意味着美利坚同盟国与苏联开价讨价

图片 1

An old woman hit my car on the drivers’ side, there are scrathes above
the wheel , on the realms of the wheel and there is also a part pushed
in .It is bad.We were just driving on the road,she back her car from the
parking lot without watching back,and bump!It is 100% her fault.She is
very annoying and crazy, tring to drive away. She just left her phone
number,yelled she is very very busy, her car insurance will cover
repairs of our car and drive away. my husband and I have never had a car
collision or car accident before, and just don’t know how much what need
to be done, what’s going need to be done,how to get our car fixed.So my
husband called the old woman many times,but she didn’t answer.Fuck!I
know it is not super bad,but her attitude is so annoying and made us so
mad.So my husband had to called the police to report this accident. A
few minutes later, two police officers come over, one of them called
her, she answered. She said she will let someone to deal with it ,and we
agreedto go to vehicle loss setting center together in the afternoon,
when we got there,she didn’t even show up,she let a young guy working in
auto repaire company to deal with the thing.well,maybe it is ok.

电影海报

At first, the guy didn’t want to confirm the accident and we didn’t know
what he planed for.May be he wanted us to fix our car in their
company.Honestly,I ever consider let the vehicle repair compay to fix
our car, because it faster and can be done without any mess. But afer we
called several friends, we decided that we’d better follow the claims to
fix our car with the at fault party’s insurance company.and here is
why:firstly,we are not the at-fault party, and secondly,we also have a
claim against at fault party’s diminished value.even it is fixed
perfectly,it is not worth as much as it is not involved in an
accident.So we insisted to confirm the accident and determine the amount
of loss.When we finish this ,it is almost 5:pm.Next, we go to the auto
4s shop together.

《间谍之桥(Bridge of
Spies)》是斯PeelBerg发行人、Cohen兄弟插手制片人、汤姆.Hank斯主角的一部美利坚合作国影片。在快要公布的第⑦8 届奥斯卡奖中,本片拿到了总结最佳影片、最佳原创剧本在内的六项提名。

Auto 4s shop said it needs to pay first, so we called her
again.shewanted us topay that afront.Wow! I just can’t believe this.how
can we do that?if we paid,what if she don’t acknowledge it?at that time,
Ieven consider file the claim of our own insurance company,but that’s
stupid,because our insurance fees will go up next year.fortunately we
didn’t choose that idea.Besides,repairing our car would take at least a
month ,because there are still lots of damaged cars caused by Typhoon
waiting to befixed.They won’t give me a temporary car and we don’t have
an extra to drive,so I might have to take bus to work.Oh,noooo! So, we
decided to call police again, she finally agreed to pay afront.that is a
relief.

本片是一部格外美利坚联邦合众国主旋律的电影。美苏冷战正酣之时,London律师詹姆斯.多诺万(汤姆.汉克斯饰演)受United States政坛的委任,为被抓获的苏联王牌间谍Rudolph.Abe尔中将担任律师。多诺万顶住多方压力,拒绝走过场,认真实践了驳斥职分。不久后,U.S.的一架
U-2
侦察机在苏联被击落,飞行员鲍威尔被俘。多诺万受雇于中情局,代表U.S.与苏联谈判,试图以Abe尔换回鲍威尔。

we are so tired today.it is so complicated of this thing.

想感受完整故事情节的诸位可以去看原片。我们那篇小文章的目标是「看电影,学语言表达」。片中的James.多诺万是一人辩护律师,执行的是严肃的政治职分,那么大家能从他的言语中学点什么吧?当然是学怎么着像律师一样讲道理。我从片中节选了Donovan两段极度有逻辑的对话,以为例子,和豪门一同聊天如何用庄重的口语在得体的景况下讲庄重的道理。

以下旁白文本摘自电影剧本

剧照 1

有的一:怎么样尊重地批驳一种看法

多诺万和另一名律师 Bates
在谈论案情:Donovan为一家保证公司做法律顾问,该保障集团保管的2个驾车人在协同交通事故中撞了三个骑摩托车的人。双方在座谈保障集团的事故赔付任务难题。

DONOVAN: Don’t say “my guy.” He’s not “my guy.”
BATES: Yes he’s your guy. Who’re we talking about?
DONOVAN: We’re talking about a guy who is insured by my client. So
don’t make him “my guy.”

多诺万在那里运用了戮穿谎话(Clarification)的法子:我们谈谈的那人不是本身的当事人,请不要把他说成是自小编的当事者。在座谈得体难题时,大家对定义的概念必必要简明,不能歪曲。如若大家接受了对方对定义的概念,而不锲而不舍和谐的明亮,就很有可能在未来的申辩中被敌方「绕进去」,那会让大家丧失主动权。

BATES: Okay, fine, my point is he — the guy insured by your client —
he doesn’t deny any of these things happened —

DONOVAN: “These things?”

BATES: Yes. These five things.

DONOVAN: Wait. Hold it, hold it, hold it. Not five things, one thing.

BATES: Clearly, it’s five things.

DONOVAN: Well — I’m sorry — it’s not clear to me. Five things?
Explain it to
me.

BATES: It’s self-evident.

DONOVAN: Okay, then tell me what happened, tell me the story in a way
that makes sense. For five things.

在此地,多诺万牢牢抓住对手不放,不给对方喘息的火候。「那多少个东西?是啥啊?说驾驭。」当对手说「It’s
self-evident(那是不言自明的)」时候,Donovan拒绝接受,须求对方交付证据。「不是五件事,是一件事。如若你以为是五件事,要给自身表明代楚。」那是什么样?是写
TOEFL 和 GRE 以及一切作文的最根本的尺度:讲证据!

BATES: The guy insured by your client — is driving down State Highway
19 when he loses control of his car, hits my five guys. The five guys
who hired me to represent them because you’re not honoring your claim.

DONOVAN: You mean my client is not honoring the claim. The insurance
company.

BATES: Mr. Donovan: we’re all clear on who’s who here.

DONOVAN: Except, my client honors every claim. They do, Mr. Bates,
every
single legitimate claim. Up to the limit of their liability, which is
$100,000 per accident in the case of this man’s policy. And this is
one claim, according to your description. “He hit my five guys.” The
guy insured by my client had one accident, one one one, losing
control of the car and hitting five motorcyclists.

多诺万是2个要命认真的人。为了强调本人的视角,他在此处用了「one one
one」,还真是根本的事体说一次。大致庄严认真到了喜人的水准。

BATES: From their point of view, five things happened.

DONOVAN: Look Bob — may I? Bob? (gestures to self) Jim. If I go
bowling and I throw a strike, one thing happened. Ten things didn’t
happen.

BATES: Jim. My clients are not bowling pins. As much your guy might
have
treated them so —

DONOVAN: Lemme finish. If your house is insured to $100,000 and a
tornado carries it away, it carried away one house. It didn’t pick up
every stick of furniture and destroy it in a separate incident. If
that’s what you’re saying, well, then there is never any limit to our
liability and that is the end of the insurance business. And then,
Bob, nobody is safe.

即使说前边的两段对话都以选配,这一段就是紧锣密鼓的交锋了。Bates
律师试图求证,贰个的哥撞倒八个骑车人,要分头对三人展开赔付。多诺万反驳说,那是手拉手交通事故而不是五起事故。有限辅助公司对同步事故的赔付有上限,所以不大概分别给多少人越来越多的赔付。多诺万的理念无疑是明证、站得住脚的。他那样说:

Up to the limit of their liability, which is $100,000 per accident in
the case of this man’s policy. And this is one claim, according to
your description. “He hit my five guys.” The guy insured by my client
had one accident, one one one, losing control of the car and
hitting five motorcyclists.

确保集团的义务上限是每起事故赔偿100000泰铢。而驾驶人撞倒三个人,这是同台事故,不是五起事故。所以五个人加起来,也只可以分享那十万元的赔偿,无权向保证公司索赔越多。

那听上去很客观,但似乎在心思上令人难以承受。所以 Bates
律师反驳说,对七个受害人而言,这是五起事故。怎么样说服她接受二个更合理(但似乎略阴毒)的意见呢?多诺万律师用了三个类比。

类比 1
打保龄球的时候,我扔出三个全中,十二个球瓶被击倒,那是一件事,而不是十件事。

类比 2
一幢房屋被沙沙尘暴摧毁,沙尘暴摧毁的是整座房子,而不是一件一件分别摧毁了内部的灶具和摆放。

那五个类比看起来不讲心境。所以 Bates
律师反驳说,「你不恐怕把人看做保龄球瓶」。但这么些理论没有驳倒多诺万的主干逻辑:当一件工作完全发生的时候,我们不该把它割裂为许八个例外的、相互独立的轩然大波。这一个大旨逻辑与他们谈谈的这起畅通无阻事故,以及多诺万在事故赔付义务上的立场,是一模一样的。那就是大家所说的创制类比。鉴于
TOEFL 的口语、写作和 GRE 的 AW
都亟待举例子和理论,而说理的一种样式是举办类比,举事例其实也必要例子本人和眼光之间形成有效类比。那如何是立见成效的类比和举例呢?

  1. 类比关系中的八个东西最幸而场馆上接近且简单被明白(一辆车撞了三人,3个球击倒十一个瓶);假如是举事例,那么例子自身要比观点更直观、更易于精通。
  2. 类比关系中的八个东西在内在逻辑上高度一致(一辆车两回性撞了三人,一场沙风暴一下子摧毁了整座房子);例子也要和眼光的内在逻辑中度一致。

那番话可以说已经彻底驳倒了 Bates
律师的看好。所以最终,多诺万为切磋盖棺定论:如果都按您说的那么赔偿,有限支撑集团就得承担无限的职责,保险业就要完蛋啦,而且尚未什么人是高枕无忧的。这番话配上前面的类比和对定义的可观澄清,足以保证Donovan全身而退。在方方面面经过中,Donovan律师在言语上毫不留情,说话的口气和腔调咄咄逼人,但并不曾发自出任何恼怒、不屑或自居,可以说成功了不怒自威。那也是讲道理的极端表现。

剧照 2

有的二:怎么样迂回出击驳倒一种观点

之后,随着故事情节的迈入,Donovan律师接受委派,准备为Abe尔中校辩护。中情局的探员
Hoffman找上门来,须求多诺万把她与Abe尔的对话内容告知给中情局,以获取情报。这显明违背美利哥的相干法规,也违反律师的职业准则。Hoffman试图说服多诺万破坏规矩,多诺万则有理有据地对此举办了盛大回手。

(此处的 MAN 就是 Hoffman 探员)

DONOVAN: CIA?

MAN: Yeah. Just wanted to chat. How’s the case going?

DONOVAN: The case is going great. Couldn’t be better.

MAN: Uh-huh. Has your guy talked?

DONOVAN: …Excuse me?

MAN: You met him, has he talked? Has he said anything yet?

(Donovan stares at him. Then,)

DONOVAN: We’re not having this conversation.

MAN: No, of course not.

DONOVAN: No, I mean we’re really not having it. You’re asking me to
violate attorney-client privilege.

到那时候截止都以选配。多诺万鲜明不想和对方打圆场,一箭上垛指出了对方的目标。那实质上也是我们需求上学的讲道理的讲话情势:不要绕弯子,把您的看法直截了本土拍出来。考试中的口语和创作部分都有严谨的年华范围,在那个限制之下又须要我们把话说精通,实际上就是变相地须求我们少说废话、直奔主题。

MAN: Oh c’mon counselor, you —

DONOVAN: And I wish people like you would quit saying “Oh c’mon,
counselor.” I didn’t like it the first time it happened today, a judge
said it to me twice, and the more I hear it, the more I don’t like it.

MAN: Ok, well listen, I understand attorney-client privilege. I
understand all the legal gamesmanship and I understand that that’s how
you make a living. But I’m talking to you about something else — the
security of your country. I’m sorry if the way I put it offends you,
but we need to know what Abel is telling you. You understand me,
Donovan? We need to know. Don’t go Boy Scout on me — we don’t have a
rule book here.

Hoffman 在此地的「Oh come
on」实际上在我们的常常生活中也不时出现。你和一个人讲道理,他冷不防话锋一变,先河和您谈人情、谈暗箱操作、谈关系……你势必对上边那几个表述不生疏:

「哎哎,兄弟!(不要那么认真好不好)」

「没事~~~~(拖非常短的声调,先河准备不讲理)」

Hoffman探员试图绕开法律和辩护人的工作准则,他的兵器比相似的人情世故世故要强大得多:「那是为着国家安全的急需」。仗着那多少个神圣的大字,他须求多诺万律师违背保密协议,「别跟小编玩童子军荣誉守则(Boy
Scout),大家不讲游戏规则。」

国家安全,那终归是一块很吓人的牌号。面对相似的流氓,大家自然可以庄敬地反驳回击。但如果这人是你的小业主,准备对您利用咸猪手呢?似乎大家就得考虑换一种方法工作,不可以大概地说一句「你滚」。所以多诺万律师接下去放了二个大招:

(Donovan takes a beat, sizing the man up.)

DONOVAN: You’re agent Hoffman, yeah?

MAN: Yeah.

DONOVAN: 德文 extraction? (extraction 可以了解为门户,即 霍夫曼有德意志联邦共和国血统)

MAN: Yeah, so?

DONOVAN: My name is Donovan, Irish. Both sides, mother and father.I’m
Irish, you’re German, but what makes us both Americans? Just one
thing, one one one. The rule book. We call it the Constitution. We
agree to the rules, and that’s what makes us Americans, it’s all that
makes us Americans. So don’t tell me there’s no rule book and don’t
nod at me like that you sonofabitch.

末段那段话是典型的「以子之矛攻子之盾」。在你麻烦正面驳倒对手的意见时,提议对方逻辑中不可以自洽之处,让对方不战而败,就是最佳选项。Hoffman你不是跟我讲国家安全,讲游戏规则吗?嗯,美利哥的总游戏规则是美利坚合众国行政法;没有美利坚联邦合众国刑事诉讼法就没有所谓的美利坚合作国,因为只要不确认行政诉讼法,你这几个西班牙人和自家这些爱尔兰人就与米利坚一毛钱关系尚未。所以当您以国家安全的名义让自个儿做违背U.S.行政诉讼法和法规的事的时候,对不起,你在破坏美利坚合作国存在的底蕴。你是自相争执的。

多诺万律师的思路实际上类似于归谬法(Reductio ad
absurdum),其主旨步骤是那样的:

  1. 鉴别出对方视角中的前提和结论,恐怕说手段和目标(为了国家安全,小编要你做违规的事)
  2. 从对方的解说中引申出1个或一文山会海严密的推理(违规的事务,越发是违反刑事诉讼法的事情,实际上动摇了美利哥存在的基本功)
  3. 最后得出二个臆度,与对方论述中的前提或根本目标争辩(动摇美利坚联邦合众国存在的底子等于威逼国家安全,即为了国家安全而最后胁制了江山安全)
  4. 停在此间。

在辩论和辩论中,若是我们能把话说到那个程度,那么普通已经足以转身潇洒地走开,「你早就死了」。所以最后多诺万也丝毫不准备掩饰他对
霍夫曼 的反感,用一句 s.o.b. 截至了出口。

那番话间接把 Hoffman打得哑口无言。在Donovan收拾东西准备走的时候,他讪笑着又多问了一句话,「大家相应担心您呢?(Do
we need to worry about
you?)」那句话实际包蕴暗中恐吓的意义,「倘诺爆发什么样不太好的事体我可不知道该怎么承担啊……」。对此,多诺万丝毫不为所动,「如若你们让本人执行小编的职责就怎么事都不会爆发。(Not
if I’m left alone to do my job.)」意思就是,你们 CIA
请我来做辩护律师,你一旦做了对自作者不利的事,那实在就打了您本人的脸,你望着办。

足见,在体面的开口中讲道理,那是一件尤其难的事。大家要求的是对团结立场的通晓坚持不渝,对对方视角中的漏洞予以坚决回手,还要有丰盛的胆气。另一方面,即便在冷战的不安气氛下,U.S.A.一体化上依旧是个讲道理的地方,那也是令大家非凡羡慕的……所以,当大家期待去美利坚合作国留学,希望在讲道理的
TOEFL 和 GRE
考试中获取好战表的时候,请务必学会怎么在严穆的语境下讲道理。

2016 年 2 月

相关文章