Luyện nói tiếng Anh bằng Shadowing qua video: "A Time for Choosing" by Ronald Reagan

Chọn chế độ luyện tập

Mỗi chế độ mở một phòng luyện tập toàn màn hình.

349 câu

Nếu các câu quá ngắn hoặc quá dài, hãy bấm Edit để chỉnh sửa.

The following pre -recorded political program is sponsored by TV for Goldwater Miller on behalf of Barry Goldwater, Republican candidate for President of the United States.

Ladies and gentlemen, we take pride in presenting a thoughtful address by Ronald Reagan, Mr. Reagan.

Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Thank you and good evening.

The sponsor has been identified, but unlike most television programs, the performer hasn't been provided with a script.

As a matter of fact, I have been permitted to choose my own words

and discuss my own ideas regarding the choice that we face in the next few weeks.

I have spent most of my life as a Democrat.

I recently have seen fit to follow another course.

I believe that the issues confronting us crossed party lines.

Now one side in this campaign has been telling us

that the issues of this election are the maintenance of peace and prosperity.

The line has been used, we've never had it so good.

But I have an uncomfortable feeling that this prosperity isn't something on which we can base our hopes for the future.

No nation in history has ever survived a tax burden that reached a third of its national income.

Today, 37 cents out of every dollar earned in this country is the tax collector's share.

And yet our government continues to spend 17 million dollars a day more than the government takes in.

We haven't balanced our budget 28 out of the last 34 years.

We've raised our debt limit three times in the last 12 months.

And now our national debt is one

and a half times bigger than all the combined debts of all the nations of the world.

We have 15 billion dollars in gold in our treasury.

We don't own an ounce.

Foreign dollar claims are 27 .3 billion dollars.

And we've just had an ounce that the dollar of 1939 will now purchase 45 cents in its total value.

As for the peace that we would preserve, I wonder who among us would like to approach the wife

or mother whose husband or son has died in South Vietnam

and ask them if they think this is a peace that should be maintained indefinitely.

Do they mean peace, or do they mean we just want to be left in peace?

There can be no real peace while one American is dying someplace in the world for the rest of us.

We're at war with the most dangerous enemy

that has ever faced mankind in his long climb from the swamp to the stars.

And it's been said if we lose that war and in so doing lose this way of freedom of ours,

history will record with the greatest astonishment that those who had the most to lose did the least to prevent its happening.

Well, I think it's time we ask ourselves

if we still know the freedoms that were intended for us by the founding fathers.

Not too long ago, two friends of mine were talking to a Cuban refugee, a businessman who had escaped from Castro.

And in the midst of his story, one of my friends turned to the other and said, we don't know how lucky we are.

And the Cubans stopped and said, how lucky you are.

I had some place to escape to.

And in that sentence, he told us the entire story.

If we lose freedom here, there's no place to escape to.

This is the last stand on earth.

And this idea that government is beholden to the people, that it has no other source of power except the sovereign people,

is still the newest and the most unique idea in all the long history of man's relation to man.

This is the issue of this election.

Whether we believe in our capacity for self -government

or whether we abandon the American Revolution and confess

that a little intellectual elite in a far distant capital can

plan our lives for us better than we can plan them ourselves.

You and I are told increasingly we have to choose between a left or right.

Well, I'd like to suggest there is no such thing as a left or right there's only an up or down

man's old age dream the ultimate in individual freedom consistent with law

and order or down to the ant heap of totalitarianism

and regardless of their sincerity their humanitarian motives those who would

trade our freedom for security have embarked on this downward course in this vote harvesting time

they use terms like the great society

or as we were told a few days ago by the president

we must accept a greater government activity in the affairs of the people.

But they've been a little more explicit in the past.

And among themselves, and all of the things I now will quote have appeared in print, these are not Republican accusations.

For example, they have voices that say, the Cold War will end through our acceptance of a not undemocratic socialism.

Another voice says the profit motive has become outmoded.

It must be replaced by the incentives of the welfare state.

Or our traditional system of individual freedom is incapable of solving the complex problems of the 20th century.

Senator Fulbright has said at Stanford University that the Constitution is outmoded.

He referred to the president as our moral teacher and our leader,

and he says he is hobbled in his task by the restrictions of power imposed on him by this antiquated document.

He must be freed so that he can do for us what he knows is best.

And Senator Clark of Pennsylvania,

another articulate spokesman, defines liberalism as meeting the material needs of the masses through the full power of centralized government.

Well, I for one resented when a representative of the people refers to you and me,

the free men and women of this country, as the masses.

This is a term we haven't applied to ourselves in America.

But beyond that, the full power of centralized government, this was the very thing the Founding Fathers sought to minimize.

They knew that governments don't control things a government can't control the economy without controlling people.

And they know when a government sets out to do that, it must use force and coercion to achieve its purpose.

They also knew those founding fathers that outside of its legitimate functions,

government does nothing as well or as economically as the private sector of the economy.

Now, we have no better example of this than government's involvement in the farm economy over the last 30 years.

Since 1955, the cost of this program has nearly doubled.

One -fourth of farming in America is responsible for 85 % of the farm surplus.

Three -fourths of farming is out on the free market

and has known a 21 % increase in the per capita consumption of all its produce.

You see, that one -fourth of farming, that's regulated and controlled by the federal government.

In the last three years, we've spent $43 in the feed grain program for every dollar bushel of corn we don't grow.

Senator Humphrey last week charged that

Barry Goldwater as president would seek to eliminate farmers.

He should do his homework a little better because he'll find out

that we've had a decline of five million in the farm population under these government programs.

He'll also find

that the Democratic administration has sought to get from Congress extension of the farm program to include

that three -fourths that is now free.

He'll find that they've also asked for the right to imprison farmers who wouldn't keep books as prescribed by the federal government.

The Secretary of Agriculture asked for the right to seize farms through condemnation and resell them to other individuals.

And contained in that same program was a provision

that would have allowed the federal government to remove two million farmers from the soil.

At the same time, there's been an increase in the Department of Agriculture employees.

100

There's now one for every 30 farms in the United States.

101

And still they can't tell us how 66 six shiploads of grain headed for Austria disappeared without a trace, and Billy Solestus never left shore.

102

Every responsible farmer and farm organization has repeatedly asked the government to free the farm economy.

103

But who are farmers to know what's best for them?

104

The wheat farmers voted against a wheat program.

105

The government passed it anyway.

106

Now the price of bread goes up, the price of wheat to the farmer goes down.

107

Meanwhile, back in the city, under urban renewal, the assault on freedom carries on.

108

Private property rights so diluted that public interest is almost anything a few government planners decide it should be.

109

In a program that takes from the needy and gives to the greedy, we see such spectacles as in Cleveland, Ohio.

110

A million

111

and a half dollar building completed only three years ago must

112

be destroyed to make way for what government officials call a more compatible use of the land.

113

The president tells us he's now going to start building public housing units in the thousands, where heretofore we've only built them in the hundreds.

114

But FHA and the Veterans Administration tell us they have 120 ,000 housing units they've taken back through mortgage foreclosure.

115

For three decades, we've sought to solve the problems of unemployment through government planning, and the more the plans fail, the more the planners plan.

116

The latest is the Area Redevelopment Agency.

117

They've just declared

118

Rice County, Kansas a depressed area.

119

Rice County, Kansas has 200 oil wells, and the 14 ,000 people there have over $30 million on deposit in personal savings in their banks.

120

When the government tells you you're depressed, lie down and be depressed.

121

We have

122

so many people who can't see a fat man standing beside

123

a thin one without coming to the conclusion the fat man got that way by taking advantage of the thin one.

124

So they're going to solve all the problems of human misery through government and government planning.

125

Well, now, if government planning and welfare had the answer, and they've had almost 30 years of it,

126

shouldn't we expect government to read the score to us once in a while?

127

Shouldn't they be telling us about the decline each year in the number of people needing help, the reduction in the need for public housing?

128

But the reverse is true.

129

Each year the need grows greater, the program grows greater.

130

We were told four years ago that 17 million people went to bed hungry each night.

131

Well, that was probably true.

132

They were all on a diet. But now we're told

133

that 9 .3 million families in this country are poverty -stricken on the basis of earning less than $3 ,000 a year.

134

Welfare spending 10 times greater than it was in the dark depths of the Depression.

135

We're spending $45 billion on welfare.

136

Now, do a little arithmetic and you'll find that

137

if we divided the $45 billion up equally among those 9 million poor families, we'd be able to give each family $4 ,600 a year.

138

And this added to their present income should eliminate poverty.

139

Direct aid to the poor, however, is only running about $600 per family.

140

It would seem that someplace there must be some overhead.

141

So now we declare war on poverty, or you too can be a Bobby Baker.

142

Now do they honestly expect us to believe that if we add $1 billion to the $45 billion we're spending,

143

one more program to the 30 -odd we have, and remember this new program doesn't replace any,

144

it just duplicates existing programs do they believe that poverty is suddenly going to disappear by magic?

145

Well, in all fairness, I should explain there is one part of the new program that isn't duplicated.

146

This is the youth feature.

147

We're now going to solve the dropout problem, juvenile delinquency, by reinstituting something like the old CCC camps.

148

And we're going to put our young people in these camps.

149

But again, we do some arithmetic and we find

150

that we're going to spend each year just on room and board for each young person we help, $4 ,700 a year.

151

We can send them to Harvard for $2 ,700.

152

Of course, don't get me wrong.

153

I'm not suggesting

154

Harvard is the answer to juvenile delinquency.

155

But seriously, what are we doing to those we seek to help?

156

Not too long ago, a judge called me here in Los Angeles He told me of a young woman who'd come before him for a divorce

157

She had six children, was pregnant with her seventh

158

Under his questioning, she revealed her husband was a laborer

159

Earning $250 a month

160

She wanted the divorce to get an $80 raise

161

She's eligible for $330 a month in the Aid to Defend the Children program.

162

She got the idea from two women in her neighborhood who'd already done that very thing.

163

Yet any time you and I question the schemes of the do -gooders, we're denounced as being against their humanitarian goals.

164

They say we're always against things, we're never for anything.

165

Well, the trouble with our liberal friends is not that they're ignorant.

166

It's just that they know so much that isn't so.

167

Now...

168

We're for a provision that destitution should not follow unemployment by reason of old age.

169

And to that end, we've accepted

170

Social Security as a step toward meeting the problem.

171

But we're against those entrusted with this program when they practice deception regarding its fiscal shortcomings.

172

When they charge that any criticism of the program means

173

that we want to end payments to those people who depend on them for a livelihood.

174

They've called it insurance to us in a hundred million pieces of literature.

175

But then they appeared before the Supreme Court, and they testified it was a welfare program.

176

They only used the term insurance to sell it to the people.

177

And they said

178

Social Security dues are a tax for the general use of the government.

179

And the government has used that tax.

180

There is no fund.

181

Because Robert Byers, the actuarial head, appeared before a congressional committee and admitted that

182

Social Security as of this moment is $298 billion in the hole.

183

But he said there should be no cause for worry, because as long as they had the power to tax,

184

they could always take away from the people whatever they needed to bail them out of trouble.

185

And they're doing just that.

186

A young man, 21 years of age, working at an average salary, his Social Security contribution would,

187

in the open market, buy him an insurance policy that would guarantee $220 a month at age 65.

188

The government promises 127.

189

He could live it up until he's 31 and then take out a policy that would pay more than Social Security.

190

Now are we so lacking in business sense that we can't put this program on a sound basis

191

so that people who do require those payments will find they can get them when they're due, that the cupboard isn't bare?

192

Barry Goldwater thinks we can.

193

At the same time, can't we introduce voluntary features

194

that would permit a citizen who can do better on his own to be excused upon presentation of evidence

195

that he had made provision for the non -earning years?

196

Should we not allow a widow with children to work and not lose the benefits supposedly paid for by her deceased husband?

197

Shouldn't you and I be allowed to declare who our beneficiaries will be under this program, which we cannot do?

198

I think we're foretelling our senior citizens

199

that no one in this country should be denied medical care because of a lack of funds.

200

But I think we're against forcing all citizens, regardless of need, into a compulsory government program,

201

especially when we have such examples as was announced last week when France admitted that their Medicare program is now bankrupt.

202

They've come to the end of the road. In addition, was Barry Goldwater so irresponsible when he suggested

203

that our government give up its program of deliberate planned inflation so that when you do get your Social Security pension,

204

a dollar will buy a dollar's worth and not 45 cents worth?

205

I think we're for an international organization where the nations of the world can seek peace.

206

But I think we're against subordinating American interests to an organization

207

that has become so structurally unsound

208

that today you can muster a two -thirds vote on the floor of the General Assembly among nations

209

that represent less than 10 % of the world's population.

210

I think we're against the hypocrisy of assailing our allies

211

because here and there they cling to a colony

212

while we engage in a conspiracy of silence

213

and never open our mouths about the millions of people enslaved in the Soviet colonies in the satellite nations.

214

I think we're forading our allies by sharing of our material blessings with those nations which share in our fundamental beliefs.

215

But we're against doling out money government to government, creating bureaucracy, if not socialism, all over the world.

216

We set out to help 19 countries.

217

We're helping 107.

218

We've spent $146 billion.

219

With that money, we bought a $2 million yacht for Haile Selassie.

220

We bought dress suits for Greek undertakers, extra wives for Kenya government officials.

221

We bought a thousand TV sets for a place where they have no electricity.

222

In the last six years, 52 nations have bought $7 billion worth of our gold and all 52 are receiving foreign aid from this country.

223

No government ever voluntarily reduces itself in size, so government programs once launched never disappear.

224

Actually, a government bureau is the nearest thing to eternal life we'll ever see on this earth.

225

Federal employees, federal employees number two and a half million, and federal, state and local, one out of six of the nation's workforce employed by government.

226

These proliferating bureaus with their thousands of regulations have cost us many of our constitutional safeguards.

227

How many of us realize that today federal agents can invade a man's property without a warrant, they can impose a fine without a formal hearing,

228

let alone a trial by jury, and they can seize and sell his property at auction to enforce the payment of that fine.

229

In Chico County, Arkansas, saw James Weir overplanted his rice allotment.

230

The government obtained a $17 ,000 judgment, and a U .S marshal sold his 960 -acre farm at auction.

231

The government said it was necessary as a warning to others to make the system work.

232

Last February 19th at the University of Minnesota, Norman Thomas, six -times candidate for president on the Socialist Party ticket said if Barry Goldwater became president,

233

he would stop the advance of socialism in the United States.

234

I think that's exactly what he will do. But as a former

235

Democrat, I can tell you Norman Thomas isn't the only man who has drawn this parallel to socialism with the present administration?

236

Because back in 1936, Mr. Democrat himself, Al Smith, a great American,

237

came before the American people and charged that the leadership of his party was taking the party of Jefferson, Jackson, and Cleveland down the road.

238

under the banners of Marx, Lenin, and Stalin.

239

And he walked away from his party, and he never returned till the day he died.

240

Because to this day, the leadership of that party has been taking that party, that honorable party, down the road,

241

in the image of the Labour Socialist Party of England.

242

Now, it doesn't require expropriation or confiscation of private property or business to impose socialism on a people.

243

What does it mean whether you hold the deed

244

or the title to your business or property

245

if the government holds the power of life and death over that business or property, and such machinery already exists,

246

the government can find some charge to bring against any concern it chooses to prosecute.

247

Every businessman has his own tale of harassment.

248

Somewhere a perversion has taken place.

249

Our natural, unalienable rights are now considered to be a dispensation of government, and freedom has never been so fragile,

250

so close to slipping from our grasp as it is at this moment.

251

our democratic opponents seem unwilling to debate these issues they want to make you

252

and I believe that this is a contest between two men

253

that we're to choose just between two personalities well what of this man

254

that they would destroy and in destroying they would destroy that

255

which he represents the ideas that you

256

and I hold dear is he the brash and shallow

257

and trigger happy man they say he is well I've been privileged to know him when

258

I knew him long before he ever dreamed of trying for high office

259

And I can tell you personally I've never known a man in my life I believed

260

so incapable of doing a dishonest or dishonorable thing

261

This is a man who in his own business

262

Before he entered politics Instituted a profit -sharing plan before unions had ever thought of it.

263

He put in health and medical insurance for all his employees.

264

He took 50 % of the profits before taxes and set up a retirement program, a pension plan for all his employees.

265

He sent monthly checks for life to an employee who was ill and couldn't work.

266

He provides nursing care for the children of mothers who work in the stores.

267

When Mexico was ravaged by the floods in the Rio Grande, he climbed in his airplane and flew medicine and supplies down there.

268

An ex -GI told me how he met him.

269

It was the week before Christmas during the Korean War,

270

and he was at the Los Angeles airport trying to get a ride home to Arizona for Christmas.

271

And he said that a lot of service men there and no seats available on the planes.

272

And then a voice came over the loudspeaker and said, any men in uniform wanting a ride to Arizona, go to runway such and such.

273

And they went down there.

274

There was a fellow named Barry Goldwater sitting in his plane.

275

Every day in those weeks before Christmas, all day long.

276

He'd load up the plane, fly it to Arizona, fly them to their homes, fly back over to get another load.

277

During the hectic split -second timing of a campaign,

278

this is a man who took time out to sit beside an old friend who was dying of cancer.

279

His campaign managers were understandably impatient, but he said there aren't many left to care what happens to her.

280

I'd like her to know I care.

281

This is a man who said to his 19 -year -old son, there is no foundation like the rock of honesty and fairness.

282

And when you begin to build your life on that rock, with the cement of the faith in God that you have,

283

then you have a real start.

284

This is not a man who could carelessly send other people's sons to war.

285

And that is the issue of this campaign that makes all the other problems I've discussed academic,

286

unless we realize we're in a war that must be won.

287

Those who would trade our freedom for the soup kitchen of the welfare state have told us

288

they have a utopian solution of peace without victory.

289

They call their policy accommodation.

290

And they say if we'll only avoid any direct confrontation with the enemy, he'll forget his evil ways and learn to love us.

291

All who oppose them are indicted as warmongers.

292

They say we offer simple answers to complex problems.

293

Well, perhaps there is a simple answer.

294

Not an easy answer, but simple.

295

If you and I have the courage to tell our elected officials

296

that we want our national policy based on what we know in our hearts is morally right, We cannot buy our security,

297

our freedom from the threat of the bomb.

298

By committing an immorality so great as saying to a billion human beings now enslaved behind the Iron Curtain, give up your dreams of freedom,

299

because to save our own skins we're willing to make a deal with your slave masters.

300

Alexander Hamilton said a nation which can prefer disgrace to danger is prepared for a master

301

and deserves one now let's set the record straight there's no argument over the choice between peace

302

and war but there's only one guaranteed way you can have peace and you can have it in the next second

303

surrender admittedly there's a risk in any course we follow other than this

304

but every lesson of history tells us that the greater risk lies in appeasement

305

and this is the specter our well -meaning liberal friends refuse to face Yes.

306

that their policy of accommodation is appeasement.

307

And it gives no choice between peace and war, only between fight or surrender.

308

If we continue to accommodate, continue to back and retreat, eventually we have to face the final demand, the ultimatum.

309

And what then?

310

When Nikita Khrushchev has told his people, he knows what our answer will be.

311

He has told them that we're retreating under the pressure of the Cold War, and someday, when the time comes to deliver the final ultimatum,

312

our surrender will be voluntary because by that time, we will have been weakened from within spiritually, morally, and economically.

313

He believes this because from our side he's heard voices pleading for peace at any price, or better read than dead,

314

or as one commentator put it, he'd rather live on his knees than die on his feet.

315

And therein lies the road to war, because those voices don't speak for the rest of us.

316

You and I know and do not believe that life is

317

so dear and peace so sweet as to be purchased at the price of chains and slavery.

318

If nothing in life is worth dying for, when did this begin?

319

Just in the face of this enemy?

320

Or should Moses have told the children of Israel to live in slavery under the pharaohs?

321

Should Christ have refused the cross?

322

Should the patriots at Concord Bridge have thrown down their guns and refused to fire the shot heard round the world?

323

The martyrs of history were not fools.

324

And our honored dead, who gave their lives to stop the advance of the Nazis, didn't die in vain.

325

Where then is the road to peace?

326

Well, it's a simple answer after all.

327

You and I have the courage to say to our enemies, there is a price we will not pay,

328

there is a point beyond which they must not advance.

329

And this, this is the meaning in the phrase of Barry Goldwater, peace through strength.

330

Winston Churchill said the destiny of man is not measured by material computations.

331

When great forces are on the move in the world, we learn we're spirits, not animals.

332

And he said there's something going on in time and space and beyond time and space, which, whether we like it or not, spells duty.

333

You and I have a rendezvous with destiny.

334

We'll preserve for our children this, the last best hope of man on earth,

335

or we'll sentence them to take the last step into a thousand years of darkness.

336

We will keep in mind and remember that

337

Barry Goldwater has faith in us.

338

He has faith that you and I have the ability

339

and the dignity and the right to make our own decisions and determine our own destiny.

340

Thank you very much.

341

Thank you, Ronnie, for this very stirring speech.

342

I am John Kilroy, National Chairman, TV for Goldwater Miller.

343

I want to ask each of you to take part

344

in this important presidential campaign by contributing what you can to keep the Goldwater Crusade on the air.

345

Send one, ten, fifty dollars, or any amount to TV for Goldwater Miller,

346

Box 80, Los Angeles 51.

347

I repeat, TV, Goldwater Miller, Box 80, Los Angeles 51.

348

The preceding pre -recorded political program was paid for by TV for Goldwater Miller on behalf of Barry Goldwater,

349

Republican candidate for President of the United States.

Tải Ứng Dụng

Mọi thứ bạn cần để nói trôi chảy

Chấm điểm AIChấm từng câu nói

Luyện IPAThành thạo mọi âm

Từ vựngMở rộng vốn từ

Game Từ vựngHọc qua chơi

Quét QR

Download on theApp Store Get it onGoogle Play

Cùng kênh

President Ronald Reagan's First State of the Union Address, January 26, 1982

Daily ConversationWorking Adults

Challenger: President Reagan's Challenger Disaster Speech - 1/28/86

IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepUniversity Students

FOR YOU

Video gợi ý

332 câu

ENGLISH SPEECH | MICHELLE OBAMA: Donald Trump's Sexual Behaviour (English Subtitles)

Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults

180 câu

SPEECH MASTERY | MARCO RUBIO: Decline Is a Choice! (English Subtitles)

Daily ConversationUniversity StudentsWorking Adults

301 câu

Watch CNBC's full interview with former Secretary of State Antony Blinken

Business EnglishDaily ConversationUniversity Students

1984 Presidential Debate: Reagan v. Mondale

230

10 câu

1984 Presidential Debate: Reagan v. Mondale

IELTS PrepTOEFL PrepBusiness English

Từ vựng và ghi chú luyện nói cho bài học này

Bài luyện nói này dựa trên video “"A Time for Choosing" by Ronald Reagan”. Video này có 349 câu và 4674 từ để luyện shadowing. Phần lời nói dài 28:59. Người nói nói với tốc độ tự nhiên, khoảng 161 từ mỗi phút, gần với hội thoại hằng ngày. 84% số từ nằm trong 3.000 từ tiếng Anh thông dụng nhất; phần còn lại nên xem trước khi luyện.

Từ vựng quan trọng trong video

15 từ đáng học trong video, kèm phiên âm và nghĩa:

Từ	Phiên âm	Nghĩa
farmer danh từ	/ˈfɑɹ.mɚ/	nông dân
welfare danh từ	/ˈwɛlˌfɛɚ/	phúc lợi
socialism danh từ	/ˈsoʊʃəlɪzəm/	chủ nghĩa xã hội
poverty danh từ	/ˈpɑːvɚti/	sự nghèo nàn
earn động từ	/ɝn/	kiếm
solve động từ	/sɒlv/	giải quyết
depressed tính từ	/dɪˈpɹɛst/	trầm cảm
disappear động từ	/dɪsəˈpɪɹ/	biến mất
surrender động từ	/səˈɹɛndə(ɹ)/	đầu hàng
wheat danh từ	/ˈwiːt/	lúa mì
thin tính từ	/ˈθɪn/	mỏng, mảnh
guarantee danh từ	/ˌɡæɹ.ənˈtiː/	sự bảo đảm
divorce danh từ	/dɪˈvɔːs/	ly hôn
courage danh từ	/ˈkʌ.ɹɪd͡ʒ/	can đảm
auction danh từ	/ˈɔkʃən/	bán đấu giá, đấu giá

Cụm động từ bạn sẽ nghe

Từ	Nghĩa
give up động từ	đầu hàng
go up động từ	lên
lie down động từ	nằm xuống, nằm ngả
take back động từ	lấy lại

Những câu đáng luyện lại

Các câu ngắn, trọn ý trong video mà bạn có thể dùng lại khi giao tiếp hằng ngày:

We don't own an ounce.
Of course, don't get me wrong.
I think that's exactly what he will do.
I'd like her to know I care.

Ngữ pháp trong video

Những cấu trúc người nói dùng nhiều nhất, kèm đúng cụm từ trong video:

Cấu trúc	Trong video
Thì hiện tại hoàn thành tiếp diễn have/has been + -ing — việc bắt đầu từ trước và vẫn đang tiếp tục	has been telling · has been taking
Thì hiện tại hoàn thành have/has + quá khứ phân từ — việc đã xảy ra nhưng còn liên quan đến hiện tại	has been identified · have been permitted · have spent
Câu bị động be + quá khứ phân từ — nhấn vào việc xảy ra, không phải người làm	is sponsored · has been identified · have been permitted
Mệnh đề quan hệ who / which + mệnh đề — thêm thông tin về người hoặc vật	those who had · those who would · people who can

Phát âm cần chú ý

Người nói dùng 94 dạng rút gọn, ví dụ we're, we've, they've. Hãy nói theo dạng ngắn đúng như bạn nghe.

Âm “th”: thin /ˈθɪn/, seventh /ˈsɛvənθ/, arithmetic /æɹɪθˈmɛtɪk/
Âm “sh” và “zh”: socialism /ˈsoʊʃəlɪzəm/, provision /pɹəˈvɪʒ.ən/, auction /ˈɔkʃən/, pension /ˈpɛnʃən/, accommodation /əˌkɒm.əˈdeɪ.ʃən/
Từ dài — đặt trọng âm cho đúng: socialism /ˈsoʊʃəlɪzəm/, unemployment /ʌn.ɪmˈplɔɪ.mənt/, eliminate /ɪˈlɪm.ɪ.neɪt/, accommodation /əˌkɒm.əˈdeɪ.ʃən/, voluntary /ˈvɑ.lənˌt(ɛ)ɹi/

Những âm người Việt thường gặp khó:

Cụm phụ âm cuối — đọc đủ từng âm, đừng nuốt âm cuối: solve /sɒlv/, depressed /dɪˈpɹɛst/, unemployment /ʌn.ɪmˈplɔɪ.mənt/, ounce /aʊns/, consistent /kənˈsɪs.tənt/
Âm /tʃ/, /dʒ/ và /ʒ/ — tiếng Việt không có, đừng đọc thành “ch” hay “gi”: provision /pɹəˈvɪʒ.ən/, courage /ˈkʌ.ɹɪd͡ʒ/, juvenile /ˈd͡ʒuvəˌnaɪl/, conclusion /kənˈkluːʒən/, mortgage /ˈmoɹ.ɡɪd͡ʒ/
Âm /æ/ — mở miệng rộng hơn âm “e”: guarantee /ˌɡæɹ.ənˈtiː/, behalf /bɪˈhæf/, ally /ˈæl.aɪ/, businessman /ˈbɪznəsmæn/, humanitarian /hjuˌmæ.nəˈtɛ.ɹi.ən/

Cách luyện với video này

Nghe hết video một lần, chưa cần nói, và ghi lại những từ bạn chưa biết.
Bắt đầu ở tốc độ 0,75×, nói đuổi từng câu, rồi quay lại tốc độ bình thường khi đã quen.
Ghi âm giọng mình rồi so với bản gốc, chú ý các từ như farmer, welfare, socialism.

Phương Pháp Shadowing Là Gì?

Shadowing là kỹ thuật học ngôn ngữ có cơ sở khoa học, ban đầu được phát triển cho chương trình đào tạo phiên dịch viên chuyên nghiệp và được phổ biến rộng rãi bởi nhà đa ngôn ngữ học Dr. Alexander Arguelles. Nguyên lý cốt lõi đơn giản nhưng cực kỳ hiệu quả: bạn nghe tiếng Anh của người bản xứ và lặp lại to ngay lập tức — như một "cái bóng" (shadow) đuổi theo người nói với độ trễ chỉ 1–2 giây. Khác với luyện ngữ pháp hay học từ vựng bị động, Shadowing buộc não bộ và cơ miệng phải đồng thời xử lý và tái tạo ngôn ngữ thực tế. Các nghiên cứu khoa học xác nhận phương pháp này cải thiện đáng kể phát âm, ngữ điệu, nhịp điệu, nối âm, kỹ năng nghe và độ lưu loát khi nói — đặc biệt hiệu quả cho người luyện IELTS Speaking và muốn giao tiếp tiếng Anh tự nhiên như người bản ngữ.

Phương pháp shadowing: đọc hướng dẫn từng bước đầy đủ →