2023年9月24日学术讨论范文
Your professor is teaching a class on sociology. Write a post responding to the professor’s question.
In your response, you should do the following.
• Express and support your opinion.
• Make a contribution to the discussion in your own words.
An effective response will contain at least 100 words.
Doctor Achebe
In recent years, with the increasing prevalence of online payment methods, we’ve seen a significant decrease in the use of cash for everyday transactions. This shift has prompted a debate about whether it’s a positive or negative development. So, let me pose this question to you: With the decrease in cash usage due to the rise of online payments, do you consider this trend to be positive or negative? Why or why not?
Paul
This is indeed a positive development because it offers tremendous convenience. We can complete transactions with just our smartphones, eliminating the need to carry a wallet full of cash and coins. This convenience not only streamlines our daily routines but also reduces the risk of theft or loss associated with physical cash.
Claire
This trend is negative because it disconnects us from our spending habits. When we use cash, we have a tangible sense of how much money we’re spending, which helps us keep track of our expenses. With digital payments, it’s easier to lose sight of our financial transactions, potentially leading to overspending and financial mismanagement.
范文正文
I believe the disadvantages of reduced cash usage may outweigh its advantages. The main reason is that most mobile payment applications are not designed with marginalized or minority groups in mind. If these individuals are excluded from the increasingly dominant digital payment systems, they may encounter significant challenges in their daily lives. For example, while younger generations tend to adopt mobile payments easily due to their familiarity with smartphones,【让步状语从句】older adults often struggle to use such technologies. This is largely because developers frequently overlook the needs of elderly users when designing e-payment interfaces, making it difficult for them to identify where to tap on the screen in online payment scenarios.【表语从句+分词短语+it形式宾语】In addition, for people with visual impairments or disabilities, the small font size commonly used in mobile apps can be a serious barrier. This may lead them to feel alienated or even rejected by technological progress. Though Paul’s idea is valid to some extent, he did not mention that digital payment systems, when failing to accommodate those who are less tech-savvy or have disabilities, can lead to exclusion rather than convenience.【让步状语从句+宾语从句+定语从句】Therefore, it is reasonable to argue that the broader societal impact of less use of cash is more negative than positive.
写作思路和特色:
这道题是2023年9月24日托福学术讨论写作真题,也是托福考试中反复出现的学术讨论写作题目之一。在这一道表明立场类题目中,教授询问:由于线上支付的兴起,现金使用的减少是积极的发展还是消极的趋势?Paul认为这是一种积极发展,因为它带来了极大的便利,如今我们只用智能手机就能完成交易,无需再携带装满现金和硬币的钱包;Claire则认为这是一种负面趋势,因为它让人们对自己的消费习惯失去了直观的感受,使用电子支付时,人们更容易忽视自己的消费情况,进而导致超支和财务管理不善。
这篇文章采用了“个人观点+因果论证+举例论证+让步反驳+总结”的写作结构,围绕“现金使用减少是否是一个积极趋势”这一话题展开,明确表达了反对立场,认为这种趋势的弊大于利。首先,文章指出,电子支付工具在设计时往往忽视边缘群体或少数群体的需求,导致这些人可能在日常生活中面临严重困难。接着,为支撑这一观点,文章列举了两个具体群体:首先是老年人,由于不熟悉智能手机的操作,加之开发者在设计电子支付界面时常常不考虑他们的使用习惯,使得他们很难正确操作,甚至无法完成支付;其次是视力障碍者或残障人士,他们常被移动支付应用中常见的小字体所困扰,从而感受到被科技进步排斥的疏离感。此外,文章还针对Paul的观点进行反驳,指出Paul虽然有一定道理,但他忽略了一个关键问题,即电子支付系统未能照顾那些不擅长使用技术或身体不便的人,反而带来了排斥效应。最终,文章总结并重申论点,从更广泛的社会影响来看,减少现金使用的趋势弊大于利。
文章语言简洁清晰,句式自然流畅,论点突出,论据具体且具代表性,具有较强的说服力;逻辑结构严谨,论证顺序由个体问题上升到社会影响,体现了较高的思辨能力和论述技巧。
用词用语整理:
【表语从句+分词短语+it形式宾语】
“This is largely because developers frequently overlook the needs of elderly users when designing e-payment interfaces, making it difficult for them to identify where to tap on the screen in online payment scenarios.” 这句话通过具体解释老年人难以使用电子支付的原因,强化了文章关于电子支付系统对边缘群体不友好的核心论点,从而为后续论证奠定基础。其中,表语从句解释现象的原因,分词短语补充说明行为的后果,it形式宾语则使句子结构和语义表达更符合英语习惯,增强了句子的逻辑性与说服力。
【让步状语从句+宾语从句+定语从句】
“Though Paul’s idea is valid to some extent, he did not mention that digital payment systems, when failing to accommodate those who are less tech-savvy or have disabilities, can lead to exclusion rather than convenience.” 这句话通过承认其中一位同学观点的合理性后指出其忽略的重要问题,不仅体现了辩证且客观的立场,也有力支撑了文章关于数字支付可能引发社会排斥的中心论点。其中,让步状语从句体现了理性与逻辑,宾语从句指出了对方观点的疏漏,定语从句则细化了受影响人群,三者共同使句子整体结构层次清晰、语言严谨,为强化文章论点提供了有力支持。
outweigh(重于,大于):动词,意思是在重要性、价值、影响力等方面超过、胜过,常用于表达两件事情的比较,强调某一方面的正面或负面影响更大。在文章中用于强调弊端超过利端,准确传达文章立场的倾向性,是引出论点并设定整体论证方向的关键动词。
例句:
In my opinion, the benefits of working from home outweigh the challenges.
我认为,在家工作的好处大于挑战。
marginalized(被排斥的,被边缘化的):形容某人或某群体被社会、制度或主流文化边缘化、排斥在外,意味着他们的声音、权益、需求经常被忽视,无法公平参与或获得资源。在文章中用来指代在电子支付系统中被忽视的群体。
例句:
People living in rural areas are often marginalized in national policy discussions.
生活在农村地区的人们在国家政策讨论中常常被边缘化。
minority groups(少数群体):指的是社会中人数较少,或处于弱势、边缘地位的群体。这些群体可能因为种族、民族、宗教、语言、性别、残疾等原因与主流群体有所不同,通常在社会、政治或经济方面面临不平等或歧视。在文章中与marginalized并列使用,突出电子支付系统在设计上可能造成的、比较广泛的社会排斥问题。
例句:
Many laws have been introduced to protect the rights of minority groups.
许多法律已经被制定出来,以保护少数群体的权利。
excluded from(被排除在……之外,不被包含在……内):固定短语,表示某人或某物没有被允许参与某个活动、组织或范围。在文章中用来强调部分群体因无法适应电子支付而被排除在主流支付方式之外,突出技术发展带来的社会隔离感,从而有力支撑文章对减少现金使用的反对立场。
例句:
Many people were excluded from the club because they didn’t meet the requirements.
许多人因为不符合条件被排除在俱乐部之外。
dominant(占优势的):通常用来形容在某个领域、群体或环境中占据主导地位的人、事物或特点。在文章中用来形容电子支付系统在社会中的主导地位,凸显其广泛影响力,从而为后文讨论其对边缘群体排斥性的负面影响提供背景依据。
例句:
English is the dominant language in international business.
英语是国际商务中主要的语言。
overlook(忽视,忽略):指没有注意到某个细节、错误或者重要的信息,通常不是故意的,而是因为不小心或者没有仔细检查。在文章中强调开发者忽视老年人及特殊群体需求的行为,揭示电子支付设计中的盲点,从而增强文章核心论点的说服力。
例句:
Don’t overlook the small details—they can be very important.
不要忽视那些小细节,它们可能非常重要。
tap on(轻触,轻轻敲击):动词短语,常用来描述用手指轻触某个物体(比如手机屏幕、按钮等),也可以引申为利用或开发某种资源或潜力,比如tap on new markets(开发新市场)。在文章中具体描述老年用户在电子支付界面上的操作动作,生动地展现技术使用障碍,增强论述的细节感和真实感。
例句:
She tapped on the screen to select the picture.
她轻触屏幕选择那张照片。
impairments(损伤,障碍):通常指身体、感官、心理或功能上的缺陷或损伤,可以用来描述某种能力的减弱或丧失,除了文章中的视力障碍(visual impairment),还可以表示听力障碍(hearing impairment)、智力障碍(mental impairment)、认知障碍(cognitive impairment)等。在文章中强调电子支付系统对残障人士的忽视,强化文章关于技术包容性不足的批评。
例句:
Many elderly people experience impairments in their vision or hearing.
许多老年人会出现视力或听力障碍。
alienated(疏离的,被疏远的):形容词,通常用来描述一个人觉得自己不被社会、团体、家庭等接纳或理解,产生孤立感或被排斥的情绪。在文章中用于表达边缘群体因无法适应电子支付而产生的被疏离感,强化技术进步带来社会排斥的情感冲击,从而增强文章论点的说服力与共鸣效果。
例句:
After moving to a new city where he knew no one, Tom felt completely alienated and alone.
搬到一个人生地不熟的新城市后,汤姆感到完全被疏离和孤独。
accommodate(考虑到,顾及):表示在做计划、决定或行动时,考虑到他人的需要、感受或情况,并作出适当调整。在文章中强调如果电子支付系统无法兼顾不同用户群体的需求,将难以体现技术的包容性与公平性,甚至可能导致社会排斥问题。
例句:
The schedule was changed to accommodate the needs of the international participants.
日程安排作了调整,以顾及国际参与者的需求。
tech-savvy(精通科技的):指一个人精通科技、懂得使用技术产品,尤其是电脑、智能手机、互联网等现代科技。在文章中与老年人或残障人士形成对比,从而突出电子支付系统对不同用户适应能力的差异性,强化文章关于技术排斥的论点。
例句:
As more services move online, it’s important to ensure that elderly people who are not tech-savvy are not left behind.
随着越来越多的服务转移到线上,我们必须确保那些不懂科技的老年人不会被社会所抛下。