edges never get smoothed.

262

Bad ideas that everyone privately doubts never get challenged.

263

And the middle ground, where most people actually live, becomes the most dangerous place to stand

264

and it's one of the manifestations of it is the hyperpolarization

265

we see in the united states today in both parties we are seeing struggles between extremists and moderates

266

and it's the moderates who are finding it necessary to falsify their preferences to give up certain nuances in their arguments.

267

And those individuals find it very risky to participate in debates because they get demonized by both sides.

268

Extreme positions rarely require nuance or compromise.

269

Moderate positions almost always do.

270

So extremism is easier to defend in public than moderation.

271

Over time, the moderates fall silent.

272

The extremists keep talking.

273

What looks like a polarized society is actually a society

274

that is mostly silencing itself with two vocal minorities screaming from the edges.

275

There's one final consequence of preference falsification, and it's an important one.

276

It hides reality from the people in charge.

277

Almost no one saw the collapse of communism until it happened.

278

Not the CIA, not the KGB, not the dissidents on the ground.

279

Then it happened.

280

This is what preference falsification does at scale.

281

It makes a society look stable when it's weak.

282

It makes a regime look popular when it's actually hated.

283

It makes a workplace, a friendship, a marriage look like everyone is on the same page when underneath, almost no one is.

284

And then one day, the smallest thing tips the balance and the whole arrangement collapses faster than anyone thought possible.

285

Timur's own family in Turkey experienced this.

286

They believed in a secular Turkey.

287

They assumed the religious resentments around them would fade with education and modernization.

288

They couldn't see what was bubbling under the surface

289

because the people who disagreed with the country's direction were not allowed to say it out loud.

290

Decades later, Turkey would change in ways that no one in Timur's circle predicted.

291

Every society and every relationship contains fault lines under its surface.

292

The question is whether you release this pressure slowly and safely by talking about differences and disagreements,

293

or whether you let the pressure build up to the point of an earthquake.

294

Tumor isn't saying that there is a quick fix for preference falsification.

295

This is a phenomenon that is woven into how humans interact with one another.

296

But Tumor's research points to something useful, and it's easier to accomplish than you might expect the first step is just to notice preference falsification around

297

you to notice when you're nodding along with something you don't believe to pay attention

298

when no one in the room is saying what they're saying in the hallway outside to take note

299

when laughter at a joke is the only honest reaction in the room

300

you will not fix the world by speaking up at a work meeting

301

sometimes the polite lie is the right call but every once in a

302

while in the room where it actually matters

303

you may be the only person willing to say what almost everyone is thinking privately

304

and the moment you do might be the moment you find out

305

you were never alone thank you for watching

306

this video each week on the hidden brain audio podcast i bring you ideas

307

and insights from the world's leading researchers if you'd like to have your mind stretched please check us out on Apple,

308

Spotify, or at hiddenbrain .org.

309

I'm Shankar Vedantam.

310

See you soon.

앱 다운로드

유창하게 말하는 데 필요한 모든 것

AI 발음 평가문장마다 점수 확인

IPA 발음 연습모든 소리 마스터

단어 학습나만의 단어장 만들기

단어 게임놀면서 외우기

QR 스캔

Download on theApp Store Get it onGoogle Play

같은 채널

Why Your Brain Sabotages Your Own Happiness

Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults

FOR YOU

이 레슨의 어휘와 말하기 포인트

이 말하기 레슨은 영상 “The Lie You Tell Every Day”을(를) 바탕으로 합니다. 이 영상에는 섀도잉할 문장 310개와 단어 3528개가 있습니다. 말하는 구간의 길이는 24:01입니다. 화자는 분당 약 147단어의 일정한 속도로 말해서 섀도잉하기에 편한 속도입니다. 영어에서 가장 많이 쓰이는 3,000단어에 속하는 단어가 81%뿐이라 어휘가 어려운 편입니다.

이 영상의 핵심 어휘

영상에 나오는 익혀 둘 만한 단어 15개를 발음, 뜻과 함께 정리했습니다.

단어	발음	뜻
preference 명사	/ˈpɹɛf(ə)ɹ(ə)ns/	선택
regime 명사	/ɹəˈʒiːm/	제도
communist 명사	/ˈkɑ.mjə.nɪst/	공산주의자, 빨갱이
phenomenon 명사	/fəˈnɒm.ɪ.nən/	현상
uncle 명사	/ˈʌŋ.kl̩/	아저씨, 삼촌
hire 동사	/ˈhaɪɹ/	고용하다
moderate 형용사	/ˈmɑdəɹət/	적당하다
workplace 명사	/ˈwɝkˌpleɪs/	직장, 일터
colleague 명사	/ˈkɒliːɡ/	동료, 동업자
execute 동사	/ˈɛksɪˌkjuːt/	처형하다
ordinary 형용사	/ˈɔɹdɪnɛɹi/	정규의, 보통의
friendship 명사	/ˈfɹɛn(d)ʃɪp/	우정, 우의
supporter 명사	/səˈpɔɹ.tɚ/	지지자
dictator 명사	/ˈdɪkˌteɪtəɹ/	독재자
defend 동사	/dɪˈfɪnd/	방어하다

영상에 나오는 구동사

단어	뜻
come down 동사	내려오다
get along 동사	과/와/ 잘 지내다, 과/와 사이가 좋다
get together 동사	만나다
give up 동사	항복하다

따라 말해 볼 만한 문장

영상에 나오는 짧고 완결된 문장으로, 일상 대화에서 그대로 쓸 수 있습니다:

You've told a lie today.
Not the kind you'd ever feel guilty about.
You laughed at a joke that wasn't funny.
It's what allows extremists to dominate our politics.
Isn't going along to get along the price we pay for civilization?

이 영상의 문법

화자가 가장 많이 쓰는 문형을 영상 속 실제 표현과 함께 정리했습니다.

문형	영상 속 표현
현재완료 have/has + 과거분사 — 과거의 일이 지금도 관련이 있을 때	You've told · you've ever lived · you've experienced
수동태 be + 과거분사 — 누가 하는지보다 무슨 일이 일어나는지에 초점	been lost · be made · was executed
관계절 who / which + 절 — 사람이나 사물에 대한 추가 정보	one who didn · people who had · People who knew

주의할 발음

화자는 don't, isn't, couldn't 같은 축약형과 약화된 형태를 45번 사용합니다. 들리는 대로 짧게 발음하세요.

“th” 소리: theater /ˈθi(ə)tɚ/, gather /ˈɡæðɚ/, earthquake /ˈɝθkweɪk/, underneath /ˌʌndɚˈniθ/
“sh”와 “zh” 소리: regime /ɹəˈʒiːm/, friendship /ˈfɹɛn(d)ʃɪp/, ownership /ˈoʊnɚʃɪp/, punish /ˈpʌnɪʃ/, censorship /ˈsɛnsɚʃɪp/
긴 단어 — 강세 위치에 주의: phenomenon /fəˈnɒm.ɪ.nən/, affirmative /əˈfɝməɾɪv/, ordinary /ˈɔɹdɪnɛɹi/, minority /maɪˈnɒɹ.ɪ.ti/, disagreement /dɪsəˈɡɹiːmənt/

한국어 화자가 어려워하는 소리:

/f/ — ㅍ(/p/)으로 바꾸지 말고 윗니를 아랫입술에 대기: preference /ˈpɹɛf(ə)ɹ(ə)ns/, phenomenon /fəˈnɒm.ɪ.nən/, affirmative /əˈfɝməɾɪv/, friendship /ˈfɹɛn(d)ʃɪp/, defend /dɪˈfɪnd/
/v/ — ㅂ(/b/)과 구별하기: privately /ˈpɹaɪvɪtli/, affirmative /əˈfɝməɾɪv/, overnight /əʊvə(ɹ)ˈnaɪt/, weave /wiːv/, relative /ˈɹɛl.ə.tɪv/
/z/ — ㅈ이 아니라 성대를 울리는 /s/: communism /ˈkɒmjᵿnɪz(ə)m/, visible /ˈvɪzɪb(ə)l/, prisoner /ˈpɹɪzənə/, compromise /ˈkɑmpɹəˌmaɪz/, journalism /ˈd͡ʒɝnl̩ˌɪzəm/

이 영상으로 연습하는 방법

먼저 말하지 않고 영상을 끝까지 듣고 모르는 단어를 적어 둡니다.
보통 속도로 한 문장씩 섀도잉하고, 화자의 리듬과 맞을 때까지 반복합니다.
자신의 목소리를 녹음해 원본과 비교하고, preference, regime, communist 같은 단어에 특히 주의합니다.

쉐도잉이란? 영어 실력을 빠르게 키우는 과학적 방법

쉐도잉(Shadowing)은 원래 전문 통역사 훈련을 위해 개발된 언어 학습 기법으로, 다언어 학자인 Dr. Alexander Arguelles에 의해 대중화된 방법입니다. 핵심 원리는 간단하지만 매우 강력합니다: 원어민의 영어를 들으면서 1~2초의 짧은 지연으로 즉시 소리 내어 따라 말하는 것——마치 '그림자(shadow)'처럼 화자를 따라가는 것입니다. 문법 공부나 수동적인 청취와 달리, 쉐도잉은 뇌와 입 근육이 동시에 실시간으로 영어를 처리하고 재현하도록 훈련합니다. 연구에 따르면 이 방법은 발음 정확도, 억양, 리듬, 연음, 청취력, 말하기 유창성을 크게 향상시킵니다. IELTS 스피킹 준비와 자연스러운 영어 소통을 원하는 분들에게 특히 효과적입니다.

섀도잉 방법: 단계별 전체 가이드 읽기 →

쉐도잉 연습: The Lie You Tell Every Day - 영상으로 영어 말하기 배우기

연습 모드 선택

앱 다운로드

같은 채널

Why Your Brain Sabotages Your Own Happiness

추천 영상

"Where are we not telling the truth?" | Jon Lovett | Google Zeitgeist

EVERY LEVEL OF MANIPULATION

How Different Are Our Inner Monologues?

The uncomfortable truth | Yuval Noah Harari

10 Unspoken Rules Nordic People Ignore To Keep Life Simple

16 minutes of natural conversation | The British Podcast

When She Plays The Victim (The Stoic Reality Check)

Who you are fluctuates every single second | Lisa Feldman Barrett

Social Media is Warping Your Mind

Why Do Humans Have to Pretend to Sleep to Fall Asleep?

The Two Biggest Lies in HISTORY

UNDERSTANDING INTERPERSONAL DYNAMICS THROUGH CONVERSATION #funny #movie #thementalist #shorts #ai