108 年 國立政治大學英國語文學系碩士班英語教學組《英文寫作》
第 1 題
Passage 1: Technique and Technology
The imposing structure of technology, as the dominating presence in modern society, tends to assimilate the meaning of "technique" to itself. This assimilation shows itself more plainly in other languages than English: in German, for example, Technik signifies technology, and in intellectual discussion is likely to be used more often than its cognate, Technologie; and similarly for technique and technologie in French. The assimilation of these two terms to each other is the great fact of modern history. What we are dealing with here, and what we shall be dealing with throughout, is the single phenomenon indicated by the hyphenated form technique-technology.
The two, in fact, have become inseparable. The majority of us have only minimal techniques in relation to the machines we use. We know how to press buttons, and most of us drive our automobiles without knowing what a carburetor is. But if our civilization were to lose its techniques, all our machines and apparatus would become one vast pile of junk. We would not know how to produce the power that keeps the machines running, and we would not know how to replace those machines that wore out. We would roam amid a landscape of dynamos, factories, and laboratories, and with all this equipment still intact as so much sheer physical matter, we would nevertheless be a civilization without a technology. Modern science and technology are the offspring of method and they persist only so long as we command this method.
Technology is embodied technique. [...]
Stripped down to its logical essence, the machine would hardly seem to be a threatening thing. It merely performs routine actions in our service; it does our long division for us, so to speak. It is when the machine becomes more clever that we begin to fear it. It may become cleverer than ourselves, and something we cannot control. There is also the fact that clever people can sometimes become quite thoughtless in pursuing their goals; thus the more complex and subtle the technology the more likely sometimes it is to carry with it damaging side effects that were never expected.
But whatever its source, there is no doubt that the suspicion of technology has become so widespread that the dominant myth of our time may very well become that of Frankenstein's monster. And, as should be the case with myths, this one has begun to have a strong grip not only on the intelligentsia but on the popular mind as well. The horror movies, for example, are mostly a re-creation of this myth in one form or another, and their audience has grown steadily. Most of science fiction, as a prophecy of the future, is one prolonged horror story. For the student of our culture, this situation has a very curious and striking ambiguity about it. While our writers, and some of the best of them, were seeking to re-create myths in literature for the sake of an age that seemed to have lost the capacity for myth, all this time technology was bringing in one very big myth through the back door. And there is the further irony about this: While technology is something essentially pointed toward the future, it has nevertheless been able to stir in the unconscious of the modern audience the primeval fears and horrors of monsters and ogres with which the old legends and fairy tales abound.
from William Barret, The Illusion of Technique (1978)
Questions:
- According to the passage, what danger(s) from technology does modern society face?
- According to the passage, how is technique connected to technology, and what is the distinction between them?
- What do you think is the "one very big myth" that technology has inserted into modern culture? Use details from the passage to support your answer.
登入後即可作答並保存紀錄。
本題為閱讀理解題，要求考生根據提供的文章內容，回答三個關於「技術」（technique）與「科技」（technology）的相關問題。考生需理解文章主旨，並能從中提取資訊來回答具體問題。
核心觀念：
文章探討「技術」與「科技」在現代社會中的演變、關聯及潛在的社會影響。重點在於理解作者如何定義這兩個詞，它們之間的關係，以及科技發展可能帶來的恐懼與迷思。
解題步驟：
1) According to the passage, what danger(s) from technology does modern society face?
文章指出，現代社會面臨的科技危險主要有兩方面：
- 失控的機器與人類的無能為力： 當機器變得比人類更聰明，我們可能無法控制它們。此外，如果現代人喪失了操作和維護機器的「技術」（techniques），即使擁有先進的設備，也會淪為一堆廢鐵，文明將不復存在。文章提到：「It is when the machine becomes more clever that we begin to fear it. It may become cleverer than ourselves, and something we cannot control.」、「But if our civilization were to lose its techniques, all our machines and apparatus would become one vast pile of junk.」
- 意想不到的負面影響與恐懼的迷思： 科技的複雜性與精密性可能帶來意想不到的破壞性副作用。更重要的是，人們對科技普遍存在懷疑，並將其與「科學怪人」的迷思連結，這種恐懼感瀰漫於社會，體現在科幻小說和恐怖電影中。文章提到：「thus the more complex and subtle the technology the more likely sometimes it is to carry with it damaging side effects that were never expected.」、「there is no doubt that the suspicion of technology has become so widespread that the dominant myth of our time may very well become that of Frankenstein's monster.」
【答案】現代社會面臨的科技危險包括機器變得過於聰明而難以控制，以及人類自身因失去操作技術而對機器無能為力。此外，科技的複雜性可能帶來預期外的損害，更甚者，社會上瀰漫著對科技的懷疑和恐懼，將科技比擬為「科學怪人」的迷思，這種恐懼影響了流行文化，如科幻小說與恐怖電影。
2) According to the passage, how is technique connected to technology, and what is the distinction between them?
文章明確指出，「技術」（technique）與「科技」（technology）在現代社會中已緊密結合，甚至被同化，作者稱之為「technique-technology」的現象。
- 連結： 文章開頭即提到，科技（technology）有同化「技術」（technique）意義的趨勢。德國的「Technik」和法國的「technologie」都同時包含這兩個概念。更重要的是，文章強調「Technology is embodied technique.」（科技是具體化的技術）。這意味著，科技的實質就是各種技術的集合與應用。沒有了技術，科技便無法運作。
- 區別： 雖然兩者緊密相連，但文章暗示了它們的層次不同。技術（technique）更側重於「如何做」（how-to），是操作、應用和掌握方法的能力。
第 2 題
Passage 2: Is Grammar Innate or Learned?
Conventional wisdom has maintained, over and above [our] physiological pre-preparedness for language, that we are born with a set of grammatical rules (universal knowledge structures), stored somewhere in our minds, that allow us to acquire grammar almost effortlessly. The idea is that the grammar that underlies all of the 7,000 or so of the world's languages is essentially the same. In short, our species has evolved a specialised grammar module, embedded in our brains, and genetically encoded. And this provides us with the ability to acquire language in the first place: our grammar faculty is in place at birth.
This idea is often referred to as Universal Grammar: all human languages, no matter the variety we happen to end up speaking, are essentially the same. Whether someone learns English, Japanese, Swahili, Tongan or whatever, when you get down to it, they are all alike. Sure, each of these languages has different vocabularies. And each language makes use of a different, although partially overlapping, set of sounds. But underneath it all, the essential ingredient of language--our grammar is pre-programmed in our the human genome: we are all born to produce language because of our common genetic heritage, our Universal Grammar. Just as all of us grown distinctively human organs-brains, livers, hearts and kidneys-so too we develop language: a consequence of our grammar organ, which grows in the human brain, and which no other species possesses. And it is this innately specified knowledge of grammar that underpins our ability to develop and acquire language-any language-in the first place. [...]
[However,] the majority of the evidence, viewed with objective eyes, now appears to show that language is not innate in the way just outlined.
In a nutshell, I aim to convince you of the following: language doesn't arise from innately programmed knowledge of human grammar, a so-called 'Universal Grammar'. I will argue that language reflects and builds upon general properties and abilities of the human mind-specifically our species-specific cultural intelligence; it reflects human pro-social inclinations for inter-subjective communication. I will seek to persuade you that when we acquire language in infancy, we do so by acquiring the language of our parents and caregivers, painstakingly, and by making many mistakes in the process. Language is not something that emerges automatically, and effortlessly. It arises primarily from the language input we are exposed to, from which we construct our mother tongue. Moreover, human infants, I will show, are not empty vessels that come empty-handed to the language-learning process. We come ready-equipped with a battery of various general learning mechanisms that make us adept at acquiring our mother tongue(s). [...]
While I, and a great many other professional linguists, now think that the old view is wrong, nevertheless, the old view-Universal Grammar: the eponymous 'language myth'-still lingers; despite being completely wrong, it is alive and kicking. I have written this book to demonstrate exactly why the old view is a myth; and to show what the reality is.
from Vyvyan Evans, The Language Myth: Why Language Is Not an Instinct (2014)
Questions:
- What does the author mean by "physiological pre-preparedness for language"? Explain this phrase, using your own examples to illustrate its meaning.
- What does the author mean by "pro-social inclinations for inter-subjective communication"? Explain this phrase, using your own examples to illustrate its meaning.
- What is the significance of the words "specialised" and "general" in the passage? Explain the role of these words in the two sides of the argument expressed in the passage. Use examples of your own to clarify the meaning of each word.
登入後即可作答並保存紀錄。
本題為閱讀理解題，考生需要根據作者 Vyvyan Evans 在《The Language Myth: Why Language Is Not an Instinct》一書的節選內容，回答三個關於語言學習的觀點問題。文章主要探討語言（特別是文法）是天生（innate）還是後天學習（learned）的爭論。
核心觀念：
文章對比了兩種關於語言習得的觀點：一是「天賦論」（innatist view），認為人類擁有先天的「普世文法」（Universal Grammar），是專門用於處理語言的「專門化」模組；二是作者傾向的「學習論」（learning view），認為語言習得主要依賴於後天接觸的語言輸入，以及人類普遍的學習機制。
解題步驟：
1) What does the author mean by "physiological pre-preparedness for language"? Explain this phrase, using your own examples to illustrate its meaning.
「Physiological pre-preparedness for language」指的是人類在生理結構上，為了能夠學習和使用語言而具備的先天氣質或準備。這並不等同於擁有預設的文法規則，而是指我們的大腦和發聲器官等身體結構，天生就適合進行語言活動。
- 文章中的含義： 作者在提到「Conventional wisdom」（傳統觀念）時，首先引入了「physiological pre-preparedness for language」，並將其與「born with a set of grammatical rules」（天生就擁有一套文法規則）的觀點並列。這暗示「physiological pre-preparedness」是更基礎的生理準備，而「grammatical rules」則是基於這種準備而可能發展出的特定能力。它指的是我們作為人類物種，在演化過程中，身體（尤其是大腦、聲帶、聽覺系統等）被塑造成了能夠處理複雜聲音、理解語義、並產生連貫語句的「工具」。
- 考生可以使用的例子：
- 大腦結構： 人類大腦擁有語言處理的專門區域，如布羅卡區（Broca's area）和韋尼克區（Wernicke's area），這使得我們能夠理解語言（聽、讀）和產生語言（說、寫）。這種大腦結構的演化就是一種生理準備。
- 發聲器官： 人類的口腔、喉嚨、聲帶等發聲器官的結構，能產生豐富多樣的聲音，這是動物界所罕見的，為複雜的語音系統奠定了生理基礎。
- 聽覺系統： 我們能夠精確辨識和區分大量的語音差異，這對學習口語至關重要。
【答案】「Physiological pre-preparedness for language」指的是人類天生在生理結構上，特別是大腦、聽覺和發聲器官，為了能夠學習和使用語言而具備的適應性。這是一種演化上的準備，使我們具備處理聲音、理解語義和產生複雜語句的潛力。例如，人類大腦中專門負責語言理解和產生的區域（如布羅卡區和韋尼克區），以及能夠發出豐富多樣語音的聲帶和口腔結構，都是這種生理準備的體現，使得我們能夠發展出語言能力。
2) What does the author mean by "pro-social inclinations for inter-subjective communication"? Explain this phrase, using your own examples to illustrate its meaning.
「Pro-social inclinations for inter-subjective communication」指的是人類天生傾向於與他人建立社會連結、進行互動和共享理解的內在驅動力。
- 文章中的含義： 作者在這裡提出，語言並非來自預設的文法模組，而是反映並建基於人類普遍的能力，特別是「species-specific cultural intelligence」（物種特有的文化智能）和「pro-social inclinations for inter-subjective communication」。後者強調了人類作為社會性動物，有與他人建立連結、交流思想、分享感受的內在需求。「Inter-subjective」意味著「主體間的」，即在不同個體的主觀意識之間建立共同的理解。「Pro-social」則指有利於社會互動和合作的傾向。因此，這句話描述的是一種促使我們與他人溝通、分享、協作、並尋求共同理解的社會性驅力。作者認為，正是這種驅力，加上普遍的學習機制，促使我們學習語言。
- 考生可以使用的例子：
- 嬰兒的咿呀學語與互動： 嬰兒在還沒有掌握太多詞彙時，就會通過眼神交流、手勢、表情和聲音來與照顧者互動，尋求關注和回應。這種早期的互動就是一種「inter-subjective communication」的萌芽，受到「pro-social inclinations」的驅動。
- 合作學習： 在學習新事物時，人們傾向於與他人討論、請教、分享經驗，以達到共同的理解和解決問題。這種合作學習的動機，就是一種「pro-social inclination」在「inter-subjective communication」中的體現。
- 情感表達與共鳴： 人們會通過語言來表達自己的感受，並期望得到他人的理解和共鳴。例如，朋友間互相安慰、分享喜悅，這都體現了通過溝通來連結情感的需求。
第 3 題
Part II (40%)
Choose one of the following questions and answer it in a coherent essay of no less than 700 words.
- Choose a generally acknowledged classic of English-language literature. Why should the work you have chosen
no longer be included in the curriculum of a university English department?
or - Some linguists argue that grammar is an innate capability of human beings. Other linguists argue that grammar,
like all the other elements of a language, is learned from one's surroundings. Why is the correct answer to this
argument relevant to the teaching of English to speakers of other languages?
登入後即可作答並保存紀錄。
本題為長篇寫作題，考生需從兩個題目中選擇一個，並以論述清晰、結構完整的英文寫作（至少 700 字）來回答。
核心觀念：
Part II 提供了兩個寫作題目，分別從文學批評和語言學角度出發，要求考生進行深入的論述。
- 題目一：文學批評，要求考生選擇一部公認的經典英文文學作品，並論證為何該作品不應再被納入大學英文系的課程。這需要考生具備批判性思考、文學分析能力，並能結合當代社會文化脈絡來重新評估文學經典的價值。
- 題目二：語言學與應用，要求考生探討「文法是天生還是後天學習」的爭論，並論證其對英語作為第二語言（ESL/EFL）教學的相關性。這需要考生理解語言學的理論，並能將理論與實際教學應用聯繫起來。
解題建議：
關於題目一：
考生在選擇經典作品時，可以考慮以下幾類，並從中選擇一個能提出強烈批判性論點的作品：
- 反映過時觀念的作品： 例如，描寫種族歧視、性別不平等、殖民主義等，其價值觀與當代社會格格不入，可能對學生產生不良影響。例如，某些 19 世紀的小說可能涉及當時普遍但現今被視為不當的觀點。
- 語言或形式過於晦澀的作品： 雖然挑戰性是學習的一部分，但如果某部作品的語言或結構對現代學生來說過於艱澀，以至於難以理解其核心思想，或者需要耗費不成比例的時間去解讀，那麼其教學效益可能不如其他作品。
- 主題與當代關聯性低的作品： 如果某部作品的主題或背景與現代學生的生活經驗、社會關懷相去甚遠，且作者未能提供足夠的普世價值來連結，那麼其吸引力和教學價值可能會打折扣。
- 已被過度闡釋或研究的作品： 有些作品可能已被學術界過度解讀，導致學生難以產生新的觀點，或感到學習壓力巨大。
寫作結構建議（題目一）：
- 引言 (Introduction):
- 簡介大學英文系的課程目標（培養批判性思維、文學鑑賞力、跨文化理解等）。
- 選擇一部公認的經典英文文學作品（例如：Heart of Darkness by Joseph Conrad, Lolita by Vladimir Nabokov, The Great Gatsby by F. Scott Fitzgerald, Pride and Prejudice by Jane Austen 等，但需選擇一個能提出「不應再納入」的理由）。
- 提出你的論點：為何這部作品不應再被納入現代大學英文系的課程。
- 論證段落 (Body Paragraphs):
- 段落一：批判作品中的特定內容或價值觀。 舉例說明作品中可能存在的種族主義、性別歧視、殖民主義的描寫，及其如何與當代社會的價值觀衝突，可能對學生造成誤導或傷害。
- 段落二：討論作品的當代關聯性或教學效益。 說明為何該作品對當代學生而言，其主題、語言或形式已不再具有足夠的吸引力、啟發性或教學價值。與其他更具現代意義或更能達成教學目標的作品相比，其優勢何在？
- 段落三：提出替代方案或更適合的選擇。 建議可以哪些當代或更具包容性的文學作品來取代，以更好地達成英文系的教學目標。
- （可根據需要增加論證段落，例如討論作品的語言風格、批評史等。）
- 結論 (Conclusion):
- 重申你的論點，總結為何該作品不再適合現代大學英文系課程。
- 強調課程更新的重要性，以適應時代發展和學生的需求。
關於題目二：
這個題目結合了語言學理論與實踐教學。考生需要展現對「innate vs. learned」爭論的理解，並能將其應用於英語教學。
寫作結構建議（題目二）：
- 引言 (Introduction):
- 簡介語言學中關於文法習得的兩種主要觀點：「天賦論」（innate capability）和「學習論」（learned from surroundings）。
- 簡述這兩種觀點的核心主張。
- 提出你的論點：說明「正確答案」（或更貼近事實的解釋）對英語作為外語（EFL）或第二語言（ESL）教學的重要性。