May 23

The 10th FLTRP Cup Debating Competition

ELTM│ Add comments

2006-04-27 09:18:14

Steven L. Johnson, Associate Professor
University of Alaska Anchorage

 I first came to China to work with Chinese debaters for the 8th FLTRP Cup in May 2004. While there, I did a short lecture for judges and served as a guest adjudicator. While the level of debate that I saw at that tournament was solid, I guessed it would be at least five years before academic debating began to mature in China.

  How wrong I was.

  Between returning for a training session in November 2004 and serving as Chief Adjudicator for the 10th FLTRP Cup, I have been astounded at how quickly China has advanced in academic debating. The vast majority of students and tutors I’ve met are very enthusiastic about debating and very hungry for information about how to debate successfully. Most debates I saw at the 10th FLTRP Cup rivaled solid debating on the US and World university debate circuits; I believe that the world is going to be surprised by China when her students emerge on the international debating stage.

  But the most impressive aspect of the competition was not what happened in the debate rounds themselves though the students’ efforts were very inspiring. What was most impressive was what the activity of debating promises for those Chinese students who study it and for relationships between the East and the West.

  Debating in English, as so many observed over during the 10th FLTRP Cup, presents special challenges for Chinese students, not the least of which is speaking extemporaneously in a non-native language. While I value the benefits for English fluency that debating in English provides, I don’t believe that improved English language proficiency is the most significant benefit offered by debating. Many activities can teach students how to speak the English language, few activities teach students how to think the English language. Academic debating teaches students how to think the English language.

  It is through language that our cultures are created, represented and communicated. The ability to understand a culture different from one’s own requires that one not only speak the language of that culture but understand the way of thought upon which the language of that culture is built. One of the most fundamental differences between Eastern and Western cultures is the level of context shared between the people of those cultures. In general, Eastern cultures are considered high-context cultures; the members of those cultures share, in large part, similar backgrounds, experiences, orientations and cultural predispositions that influence their ability to communicate. This high-context orientation is reflected in Eastern languages and, in particular, Chinese. While it may be a relatively easy thing for a Westerner to learn the basic number of characters required for functional literacy in Chinese (estimates range from 2000-3000) the meaning of those words are beyond the grasp of most foreign students of the language.

  English, as a linguistic embodiment of Western culture, is a far more low-context language. It has words usually several or every possible permutation of thing, action, feeling, condition and state of being. Estimates of the vocabulary of the English language range from 300,000 to 600,000, depending on which words are counted. English needs this many words to account for all the people who speak the language yet share limited context with each other. English speakers come from different cultural backgrounds, different countries, different perspectives and different systems of values that require a language rich in options to express ideas clearly. Put simply, the less communicators know about each word the more different they are to put the more words they need to communicate.

  This pluralism, a fundamental aspect of Western culture, is evident in debate. In my opinion, debate is the type of communication activity most closely tied to how people from the Western world, most of whom are English speakers I think. Because there are so many contingencies in Western thought, because one point-of-view is as valued as the next, because meaning is not assumed to be shared by speakers but rather is cooperatively constructed by the people sharing the communication experience there must exist a venue in which those competing perspectives can be exchanged, argued and tested. To debate is to think English.

  This way of thinking is challenging for Chinese students to accept: that there is no right answer in debate is frustrating. I can begin to count the number of times Chinese debaters would approach me with concerns punctuated with the question “but what is the right answer?” That’s the point of debate, I would reply, there is no right answer. There is only what you can convince the audience. Put another way, I encourage debater to avoid asking what is and is not allowed; they should ask, instead, what is strategically advantageous to my persuasive goals?

  Accepting that there is a plurality of right answers is challenging for Chinese debating adjudicators as well. The biggest challenge the FLTRP Cup competition faces is in the expertise and objectivity of its adjudicators. Judges need to be more concerned with the quality of the arguments made in the round and not their perceptions of the a priori truth or falsity of the motion or strict adherence to rules whether real or imagined. Until Chinese debaters are convinced that they’re being judged by what they say in the round rather than by what the judge believed before the debate began, they will be frustrated.

  But these challenges are not insurmountable. They’re not even as significant as they were when I first started working with academic debating in China. Chinese debaters are quickly realizing the creative possibilities available to them in academic debating and developing their own styles and strategies based on what works and what does not. Chinese adjudicators are fast learning to appreciate the intellectual joy of remaining open to arguments made by debaters given those arguments they would likely reject were they making a decision free from the influence of passionate debaters.

  But most importantly, the debating community in China is learning how the West thinks. Let me be clear: I’m not arguing that Western ways of thought are superior to Eastern ways of thought. I believe, however, that those who know both Eastern and Western ways of thought are better prepared to navigate the intersections of culture that are the hallmark of increased globalization. Those people, many of whom will be Chinese debaters who participated in this competition, will lead the rest of us to a better understanding of and appreciation for both cultures. In so doing, they will make the most valuable contribution of all.

Source: 评委眼中的�外研社杯�辩论赛棗 - 活动·赛事 - 外语教学与研究出版社

This Article is from: Health matters[http://stevenlichen.com]

URL: http://stevenlichen.com/2007/05/23/the-10th-fltrp-cup-debating-competition/

    Leave a Reply