跟讀練習: Amartya Sen interview (1999) - 通過影片學習英語口語

選擇練習模式

每種模式都會開啟全屏練習室。

193 句

如果句子過短或過長，請點選 Edit 進行調整。

Mark Yassin is the winner of the 1998 Nobel Prize in Economics.

He was given the award for "restoring an ethical dimension to

the discussion of economic problems." His writings have revolutionized the theory of development by focusing on the importance of freedom over wealth.

In his new book, "Development as Freedom," he allows economics to address the social basis of the well -being of the individual.

I am pleased to have him on this broadcast as we

always are to have someone here who brings piercing insight into issues

that are part of not only the discussion in the United States, but the world.

Welcome.

Thank you very much.

This notion of how you feel about markets.

and democracy, and how you feel about growth economics, working best in an economic environment that is,

in a political environment that's a democracy, or a political environment that is a totalitarian.

Stay.

Yes, well I think what I'd like to think of in this context is to go with behind the institutions and

The main approach, which actually the book also does pursue,

is that the very basic thing which leads to social change and progress is ultimately individual freedom.

But individual freedom, of course, is also conditional on certain social opportunities being available, political opportunities, economic opportunities.

And my claim is that the freedoms of different kinds complement each other, just as I was mentioning in the case of the rise.

a communal riot, so people didn't have economic freedom, had to go into hostile area and got killed.

So economic freedom gives you more liberty there also.

Similarly, I think political freedom gives voice.

democracy, civil rights, open media, public discussion like we are having now, gives voice to the people who are deprived.

And you make the point.

Well taken, it seems, that at a time of a famine,

A democracy is more likely to put a break on a famine than a totalitarian state.

It's not only more likely, that's radically so.

There has never been a famine in a democratic country, even very poor ones, like Zimbabwe, Botswana, India.

India continues to have famine, right up to independence, which is the last one that occurred, which I saw as a child I was mentioning.

But if you look at the famines today, they're all in countries that are totalitarian.

Well, if you think of North Korea, Sudan, if you think of the past, the biggest famine in record history, China, 58, 61, 30 million people dead.

Soviet Union in the 1930s, military dictatorship, one kind or another,

Ethiopia, Somalia, Mozambique, Angola, one after another.

And it happens because in a democracy the protest, the public voice would not allow and tolerate.

Yeah, I would say that there are two things.

You may be very lucky and may have no democracy and still have no famine.

But if a famine were to develop, democracy provides a guarantee for stopping it because famines are extremely easy to stop.

And this was one of my earlier works.

I did a book.

published in 1981 called Poverty and Famines, showing why famines occur because of really decline on the fortunes of a very small group of people,

maybe millions, but still proportionately very small.

And you can very easily stop it, even without getting any kind of assistance from abroad.

And if a government has an incentive to do it, it can always stop a famine extremely easily.

So that led to the second part.

How can it do it if it has an incentive?

Well, if it doesn't have an incentive, then it couldn't do it.

But what I was saying that if it did have an incentive to do it, then it can carry it out very easily.

So the economic analysis led me to the political one, and it was quite clear that in a democracy, if you have to fight another election,

and not like being criticized by opposition parties, and not like being hoisted up by newspapers and the media,

you would actually do something about preventing famines and that's extremely easy to do.

And that's why, you know, even though China was in many ways doing better than India right from the beginning, from the middle of the century,

nevertheless, India was much better able to stop famine than China

because when the famine occurred

and about 10 million people were dying in China each year through that period after the Great Leap Forward failed,

there was no criticism of the government.

People didn't even know that people were dying in such numbers.

We now know from demographic statistics of the Chinese themselves.

Another aspect of this, obviously, which you have talked about, and written about is whether you look at Singapore as one example, Yes.

economic growth and a different political structure.

And then you look at some democracies likewise in Africa, where the most progressive economic growth is taking place in a democratic establishment.

So what rule do we bring out of that?

I think those who have studied these kind of issues like Robert Barrow, my old colleague from Harvard and others,

Przorsky, Limogier and others, find that actually as far as economic growth is concerned, there is no connection one way or the other very much about democracy.

It's much more concerned with the friendliness of the economic climate rather than harshness of the political climate.

development in terms of human security, then I think democracy has a role.

I mean, one good example would be that East Asian, South Korea, Indonesia, Thailand, Southeast Asia,

they were all doing terribly well, and people somehow didn't miss democracy at that time when everything seemed to be going up and up together.

and the absence of a democracy were badly felt.

And naturally in South Korea and Indonesia, these became the big moments of democratic movement, and not surprisingly at all.

Explain this to me and you will understand this much better.

And I've never quite understood the reasons why.

Here in this United States, we have a booming stock market We're creating enormous wealth for certain

percentage of people The notion is that the rising tide raises all boats,

Yet we have a growing disparity between wealthy and poor.

An income inequality.

How is that possible.

Charlie, can I go beyond that?

Yes.

There is not only income inequality, that could be bad enough.

But I think that's not where the real problem is.

The real problem is the inequality of basic freedom to live in a way that you would like to live.

And that includes living long, living a life without illnesses, living in a peaceful, happy surrounding, and so on.

And if you think about that, you see the lack of health care in the United States, the lack of insurance about health care, despite the richness of the country,

I mean it's coming back to the political discussion right now, it's actually a little scandalous.

You know, whether 43 million people not having medical insurance, whether that's an exaggeration or not, certainly a very large number of people are.

And sometimes it's our good, but in fact it doesn't make any difference.

But if you look at the mortality differences between different regions of the country, and between different classes, and and between different races.

African Americans, for example, as a group, have a lower chance of reaching any kind of age beyond 15 than the Chinese

or the Indians in Kerala or Sri Lankans and so on.

And why is that?

Well, I think to some extent, lack of medical insurance plays a part.

Educational failure plays a part.

And sometimes it's thought that this is all connected with violence.

And indeed, that some violence is high and that's also a social malaise.

And family structure and lots of other things.

Actually, in the book I study and go beyond that, even if you take beyond the age of 35, then death from violence is no longer a factor.

And look at women, you see similar deprivation.

And the overall impact is just radically...

different from what the picture on income comparison would look like.

That is, if you take the African American, It's quite often said African Americans are relatively deprived compared with American whites.

100

But they're not absolutely deprived, nor are they relatively deprived compared to the third world.

101

Now that's true in terms of income.

102

They may have income 30, 40 times, the Chinese or the Indian.

103

On the other hand, The life expectancy of African Americans in this city, in New York, or in San Francisco,

104

or in Washington, is several years lower than that in India or Pakistan on an average. And

105

if you took those - The life expectancy in the inner

106

city of New York in many cases is lower than that of - African American, I'm talking about.

107

Male African American.

108

Yeah.

109

And the male African American rates are very low, like 58 years.

110

that's dramatically low in comparison with income.

111

And you have to ask the question, what's gone wrong?

112

And I think here, it's not just a question of having a democracy, but also what kind of issues could be forcefully practiced.

113

That's why I'm so delighted that to some extent this issue is returning back into American electoral politics.

114

Because without that, you won't have any change, really.

115

Because I think the - I thought that in the discussion of both Gore and Bradley,

116

at least it's...

117

You're right, it is.

118

Senator Bradley is trying to raise...

119

Senator Bradley is trying to raise this as an issue...

120

I'm meeting at one occasion, I must say, I greatly admire him.

121

I think it's wonderful if he can bring those issues into the story.

122

But you know, each area, it's peculiar.

123

In Europe, you could not have survived with the kind of healthcare situation.

124

No government would have the chance of winning an election.

125

Mr. All right, but that's what I want to get at too, because for a second, if you look at the economics and the reality of healthcare and those kinds of numbers,

126

rather than income equality, it's much more dramatic and blatant and powerful. as a condition.

127

Yeah.

128

Why do you think, even though you're expertise in your scholarly work is economics and not politics.

129

Why do you think the body politic allows that in this country?

130

I would like to believe, naively, that we are a good people who care about our neighbors.

131

Well, I think that's an extremely interesting question, and you're quite right.

132

As an economist, I hesitate to speak on it.

133

But I must say, political analysis of it.

134

requires to go much deeper into this because there are peculiar arbitrariness.

135

In America, you can get by without health insurance being a political issue in the way you can't in Europe.

136

In Europe, you can get by with double -digit unemployment levels, which no US government could have survived on.

137

In India, you cannot to have a famine, but you can survive with a regular undernourishment of a kind which is very peculiarly strong.

138

You could get away with it, and you change it.

139

You could get away in India on gender inequality.

140

It wasn't politicized, but thanks to the feminist movements and others now, and a general political change,

141

women's inequality has become a big politicized issue.

142

So I think it's a question of really

143

the opportunity of the political leadership and the vision of the political leadership to see some of these issues.

144

And I think if the medical care issue is strongly politicised, I think you'd get the kind of response that you would get in Europe.

145

And that's why I remain ultimately very hopeful on that.

146

But you can't really do a certain change without at the same time affecting public opinion and public discussion.

147

MR. And then you can get to the interesting debate on how to do something about it.

148

And therefore, honorable people can differ.

149

over how to treat the illness, but once they've got to make a commitment that there ought to be, It's unacceptable.

150

- Yes.

151

in terms of healthcare, in terms of education, in terms of children's nutrition, in terms of all those things, that affect - Yes, absolutely.

152

And I think there's no substitute to having active public discussion.

153

I mean, so far as my book is trying to do anything, it's trying to draw public attention to certain things which we do know on the basis of economic, political, social analysis.

154

And its bearing and development is interpreted here very widely.

155

It applies to America, it applies to Europe, as well as to India and China and Africa and Latin America.

156

discussion, which is really the main thing

157

that the book is trying to present in terms of identifying the various kinds of unfreedom.

158

It could be political unfreedom, it could be social opportunity unfreedom, and so on.

159

MR. Development as freedom.

160

There are many people I know.

161

who I respect and admire for their achievements, who believe that Freedom and free markets are one and the same thing.

162

I think that's just nonsense.

163

I mean, free markets are quite an important contribution to development.

164

I mean, even somebody like Karl Marx in the capital thought

165

that the American Civil Wars was the most important event of his time, on grounds that it got people out of slavery into a market economy,

166

into a great economy.

167

And yet, you need to supplement the market economy by so many other things, democracy, democracy.

168

public expenditure.

169

Great guru of market economy, Adam Smith, goes on and on on the need for public education, need for poverty relief, in fact.

170

So I think in many ways one has to place the market economy - Thank you.

171

as one institutional aspect of a multi -institutional world.

172

And anyone who wants to identify free market with freedom is as mistaken as someone who would take the view

173

that you can dispense with market in the pursuit of freedom.

174

You need to see it in a much wider context.

175

I fear asking this, but I'm tempted to anyway, and generally I follow temptation.

176

What's the best idea you ever had?

177

Thank you.

178

Oh, good God.

179

I don't know.

180

I think probably some of the ideas that I would be more pleasantly, rather more technical than easy to discuss.

181

I mentioned that the novella was connected with social choice theory.

182

There were issues of aggregation and so on, and there were these.

183

Kenneth Arrow had an impossibility theorem showing why you cannot and your decision leads to inconsistencies.

184

And really the hard work to a great extent was how you can broaden the informational input into the social analysis.

185

I think to some extent that has played a part in all these things.

186

The need to have a much wider informational structure to know much more, not just one small thing,

187

not just income, but also how people's lives go, their health care, their educational arraignment, these turn out to be quite crucial in both the technical

188

mathematical problems in dealing with impossibility as well as in terms

189

of public discussion problems in making a change in the world in which we actually live.

190

These ideas and others are discussed in this book, Development is Freedom, winner of the 1998 Nobel Prize in Economics.

191

Thank you for joining us.

192

See you next time.

193

Bye.

下載應用

流利口語所需的一切

AI 發音評分逐句打分

音標練習掌握每個音

詞彙學習建立你的詞庫

詞彙遊戲邊玩邊學

掃碼

Download on theApp Store Get it onGoogle Play

同頻道

Christopher Hitchens interview (1996)

University StudentsWorking Adults

Bernardo Bertolucci interview (1994)

Daily ConversationWorking Adults

FOR YOU

為什麼要通過這個影片練習口語？

通過觀看和模仿這段採訪影片，學習者可以深入理解如何在真實的對話中表達自己的觀點。馬爾克·亞辛與阿馬蒂亞·森的對話不僅涉及經濟學和社會問題的深刻見解，還展示瞭如何在不同的政治環境中進行有效的溝通。這種英語口語練習的方式，特別適合希望提升流利度和表達能力的學習者，能夠幫助他們在討論複雜話題時更加從容自信。同時，重現對話中的語調和語速，可以有效地增強學習者的聽說能力，幫助他們在實際交流中更加自然。

語法與表達在語境中的分析

在阿馬蒂亞·森的演講中，有幾個關鍵的語法結構值得注意：

條件句：例如，他提到“如果一個國家是民主的，就更有可能阻止飢荒。”這樣的句式可以幫助學習者理解如何在討論因果關係時使用條件句。
被動語態：使用“在民主國家，從未發生過饑荒”的表達，能夠引導學習者掌握被動語態在強調事實和結果時的用法。
對比結構：森提到“經濟自由與政治自由相輔相成”，這種對比可以幫助學習者掌握在討論中進行比較的技巧，增加口語表達的豐富性。
情態動詞：例如“可以”、“應該”等情態動詞的使用，能夠幫助學習者掌握如何表達能力和必要性，使口語更加生動。

常見發音陷阱

在影片中，有幾個可能會導致發音困難的詞彙，學習者需要特別注意：

freedom（自由）：注意“f”音的發音，避免變得模糊不清。
democracy（民主）：這個詞的重音放在第二個音節上，許多學習者可能會發錯。
famine（饑荒）：學習者需注意此詞的短母音和清晰發音，避免將其與其他相似發音的詞混淆。

通過這些英語影子跟讀的技巧，學習者可以在自我練習中糾正發音，使他們在口語交流中更加自信流利。在合適的shadow speak環境中，反覆練習將確保他們能夠準確表達自己的想法。

影片中的語法

說話人最常用的結構，並附上影片中的原話：

結構	影片中的用法
被動語態 be + 過去分詞 — 強調發生了什麼，而不是誰做的	was given · are deprived · being criticized
定語從句 who / which + 從句 — 補充說明人或事物	people who are · independence, which is · those who have
現在完成時 have/has + 過去分詞 — 過去發生但與現在仍有關聯的事	have revolutionized · has never been · have talked

什麼是跟讀法？

跟讀法 (Shadowing) 是一種有科學依據的語言學習技巧，最初開發用於專業口譯員的培訓，並由多語言者Alexander Arguelles博士普及。這個方法簡單而強大：您在聽英語母語原聲的同時立即大聲重複——就像是一個延遲1-2秒緊跟說話者的影子。與被動聽力或語法練習不同，跟讀法強迫您的大腦和口腔肌肉同時處理並模模擬實的講話模式。研究表明它能顯著提高發音準確性，語調，節奏，連讀，聽力理解和口語流利度——使其成為雅思口語備考和真實英語交流最有效的方法之一。

影子跟讀法: 閱讀完整分步指南 →

跟讀練習: Amartya Sen interview (1999) - 通過影片學習英語口語

選擇練習模式

下載應用

同頻道

Christopher Hitchens interview (1996)

Bernardo Bertolucci interview (1994)

推薦影片

What is the Capability Approach to development?

ENGLISH SPEECH | AKASH BANERJEE: India’s Path (English Subtitles)

Why Socrates Hated Democracy

Aung San Suu Kyi: Nobel Peace Prize Lecture

Eco 155: Principles of Macroeconomics Class 1

Anna Lembke on Pleasure, Pain, and Recovery in a Dopamine-Driven World

Secretary Marco Rubio Remarks at Munich Security Conference

Will the Good of the Other – Bishop Barron's Sunday Sermon

Dr Maszlee Malik argues Islam is like democracy: it is not perfect - but they are compatible 6/8

Anti-matter & nuclear weapons: Why technology is always a double-edge sword | Don Lincoln

Creating Capabilities – Martha Nussbaum

Social mobility and education: DISCUSSION - BBC Newsnight

為什麼要通過這個影片練習口語？

語法與表達在語境中的分析

常見發音陷阱

影片中的語法

什麼是跟讀法？