The article and the professor are both talking about ( A＆B ). However, the professor claims that ( B ), and he refutes the main points made in the reading passage. The three points of view between the two parties are presented as follows.
First of all, the professor argues that ( B ). This idea questions the article’s point of view that ( A ). In addition, she states that ( B ). She also mentions that ( B ).
Second, the professor takes the position that ( B ). This standpoint is also opposed to the claim in the passage that ( A ). In his opinion, he tells that ( B ). Furthermore, he notes that ( B ).
Finally, the speaker goes further to make a point that ( B ). This viewpoint also refutes the writer’s view that ( A ). In the lecture, she says ( B ). According to the lecture, the professor points out that ( B ). Therefore, the main points made by the professor cast doubt on the main points made in the reading passage.
A response at this level successfullyselectstheimportantinformationfromthe lecture and coherently and accuratelypresentsthisinformation in relation to the relevant information presented in the reading. The response is well organized, and occasional language errors that are present do not result in inaccurate or imprecise presentation of content or connections.
Jane Austen (1775-1817) is one of the most famous of all English novelists, and today her novels are more popular than ever, with several recently adapted as Hollywood movies. But we do not have many records of what she looked like. For a long time, the only accepted image of Austen was an amateur sketch of an adult Austen made by her sister Cassandra. However, recently a professionally painted, full-length portrait of a teenage girl owned by a member of the Austen family has come up for sale. Although the professional painting is not titled Jane Austen, there are good reasons to believe she is the subject.
First, in 1882, several decades after Austen’s death, Austen’s family gave permission to use the portrait as an illustration in an edition of her letters. Austen’s family clearly recognized it as a portrait of the author. So, for over a century now, the Austen family itself has endorsed the claim that the girl in the portrait is Jane Austen.
Second, the face in the portrait clearly resembles the one in Cassandra’s sketch, which we know depicts Austen. Though somewhat amateurish, the sketch communicates definite details about Austen’s face. Even though the Cassandra sketch is of an adult Jane Austen, the features are still similar to those of the teenage girl in the painting. The eyebrows, nose, mouth, and overall shape of the face are very much like those in the full-length portrait.
Third, although the painting is unsigned and undated, there is evidence that it was painted when Austen was a teenager. The style links it to Ozias Humphrey, a society portrait painter who was the kind of professional the wealthy Austen family would hire. Humphrey was active in the late 1780s and early 1790s, exactly the period when Jane Austen was the age of the girl in the painting.
| リスニング レクチャー
レクチャー （スクリプト）
（赤） ： 解答例の構成に使われている要点。
The evidence linking this portrait to Jane Austen is not at all convincing. Sure, the painting has long been somewhat loosely connected to Austen’s extended family and their descendants, but this hardly proves it’s a portrait of Jane Austen as a teenager. The reading’s arguments that the portrait is of Austen are questionable at best.
First, when the portrait was authorized for use in the 1882 publication of her letters, Jane Austen had been dead for almost 70 years. So the family members who asserted that the painting was Jane had never actually seen her themselves. They couldn’t have known for certain if the portrait was of Austen or not.
Second, the portrait could very well be that of a relative of Austen’s, a fact that would explain the resemblance between its subject and that of Cassandra’s sketch. The extended Austen family was very large, and many of Jane Austen’s female cousins were teenagers in the relevant period, or had children who were teenagers. And some of these teenage girls could have resembled Jane Austen. In fact, many experts believe that the true subject of the portrait was one of those relatives, Mary Ann Campion, who was a distant niece of Austen’s.
Third, the painting has been attributed to Humphrey only because of the style, but other evidence points to a later date. A stamp on the back of the picture indicates that the blank canvas, you know, the actual piece of cloth on which the picture was painted, was sold by a man named William Legg. Records show that William Legg did not sell canvasses in London when Jane Austen was a teenager. He only started selling canvasses when she was 27 years old. So, it looks like the canvas was used for the painting at a time when Austen was clearly older than the girl in the portrait.
▮ Question
Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they respond to the specific arguments made in the reading passage.
| 解答例
（青）： リーディングの要点。
（赤）： レクチャーの要点。
★ レクチャーの要点が中心に構成されているのがわかります
The lecture casts doubt and questions the evidence presented in the reading passage regarding a painting allegedly of Jane Austen.
First, about the family’s recognition of the painting as that of Jane’s as a teenager. The lecturer points out that in 1882, when the Austen family authorized the use of the painting as a portrait of Jane in the publication of her letters, Jane had been dead for 70 years. Hence, the family members who claimed this portrait to be of Jane’s probably have never seen her, and don’t necessarily know how she looked.
While the reading passage presents the resemblance of the face features to prove that the teenager in the portrait is indeed Jane, the lecturer sees otherwise: the teenager in the portrait could have been any cousin or niece of Jane. The lecturer claims that there was much to the date of the portrait based on the stamp on the canvas itself. According to the stamp it was sold by William Legg, who didn’t sell canvas in London when Jane was a teenager. He only began selling canvas in London when Jane was 27 years old.
The sea otter is a small mammal that lives in waters along the western coast of North America from California to Alaska. When some sea otter populations off the Alaskan coast started rapidly declining a few years ago, it caused much concern because sea otters play an important ecological role in the coastal ecosystem. Experts started investigating the cause of the decline and quickly realized that there were two possible explanations: environmental pollution or attacks by predators. Initially, the pollution hypothesis seemed the more likely of the two.
The first reason why pollution seemed the more likely cause was that there were known sources of it along the Alaskan coast, such as oil rigs and other sources of industrial chemical pollution. Water samples from the area revealed increased levels of chemicals that could decrease the otters’ resistance to life threatening infections and thus could indirectly cause their deaths.
Second, other sea mammals such as seals and sea lions along the Alaskan coast were also declining, indicating that whatever had endangered the otters was affecting other sea mammals as well. This fact again pointed to environmental pollution, since it usually affects the entire ecosystem rather than a single species. Only widely occurring predators, such as the orca (a large predatory whale), could have the same effect, but orcas prefer to hunt much larger prey, such as other whales.
Third, scientists believed that the pollution hypothesis could also explain the uneven pattern of otter decline: at some Alaskan locations the otter populations declined greatly, while at others they remained stable. Some experts explained these observations by suggesting that ocean currents or other environmental factors may have created uneven concentrations of pollutants along the coast.
| リスニング レクチャー
レクチャー （スクリプト）
（赤） ： 解答例の構成に使われている要点。
Well, ongoing investigations have revealed that predation is the most likely cause of sea otter decline after all.
First, the pollution theory is weakened by the fact no one can really find any dead sea otters washing up on Alaskan beaches. That’s not what you would expect if infections caused by pollution started killing a lot of otters. On the other hand, the fact that it’s so hard to find dead otters is consistent with the predator hypothesis: if an otter is killed by a predator, it’s eaten immediately so it can’t wash up on shore.
Second, although areas may prefer to hunt whales, whales have essentially disappeared from the area because of human hunters. That means that areas have had to change their diet to survive, and since only smaller sea mammals are now available, orcas have probably started hunting those. So it probably is the areas that are causing the decline of all the smaller sea mammals mentioned in the passage, the seals, the sea lions, and the sea otters.
And third, the uneven pattern of otter decline is better explained by the orca predation theory than by the pollution theory. What happens to otters seems to depend on whether the location where they live is accessible to areas or not. In those locations that areas can access easily, the number of sea otters has declined greatly. However, because areas are so large, they can’t access shallow or rocky locations. And shallow and rocky locations are precisely the types of locations where sea otter populations have not declined.
▮ Question
Summarize the points made in the lecture, being sure to explain how they respond to the specific points made in the reading passage
| 解答例
（青）： リーディングの要点。
（赤）： レクチャーの要点。
★ レクチャーの要点が中心に構成されているのがわかります
The topic discussed here is the investigation of the causes of the disappearance of the sea otter, which is a small mammal that lives in waters along the western coast of North America from California to Alaska. The woman in the lecture argues that the cause of their disappearance is the presence of the predators, especially areas, and not pollution as the reading says.
Firstly, she argues that one of the proofs of their being attacked by the predators is the fact that no one can find any dead sea otters. If the cause was the pollution, many dead sea otters would be found along the shores. In addition, a predator will immediately eat its prey so this is why no dead sea otters were found.
Secondly, the woman in the lecture argues there is another explanation than pollution why smaller sea mammals are all disappearing.She says that, since the whales tend to disappear because of the humans hunting them, the areas had to adapt their food habits to the sea conditions and as a result they have started eating the smaller sea animals available among them sea otters being included.
Thirdly, she argues that the areas cannot access the shallow locations. This is why there are some areas where the sea otters are numerous. It’s not because of uneven concentrations of pollutants.
The topic discussed here is the investigation of the causes of the disappearance of the sea otter, which is a small mammal that lives in waters along the western coast of North America from California to Alaska. The woman in the lecture argues that the cause of their disappearance is the presence of the predators, especially areas, and not pollution as the reading says.
| Body １ パッセージ理由1への反論
Firstly, she argues that one of the proofs of their being attacked by the predators is the fact that no one can find any dead sea otters. If the cause was the pollution, many dead sea otters would be found along the shores. In addition, a predator will immediately eat its prey so this is why no dead sea otters were found.
| Body 2 パッセージ理由2への反論 Body
Secondly, the woman in the lecture argues there is another explanation than pollution why smaller sea mammals are all disappearing.She says that, since the whales tend to disappear because of the humans hunting them, the areas had to adapt their food habits to the sea conditions and as a result they have started eating the smaller sea animals available among them sea otters being included.
| Body ３ パッセージ理由3への反論 Body
Thirdly, she argues that the areas cannot access the shallow locations. This is why there are some areas where the sea otters are numerous. It’s not because of uneven concentrations of pollutants.
The lecturer discusses the points made in the text but reaches a different conclusion in each case. For one thing, she states that yes, people are reading less literature then they were in earlier times but this does not equal an immediate decline of culture. On the contrary, in her opinion our culture is simply evolving and changing. Although literature is one of the most obvious elements of culture, there are also lots of other forms of artistic expression in our ever-changing culture, e.g. music. And those elements are not less valuable and less creative than literature and they appeal to more modern concerns than literature.
Also the lecturer disputes the text that says we are going to lose interesting writers of literature. She says that today literature is not interesting enough for the reader! In the lecturers opinion this is mainly due to the fact that modern literature is often written with the intention of being difficult to understand, which does not make it very attractive for the modern reader.
And finally just because people are not reading literature anymore this does not mean they are not reading at all and losing their imagination and empathy; instead there are many other valuable types of books which people are reading, e.g. science textbooks and political analysis. These books can stimulate readers and provide satisfaction and learning.
The lecturer points out that there are other forms of writing that are of high quality and just as intellectually stimulating as literature.
ポイント（反論）2
The lecturer argues that people spend time on culturally valuable activities such as listening to good music or watching good movies. The definition of culture is changing.
ポイント（反論）3
The lecturer argues that maybe there is less readership of literature because the writers of literature nowadays are making their books/ works too hard to understand.
スクリプト
It is often said that people are reading less literature today than they used to. What should we make of this?
Well, first, a book doesn’t have to be literature to be intellectually stimulating. Science writing, history, political analysis, and so forth aren’t literature, perhaps, but they’re often of high quality. And these kinds of books can be just as creative and well-written as a novel or a play-they can stimulate the imagination. So don’t assume that someone who isn’t reading literature isn’t reading a good book.
But let’s say that people aren’t just spending less time with literature, they’re also spending less time with books in general. Does that mean that the culture is in decline? No. There’s plenty of culturally valuable material that isn’t written: music and movies, for example. Are people wasting their time when they listen to a brilliant song or watch a good movie? Do these non-literary activities lower cultural standards? Of course not. Culture has changed. In today’s culture there are many forms of expression available other than novels and poems, and some of these creative forms speak more directly to contemporary concerns than literature does.
Finally, it’s probably true that there’s less support for literature today than in earlier generations. But don’t be too quick to blame the readers. Sometimes it’s the author’s fault. Let’s be honest: a lot of modern literature is intended to be difficult to understand. There’s not much reason to suppose that earlier generations of readers would have read a lot of today’s literature either.
Directions: Give yourself 3 minutes to read the passage
A recent study reveals that people, especially young people, are reading far less literature-novels, plays, and poems-than they used to. This is troubling because the trend has unfortunate effects for the reading public, for culture in general, and for the future of literature itself.While there has been a decline in book reading generally, the decline has been especially sharp for literature. This is unfortunate because nothing else provides the intellectual stimulation that literature does. Literature encourages us to exercise our imaginations, empathize with others, and expand our understanding of language. So by reading less literature, the reading public is missing out on important benefits. Unfortunately, missing out on the benefits of literature is not the only problem. What are people reading instead? Consider the prevalence of self-help books on lists of best sellers. These are usually superficial, poorly written, and intellectually undemanding. Additionally, instead of sitting down with a challenging novel, many persons are now more likely to turn on the television, watch a music video, or read a Web page. Clearly, diverting time previously spent in reading literature to trivial forms of entertainment has lowered the level of culture in general. The trend of reading less literature is all the more regrettable because it is taking place during a period when good literature is being written. There are many talented writers today, but they lack an audience. This fact is bound to lead publishers to invest less in literature and so support fewer serious writers. Thus, the writing as well as the reading of literature is likely to decline because of the poor standards of today’s readers.
パッセージのポイント
ポイント１
The passage argues that reading less literature means that readers are missing out on ways to stimulate their imagination and help with their mental development.
ポイント２
The passage argues that many of the kinds of reading that people currently spend time on instead of literature are just trivial entertainment and lead to lower cultural standards.
ポイント３
The passage says that another bad effect of the decline in reading literature is that talented writers of literature are not being supported.
The whole family gathered / around a warm stove. / lay down / and went to sleep.// Once a day / everyone got up / to eat a piece of hard bread.// Then they went back to sleep. // The members of the family took turns/ keeping the fire burning. //This was not “hibernating” / like what bears do in the winter.// But it was a sensible decision / by the members of the family.// Just stay in bed / for as long as possible. / and do not work.// To these French farmers / “working more to earn more”/ did not seem like a good idea. // Instead of working throughout the year,/ the people of one village on the Rhone River/ made enough money for one year / relaxing, hunting and sleeping. //Few people needed money / until the 20th century. //
読解力をつける4つの秘訣！
スラッシュ・リーディングの他にも速読を鍛える方法がありますので、併せて習得してください。
1. 読書に集中できる環境作り
まず、第一に、「読む」ことに集中してください。
TVやスマホ、iPadなどを周りに置かないでください。
そして、あなたがリラックスできて
パッセージを読むのに適した明るさの下で読むようにしましょう。
記事や本に書かれている情報を吸収しやすい脳にするためには、
脳をリラックス状態にさせ、さらに十分な酸素を送ることも大切です。
2. 読む目的を明確にする
2番目に、読む目的についてよく考えてください。
記事/本/雑誌/コラムなどの表紙を見れば、読み物の主題や
何について書かれているかはわかります。
そこで、あなたが、そこから何を学びたいのか、知りたいのかを明確にしましょう。
例えば、記事のタイトルが ”The Remedies of Migraine-片頭痛療法 ” だとします。
