朗文英语听说教程三

Unit 1 Slang: Talking Cool

TEACHER: OK, let's get started . . . Today we're going to be looking at a really interesting phenomenon, slang. We'll be looking at where slang comes from, who uses it and why. We all use it more often than you might think—every day of our lives, in fact. And we use it for a reason.

You know, most of us are fascinated with slang. We con-tinually hear new words and phrases enter the language and replace old, and we see familiar words take on new meanings. We feel a need to keep in touch with these changes, to be aware of the latest street talk. Fact is, we love slang. But what is it exactly? What is slang? Anyone like to suggest a definition?

STUDENT 1: Isn't it basically kind of casual talk? TEACHER: Can you say a bit more?

STUDENT 1: You know, the sort of words we use with friends ... in relaxed situations.

TEACHER: Good. You're pretty much there with your idea of casual language. We can say that slang is language that's found only in the very informal speech of particular groups of people. It can help to identify the communities, the groups of people, who use it. And this brings me to the first important point of the lecture—why people use slang.

A lot of slang comes from not wanting to be understood by outsiders, people outside your circle. In other words, people exploit slang to give their group an identity, by making their language exclusive, or at least private. Through this private language, they can tease one another, enjoy shared experiences, and keep everyone else at a distance. All cultures contain groups or subcultures with different interests and priorities, and each group tries to establish a separate identity. They want people to know who they are, what they stand for—and slang helps to construct and cement that identity. We can say, then, that slang reflects the experiences, beliefs, and values of its speakers.

Now let's look more closely at this relationship between slang and community, slang and identity. A nice example of this is, uh, student language, sometimes called \the words they use are used by both sexes, often metaphorically rather than literally. That is to say, the conventional meaning of the words change. For example, words that have traditionally had strong negative literal meanings that are used as insults have taken on, uh, gentler, and in many cases even positive meanings in conversation. We'll look at some examples later.

Now, if you ask college students why they use slang, they'll tell you it's cool, and that's true in several different ways. First, it's cool because it's in style, in fashion. Using current slang shows that the speaker is in tune with the times . . . you know, that he or she knows what's in fashion and is pan of that fashion.

Second, slang is cool in the sense of showing that the speaker is knowledgeable . . . the speaker is \the speaker knows when slang is acceptable. People don't use slang all the time, only in situations and with people who accept the use of slang—a point I'll return to later. Research tells us that although young people often deny that they use slang intentionally, in fact they clearly choose whether or not to use it depending on the situation they're in. As we've already said, slang's typically used in informal rather than formal settings, and this is certainly true among college students: They usually avoid using it in the class-room or a work environment, for example. Anyone like to suggest why?

STUDENT 1: People won't understand them. STUDENT 2: Yeah, so it's like a waste of time.

TEACHER: Well, that may be true, but it's not the main reason. They don't use it simply because it could make them look bad. And everyone hates looking bad, right?

So, to review, we've said that students use slang only in certain situations. But they also only use it with certain peo-ple, usually friends. When they use slang, they are showing that they share social and emotional experiences—so slang reinforces their relationships. But ... it also gives special meaning to what they say. For instance, to say \was the bomb\is more than merely saying it was a very good party. It shares an emotional experience that might otherwise take several sentences to explain. In other words, it's a kind of. . . shorthand.

The third and final way slang's cool is that it's fun; it's very creative in the same way that poetry is, and it's often humorous. In other words, it's a form of play, a way of entertaining.

So . . . uh, let me repeat: I've said that slang's cool for three reasons: One, it shows the user's fashionable and in tune with the times; two, it's a way of reinforcing relation-ships and communicating efficiently; and three, it's fun and entertaining. Got that?

All right then, let's now take a look at different kinds of slang, in particular three types of slang words: those that are currently most used, those that linger year after year, and those that have become unfashionable.

So . . . now what is the most used slang? Well, research tells us that over the past few years, in the number one posi-tion is \

- 102 -

excellent, attractive, or nice. So somebody might say, for example, that his friend's new motorbike is really dope; in other words, it's very good. Other words that feature in the top twenty include \bomb\means bad, unfair, crazy, or foolish), and \(meaning person—usually a man, actually). Any other examples? Yes? STUDENT 1: Hella. TEACHER: Meaning? STUDENT 1: Very, a lot. TEACHER: OK, yep. Luis?

STUDENT 3: \relax, you know, sit around doing nothing.

TEACHER: Right. And it's interesting, isn't it, how most slang terms indicate approval or disapproval; they show what we feel positive or negative about. So, like \bomb,\we have \\—spelled P-H-A-T, not F-A-T—\and \—all meaning good, excellent, nice, or attractive.

And then you have words like \which really mean good; so \you see, slang does strange things with language. Like I said earlier, it's certainly creative. As a matter of fact, some slang words have many different meanings, sometimes as many as nine or ten. For instance, the word \or \has various meanings, but they all reflect the idea of unusual, strange, or extreme. When a word's used a lot or has a num-ber of different meanings like this, we sometimes say it \hard.\The word \then, is a word that works hard.

Uh . . . now, the second type of slang consists of words that linger from decade to decade and never seem to go out of fashion—and these words also work hard, that is, they have a lot of meanings. A great example is the word cool— forever popular, it seems! Other terms in this category are \\\\man,\\\\of these show approval or disapproval.

And . . . now, finally, there are slang terms that come and go; they disappear almost as quickly as they appear. Examples include \five,\\it hanging,\and \Words like these often disappear because they're closely associated with famous personalities who similarly come and go—they're popular, in the spotlight for a while, and then seem almost to disappear. And when they disappear, the slang associated with them tends to disappear as well. Now, today, public tolerance of slang is at an all-time high—just look at how widely it's used in newspapers. But how do college teachers and academics view slang? Well, some persist with the idea that its use will degrade . . . uh, you might even say \among themselves students tolerate words their teachers

might consider taboo. Students are actually very good at code-switching; that is, they're very good at using different styles or codes of communication in different situations. Do you agree? Do you use slang in your essays or when you speak with a teacher?

STUDENT 3: Personally I never use slang in essays. It just doesn't feel right. It's true, you know, most students know when to use slang, and when not to.

STUDENT 2: I agree. I sometimes use it with teachers, though; it just depends on who the teacher is.

TEACHER: Why, I imagine most people do the same. Here's something you may find surprising: A recent study on stu-dent conversation suggests that students don't in fact use slang that often but instead they choose more ordinary col-loquial vocabulary.

OK, to finish up, now let me say something about the history of slang. Many years ago, slang was closely associ-ated with underground, criminal organizations, groups that deviate from mainstream society . . . uh . . . with notions of outcasts and socially unacceptable behaviors. A look back in time shows, for example, that in the seventeenth century more than twenty words were used to refer to vagrants, that is, to someone who has no home or job. Today, of course, these associations are much weaker and slang's used much more widely. As underground culture has become more mainstream, there's not the same need for the kind of secret code that slang offered. Today, most of us use slang and aren't ashamed of using it. It may still have negative connotations, but like it or not it's here to stay, and increasingly it's become the subject of serious academic study. And why not? As I've tried to show, it's a fascinating social as well as linguistic phenomenon. So, any questions? . . .

Unit 2 Murphy's Law

TEACHER: Good afternoon, everyone. More than 200 years ago, the Scottish poet Robert Burns said that \best laid plans of mice and men often go awry.\firsthand experience with what Burns means; no matter how carefully we plan a project and no matter how carefully we try to, uh, anticipate problems, we're likely to, uh encounter something unexpected and unwelcome that will throw our plan off course.

Well, class today we'll be looking at how plans can go right or wrong... and, uh, how we can make sense of this. Are you all familiar with Murphy's Law? Well, according to Murphy's Law, anything that can go wrong will go wrong. So we'll be looking at everyday examples of Murphy's Law—uh, things like why toast falls buttered-side down, why it always seems like we choose slow lines at the supermarket, and why it is so difficult to win when we gamble.

As you may know, we now have many different versions of Murphy's Law, and today I'd like to look at the science behind three of them. I'll try to show you that some things

- 103 -

which have happened to you, and which you may have thought were simply bad luck, had nothing to do with luck at all. What I'm saying is that there are some very good sci-entific reasons for many of the things that happen to us, and we're not victims of bad luck as often as we might think. When we consider some basic science and probability theory, we can more clearly understand why some \things happen the way they do.

All right. Let's begin with a very commonplace situation. Let's say you've just gotten up. You're still sleepy, and you make your way to the breakfast table. In your half-awake state, you accidentally hit your piece of toast, which has butter on one side. The toast begins to fall to the floor. Now what are the chances that you'll be lucky and the toast will land buttered-side up? Well, the toast has only two sides, so most people think that the answer is fifty-fifty. Fifty percent. Right? Do you think that there's a 50 percent chance that the toast will land with the buttered-side up?

STUDENT 1: Well, this sounds like a trick question, but, uh, yeah. Logically, 50 percent sounds about right.

TEACHER: Yes, 50 percent does seem right, but, in this case, Murphy's Law of Falling Toast says: \a table will land buttered-side down.\ity of this happening is extremely high. It's close to 100 per-cent. Now, here's why. When something like a piece of toast falls from a table, its behavior is not random. The rate of spin is controlled by the laws of physics. This is the problem. The rate of spin, that is, how fast the toast spins, is too low for the toast to make a complete revolution. It's too slow to turn completely around and hit the floor buttered-side up. The rate of spin is determined by the force of gravity. So in a very real sense, the laws of physics, and specifically the rate of spin, make sure that our toast lands buttered-side down almost all the time. So the point is that simple probabilities—for example, the probability that toast has a fifty-fifty chance of landing buttered-side up—can be greatly affected by other more fundamental factors, such as the laws of physics. So, in this case, we believe that we have bad luck because we don't understand that the natural laws of physics are in effect. The toast should land buttered-side down. OK? Let's look at the next point.

Now we come to one of my most frustrating situations in life—the supermarket line. In this case, Murphy's Law of Supermarket Lines says: \line next to you will move faster than yours.\Now everybody wants to get into the fastest line when they go to the supermarket, right? OK, so let's say that you're at your local supermarket and there are five lines, but each of the five lines looks pretty much equal in length. Now, of course, you want to try to anticipate which one of the five lines will move the fastest. Well, this is where simple probability theory enters the picture. The chances that you have chosen the fastest of the five lines is one divided by the number of lines, which is five in this case. So mathematically, the formula is one divided by N where N is the total number of lines. So in this example, one divided by five gives us what?

STUDENT 2: One divided by five is one-fifth or . . . uh . . . 20 percent.

TEACHER: Right. Twenty percent. There's only a 20 percent chance that we have chosen the fastest of the five lines. Now even if we reduce that to three lines, our line and the lines on each side of us, the chances we've chosen the fastest line are still only what?

STUDENT 2: Uh, 33 percent. One out of three.

TEACHER: Sure. One divided by three is 33 percent, so it's not just your imagination that one line near you almost always moves faster than yours. Simple probability theory shows that the odds are against you. If there are very many lines, the chances that you'll choose the fastest one is quite low. So, you see, it has little to do with luck, but we perceive that it does.

All right. Now let's look at a final situation that shows how we commonly misunderstand the laws of probability. We've come to Murphy's Law of Gambling that says simply: \will lose.\Now in the case of the supermarket lines that we've just talked about, probability theory applied very nicely. And actually, as we go through life, most things are fairly predictable because they follow the basic laws of probability. Weather is an example. Let's say that it's been raining for a week, and a friend says to you \tomorrow.\Is that an unreasonable statement? Well, no. Clouds move, and they are of limited size, so if it's been raining for a week, it's likely that the rain and clouds will end soon. In other words, the next sunny day is more likely to occur after the seventh day of rain than after the first, because the storm front has what is called a life history. Now this is important, so let me explain that term. Events with a life history have changing probabilities of certain events occurring over time. For instance, uh, if you plant flower seeds, you can predict with reasonable accuracy when the plants will come up, when they will bloom, and how long they will bloom. For instance, with some types of flowers, there's a 90 percent chance that they will come up fifteen to twenty days after the seeds have been planted. In short, the growth of a flower follows a clear predictable pattern, and we call this pattern a life history. But this is the trick with many gambling games. The casino owners want us to believe that dice also have a life history and that we can therefore estimate the probability of events related to the dice. However, gambling devices like dice are different because they don't have life histories. Now . . . what do you think that means?

STUDENT 1: There aren't any reliable patterns? Um, just because I rolled a seven last time doesn't tell me anything about the next roll.

TEACHER: Right. You can't look at the past rolls of the dice and predict what the next roll will be. Now many people, especially gamblers, think that they can, but this is what's called the gambler's fallacy. The gambler's fallacy is expect-ing to roll a seven with a pair of dice because a seven hasn't come up recently. So, in other words, there's a widespread belief among gamblers that dice have a life history. In the

- 104 -

real world, that's not a bad way to reason, but in a casino, it's the path to financial loss. Dice have no memory, no life history. Now you can predict that if you roll one dice many, many times, the number five will come up about 16 percent of the time. That's one divided by six. But that's not what we're concerned with here. We're concerned with the next roll of the dice. As a result, the element of arbitrariness or randomness makes prediction of the next roll impossible. Statisticians who work with probability theory call the roll of a pair of dice a single-event probability, and many of these same statisticians believe that the probability of a single event can't even be computed mathematically. So, the same probability theory that works well with supermarket lines won't help you win a million dollars in a dice game in Las Vegas. It could, in fact, lead to a catastrophe!

So, to sum up, we have looked at three cases involving Murphy's Law and our perception of \luck.\The first case was the toast, right? Our toast lands buttered-side down far more often than we would predict because the basic laws of physics have a strong effect on normal probabilities. The second case was the supermarket line, remember? Another line moves faster than ours because the laws of probability are behaving normally, even though we might perceive them as behaving unfairly. And the third case was the dice game. People lose at gambling games like dice because the laws of \history probability\simply don't apply in those situa-tions, even though gamblers think they do.

So, as you can see, in some cases, Murphy's Law is not just some form of bad luck. There are some very real, scien-tific explanations for these events. OK, that's about it for today. For next class I'd like you to take a look at Chapter 7 and be ready to talk about the discussion questions on page 255. See you then. Unit 3 Types of Memory

TEACHER: Good morning everyone. Um . . . today, I have the pleasure of introducing you to the basics of what I think is one of the most fascinating topics in the field of psychology—memory. What is memory? How does memory work? The research in this field is fascinating and dates back to the late 1800s, so it's been going on for more than a century. I'll begin today by saying a few things about three types of memory that we all have, and then we'll look at how memory is measured.

All right. First of all, let's begin by looking at types of memory. One of the most common ways to classify memory is based on time . . . based on time and duration of use. So typically, memory is divided into three types: sensory memory, working memory (which is also referred to as short-term memory), and long-term memory. Again, that's sensory memory, working memory, and long-term memory. Let's talk about sensory memory for a minute. Sensory memory holds information for only an instant, say, less than half a second. This is just long enough to register an impression on one or more of our five senses—sight, hear-ing, touch, smell, or taste. Let me give you an example of a

phenomenon concerning visual sensory memory that I'm sure you've all experienced. Imagine that you're holding up a flashlight on a dark night. You start to move it in circles slowly, watching it carefully the whole time. Pretty soon you aren't just seeing the flashlight... you can see a full circle of light! Of course, it's actually just one point of light being moved around, but your memory of the visual sensation of the light fills in the rest of the circle. That's one example of sensory memory. So remember, you can hold something in your sensory memory for just a fraction of a second, up to around half a second, then it fades away.

Now if you want to keep the information for longer than a second, you have to put it into your working memory. Working memory, the second type of memory, allows us to hold on to things for as long as we think about them, that is, as long as we're paying attention to them. It's something like a kind of temporary storage place. Let me give you a simple math problem. Are you ready? Here goes ... 18 plus 44 plus 9 plus 19. . . I'll say that one more time. OK? 18 plus 44 plus 9 plus 19. ... All right? . . . Do you all have the answer? Maya? STUDENT 1: Uh, I think it's 90. Yeah, 90.

TEACHER: Let's see . . . 18 plus 44 is 62 . .. plus 9 is 71 .. . plus 19 is 90. Ninety is the answer. Now, to figure out this problem, you had to use your working memory. As you did the problem, you had to continue holding the numbers in your memory until you got the final answer. If you stopped concentrating on the numbers, that is, you stopped saying them to yourself, or stopped visualizing them, you would have forgotten them and then you wouldn't have been able to solve the problem. Do you see how that works?

Here's one more example of working memory involving reading. Look at the sentence: \is the only natural food that is made without destroying any kind of life.\It's written down in your textbook. Why, you may wonder, do we need working memory to understand such a simple sen-tence? Well, the answer is because working memory holds the first part of the sentence, \is the only natural food ...\while our eyes move on to the last part, that is, \without destroying any kind of life.\Without our working memory, we would forget the first part of the sentence before we got to the end. So reading even short or simple passages would be impossible without our working memory.

OK, I think you can see how important working memory is, but our working memory is very limited, and it can only hold information temporarily. It usually lasts only one and one half to two seconds and then it begins to fade. So if working memory were all we had, we would be very limited. Essentially, working memory mediates between how we experience the environment and our long-term memory. This brings us to the third type of memory that we'll talk about today, long-term memory.

Now, long-term memory is involved with information that's stored for considerable lengths of time. For example, do you remember the name of your best friend when you were ten years old? I bet you do, because this information is certainly in your long-term memory. Actually, memory that's tested after about one minute behaves in a very simi-

- 105 -

lar way to memory tested after a day, a week, or even years, so many scientists believe that any memories more than one minute old are part of our long-term memory. Interestingly, these memories seem to change over time in the sense that we tend to add information to them. In a sense, our memo-ries become somewhat distorted. The reason behind these changes is that our memory is designed to keep or preserve meaning, not to keep impressions or images, but to keep meaning. For example, try to remember a conversation you had yesterday with a friend. Now if you're like most people, you can't remember the exact words that you or your friend said, but you can remember the ideas that you discussed. Your memories of the points that were most important to you will be the clearest. So the essential feature of long-term memory is that it specializes in holding meaning. OK, are there any questions about that? Yes?

STUDENT 1: Yeah. Can you explain why we don't remember all of the details of our past conversations?

recognition is a lot easier for most of us than recall. In other words, asking yourself \I seen this before?\is easier than remembering everything you saw.

Now the third basic method used to measure memory is relearning. Let me give you an example of a relearning test. First, you try to memorize a list of words. Then you don't look at the list for a period of time, maybe a week. If you're like most people, you won't be able to remember all of the words. After a week, you then look at the list a second time and try to relearn it. As you would guess, most people relearn information somewhat faster than they learn it the first time. By measuring the time people need to relearn information, we can calculate how much information they have stored in their long-term memories the first time.

So, let's stop there for today. Uh ... I hope that you'll put today's material in your long-term memory ... or you're going to have a hard time with the test. See you next week.

TEACHER: So the question is, \Unit 4 Actions Speak Louder than Words most experts believe that if we remembered all of the details of our past experiences, our memory system would be filled

TEACHER: OK, class, OK . . . let's begin. What do we mean

with a lot of trivial information, a lot of trivial and generally

when we say that actions speak louder than words?

useless information. Secondly, it is conceivable that we

would find it extremely difficult to sift through such a . .. a STUDENT 1: Uh . . . that means we believe people's actions mass of detailed information and find the really important more than we believe their words. information that we need. Um ... in other words, memory

TEACHER: Yes, exactly right—and, uh, in a sense, actions searches would proceed a lot more slowly.

are more important than words. That's because we usually judge speakers' intentions by the nonverbal signals they send STUDENT 1: OK, I see. Thank you.

us. And that's what our subject today's all about, nonverbal

TEACHER: OK, let's move on to ways of measuring communication—how we communicate through our memory. Just as we distinguished three types of memory, actions— facial expressions, eye contact, tone of voice, uh, there are three main ways of measuring how much a person body movement, and so on. And if any of you doubt the remembers. The first of these methods is called recall. You importance of these things, you might like to consider a use recall many times every day. Here's what I mean. . . . couple of statistics I've got here in front of me. Some Take out a sheet of paper. . . . OK, now look at the word list communication specialists estimate we spend about 75 in your text: drum, band, studio, and so on. . . . Read it percent of our waking hours communicating. And, more to silently to yourself. . . . OK? . . . Have you looked at all of the point, words account for only, mm, 10 to 30 percent of the words? . . . OK, you should be finished by now. Now, that communication—the bulk's nonverbal. That's food for close your book. Write down the words you saw, as many as thought, uh? you can, on your paper. . .. Go ahead.. .. OK, that's a simple Now although people clearly understand its importance, recall test. Now, most of you probably remembered most of nonverbal communication—I'll call it N.V.C. for short—is the words, but not all of them. Our memories, of course, are actually a rather recent field of study and owes a lot to an not perfect, and of course forgetting is natural. American anthropologist named Raymond Birdwhistle— The second method of measuring memory is recognition. spelled B-I-R-D-W-H-I-S-T-L-E. Easy name to remember, OK, for this you need another piece of paper, or just turn that right? Birdwhistle began studying nonverbal communication one over. . . . All right. Number the page from one to in the 1950s and, um ... one of his main ideas was that the eight. . . . Now look at the word list again. OK, now close meaning of nonverbal behavior depended on the context in your book. I'm going to say eight words. You have to write which it was used.... Uh, it depends on the context. So, he \—\looked at the whole context of nonverbal behavior— how the word I say was not on the list. Ready? Here I go. 1. stu-and, uh, where certain types of nonverbal behavior dio. 2. guitar. 3. stage. 4. recorder. 5. wiring. 6. song 7. appeared—and not just one particular behavior in isolation. vocalist. 8. drum. . . . OK, everybody finished? The answers Facial expressions, for example—frowns, smiles, raised eye-are 1. yes, 2. no, 3. yes, 4. no, 5. yes, 6. no, 7. yes, and 8. brows, and, uh, so on—we all use these to convey many dif-yes. . . . How did you do? Anyone get all eight correct? . . . ferent meanings. But those meanings are largely determined Good! That's what we call a recognition test. In contrast to by the situations we're in and the relationships that we have the recall test, recognition is more receptive and doesn't with the people we're communicating with. So, the same require you to produce anything. For this reason,

- 106 -

expression can have different meanings, right? Take a smile, for example, what does it mean?... Uh, Mike?

STUDENT 2: Uh .. . uh, agreement, I guess. \TEACHER: OK. Yes, it could mean \also mean \trying to make you feel comfortable,\or maybe, uh, \point is, the situation or the relationship between the people involved gives a particular meaning to the smile. All right. Now although today I want to focus on physical nonverbal communication—uh, often called body language or kinesics, that's K-I-N-E-S-I-C-S—you should know that there are other types of nonverbal communication. G. W. Porter, for example, divides nonverbal communication into four categories, which I'd like to look at just briefly. There's the Physical N.V.C. I just mentioned. That includes facial expressions, tone of voice, sense of touch and smell, and body movement. Secondly, there's Aesthetic N.V.C.— that's A-E-S-T-H-E-T-I-C, meaning related to beauty. And Aesthetic N.V.C. takes place through creative expressions, like playing instrumental music, dancing or painting, sculpting. And we certainly know that we can communicate with people through creative expressions like these.

Now, next is Signs, which is a mechanical type of com-munication. Now, it includes the use of things like signal flags used at airports, the twenty-one gun salute used in the military, and police sirens used on public streets. And last is Symbolic N.V.C, which uses religious, status, or ego-build-ing symbols—you know, things like wearing crosses in the Christian religion or special pins to show membership in a particular club, like a fraternity. So, again, you've got physi-cal, aesthetic, signs, and symbolic nonverbal communication. Got that?

But let's go back to Porter's first type, Physical N.V.C, or body language .... Um, it's divided into two main types— static features and dynamic features. Static features include distance, orientation, posture, and physical contact. Let's look at distance first. The distance a person stands from another often sends a nonverbal message. In some situations it's a sign of attraction; in others it's a reflection of social sta-tus; in others it shows the intensity of the exchange. Distance has to do with personal space and what an invasion of someone's personal space signifies, what it means. Britney? STUDENT 1: Yes, what is personal space exactly? Could you explain it a bit more, please?

TEACHER: Ah, well, good question. Well, it's kind of like a bubble each of us places between ourself and others—an invisible border or limit. Now this affects how close we stand to others, where we sit in a room, at a meeting, and uh, so on—things which affect how comfortable we feel. Generally speaking, the higher your status, the more space you'll have and the easier it'll be to invade other people's space. Uh, I hope that's clearer.

Now, orientation's different from distance and has to do with the way we position ourselves in relation to others. For example, people cooperating are likely to sit side-by-side, while competitors are likely to sit face to face ... right? And posture's different again; it concerns whether we're slouched

or we're standing or sitting straight. You know: Are our legs crossed, our arms folded? That sort of tiling. These convey the level of formality or relaxation in the same situation. Then comes physical contact, and here we're talking about touching, holding, hugging, and so on. These convey or show messages—particularly how intimate we feel—and their meaning can vary a lot between cultures. Hands touching in one culture may be an act of great intimacy, whereas in another . . . simply a sign of friendship. The fact is, though, that touching and physical intimacy can send a more direct yet subtle message than dozens of words. Be careful though: This kind of communication can easily invade someone's personal space, and that can .. . lead, uh . . . cause mistrust, lead to problems—and actually shut down the communication.

So those are Porter's static features. Let's now look at his dynamic features. These are basically things like facial expressions, gestures, eye contact, and uh, body movements. Facial expressions, then .. . these continually change during a conversation, and participants constantly watch and respond to each others' expressions. These expressions usually communicate the emotions and attitude of the speaker. Take eyes for example; they. . . . Well, let me ask you, what do you think they reveal? Yes? STUDENT 2: Um ... happiness and sadness? TEACHER: Fear? Fright? STUDENT 3: Friendliness.

TEACHER: Yes, some of these things are revealed in the eyes, happiness and sadness yes . . . also fright and surprise. Think about it. Think about how your eyes respond when you hear something surprising, or frightening, or sad, or cheerful. Now, the lower face—the mouth and jaw—also reveals happiness or surprise, especially the smile, as we've said. The upper face, eyebrows, and forehead can also reveal anger. In some communication studies, it's been estimated that facial expressions provide 55 percent of the meaning of a message; vocal cues, such as pitch and volume, provide 38 percent; and verbal cues only 7 percent. So, a person's expressions seem to be a better indicator of his meaning than words, which play a minimal part.

OK, now where are we? Oh. We're looking at Porter's dynamic features of communication. Next we come to ges-tures. You know, one of the most important parts of gestur-ing, hand movements, is one of those least understood by scientists. Most are not universal, and as we all know, the same gesture can have different meanings in different coun-tries. Here in the U.S. we make a circle with our thumb and first finger and it means \\story goes that former President Richard Nixon made a huge mistake on a trip to South America when he held up both hands using this \in the audience were quite shocked! The fact is, we have to be very careful about what our bodies are saying . .. especially when in a different culture.

Now let's move on to eye contact. Eye contact is a very powerful form of nonverbal communication. One thing

- 107 -

about eye contact that is generally agreed on is that someone with higher status usually maintains eye contact longer if he's talking to someone of lower status. In other words, he stares. Anything else you think a direct stare indicates? STUDENT 1: Determination . . . uh . . . openness.

TEACHER: Exactly, and it creates a feeling of trust. And looking downward?

STUDENT 1: That shows dishonesty, guilt,... uh .. .

TEACHER: Yes, it does, but also modesty, in some cases. And eyes rolled upwards suggest tiredness. I don't see any of that right now, I'm glad to say!

And the last, the fourth item on Porter's list is body move-ment. You know, it's interesting that a lot of the work on non-verbal communication has been done for corporations. They want to improve their employees' performance. So for example, if you lean forward in an interview, this suggests you're energetic, somebody prepared to make major changes. If you hold yourself at your tallest, uh, this suggests you're probably a presenter, and good at selling yourself or the organization. And with side-to-side movements, if you take up a lot of space while talking by moving your arms a lot, you're seen as a good informer and listener, so you're desirable to the company. See?

So to finish up, I'm going to list five things that differen-tiate verbal and nonverbal communication. I'd like you to note them down. First, while spoken languages differ from country to country, emotions are communicated in much the same nonverbal way throughout the world. Second, although we know a lot about the grammar of spoken language, we still don't know very much about the \of N.V.C. Third, we don't have any dictionaries for N.V.C. If you go to a foreign country and somebody makes a hand gesture you don't understand, there's no dictionary to help you. And fourth, we can ask for repetition or clarification of what somebody has said, but it's practically impossible to ask, \you repeat that smile?\or \does that facial expression mean?\We have to understand nonverbal communication the first time around. And finally, we can hide our true feelings with spoken language, but it's more difficult with N.V.C. We can't just stop ourselves from turn-ing red, or slow down our heartbeat, right? So whether we like it or not, body language can't lie—although I'll bet there are times we all wish it could.

So in conclusion then, nonverbal communication is an integral part of communication. OK, now let's quickly get into groups and talk about some of the differences I've just mentioned. This is what I want you to do. Just pull your chairs around. .. .

Unit 5 Marriage: Traditions and Trends

race for thousands of years. And, although some would say that the institution of marriage has come under attack in recent decades, marriage isn't going to disappear anytime soon. We're going to start today by looking at some defini-tions of marriage. Then, we'll consider the selection of a marriage partner, a critical decision that—you will see—has been handled very differently by different cultures. We'll see that how societies handle this question has changed in recent decades, and this change is having a strong impact on marriage in today's world.

OK. So what is marriage? This may seem like a simple question, but not every society answers it in the same way. Generally, we can describe marriage as a more or less durable union between one or more men and one or more women that is sanctioned by society. I know that's long, so let me repeat it. Marriage is a more or less durable union . . . between one or more men .. . and one or more women . . . that is sanctioned by, that is accepted by, society. All right? Now the words \of this definition because social approval is what distinguishes marriage from other relationships between adults. A second important point is that the obligations between partners—or the responsibilities that the partners have toward each other—are specified in marriages. Now what do you think might be an example of a marriage obligation? What are married people expected to do? Yes, Monica.

STUDENT 1: To take care of your marriage partner... . TEACHER: Good. Anything else?

STUDENT 2: Uh ... to take care of the children. . . . TEACHER: Absolutely. Those are the main ones. So one obligation is to provide care for the children and provide them with an acceptable position in society. Now this definition of marriage says that marriage is a licensing of parenthood. OK, just what do we mean by that? A licensing of parenthood means it allows people to become parents. Now in most societies, the key has traditionally been having acceptable social fatherhood. This is called \fatherhood\because traditionally the father is supposed to be responsible for ensuring the, uh . . . the social development of the child. Some people say, though, that this task has more often fallen to the mother. In addition, nowadays, some people prefer to use a term such as \parenthood\and do away with the gender bias of the traditional term. ... I, I see a question. Go ahead.

STUDENT 3: I'm a little confused by what you mean by social fatherhood or social parenthood. Could you explain more about that?

TEACHER: Sure. How about an example? Maybe that would make the idea clearer. In many countries, children can

TEACHER: Good afternoon, class. Today I'd like to talk be adopted. Now in those cases, the adoptive parents are not about a subject which is probably going to be very important the actual birth mother and father. in your future, for many of you at least—marriage. Marriage,

STUDENT 3: OK, so the people who adopt the child as you probably know, has been with the human

become the social mother and social father.

- 108 -

TEACHER: Exactly. So if you remember that the social mother or father isn't necessarily the birth mother or father, you'll have the idea. STUDENT 3: OK.

TEACHER: All right. So those are a couple of ideas about marriage and how marriage can be defined. Now let's move on to take a look at how marriage partners are selected. The first ideas that are important are exogamy and endogamy. Exogamy. That's E-X-O-G-A-M-Y. And endogamy is spelled E-N-D-O-G-A-M-Y. Do you have that? OK ... so exogamy is the idea that marriage should take place with someone from outside of our group and, uh . . . endogamy is the opposite . . . the idea that marriage should take place with someone inside our group.

Now this sounds quite simple, but if you think about it, any individual belongs to many different groups. For instance, we can belong to a racial group, a national group, a socioeconomic group, or a religious group, to name a few. So one idea of marriage might be that you should marry within your religious group. For instance, the parents of a Muslim child might want their child to marry another Muslim, parents of a Catholic another Catholic, and so on. What would that be? Exogamy or endogamy?

STUDENT 1: Endogamy. Uh . . . because that's inside a group. It's the same religion.

TEACHER: Right. Right. That's endogamy. However, those same parents would almost certainly demand that their child marry someone who was not a member of their immediate family. In other words, you can't marry your brother or sister. That's illegal in many societies. That's a fairly universal example of exogamy. Rules against marrying someone within one's own immediate family are thousands of years old.

If you think about your country, your culture, or your par-ents for a few minutes, you'll realize that endogamy is an extremely powerful idea in most societies. However, this concept is changing. Take my brother as an example, or I guess I should say a counter-example. What I mean is that his marriage is a good example of exogamy. He's married to a woman who is a different race and different nationality. They speak different native languages. Although our family has been understanding and supportive of his marriage, he's the only person in the entire family who has married outside of our national, cultural, and language group, so his marriage is far from the cultural norm. In many other parts of the world, the cultural norm as well is to marry within the national, racial, and linguistic group. This is interesting to think about, and I'll give you chances to discuss this later. Now let's move on to the second point . . . about how marriage partners are selected. Who chooses the marriage partner. If we look at different cultures throughout the world, the decision is made either by the family—usually the parents—or by the couple who is getting married. The first case is called an arranged marriage. In an arranged marriage, the family restricts or controls the choice of marriage partner. In extreme cases, the individuals getting married don't meet each other until the wedding ceremony itself.

Obviously, there's no dating or romance before the wedding in this situation. Now, depending where you come from, you may be very familiar with arranged marriages because they're still common in the Middle East, Africa, and ... uh, some countries in Asia. Arranged marriages are found in cultures in which the extended family is common. That is, the family is made up not only of parents and children, but also grandparents, grandchildren, and perhaps even aunts and uncles and so on. In extended families, marriage is a family affair, and individuals are expected to conform to the overall wishes of the group. In other words, the people getting married have little or no independence in terms of choosing their marriage partner.

Now, in contrast to arranged marriages, people in many places around the world have a great deal of freedom in deciding who they'll marry in what some call \mar-riages.\sion between two people is not a traditional idea. Typically, marriage has been the business of the whole family or even the whole tribe. This has been the norm throughout most of the world, and the idea that men and women could marry freely is relatively modern. In ancient societies, the tribe had to approve of the match, and the idea of a couple choosing each other freely would have been extremely shocking—and in many cases, against the law of the group. In other words, the wishes of the individual were subordinate to the wishes of the group. Even in the societies upon which modern western civilization is based, meaning the Romans and the Greeks, marrying for love was virtually unknown. The fact is, love has not been the point of marriage in much of human history. Having children and cementing ties between families, tribes, and other groups have been considered far more important. Actually, this all makes sense when you consider that marriage laws are essentially attempts to preserve the type of family unit that is valued in that culture and to protect traditional cultural values.

Now, let's fast-forward to the present. As we're all aware, the situation surrounding marriage has changed. The world has been undergoing rapid changes in the past century, and one of those changes has been a general eroding of the extended family in many parts of the world. The extended family is gradually being replaced with the smaller nuclear family, in which parents and children live separately from other members of the family. In the nuclear family, individ-ual choice is very important. The idea is that mature indi-viduals should make their own choices regarding marriage, and that love and romance are necessary conditions for a successful marriage. The couple is also expected to set up an independent household of their own. So, for better or worse, the world seems to be moving much more strongly toward freedom of choice where marriage is concerned. I think that it's interesting to speculate about the possible results of this trend. For instance, what do you think might happen where endogamy and exogamy are concerned? Do you think we may see a breakdown of endogamy? Will traditional institutions such as arranged marriages begin to erode? Do you think we'll see more interracial and international marriages? If so, how will this affect our world? Well,

- 109 -

I'd like to hear what you think about these ideas, so take a look at the discussion questions 2 through 5 at the end of Chapter 6, and be prepared to discuss those next class. All right. Any questions?. .. OK. Get out your homework and let's break into groups. . ..

Unit 6 Black Holes, White Holes, and Wormholes TEACHER: Are there any questions before we begin?... No? ... This afternoon I'm going to introduce you to three mys-terious phenomena that have been puzzling astronomers since the early twentieth century—phenomena which promise to tell us a good deal about the origins of our uni-verse and the nature of space and time. I'm talking about black holes, white holes, and wormholes. Are you familiar with these? I'm sure most of you have heard of these things—maybe through movies—but if you're like most people, you probably really don't understand them very well, right? What I'd like to talk about today—in pretty simple terms—is what these things are and what evidence we have that they exist.

Let me start, then, with black holes, which is probably the most familiar term for most people. The term \hole\was first used back in 1969 by an American physicist named John Archibald Wheeler. He used it to describe the final stage in the life of very large stars. Black holes have incredi-bly strong gravitational force—so strong, in fact, that noth-ing can escape their gravity, not even light. And since no light can escape from them, and since we need light to see, we cannot see black holes,... which is precisely why we call them \holes,\

STUDENT 1: If they can't see them, how do scientists know black holes exist?

TEACHER: Excellent question. Scientists know they exist because they can see their effect on nearby objects. For example, black holes pull gases off the surface of nearby stars. Scientists are able to see these gases being sucked into the black hole. STUDENT 1:I see...

TEACHER: So . . . what causes black holes? . . . Well, to answer that question it's helpful to first consider small and medium-sized stars. In the last stage of their lives, small and medium-sized stars become what we call white dwarfs. Now, a white dwarf is a small, very hot mass which is formed when the star's gravity collapses the star. All its heat, energy, and mass are compressed into a smaller and smaller space. This makes the star hotter and gives it a stronger gravitational pull. So that's what happens with small and medium-sized stars. As I've said, though, a black hole is the final stage in the life of a very large star, and this means its gravity's much stronger. Anyone like to suggest why? Sergio?

STUDENT 2: It's larger, so it has more mass, and that makes its gravitational pull stronger.

TEACHER: Yes, Sergio; you're absolutely right. In the case of a large star, there's more mass, and therefore the gravita-tional force is stronger. And, as the gravitational force becomes stronger and stronger, the star gets smaller and smaller until all its energy and mass is compressed into one tiny point called the \—that's \that? The singularity then sucks or pulls in everything near it—even light—because its gravitational force is so strong. So, we get a black hole. In other words, the powerful gravi-tational force of a black hole is caused by an extremely large mass being forced into—drawn into--a tiny space ... the singularity. It's a bit like taking an orange and squeezing it so hard that it becomes as small as the head of a pin . . . but its weight doesn't change. When a large mass is forced into a tiny space like this, we say it's very dense. So, the tiny point called the singularity is an extremely dense object.

Now, here's an interesting question: How small does a star need to become in order to create the huge gravitational force of a black hole? Well, just consider this: We're told that if the sun were the size of a large mountain, it would need to shrink to the size of a small butterfly. Think about that—from a mountain to a small butterfly. Yet, it would still weigh the same as the original mountain. It would, as we've said, be extremely dense!

Now, most of their lives, stars remain a constant size because they have a balance of forces. On one side you've got heat—which is made because the star burns fuel, which helps push the star out. On the other side there's the effect of gravity, which pulls the star in. Heat versus gravity—see? So you get a balance. However, after billions of years, the star uses up all its fuel. Then, there's an imbalance—there's no more heat. Gravity wins the battle, and the star collapses. Now, students often ask me what it would be like to be sucked into a black hole. The truth is we can't really be sure. However, scientists have tried to imagine this event, and it doesn't sound very appealing. Let me explain. The area immediately surrounding a black hole is called the \horizon.\Once you cross this area, the event horizon, you can't go back The gravity there is so strong that you wouldn't be able to escape the black hole. The gravitational force pulling on your legs would be greater than the gravitational force pulling on your head, and the difference between the two forces would stretch you. Each and every atom of your body would be torn apart from the others and pulled toward the singularity at the black hole's center. There, they'd be squeezed until they ceased to exist. Not very nice!

OK, enough about what getting sucked into a black hole would be like. Now I'm going to move on to different types of black holes. Basically, there are two kinds of black holes: rotating and nonrotating. Let me explain the difference. If you cross the event horizon of a nonrotating black hole, it's certain you'll die. However, some scientists believe that this might not happen if you cross the event horizon of a rotating black hole. Because the hole rotates, you may be able to somehow avoid entering the singularity, and you may even be transported to another part of the universe and forced out of a white hole—although only as millions of particles prob-ably. ... Your body would have been torn apart, I'm afraid.

- 110 -

Now this brings us to our second and third phenomena: white holes and wormholes . . . things we know much less about and which are far more controversial. Basically, a white hole's the opposite of a black hole. Instead of matter being pulled into it, matter is pushed out of it. The idea is that if matter falls into a black hole, it comes out of a white hole at the other end—and matter in this case includes light, by the way. Light which enters a black hole exits via a white hole. This causes that white hole to appear as a bright white object—that's where it gets its name. Now, the actual tunnel through which the matter passes—from the black hole to the white hole—is called a \by a worm. So you can see how the three phenomena are connected, right?

Now like I said, the idea of white holes and wormholes is still very uncertain. What I mean is there's no empirical evi-dence of their existence, it's all only theoretical. However, if a white hole and a black hole could be linked somehow, then whatever falls into a black hole could—in theory at least—suddenly appear out of a white hole some other place in the universe. Yes, Kristy? You have a question? STUDENT 1: Uh, yeah ... yeah, I do. TEACHER: OK . . .

STUDENT 1: I once read a science-fiction novel about peo-ple using wormholes to travel through time. Is that right? I mean, is it possible to travel through time using wormholes? TEACHER: Good question Kristy. The simple answer is . . . we don't know. You're right though; in science fiction, wormholes do allow people to travel across large amounts of space and time very quickly. If you want to understand how, just imagine an insect on a large piece of paper. It would take the insect a long time to walk across the paper, right? But if you folded the paper, the distance for the insect to cross would be much smaller, so it would cross the paper faster. Now wormholes bend space in the same way that you fold a piece of paper. This means that just as the insect never crosses most of the paper, someone traveling through a wormhole never passes through the space between the entrance and the exit. He um ... he basically takes a shortcut, not just through space—what we call the third dimen-sion—but also through time—what we call the fourth dimension. And the exit point—the white hole—may be somewhere far away, possibly in a different universe . . . uh, linked to our own universe only via the wormhole. And if the exit to the wormhole is in the past, then you could travel back in time by going through. But, I repeat, this is more science fiction than reality, and many people deny the existence of wormholes. It's . . . yes?

STUDENT I: But wait a minute. I thought wormholes had been proven mathematically.

TEACHER: True, it's been proven mathematically that they could exist. But that doesn't mean they actually exist in nature. And even if, one day, white holes and wormholes were shown to exist in reality, not just in theory, there'd still be at least two problems with traveling through them. For a

start, scientists believe they wouldn't be stable. Therefore, even a small disturbance, like a person traveling through it, could cause the wormhole to collapse. In fact, some argue that, in order to travel through a wormhole, the black hole (the entry hole) and white hole (the exit hole) would have to be identical, and any small difference between them could destroy the wormhole. So that's problem number one. The second problem's this: Even if wormholes exist and are stable, chances are you'd be killed by the radiation inside them. So you see, although these are interesting concepts, right now it's difficult to know how real they are or how useful they might be to us.

All right, that's all 1 want to talk about today. I've tried to give you a simple introduction to three mysterious phe-nomena that astronomers are still trying to understand. Let me just recap some of my main points. I've said that black holes have incredibly strong gravity. That gravitational force pulls everything near a black hole into the tiny center of the hole called the singularity. When objects, including light, get squeezed into the singularity, they're destroyed. However, I made a distinction between rotating and nonrotating black holes. In the case of rotating black holes, if the object crosses the event horizon—the area just on the edge of a black hole—it may avoid the singularity and exit from a white hole in another part of the universe. This might, in theory, make time travel possible. You'll remember that a white hole is the opposite of a black hole; instead of sucking matter in, it forces matter out. And a wormhole is like a tunnel that connects the black hole and the white hole.

To wrap it up, I'll just say once again that there is evidence that black holes exist, even if we're not clear about how they work. We're much less certain, though, that white holes and wormholes exist—and if they do, what value they might be to mankind. One more thing to consider is this: If time travel is possible, then shouldn't we now be meeting people from the future? OK, that's it for today. Any questions?

Unit 7 Animal Talk

TEACHER: OK, let's get started . . . um, on today's topic of animal communication. I'm just wondering . . . how many of you have pets? Dogs, cats, birds, . . . any kind of pet. Quite a few, I see. In my case, I have a golden retriever. I'd certainly like to think that I'm able to communicate with him, but what kind of communication are we really engaging in? Actually, this is a very interesting and controversial question because, in many ways, it's difficult to compare animals and humans. Humans are one species, and there are many species of animals. And each species has its own way of communicating, and some of those forms of communication are completely different from what we use. For instance, some types of fish use electrical currents to communicate, some insects use vibrations, and bats use ultrasonic signals. And then there's the sense of smell. Even though humans try to cover natural body odors with soap and deodorant and perfume, odor is a common method of communicating for many animals.

- 111 -

So . . . you see, animal communication is really not very straightforward, so today I would like to simplify matters. Although we acknowledge the fact that animals communi-cate in many different ways, today we're only going to con-sider whether animals can use language as we know it—in other words, language that is composed of words and that has a grammar. Today, now I'd like to consider three ques-tions. First, what do animal sounds mean? Second, do ani-mals intend to communicate? And third, do animals speak in sentences?

All right. The first question that I just mentioned was what animal sounds mean. Now to understand this, we need to take a close look at different types of communication. These can be divided into two types: affective communication and symbolic communication. Affective communication involves the communication of emotion. Humans use affective communication when we laugh, uh, when we cry . . . and, um, much of our nonverbal communication is this affective communication. We show a great deal of feeling with our facial expressions, gestures, and so on. Of course, animals can also express emotion, and this is one of the reasons why we love our pets so much—they're expressive in many ways. Dogs, in particular, are popular in many cultures because they're so good at appearing happy, pained, and sad. They even seem to mirror human feelings. For instance, when I'm feeling down or I've had a hard day, my dog becomes quiet and actually looks a little sad or tired himself. Well, that's my experience, but, in any case, almost all scientists agree that most higher order animals like dogs and cats can use affective communication. So one answer to our first question is that many animal sounds communicate what we can call an emotional state.

Now, remember that I said there is a second type of com-munication—symbolic. Symbolic communication is infor-mation about a specific referent that can be encoded by a signaler and decoded by a receiver. Now that's rather com-plicated, so let me give you an example. If I say the word \because I'm referring to the country. I encode this referent with a set of sounds. If you understand that referent and the set of sounds, then you'll be able to decode or translate the sounds and understand the referent. That is, you'll understand that I'm talking about a country in South America. Now can animals do that? Well, the answer appears to be \But because their vocabularies are so limited, it's probably safe to say that they can use very little symbolic communication. For instance, scientists have confirmed that one type of monkey in Africa, the vervet monkey, clearly makes different alarm calls. One type of call is very general and seems to communicate the idea of \out!\or \alert!\Monkeys that hear this call begin to look around more and act more careful. They're less tranquil, less relaxed than usual, and they're less willing to leave the safety of nearby trees. Other calls, now, are quite specific. There's a call that monkeys use when they see a leopard, a different call for eagles, and yet a different call for snakes. Now the interesting thing is that there's every indication that monkeys use these calls in a symbolic way. For instance, when a vervet monkey hears a leopard call, it often

runs for a particular type of tree that leopards can't climb easily. When the monkeys hear an eagle alarm call, they immediately stop what they're doing and begin scanning the sky. When they hear the snake call, they stand up straight and scan the ground in the immediate area.

Now in addition to alarm calls, animals such as monkeys and birds use food calls. Now these calls not only let others know that food has been found, but they can also sometimes give information about how much and what quality of food has been found. Now another interesting point, which is not well understood, is that some animals such as chickens seem to use food calls deceptively. In other words, sometimes chickens will use a call to indicate that they have found food even when they haven't. So what does this mean? Do chickens lie? Are they intentionally deceitful. This is a sophisticated use of communication, but few scientists are willing to admit that chickens are consciously trying to deceive other chickens, because they don't appear to have the intelligence for that kind of thinking.

The second question concerns whether animals actually intend to communicate. In other words, do animals care if there is another animal nearby who will hear their call? Well, the answer is \It appears that animals do care about this. Wild birds call out when they spot something important like food or an enemy, but they only do this when other birds are present. On the other hand, they're frequently silent in the same situations when no other birds of their species are around. So birds are apparently aware of their own species. Gender is also a factor here. For example, male chickens will call out more often when female chickens are nearby, and there's even a difference depending on whether the chicken is known or unknown. The male chickens will use food calls most frequently when unknown female chickens are nearby. Uh, I guess I should also mention that this phenomenon is not just limited to birds or chickens. Chimpanzees also communicate far more when other chimps or, in some cases, when humans are present. So the general answer to the second question is \least some types of animals are sensitive to the presence of an audience and that they do intend to communicate.

Now I've told you we believe that some animals, such as certain monkeys, can use something like words—in a limited way. You'll remember, I mentioned it appears that they can say something like \\or \But humans can use grammar, so we communicate different meanings by using words in different sequences. So for instance, I can say \dog bit the man\and that has one meaning. But if I use the same words and change the sequence and say \man bit the dog,\now I have com-municated a very different meaning. Well, this last question , is about whether animals can do this too. In other words, can they use some form of grammar? What do you think? Well, the answer is that mere is no recorded natural example of animals making anything like a sentence or using the order of a sequence of sounds to communicate symbolic meaning. The monkeys and birds we've been talking about can make alarm calls or food calls quickly or slowly, loudly or softly, but they never seem to manipulate the sequence.

- 112 -

Even the birds that seem to be saying \are communicating that idea with one identical call that doesn't change. They're not using grammar as far as anyone can tell.

Now, one group of animals that is able to manipulate their language is songbirds. As you are probably aware, many wild birds sing rather complex birdsongs. And these songs are created by combining a variety of notes in many different patterns. Some birds have hundreds of phrases that they use in thousands of different combinations. However, contrary to what you might believe, there is absolutely no evidence whatsoever that birds can communicate any sym-bolic meaning by manipulating these musical notes and phrases. Instead, they seem to use their songs just as a way of advertising themselves, attracting a mate, or maybe even expressing some type of emotion.

Well, now today we began with three questions, and I'd like to return to those questions once again. First, what do animal sounds mean? In most cases, we think they commu-nicate what we would call emotion, or affective meaning; but in some cases, they stand for specific things in the envi-ronment such as food and the presence of danger. Second, do animals consciously intend to communicate? Well, generally I suppose the answer is \though having an audience that understands the message is an important factor. And third, do animals use grammar? Here the answer seems to be \scientists have been able to identify and confirm. One reason for this is that using grammar requires far more mental processing and far more sophisticated memory than using a simple vocabulary with no grammar, and this may be the obstacle for animals—they don't have the brainpower. Some animals do have the brainpower to use a very limited number of individual words in a rigid, inflexible way, but they can't acquire thousands and thousands of words like human beings and then manipulate those words using grammar.

The thing that really sets humans apart from animals is our incredible ability to use language symbolically, produce the same words in many different combinations, and assign different meanings to those combinations. In short, grammar is an innovation that only humans have been able to develop. So, although I might prefer to believe that when I get home tonight my dog will say something like \to see you; let's go outside and play Frisbee,\he's probably really communicating something more like \happy\or \hungry.\But I'll settle for that because we com-municate pretty well with each other. All right. Now that's it for today. Are there any questions? No? OK. Will you please read Chapters 6 and 7 before next class, and I'll see you then.

that theme today and focus on male and female communi-cation styles—the differences between the way men and women communicate. Let me start by saying the issue of gender differences in communication seems to be an inter-esting one for most people—certainly for most students. Anyone like to suggest why?

STUDENT 1: I think because most of us are looking for partners, a long-term love relationship . . . you know? So it helps to understand the opposite sex, so we can communi-cate with them better.

TEACHER: Well, that probably is one major reason—so we can get along better. The truth is, gender differences have fascinated mankind for as long as people have been writing down their thoughts, from as far back as the story of Adam and Eve to contemporary books. And although numerous books and articles have been written on the subject, almost all of them draw the same conclusion: Men and women speak different languages. I'll bet most of us here have read or at least heard of some book that talks about why men and women can't talk to each other, or how they can improve communication with the opposite sex. Of course, this isn't really surprising. Most of us want to relate better to the opposite sex, and most of us have a sense that there are differences in communication style, even if they're simply based on stereotypes. As a matter of fact, research based on transcribed speech—that is, speech which has been recorded and written down exactly as it was spoken-—shows that both sexes can generally tell whether a speaker is male or female. So clearly, gender differences in language really do exist. After all, let's face it, men and women have been misunderstanding each other for generations, and that leads to problems in love relationships, challenges in professional life . . . uh . . . the workplace, and so on. Just think about this for a minute, if you will: Researchers claim we spend 70 percent of our working hours communicating and 30 percent of that is talking. So you can see it's essential that we learn how to communicate with each other. There are more complex reasons, though, why studying communication is important. The fact is . . . the fact . . . you need to realize that communication's not simply a matter of saying what you mean and being understood. How we say what we mean is equally crucial because it influences the way people perceive and respond to us. And how we express ourselves, our style, says a lot about how we see our own status—our power, our authority, if you like—in relation to our listeners. We adjust... we change the way we talk depending on who we're talking to and the impression we want to give them. In other words, our communicative style is socially conditioned. Think about that. Our communication style is socially conditioned. How we use language with others is a learned behavior, and how

Unit 8 Gender Differences in Language we talk and listen are deeply influenced by cultural

expectations. Problems arise because women and men are

TEACHER: Morning, everyone. You'll recall we began like people who have grown up in two different subcultures. looking at gender differences last week, and I'd like to They have two broadly different styles of speaking and

establishing social status based on how they've grown up. continue

What I'd like to do now is look at how these different styles develop.

- 113 -

But what are these differences? Well, at a general level, There have been many attempts to explain gender dif-ferences in communication styles, with genetics and the there arc differences in the purpose of communication— why

environment both at the top of the list. In the case of inherent they talk. We could say that generally men talk to give genetic factors, some suggest that differences in men and information or to report—they're \women's brain structure and hormone production contribute on solving problems and are less likely to ask for help or to differences in thought processes, and these in turn directions—maybe because traditional social roles demand contribute to different behavior between the sexes. Precisely that men behave like leaders, as being in control— whether how much influence genetic factors have on communication they feel that way or not. As a general rule, men try to compared to the environment—that's to say, how much establish status, their level of authority in a situation, but communication style is a product of nature as opposed to women try to establish and support intimacy, or close rela-nurture—is not yet clear. Uh . .. nevertheless, evidence tionships with others. This might well be because, until suggests that nature's responsible for only 1 percent of the recently, it was the man who was typically in the more com-difference in communication style between the sexes. Think petitive environment—both at work and at play—and about it—only 1 percent! That means the environment plays therefore who may have been more concerned about estab-a far bigger role. Now let's stop and consider just what that lishing, maintaining, and increasing status. Today, of course, means. Generally speaking, boys and girls tend to participate that's changing, and this can be seen in the type of topics in different kinds of activities as children. These activities men and women discuss. Let's consider that next as we look reflect the everyday activities of adult men and women. Girls at some slightly more detailed observations about gender dress baby dolls and boys build things, for example. Toy differences in communication.

At the risk of stereotyping, I'll say that women have stores know this very well. Now this is a generalization, of

course—there are girls who love building block sets like tended to discuss topics related to relationships, such as the LEGO, for example—but just look at how toy stores arrange home, clothes, and so on. Men, on the other hand, have their toys according to activities for girls and activities for tended to discuss money or business. However, that trend boys. And as a result of their different activities, boys and appears to be changing, with women talking more about girls develop different communication styles. Girls tradition-work and money—no doubt due to changing social roles and ally practice more intimacy-related skills, and learn how to the fact that more women are working. Actually, one study relate to others. That is, they use language to establish found that the percentage of women's conversations devoted intimacy, as a basis of friendship. Their style is what some to work and money rose from 3.7 percent in 1922 to 37.5 writers call \percent in 1990. That's more than a 33 percent jump. That for instance, this type of play naturally produces more speaks volumes, doesn't it?

Given the collaboration/competition distinction I men-collaborative communication—discussions based on

relationships, and so on. Boys, on the other hand, tend to be tioned earlier, you probably won't be surprised to learn that more goal-driven or task-oriented, and practice work-related men tend to be more aggressive and argumentative than skills. They might discuss, for example, how to build a castle women, and use more expletives—strong language, in other or lay out a track, and how to get the job done. They're words. They want to get their point across. Also as you encouraged more to compete with others and generally use might expect, women are more successful with interpersonal language to establish their status in the group. You could say tasks, it seems—in particular, comforting, persuading, and that their communication style is \justifying decisions. They also tend to be better listeners

than men. One aspect of this is how they listen; according to rather than collaboration-oriented.

Evidence suggests that these patterns are reinforced when various studies, in conversations women use more children socialize with their peers. Of course, parents, \show they're listening.

And what about nonverbal communication? Well, women teachers, and others help establish these patterns of com-munication in boys and girls by directing children's activities. show greater skills in sending and understanding nonverbal

They buy boys construction-type gifts and girls domestic messages. Also, they're less likely to signal dominance. gifts, for instance. But they also do it subconsciously by Typical male body language, on the other hand— wide talking to boys and girls in different ways. For example, if gestures, sitting with knees apart, and so on—often displays their children have problems, mothers tend to regulate or status and dominance by increasing personal space. Finally, guide their children more than fathers . . . and they tend to be men tend to stammer more than women and use more \more controlling with their daughters than with their sons. and \Fathers, in contrast, tend to be more concerned with hand gestures in conversation, and tend to speak too loudly.

Now, before I finish, a few final thoughts for you to go identifying the problem quickly and demanding a solu-tion—and they tend to do this more with their sons than with away with. As I've said, male/female communication styles

their daughters. So the mothers tend to be more controlling are mainly a social phenomenon. Given that society's and have more rules, and the fathers tend to be more constantly changing, we can also expect communication demanding of solutions. So as a result, when they are adults, styles to change to reflect the changing roles of men and men and women tend to exhibit differences in their styles of women. More women, for example, are working and rising

to positions of power and authority in business, and this is communication.

changing how they communicate. Likewise, as men take on more

- 114 -

domestic duties—take more responsibility for things like raising children, for example—their styles also changing. I've heard it said that language has prevented women from taking on new roles in society and achieving true equality with men. One way to deal with this may be for parents to change—or at least vary the kinds of activities they encourage their children to engage in. This will change the way parents talk to their children and therefore children's own ideas about how they should speak. Perhaps we also need to reduce gender segregation—get boys and girls playing together more—so they develop more similar styles. In other words, the way we bring up and educate our children is important. In fact, the changes could be quite dramatic! I'd like to close by adding two final words of caution. Firstly, when we talk about male and female differences of any kind, it's easy to fall into the trap of stereotyping men and women. Stereotypes are based on generalizations— which, of course, do not apply to everyone. What's more, even if generalizations are accurate enough at one point in time, society changes, as we've seen, and it may take some time for the ideas behind the generalizations to reflect those changes. And secondly, please bear in mind that when we talk about male and female communication styles, we have to understand that these vary from culture to culture—not surprising given the role of socialization. Therefore, most of the things I've been saying apply to North American culture but might not apply to all cultures. OK, that's it for today. Unit 9 Fashion and Status

TEACHER: Today, everyone, as part of our look at fashion and design, we're going to take a look at fashion and social status, that is, how we use fashion to make statements about our social status—who we are, how wealthy we are, and so on. We do this with the kinds of cars we buy, the style of our houses, and of course the clothes we wear, which is the subject of today's discussion.

Now, the idea of using special clothes to signal social status has a long history, dating back to ancient Egypt. In very hierarchical societies like ancient Egypt, for example, only those in high positions could wear sandals. Also, the Greeks and Romans had laws which controlled the type, the color and number of garments that could be worn, as well as the kind of embroidery used. These were known as sumptuary laws ... that's S-U-M-P-T-U-A-R-Y... sumptuary laws. . . . However, as barriers between social classes became weaker, these so-called sumptuary laws became increasingly difficult to enforce and were eventually aban-doned. Instead, high status was indicated by the cost of a person's clothing—you know, rich and exotic materials, expensive and often unnecessary accessories . . . and, um, difficult-to-care-for styles. This kind of expensive and often unnecessary clothing was designed to attract attention; it was an example of what's called conspicuous con-sumption—that's conspicuous consumption. And of course, people thought the type of clothes you wore reflected what you could afford; in other words, your clothes reflected your wealth. I'm going to be using this

word \a lot today—conspicuous basically means deliberately attracting attention.

If you look at fashion today, things haven't really changed much, have they? Even though people these days don't dress in silver or gold lace, clothes are still very much a sign of status. In fact, you could say that nowadays many people believe clothes tell us about the personality—the honesty, talent, and intelligence of the person wearing them. In some social circles, there's often a feeling that someone who's not well dressed is probably dishonest or stupid, and without talent. Now that's sad but true, I'm afraid. Many of us make these judgments very quickly and unconsciously,... which, of course, is why people read and write books with titles like Dress for Success. The idea is if you dress well, people will judge you positively even before you open your mouth, right? I'd say that people have very definite ideas about dress and character.

But today I'm going to look in detail at this idea of con-spicuous consumption. So just to recap, let me repeat that conspicuous consumption is about the different ways we spend money in order to show people our wealth. Mmm? And one of the most obvious ways we do this is by wearing more clothes than other people. This is sometimes called conspicuous addition. Whatever the occasion, the well-to-do normally wear more clothes. In North America, for instance, men are more likely to wear jackets and vests, and women, pantyhose, scarves, and unnecessary but expensive wraps—even in mid-summer. And on the beach, even though their swimsuits may be like everyone else's, just watch the wealthy put on their silk beach kimonos when they come out of the water ... or maybe a shirt, hat, and bag that matches their swimsuit. And people notice, right? Of course, they're supposed to notice; that's the point.

Of course, people also show off their status by wearing a lot of clothes consecutively rather than simultaneously. In other words, as we've seen, people wear more clothes, but they also like to show off, to display as many different outfits as possible. Basically, the more outfits you wear, the higher your status; it's as simple as that. Now how do people do this? Well, they divide daily life into different sorts of activities—what's been called conspicuous division—and each of these activities, such as going to work or going out to dinner, requires a different kind of clothing. Now, this isn't anything new. In the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, it was common for the wealthier classes to have different clothing for different parts of the day. Men would wear a morning suit, a dress coat, um, a dinner jacket, and women, morning clothes, walking clothes, tea gowns, um, motoring outfits, evening dresses. ... You name it, there was a costume for it.

Now today, we have the same tradition, but the emphasis is on sports rather than social life. Fashionable people will have different outfits for different sports, whether it's jog-ging, hiking, cycling, golf, or aerobics—and to wear the wrong outfit can cause a loss of prestige. . . . This, by the way, is what enables manufacturers of sports equipment to make so much money. And it's not just having separate clothing that's important, it's also having the right equipment; that also has to be high prestige.... It's important to have the correct brand names.

- 115 -

Now another way of indicating high status is to own many similar garments so that you rarely wear the same thing. This is what's known as conspicuous multiplication. For instance, some very wealthy men wear a brand new shirt every day; they'll never use the same shirt twice. Having a large, up-to-date wardrobe is especially important for men and women who want to establish themselves socially and professionally . . . uh, you know, who, um, . . . who want to make an impression. Once people know them . . . have made a decision about their status, it usually becomes less important. Teenagers in particular feel very strongly about showing variety in their dress. For example, teenage girls often feel so embarrassed about wearing the same outfit twice in the same week, that even if they only own a few clothes, they'll try hard to make them seem new by combin-ing them in different ways and with different accessories. They feel so strongly about this, in fact, that they'll often prefer quantity to quality.

Now, uh, let's move on to another form of conspicuous consumption, and I'm talking about the use of expensive materials, conspicuous materials. Now, in the past, materials such as satin and velvet were prestigious because they were handwoven and required a lot of time and labor. But today, modern machinery's changed all that. The result is that natural materials which are often more scarce are now more prestigious. I'm talking about materials like silk, leather, wool. In today's world, natural is best. Artificial materials, such as nylon and polyester, were expensive and very fashionable when they first appeared, but as they became cheaper to produce, \a dirty word, and now it's seen as the poor man's silk. You can also see a similar pattern with animal skins and pelts. Today because wildlife's becoming scarcer, these things have gotten more expensive and therefore more prestigious, particularly the hides of animals like the alligator. In centuries past, however, when things were different, skins and pelts of more common animals were associated with peasants and shepherds and hunters-—even outlaws. To show their status, merchants wore robes trimmed with less common fur such as beaver, noblemen preferred sable, and kings and queens wore ermine—all, again, relatively rare materials, and therefore indicators of status. As you know though, even though skins of wild animals are often prestigious in the sense of being rare and therefore expensive, today they're also seen as showing a disregard for the environment and wildlife.

OK. Now another way people display their wealth is by wearing jewelry . . . high-priced stones and metals—particu-larly those like gold and diamonds whose market price is generally known to be high. Gemstones such as rubies or emeralds, whose market price is less well known or which are more easily imitated, are less popular. Instant identification's desirable, you see. In other words, people need to be able to understand, just by looking, that something's expensive. And that's why platinum never really became very popular. Even though it's more expensive than gold, the problem was people couldn't easily tell it from silver or aluminum. Anyway, we call this display of expensive items conspicuous wealth.

Next, we come to conspicuous labeling. Not long ago, you could recognize a high-quality hand-tailored suit made

in, say, London's Saville Row or Paris. Today, though, thanks to sophisticated manufacturing methods and artificial materials that look like the real thing, it's become very difficult to tell simply by looking whether a suit, jacket, or whatever has been handmade using the finest natural mate-rials, and therefore whether it has cost far more than your average, off-the-rack equivalent. In addition, more people than ever are wealthy. Together, these two things create a problem. It's almost impossible to distinguish the rich from the very rich simply by looking at what they're wearing. So how do the very rich show their status? Well, one way is by using labels to show expensive brands. Designers realized that high-status garments didn't need to be recognizably of better quality or more difficult to produce than other gar-ments; they only needed to be recognizably more expensive. So, they had to somehow include the price of each garment in the basic design. How did they do that? The answer is they moved the designer's name from the inside to the outside of the garment. Simple! Then they aggressively promoted these names and trademarks until they became household names. Now the prices of these designer garments were not high because they were better quality, but because of the huge cost of advertising them. And people wearing these clothes would be sending out the message, \can afford to buy clothes made by this designer.\In fact, people will happily buy inferior quality clothes if they're clearly labeled and everyone knows they arc highly priced . . . and cotton T-shirts are a great example of this. They may fade quickly and shrink out of shape after just a few washings, but it doesn't matter. If they have the right designer name printed on them, people prefer them to better-made T-shirts. Apparently, they make the people who wear them feel \labeling, then, was a radical but very effective solution to a rather difficult problem. Do you see how this works?

Now to wrap up, I'd like to mention two other kinds of conspicuous consumption in clothing, to bring our total to eight different types. One of these is conspicuous out-rage—in other words, dressing which leads people to feel outrage . . . shock, if you like. Here, people purposely wear clothes that aren't in good taste, that others won't approve of .. . that don't conform. These clothes attract negative atten-tion, but they get attention nonetheless. Now the teenage punks of the 1980s were a good example of this, as are pop stars who turn up at formal events in, you know, torn or faded T-shirts with, uh, offensive language printed on them. Now this brings me to the last type: what I call associative consumption, in which people wear items of clothing because they've acquired prestige through association with high-status individuals—such as royalty like Princess Diana or film stars. A good example of this is, um, John Lennon's round glasses. These became a fashion icon, and even today people refer to round glasses as John Lennon glasses. Asso-ciative consumption also includes high-status activities. Just think of the clothing associated with horseback riding— checked suits, glossy high-heeled boots, polo shirts, and waisted jackets. These items have the power of association. We may assume that the people wearing them ride and own

- 116 -

horses and therefore have the money associated with these activities. The same's true of fashion goods associated with golfing and yachting. They all send out strong signals.

OK ... so let's quickly review. We've said that conspicuous consumption's a way of signaling how wealthy we are, what status we have, and clothing's one way we do this . . . it's one way we consume conspicuously. I've mentioned conspicuous addition, meaning people wear more clothes to show their status. And then we looked at conspicuous divi-sion, where people wear different outfits at different times of the day or for different activities. And then there was conspicuous multiplication, where people have many gar-ments of the same type. And then we considered conspicu-ous materials, in which people wear rare or expensive mate-rials to show wealth, followed by conspicuous wealth, where people wear high-priced materials such as gold and dia-monds, usually as accessories. And after that, we looked at conspicuous labeling, where garments are worn with their designer labels on the outside for everyone to see—not too subtle, but it works. It says something. And finally, we looked at conspicuous outrage—where clothing is used to attract negative attention, where the intent is to shock peo-ple—and associative consumption, where clothing is associ-ated with a celebrity or lifestyle.

So you see, fashion really is a vehicle for self-expression, for saying, \Can you match it?\All right everyone, let's take a break there and we'll start our seminar in fifteen minutes, OK? Unit 10 The Making of Genius

TEACHER: Hello, everyone. Today we'll, uh . . . begin our next unit, and the topic is one that I think you'll find inter-esting. One of the most noteworthy aspects of human beings is our remarkable ability to learn a wide variety of skills, and to learn some skills very well. I'm sure you'll agree that great athletes, musicians, and singers are often the objects of our respect and admiration, and one reason for this is that many of us believe these individuals are special, that is, we believe that they have special talents provided by their DNA. They are gifted. But do you think it is really true? Could you or I become another Mozart, another Einstein, or another Van Gogh? Today we'll look at this question by discussing expert performance, that is, performances that are at a world-class level. First, I'd like to focus on the importance of practice and some reasons why many scientists doubt that innate talent is particularly important in skill development. Second, we'll look at the contribution which innate talent might make, and finally, I'll try to tie these two ideas together by proposing that it's the interaction of practice and talent that produces great musicians, scientists, and so on.

OK, so let's begin . . . let's begin with the notion of prac-tice. First of all, let's consider the fact that there've been his-torical increases in performance in many areas, particularly in the past 1 to 200 years. For instance, Olympic records in many sports have been broken repeatedly, even in sports that've had few changes in equipment, such as running sports. How can we account for this? Well, if innate talent were a strongly limiting factor, we wouldn't expect such rapid improvements in world record performances, unless

you happen to believe that innate talent has increased in the past century. Of course, no one believes this to be the case. Instead, we believe that external factors, such as better training methods and better diets, have had an enormous effect. Now this phenomenon isn't just limited to athletics. We can find the same situation in the world of music. There are pieces of music that used to be thought of as being virtually unplayable. For instance, in the nineteenth century some people thought that the violinist Niccolo Paganini had magical powers because of the difficult techniques he had mastered. However, today many of his pieces are regularly played by adult and even by outstanding child musicians, so once again the general conclusion is that innate talent hasn't limited human performance to this point in history. If that's right, then it's reasonable to expect that better practice and training will allow skill levels to continue to rise. . . . Yeah? Do you have a question?

STUDENT: I have a comment. I mean, what you're saying makes sense to me because every year new world records are broken. I don't think we really know what our limitations are.

TEACHER: I agree. We're getting closer to human limitations every time a new world record is set, but you're right—we're not there yet. Now . . . um . . . another reason to believe that practice is extremely important is because general intelligence and memory abilities and specific—I mean, specific—abilities are not strongly related. I see a question.

STUDENT: Sorry to interrupt again, but I'm not sure what you mean by ''not strongly related.\

TEACHER: OK. Here's an example. World chess masters are intelligent, but they're not any more intelligent than many people who can't play chess at all. When world-class chess players have been tested for general memory skills, their memories are no better than many nonexperts, but when they're tested for their memory of board positions in chess, they have an extremely well-developed memory of chess board positions that they've seen in the past. This allows them to make decisions more rapidly and accurately than ordinary people.

STUDENT: OK, so experts have a ... a ... a kind of special-ized type of knowledge ... or a specialized memory. TEACHER: Well, specialized knowledge. In the case of chess, a major part of that specialized knowledge is their specialized memory for chess board positions. OK? And it all comes from enormous amounts of practice and experience in their area. Now a third point is that success is based on a variety of motivational, personality, and social factors. Important personality factors are…let's see …perseverance, or you might say patience in the face of failure, the ability to concentrate for long periods of time, self-confidence, optimism, …uh…competitiveness, a high energy level, and ... um ... the ability to control anxiety. Now related to

- 117 -

this is the idea of social support. Remember that I just men-tioned the ability to concentrate for long periods of time. Well, research has shown that very few people have the abil-ity to practice intensely for long periods of time when they have no social support. An example might help here. We know that sustained support from an adult is needed for young musicians to become successful, because without a lot of support and encouragement, young people won't do the long hours of practice necessary to excel. In other words, parental support seems to come first, and this is followed by intense practice, which then sometimes results in great skill development.

Now I've mentioned that in order to become an exceptional performer in a complex skill like playing the violin, a person has to work hard for a long period of time. Now what do you think I might mean by that? Is a long period of time one year? Three years? Five years? What do you think? . . . Yes, Greg? STUDENT: Well, I would say a lot longer than five years. I've read about the lives of several famous musicians and athletes and writers, and . . . uh, I don't know, they have to practice maybe eight or ten years or so.

TEACHER: Ten years is the answer. The truth is that even the most talented people need to begin to study or practice before the age of six, and then put in more than ten years of intensive, high-quality practice. Let's look at the classic example of a genius, Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart. Behind the original, creative music that he wrote was years of hard work. Mozart practiced intensely. He wrote his first seven works for the piano and orchestra when he was between the ages of eleven and sixteen. Now that's impressive, but they were actually arrangements of works by other composers, so his early works were a kind of practice, not creative or original. Mozart didn't produce an original masterpiece for piano and orchestra until he was twenty-one. But think about that. By the time he was twenty-one, he had been playing music for sixteen years and had been writing music for piano and orchestra for ten years—so even in Mozart's case, a long period of practice preceded his works of creative genius. All right. So far I've suggested that three things are neces-sary to become great: practice, strong personal characteris-tics such as self-confidence, and strong social support. But let's consider another factor—innate talent. This is the idea that our genetic qualities are important, that we inherit talent from our parents. Right away, I'd like to point out that the effects of innate talent are extremely difficult to measure and separate from environmental factors. Even in cases in which young children are very skilled, it's not clear that innate talent is the main cause, because researchers have almost always discovered that the child's parents had created a powerful supportive environment for the child from infancy, so social support and encouragement probably played important roles.

Now something that may surprise you is that most people who become highly skilled as adults don't show signs of greatness when they're young children. In one study, a researcher looked at twenty-one Americans who were

beginning careers as concert pianists. Generally, the signs of special skill followed a combination of good opportunities and strong encouragement from parents and teachers. Signs of greatness couldn't be seen until they had practiced intensely for at least six years. The same results were found for professional tennis players in Germany, and that's a country that has produced top players such as Steffi Graf. Signs of innate talent usually only come out after long-term parental encouragement and a considerable amount of training.

Notwithstanding the difficulties involved with trying to detect innate talent, many child psychologists believe that some children are born with talent that allows them to learn specific skills very rapidly. An example of a skill that can clearly be inherited is working memory capacity, that is, a person's ability to process and hold information in the memory when solving problems. This type of ability seems to be important in young people who are especially good at mathematics. In addition, some degree of general intelli-gence, such as the capacity to analyze problems, is clearly inherited. So some aspects of intelligence do seem to be innate.

Now, another way in which innate talents may play a role is related to what I said earlier about personality factors such as self-confidence, persistence, and competitiveness. Many researchers believe that these qualities are at least partially innate. For instance, some children seem to have a natural ability to concentrate intensely for long periods. Others seem to be naturally daring and confident. Some seem to be born with the physical, mental, and emotional energy necessary to achieve greatness. That may be a fundamental part of innate talent.

A further point is that most researchers have partly defined innate ability as the ability for someone to perform a skill well before getting the opportunity for much practice. For example, now if you find that a child is good at playing the piano right away, without any practice, you might assume that the child has innate skills. However, this may not be the case. What we should perhaps be looking at in young people is not great ability when they begin their training, but rather ease of learning. Ease of learning may be the most important sign that a child is gifted. I'm sure you noticed in school that some children seemed to learn to play a sport, play a musical instrument, or do mathematics more easily than others. It seems reasonable that this is a sign of innate talent.

OK, to summarize, what does all this mean? Well, it looks like becoming great at something involves a fairly pre-dictable process. First, the person is born with certain per-sonality characteristics. These characteristics are then prob-ably nurtured by the child's parents. Next, when the child begins to show interest in some area, the parents react supportively—that is, they encourage and perhaps even push the child to work hard and to practice intensively. Then the child goes on to achieve increasingly higher levels of skill. As the child becomes more skilled, he or she becomes more motivated to excel, and parents and teachers provide support. This can result in a long-term commitment to practice. Finally, if the child continues to work hard for around

- 118 -

ten years, he or she will probably become very highly skilled in the area chosen.

Now I'd like to remind you that scientific research rarely allows us to understand how to separate genetic and exter-nal factors in human learning. What I'd like to suggest, though, is that these two accounts of skill development are not incompatible. To quote a line on page 343 of your text-book: \ties and opportunities for engaging in intense training result in high levels of performance.\the situation quite accurately.

In closing, I'd like to ask you a final question. Were the works of Mozart brought into this world only through prac-tice and study? Can anyone make the scientific break-throughs of Einstein or play basketball like Michael Jordan if they work hard enough? In my opinion, they cannot. Innate talent is also needed, but we just haven't learned how to measure it yet. All right, now I'd like you to get into groups. Look at page 349, and there ...

make people human regardless of culture. Now think about it. Many of us in this room have, I'm sure, traveled to pans of the world our parents or grandparents never dreamed of visiting. And, as a consequence of air travel, commercial links, overseas businesses, and so on have become far easier to establish, so now goods, technologies, and fads are enter-ing new markets faster than ever before. Can anybody think of a good example of something—say, a technology or fad—that's spread quickly?

STUDENT: How about cell phones? Everybody's got them now.

TEACHER: Great example, Adam. OK, Let's take the cell phone for instance. You could go to any country in the world today, developed or otherwise, and I'd bet you could find a cell phone. You might have to search a bit, but I'm sure you could find one. Yet these haven't been around very long, relatively speaking, right? Same with computers. That's to say, because people from diverse cultures are able to interact today in a way they never could before, commodities, ideas, and attitudes all get disseminated with unprecedented speed. The latest fads—whether we're talking about electronic technology, clothing, perfume, fast foods, whatever—they now frequently become not just national but international, global phenomena.

That's one influence, air travel. Now another and maybe equally important influence has been the communications industries . . . um . . . which . . . and I'm going to include the Internet in that category, along with the media —TV, radio, newspapers, magazines, and film. We can't really discuss the subject of a global culture without considering the powerful influence of these things. Today, as we all know, film and television are multimillion, even billion-dollar industries. 'Films, documentaries, news and current affairs programs, quiz shows, even soap operas are usually made in the hope that they'll be bought and shown around the world. As a case in point, take shows such as Friends or ER. They're watched on every continent and have universal appeal, as they're based on universal human problems, on personal relationships and emotions. But these programs also present and promote ideas and attitudes. They enable viewers to see with their own eyes other ways of life. And, of course, an important element in all this is advertising. Let's not forget that the media receives most of its money from advertising—which means that advertisings a major feature of television, magazines, etc. Advertising works through the media, so we're constantly exposed to it and influenced by it. That's to say, the global spread of fads I mentioned earlier owes a lot to the power of advertising. So, just as, say, in the U.S. commercials proclaim that it's cool to wear Reebok trainers, that Kellogg's cereals are the healthiest way to start the day, that Colgate toothpaste gives your teeth the best protection, and so on . . . well, they're probably getting the same message in scores of other countries, with the result that, globally speaking, people's habits are changing; they're converging. What's an example of converging habits? . . . Oh, here's one. Many Japanese today eat cereal for breakfast rather than traditional rice and soup, or, uh, maybe have a hamburger at McDonald's for lunch. And, likewise, Ameri-

Unit 11 The New Global Superculture

TEACHER: Morning. I'd like to begin today's lecture with a question, and the question's this: We are now in an age where powerful social, political, and technological forces are changing our world and rapidly creating a homogeneous global society where people think and behave in similar ways. Do you think it's possible, in this kind of global soci-ety, for individual cultures to survive? Or will their unique traditions gradually disappear? And if these unique tradi-tions were to disappear, would it really matter? Would it, as many believe, really be a tragedy if we were to lose those things that make societies, communities, different? The fact is, the world is losing cultures quicker than you might think. Language is the best measure of cultural diversity, and it's estimated that one language is dying every two weeks, and with it unique ways of life . . . ways of thinking, communicating, and living.

So that's today's theme—the issue, if you will—that's at the heart of everything I'm going to say. First, I'll try to identify . . . um . . . describe the forces that are pushing us, driving us toward a homogeneous global society, a world superculture. Then, we'll go on to consider the disadvan-tages of a homogeneous society, and I'll . . . um . . . offer some thoughts as to why we should think very seriously about preserving individual cultures and their traditions. So . . . why is a global superculture emerging? What fac-tors can we say have contributed? Well, to start with, there's flight. You often hear people say the world has become smaller, and without doubt, flight—particularly affordable air travel—has had the greatest influence here. This means the airplane caused not just a technological but also a social revolution. Suddenly, large numbers of ordinary people were able to interact with people from other cultures thousands of miles away and see with their own eyes the differences and the similarities between them, the things that

- 119 -

cans or Canadians might choose sushi, tacos, or Chinese food. In fact, today most people, at least in large cities, expect to get almost any kind of ethnic food. The fact is that the media spreads ideas incredibly widely, quickly, and effectively—Whether it's cell phones, eating habits, fashion, whatever—and that's what makes it such a powerful mar-keting tool. To understand just how powerful, think for a minute about the music industry. Consider how television, radio, newspapers, magazines, and the Internet have been used to promote music and pop stars internationally. Stars like Elvis, the Beatles, Madonna, Michael Jackson, Britney Spears, uh . . . the Spice Girls . . . these and other stars have acquired world fame, thanks mainly to the media. And the same is true of sports teams and stars. These celebrities are internationally famous, and people in different corners of the world want to imitate them, have similar lifestyles; indeed, that's why companies use celebrities to advertise their products. The idea is that if Ronaldo uses, say, Nike soccer shoes, then you'll want to do likewise, whether you're American, Argentinian, Korean, whatever. That's the mes-sage. And the result? Youth around the world end up using the same brands.

OK. The media, then, clearly plays a major role in spreading trends across the globe and highlighting our simi-larities. But there are other forces at work too, and world politics is surely one of these. Although political divisions and ideologies continue to separate nations, it is, I think, true to say that, generally speaking, that prejudice is diminishing and people are increasingly open to other cultures and ideas. To some extent this is no doubt the result of political and therefore social convergences, of unions such as the European Union which represents a group of countries with quite different traditions in many cases, but where, nevertheless, there exists a spirit of unity ... or at least cooperation. Europeans are beginning to feel that they're members of a larger culture that's more than simply a political convenience. Heads of government increasingly appear to be consulting and acting together on issues that affect the world at large, such as the environment and third-world poverty. Because these things are reported in the media on news shows like CNN and are seen by millions, they create a sense of pulling in the same direction ... a feeling that there's a \

There's another way in which politics can affect the spread of ideas across the globe, and that is through controlling the movement of people across national borders— immigration and emigration. Political circumstances—as well as more accessible international transportation—have brought an increase in the number who choose to emigrate to another country. And when people move, so do their ideas and beliefs. Immigrants introduce things from their own cultures into their new communities .. . from sports to food, house decor, games, you name it. Again, in many countries, from Australia to England, we're seeing cultures mixing together as never before. This increase in cross-cultural contact—along with the decrease in prejudice I mentioned earlier—has led to many interracial marriages, which in turn have produced children who are familiar with more than one culture. This again reinforces similarity, the

idea that we're all members of one human race, despite surface differences. As a result, I think we have a new global superculture that's both richer and more diverse than any one single culture.

Now, communications lie at the heart of most of the things I've been talking about. Even though air travel and the media have allowed us glimpses of each other's cultures, people could not convey their ideas, beliefs, and attitudes if they couldn't communicate them. So, what I want... what I'm trying to say is that I'd like to acknowledge the role English has played as the world's unofficial international language. If you want an example, just look at the Internet. In 1990 there were just a few hundred Internet sites; today there are tens of millions, and the vast majority of these are in English.

All right. Although I've only touched on a few very broad ideas, I'd like now to finish talking about the forces that are shaping a global superculture and end by briefly sharing a few thoughts on where this trend's going. I should first say that I think a global superculture's inevitable. And, in my opinion, in many ways that's a good thing, perhaps even an ideal. It emphasizes the oneness of mankind, promotes unity, and, I would argue, helps prepare the way for a fairer world where the earth's resources benefit everyone and wealth is evenly distributed. However, that is not to say that these things must be at the expense of cultural traditions, cultural diversity. Today, for example, we see the Ainu of Japan, the Chipaya of Bolivia, and the Penan of Malaysia on the list of endangered societies. If these and other cultures were to disappear, we'd lose the wonderful variety and richness of human life, whether we're talking about philosophies, clothes, or food. To some extent we'd lose part of what has made us what we are today, lose touch with our roots, perhaps even the variety and individuality that makes us unique as a species. What's more, there'd be practical. . . possibly very significant practical implications. For instance, we may lose the benefits of alternative approaches to . . . to . . . medicine, social systems, farming techniques, not to mention spiritual insight and the like. People in the developed world not only have a lot to give, but also a lot to learn from other societies about these and other things. We're already learning that technology doesn't necessarily bring advancement; it can also bring destruction, materialism, and a decrease in morality and social cohesion. And what about the purely aesthetic representations of human civilizations; what of art forms? Do we really want to lose the rich variety of art traditions, the many different cultural expressions of human existence. Perspectives on problem-solving too—dealing with environmental issues, say, creating a balance with nature—may be lost to us. Wouldn't these losses be tragic? I, for one, believe that future generations need to incorporate insights from a multitude of cultures. This would perhaps go some way toward preserving those cultures and traditions which very simply make human society richer and more colorful.

OK, well I could say a lot more but, as always, time doesn't permit. So, to summarize then, we've looked at some of the main factors that are contributing to an emerging global culture. They include, at least, cheap available air travel, the

- 120 -

enormous power and influence of the media, changes in the political scenery— exemplified by the European Union, perhaps—and the role of English as an international lan-guage. I started by asking whether these developments will mean that individual cultural traditions will inevitably dis-appear. The answer, I think, is that, sadly, many already have, but it's possible for others to survive. For this to hap-pen, we need to think more carefully about the potential dangers of globalization, as well as its benefits, and we need to appreciate the value of these traditions, for only then will we think twice about carelessly losing them. Let's just hope enough of us realize that before it's too late.

OK. In preparation for your essay, I'd like you to think about ways in which we can ensure the survival of cultural traditions in a world where a superculture is rapidly emerg-ing. Are there any questions? Unit 12 Computer Security

TEACHER: All right, why don't we get started here. I'm quite sure that everyone in the class uses a computer regu-larly. For instance, uh, who uses e-mail every day? Right, just about everyone. Uh, how many of you use the Internet, say, at least five times a week? The same, just about everyone in the room. I think we would all agree that our lives have been changed and in many ways improved by the computer and the Internet; however, there are real dangers here. The fact is, computers and computer networks have created opportunities for crime that never existed before. As a result, the police and justice departments are becoming increasingly concerned about the growing number of computer users who are accessing private or secret informa-tion. Now this problem is on the increase worldwide. Sta-tistics are showing a trend toward more computer crime every year. In fact, recent studies have shown that around 70 percent of all companies that are online have experienced some type of attack. We can say that there are three reasons for these dangers.

Now first, personal computers hold huge amounts of information, and some of it's quite sensitive. Companies have sensitive business information, new products, and financial records to protect. Governments have defense secrets, federal banks, and records for millions of citizens. We've found that the theft of information is usually finan-cially motivated. Some companies try to get information from their competitors by accessing information from com-puters. Computer criminals also access and steal informa-tion in order to sell it to other people or competing compa-nies. Again, their purpose is usually financial gain.

OK. In the first case, the criminal steals information and then possibly sells it. The second reason for computer crime is to steal money directly. Banking, insurance, and business organizations use computers for most of their transactions, making them the hardest hit by computer criminals. Now think about this for a moment. The American banking system alone transfers over 400 billion dollars every day. With this amount being transferred daily, it's no wonder that experts fear that a major financial disaster could occur.

Now you may be interested to know that between l and 3 billion dollars are lost each year in the U.S. through com-puter crime, and 40 percent of large American companies suffered at least one major instance of computer fraud in the last ten years. Can you imagine? Forty percent! We can see from these figures how serious a problem this is. I call the people who commit these crimes computer criminals rather than hackers, because hackers may not be motivated by financial gain.

Now this is how a typical scenario might go. A computer criminal—um, let's call the criminal a \—figures out how to get into a bank network. He changes account names and numbers and puts money into a bank account that he has already opened. He then withdraws the money from the account, which is of course not in his real name. His crime has just made him rich.

In case you were wondering, this has actually happened many times in the past. In companies, goods can be stolen and inventory, that is the list of goods, and sales figures can be changed to cover up the problem. Mailing addresses can also be. temporarily changed so that expensive or valuable items are sent to the criminal's address. The accounts can then be changed back to the original addresses. Sometimes they don't detect this type of robbery for months or years, so it's impossible to find the criminal because the records have been changed back. Now remember—these things are not just stories; they have really happened.

All right. Let's consider the third reason for computer crime, which involves hacking, that is, breaking into some-one else's private computer network, often that of a company or agency. Now hacking can take place for various reasons, but it tends to be done by individuals, not organized groups, and those individuals are typically young men in their teens or twenties. Some apparently do it for the challenge, while others feel angry at society or feel powerless in their everyday lives. Hacking provides such people with something they can't get elsewhere—an exciting and com-plex challenge, an opportunity to show how much they know, and a sense of importance.

Now that we've considered some of the causes of hacking and computer crime, let's consider the effects. Well, the events that have occurred in the past twenty years are aston-ishing. On more than one occasion, computers all over the world have been shut down as a computer virus has raced around the planet. In less than twenty-four hours, billions of dollars in work hours have been lost. Computers in major companies, and even major software companies, have been shut down completely. In one case, approximately 70 percent of the computers in several European countries were shut down. Even government computers were affected. How can this happen? Easy—the transmission of a simple virus program. Even beginning students of computer science can make powerful viruses that can do everything I've just mentioned. They can write a virus program and send it via the Internet to hundreds of computer users. The virus enters the user's computer's operating system, replaces good files with a copy of itself, and then sends itself to other computers via the computer user's e-mail address book. Soon millions of computers can be infected.

- 121 -

Now there's a whole other side to this problem that is more closely related to your life. Imagine that a computer criminal is able to get, um, let's say, your credit card number. In the best case scenario, this will cause you a great deal of inconvenience, and in the worst case scenario, it will cause you financial loss. Another possibility is that someone may get your social security number; then they can impersonate you. This can lead to serious problems and huge costs in terms of time spent solving the problem and the stress involved. The more powerful a technology is, the more potential there is for problems.

Well, I've tried to give you some background about the seriousness of the problem, but now I'd like to briefly talk about the battle between hackers and computer criminals on the one side and the people and companies interested in preventing these problems on the other. What's being done to stop computer crime? First, the courts are getting much tougher with hackers—the people who illegally enter a computer network—even if they claim not to be stealing anything. The courts are also now punishing computer criminals more severely in order to give potential criminals a strong message that computer crime is serious, and if you're caught doing it, you'll be punished. Some of these criminals have gone to federal prison for several years and been fined large sums of money. This is seen as a way to discourage people from experimenting with this new type of crime.

Now within a company or other organization, firewalls are the first line of defense—the first way to deter computer crime. A firewall is a software program that acts as a gate-keeper between the Internet and a company's intranet— that's I-N-T-R-A-N-E-T—the network of computers used by the company's employees. Now one type of firewall examines the source address and destination address of all of the data going in or out of the network. It can stop some data from entering the network and other data from leaving. However, firewalls can't protect networks from all attacks. In the past, hackers have often gotten around a firewall by accessing the network from a modem that an employee has brought in on his or her own without talking to the system administrator. Such employees are also trying to find an easy route around the firewall, usually because they want to access data on their work computer from home. These paths must also be closed, so if you have a colleague who is doing this sort of thing, you should definitely talk to them because they're opening a door for potential hacking.

And another way to increase security is through the use of less obvious and less easily remembered passwords. For instance, employees are often advised to never use a per-son's name, such as \programs that are called password guessers. These programs check every word in a large dictionary, all of the names in an encyclopedia, and then they use each entry in a local telephone book. As you can guess, if you have used almost any word in your local language, the hacker will eventually find out what it is and then be able to get into your system. The most difficult passwords to guess are a combination of small and capital letters, numbers and punctuation marks, such as \tion point, small M.\Try finding that with a password guesser. In addition, passwords should be told to the mini-mum number of people.

OK, a fourth method concerns access-control software— something which has become quite common. Now this software limits the user's access to information as well as the operations he can perform. So for example, access-control software might only let people read certain files or programs but not input data, and it may keep them out of other files entirely. Many universities use this type of software. Com-puter system administrators at the school can access the entire system; teachers can access a great deal of it, but not as much as the system administrators; and finally, students can access fewer areas than the teachers. It works on a \to know\been developed to scramble data so that hackers can't understand it even if they do steal it. The data can be read and used only if the user knows the key. Now this is a very effective way of protecting information. Encryption has developed rapidly since the 1980s, so now all of us can have access to fast, affordable, and powerful encryption systems. These systems are already resistant to the average hacker, and in a few years only government or military super-computers will be able to break most codes.

And finally, audit trails—that's A-U-D-I-T trails—are also available. Audit trails monitor the use of a computer and alert owners to any attempts to enter their computer system. It's usually possible to identify any user who gains access to the system and when the access occurred, making it possible to trace the hacker. Although this isn't simple to do, it can be done, particularly if the hacker persists and returns for repeated attacks on the system. One way that some hackers have been caught has been when the system administrator has what is called a \information is put in the jail. This might be something like credit card numbers or other sensitive financial data. When the hacker tries to get the false data, the administrator uses software to determine where the hacker is. The software follows the line of data back to the hacker's computer.

Well, those are some of the major things that are happen-ing at present to decrease computer crime. None of them are completely satisfactory, but together they're certainly helping to maintain the integrity of personal and corporate computer systems and communications. And these changes, as well as the improvements that are certain to come, should influence people to stop hacking by making it less profitable and more risky. And this will help ensure confidentiality when communicating via computer. Well, let's stop here for today, and get started with your presentations. Our first speakers, uh, Carlos and Yumi, are scheduled to talk about encryption.

- 122 -

Now there's a whole other side to this problem that is more closely related to your life. Imagine that a computer criminal is able to get, um, let's say, your credit card number. In the best case scenario, this will cause you a great deal of inconvenience, and in the worst case scenario, it will cause you financial loss. Another possibility is that someone may get your social security number; then they can impersonate you. This can lead to serious problems and huge costs in terms of time spent solving the problem and the stress involved. The more powerful a technology is, the more potential there is for problems.

Well, I've tried to give you some background about the seriousness of the problem, but now I'd like to briefly talk about the battle between hackers and computer criminals on the one side and the people and companies interested in preventing these problems on the other. What's being done to stop computer crime? First, the courts are getting much tougher with hackers—the people who illegally enter a computer network—even if they claim not to be stealing anything. The courts are also now punishing computer criminals more severely in order to give potential criminals a strong message that computer crime is serious, and if you're caught doing it, you'll be punished. Some of these criminals have gone to federal prison for several years and been fined large sums of money. This is seen as a way to discourage people from experimenting with this new type of crime.

Now within a company or other organization, firewalls are the first line of defense—the first way to deter computer crime. A firewall is a software program that acts as a gate-keeper between the Internet and a company's intranet— that's I-N-T-R-A-N-E-T—the network of computers used by the company's employees. Now one type of firewall examines the source address and destination address of all of the data going in or out of the network. It can stop some data from entering the network and other data from leaving. However, firewalls can't protect networks from all attacks. In the past, hackers have often gotten around a firewall by accessing the network from a modem that an employee has brought in on his or her own without talking to the system administrator. Such employees are also trying to find an easy route around the firewall, usually because they want to access data on their work computer from home. These paths must also be closed, so if you have a colleague who is doing this sort of thing, you should definitely talk to them because they're opening a door for potential hacking.

And another way to increase security is through the use of less obvious and less easily remembered passwords. For instance, employees are often advised to never use a per-son's name, such as \programs that are called password guessers. These programs check every word in a large dictionary, all of the names in an encyclopedia, and then they use each entry in a local telephone book. As you can guess, if you have used almost any word in your local language, the hacker will eventually find out what it is and then be able to get into your system. The most difficult passwords to guess are a combination of small and capital letters, numbers and punctuation marks, such as \tion point, small M.\Try finding that with a password guesser. In addition, passwords should be told to the mini-mum number of people.

OK, a fourth method concerns access-control software— something which has become quite common. Now this software limits the user's access to information as well as the operations he can perform. So for example, access-control software might only let people read certain files or programs but not input data, and it may keep them out of other files entirely. Many universities use this type of software. Com-puter system administrators at the school can access the entire system; teachers can access a great deal of it, but not as much as the system administrators; and finally, students can access fewer areas than the teachers. It works on a \to know\been developed to scramble data so that hackers can't understand it even if they do steal it. The data can be read and used only if the user knows the key. Now this is a very effective way of protecting information. Encryption has developed rapidly since the 1980s, so now all of us can have access to fast, affordable, and powerful encryption systems. These systems are already resistant to the average hacker, and in a few years only government or military super-computers will be able to break most codes.

And finally, audit trails—that's A-U-D-I-T trails—are also available. Audit trails monitor the use of a computer and alert owners to any attempts to enter their computer system. It's usually possible to identify any user who gains access to the system and when the access occurred, making it possible to trace the hacker. Although this isn't simple to do, it can be done, particularly if the hacker persists and returns for repeated attacks on the system. One way that some hackers have been caught has been when the system administrator has what is called a \information is put in the jail. This might be something like credit card numbers or other sensitive financial data. When the hacker tries to get the false data, the administrator uses software to determine where the hacker is. The software follows the line of data back to the hacker's computer.

Well, those are some of the major things that are happen-ing at present to decrease computer crime. None of them are completely satisfactory, but together they're certainly helping to maintain the integrity of personal and corporate computer systems and communications. And these changes, as well as the improvements that are certain to come, should influence people to stop hacking by making it less profitable and more risky. And this will help ensure confidentiality when communicating via computer. Well, let's stop here for today, and get started with your presentations. Our first speakers, uh, Carlos and Yumi, are scheduled to talk about encryption.

- 122 -

本文来源：https://www.bwwdw.com/article/rqq3.html