emerges-50

叙述外语教学法主要流派

一、词语用法：

appeared属于动词，意思是：发表，出现，出庭。是appear的过去式和过去分词，表示所描述的事物是已经发生的。

appear可用于存在句型(There ～s/ ～ed )，相当于不及物动词be。

当appear指“出现”或“抵达”时，可被副词修饰。如：

She suddenly appeared in the doorway.。

她突然间出现在门口。

二、词义例句：

1、出现

A woman appeared at the far end of the street.。

一个女人在街那端出现了。

2、发表

The study appeared earlier this month in Science magazine.。

该研究本月早些时候发表于科学杂志。

3、出庭

He appeared as a witness in the trial.。

在审判中他出庭作证。

三、词汇解析：

appear

英 [əˈpɪə(r)]   美 [əˈpɪr]。

v.发表；出现，显现；出庭，出场；演出。

扩展资料

appear的基本含义有二：一是“出现”“到达”,指出席或在公共场所露面,也指可以看见或变得清晰起来,较少意味着具有确切地具体的背景或出处。appear作此解时,是不及物动词,其后常有时间、地点等状语。

appear的另一个意思是“似乎”“显得”“看起来好像”,含有因视觉误差、观点限制或他人掩饰而得到的印象与事实并不一定相符的味道。appear作此解时,主要用作系动词,也可用作不及物动词。

词义辨析：

appear, emerge, loom这三个词的共同意思是“出现”,其区别是：

1、appear强调的是公开露面;。

2、emerge指从某个掩蔽处出现或摆脱遮挡物而被看见,强调“缓缓出现”;。

3、loom则强调眼前出现的物体好像从云雾中发出,无明显轮廓,即“朦胧出现”。

factors influencing the choice of domestication and foreignization

外语教学法流派介绍

1. 外语教学法流派介绍：阅读法 2. 外语教学法流派介绍：自然法 3. 外语教学法流派介绍：自觉实践法 4. 外语教学法流派介绍：视听法 5. 外语教学法流派介绍：全身反应法 6. 外语教学法流派介绍：直接法 7. 外语教学法流派介绍：语法－翻译法 8. 外语教学法流派介绍：听说法 9. 外语教学法流派介绍：社团语言学习法 10. 外语教学法流派介绍：认知法（Cognitive Approach） 11. 外语教学法流派介绍：暗示法（Suggestopedia） 12. 外语教学法主要流派及其特点 外语教学法流派介绍：阅读法（Reading Method） 阅读法是本世纪初魏斯特（Michael West）在进行英语教学试验中新创造的一种教学法。魏斯特认为，学会用外语阅读比较容易，学生在开口说话前，先学习一定数量的材料，有—定语感，可以减少说话时犯错误的可能性，从而更快地学会外语。因此，他主张，英语教学的基本目标首先是培养学生的直接阅读能力（即不通过翻译而直接理解）。魏斯特编写的《新方法读本》（New Method Readers）（共10册）是供初学者使用的基本教材，最低限度的词汇量是3500个，其编写原则如下：1．从一开始就使学生对学习有兴趣，能看到自己的成绩。2．通过课文学习生词。3．词汇越少，它的使用范围就应当越大。4．读本内容适合学生的年龄特征。魏斯特编的课本都以故事为中心，生动有趣；每50个熟词中才出现1个生词；1个生词在新课文中至少要出现2次，以后逐渐减少出现率。他把阅读分为精读与泛读两种，并规定前者每分钟400个词，后者每分钟1200个词（最高标准）。为了培养学生的快速阅读能力，除教科书外，各册都配有阅读的副本，其分量超过教科书数倍，不包括生词。 外语教学法流派介绍：自然法（Natural Approach） 这里说的自然法不是指19世纪出现的自然法，那时的自然法是直接法的前身，与语法－翻译法相对立，强调口语教学。这里的自然法是指70年代后期在美国出现的自然法。代表人物是克拉申（StePhen Krashen）和她的同事泰勒尔（Tracy Terrel）。自然法的教学目标是个人的交际技能，也就是日常会话能力。它的最主要的特点是：1．语言学习始于理解性的输入，主张推迟口头表达，直到言语“出现”（speech“emerges”）。2．一般不纠正学生的错误。自然法把教学过程分为以下三个阶段：1．表达前阶段（The PreProduction Stase） 这一阶段的主要任务是发展听力力理解技能，不急于进行口头表达，所以也称为“沉默阶段”。2．早期表达阶段（The Early Production Stage） 这是学生在学习中处于“挣扎”的状态，经常出错。教师此时应把注意力放在意义上，而不是形式上，所以一般不纠错，除非错误重大，完全阻碍意义的传递。3．最后阶段（The Last Stage） 这是扩展的表达阶段，表达扩展到较长的话语，使用的方式是较复杂的游戏、角色扮演、开放式的对话、讨论和扩展性的小组活动。这一阶段的教学目标是表达的流利程度，所以一般也不纠错。自然法的指导思想是克拉申的语言习得理论。这种理论重视自然的交际，强调非正式的习得，而不注重形式语法的分析。跟全身反应法一样，自然法强调先充分理解后再表达，不强迫学生表达，这对外语教学有一定参考价值。但是，自然法提出，到学生的言语“出现”时再表达，那么，什么时候才“出现”呢？如果永远不“出现”，该怎么办？另外，不纠正学生的错误，也有一定的问题。外语教学法流派介绍：自觉实践法 前苏联在30年代采用自觉对比法，这种教学法比较接近传统的语法－翻译法，与直接法相对立，偏重语言知识，过多地使用翻译和对比，忽视外语实践能力，特别是口语能力的培养。60年代进行外语教学改革，创立自觉实践法。它的创始人是著名心理学家别良耶夫（ь.в.ьеляев）。自觉实践法的主要教学目标是听、说、读、写的言语能力。它的教学原则如下：1．自觉性原则理论指导实践，用必要的语法知识指导学生的言语实践活动。学习过程是言语－语言－言语，即首先让学生感受外语，积累感性材料，然后经过语言知识的学习上升为理性认识，再到言语实践中进一步发展言语能力。这是前苏联外语教学的一贯传统。2．实践性原则强调自觉实践在外语教学中的重要地位，在理解的基础上模仿和记忆。要求80%的时间用于言语实践，20%的时间用于语言理论讲解。教学活动交际化，选用有交际价值的材料，用情景法组织言语实践。3．积极性原则要求学生在整个教学过程中都处于积极状态。贯彻这条原则有三条途径：（1）运用和发展学生的理论思维能力：引导学生对语言材料进行分析、概括；提倡猜测和记忆性分析；直觉模仿与自觉模仿并重。（2）实践形式多样化：提倡在新的语言情境中创造性地运用已学过的材料；加强成对的和小组的活动；练习多样化，不同的教学要求和目的使用不同的练习方式。（3）培养学生独立作业的能力：训练学生使用教科书、参考书，教学生作笔记、拟提纲、作简介或摘要等。4．综合性原则听、说、读、写相互配合，相互促进，听、说过的东西要用读、写来巩固，听、读过的东西要用说、写来表达；听觉、视觉和运动觉综合运用。成年人学习外语，不宜硬把听说与读写分开。一般说来，初级阶段，可以侧重口语教学；但听说领先应有读写跟上。听觉应当依靠视觉、运动觉来巩固，因为听觉感受的材料容易忘记。5．考虑学生本族语的原则在教学过程中，尽可能使用外语，使用大量的外语练习，充分利用视听设备刺激学生的听觉、视觉和运动觉等，使学生在大脑皮层上建立牢固的外语动力定型，获得外语语感，并使外语同思维建立直接联系。翻译和对比作为一种教学手段，也可以使用，但要有一定的限度。从本族语到外语的翻译是一种有效的教学练习形式，但其数量要有所控制，没有必要在每种场合都指出两种语言的区别，只有在必要时才进行对比。总之，以外语为主，有限度地使用本族语。自觉实践法进入70年代，较快地吸收了功能法的长处，把原来的实践性原则发展为交际性原则，认为实践性原则只强调一般的言语实践，而交际性原则把外语看成是交际工具。交际不仅是教学的主要手段，而且是教学的主要目的。70年代的自觉实践法与60年代的自觉实践法区别的主要标志就在于这一根本原则。外语教学法流派：视听法（Audio—Visual Method） 视听法在本世纪50年代产生于法国，它最早叫整体结构法，又叫圣克卢教学法（因此法产生于法国圣克卢高等师范学院的“全世界推广法语研究所”而得名）。代表人物有法国的古根汉（G.Gou-genhein）和南斯拉夫的彼塔尔•吉布里纳。视听法的教学目标分三个阶段。第一阶段：日常口语，如《基础法语》；第二阶段：就一般性非专业化话题而进行的连贯谈话；第三阶段：就有关专业化的话题而进行的连贯谈话。视听法的主要特点如下：1．利用教学电影和录音展示语言项目，向学生提供有意义的话语和语境。2．在母语与外语对比的基础上确定教学内容。3．课堂上一般不使用学生的母语。4．听说先于读写。5．用操练的方法学习基本语法和词汇。视听法是一种有效的教学法，至今应用广泛。我们南京大学外国留学生部和北京师范大学对外汉语教学中心正在试验的视听说课，较多地吸取了视听法的长处，同时，在理论与实践上又有所发展。 外语教学法流派：全身反应法 （Total Physical Response,简称TPR） 全身反应法产生于60年代初期的美国，盛行于70年代，创始人是心理学教授阿舍尔（James T.Asher）。这种教学法是通过身体动作教授外语的方法，主要用于美国移民儿童的英语教育。全身反应法的主要教学原则如下：1．理解口语的能力要在说话之前发展 只有进行充分的理解性的听，才能自然地转移到说。同时进行听和说两种技能的训练，只会给学生造成压力，因为缺乏理解的听，学生没有做好说话的准备，很容易说错。2．理解的能力要通过全身动作来发展 大量研究证明，指令是基本的交际，第二语言的大多数语法结构和数以百计的词汇项目，都可以通过教师熟练的指令来教授。全身动作是发展理解能力的关键，没有全身动作，一个新的语言现象即使重复多次，也依然是一连串噪音。3．不可强迫学生说话 学生听到理解所学的大量接受性词汇，将外语在认知结构中内化，就产生了一个说话的待发点。这时，学生就有说话的要求，自然而然地开始说话。据研究，学生要听几十次才能发一个音。如果给学生以压力，强迫学生说话，就会引起其大脑对外来信息的抵制。外语教学法流派介绍：直接法（Direct Method） 直接法是在19世纪后半叶作为语法－翻译法的对立物在西欧出现的，主要代表人物是贝力兹（M.D.Berlitz）、艾盖尔特（B.Eggert）和帕默（H.E.Palmer）。直接法还有别的名称，如改革法、自然法、心理法、口语法、妥协法、综合直接法、折衷直接法、循序渐进直接法等，虽各有差异，但同属一类。所谓直接法，就是直接用外语教外语，不用学生的母语，不用翻译，也不注重形式语法。它的教学目标不是规范的书面语，而是外语口语。直接法的主要教学原则和特点如下：1．直接联系的原则：直接法中最基本的东西是建立语言与外界经验相联系。也就是说，在外语教学中，使每一个词语同它所代表的事物或意义直接联系，不经过母语翻译。这样做，可以使学生尽快丢掉“心译”这条拐棍直接用外语思维。2．以口语为基础的原则，口语教学是入门阶段的主要手段和目的。3．句本位原则：教外语从句子入手，以句子为单位，整句进，整句出。这样，既学到了单词，又学到了语法。从句子入手并不意味着忽视单词和语音教学，直接法十分重视句子中的单词和语音教学。4．以模仿为主的原则：通过各种模仿手段重复所学的句子，养成习惯，达到自动化地步。除了以上四条主要原则外，直接法还有其他一些教学原则，如精选语言材料的原则、循序渐进原则、趣味性等。外语教学法流派：语法－翻译法（Grammar-Translation Method） 语法－翻译法是最古老的外语教学法，已有几百年的历史。它盛行于18世纪末，代表人物是奥伦多夫（H．G．Ollendoff）。古老的翻译法、语法法和词汇－翻译法都属于同一类方法。它最初用来学习古希腊文和拉丁文这类死的语言，后来用来学习现代外语（本世纪初，这种教学法在许多国家的外语教学中占主导地位。我国解放初期的外语级学，特别是俄语教学，大都采用这种方法。语法－翻译法的基本特点可以归结为以下几个方面：l．教授语法学家所确定的所谓“规范”的语言，所使用的语言材料多以古老和过时的例句为主。2．注重书面语，不注重口语。3．语法的讲解不仅注重规则的东西，而且十分注重不规则的东西。4．课堂教学使用本族语。5．教学方法以翻译为主，通过大量笔头翻译和写作练习来检验语法规则掌握情况。教学过程一般是：先教字母的发音和书写，然后系统地教语法，最后阅读原文。语法课的安排顺序如下：1．先讲词法，后讲语法。2．用演绎法讲授语法规则，即先讲语法规则，后举例句。并翻译成本族语。3．用本族语和外语互译的方法巩固所学的语法规则。课文教学的一般步骤是：1．用本族语介绍课文内容。2．逐字逐句翻译。3．朗读课文。4．用互译的方法巩固课文。外语教学法流派：听说法（Audiolingual Method） 听说法产生于40年代美国，当时叫做陆军法或口语法，到了50年代，发展为听说法，又称结构法，在美国外语教学中占支配地位。代表人物有埃比、里弗斯等。听说法吸取了直接法重口语的特点，教学目标分听、说、读、写四项技能，但重点放在发展听、说技能上。听说法有下列特点：1．新课内容以对话形式展示。2．用模仿、重复和记忆的方式学习，以便养成习惯。3．用对比的方式安排语言结构顺序，教完一项再教另一项。4．对句型结构进行反复操练。5．很少或根本没有语法解释，语法教学靠归纳性类推，而不是靠演绎性解释。6．词汇严格控制，而且通过上下文学习。7．大量使用录音、语言实验室和视听设备。8．重视语音教学。9．允许教师使用极少量的学生母语。10．正确答案立即予以强化。11．尽力防止学生出现错误。12．有只顾语言形式操练而忽视内容的倾向。13．先听、说，后读、写。 外语教学法流派：社团语言学习法（Community Language Learning） 社团语言学习法又称咨询法（Counseling Learning），产生于60年代初期的美国，是由古兰（Charles Curran）创立的。这种教学法主要的教学目标是外语口语。它的突出特点是以学生为中心，教服从学。教师是顾问，是辅助者，学生是“病人”。教师注意的中心是“病人”的需要。另一个突出特点是依靠学生的母语，逐渐由学生的母语过渡到外语。这种教学法的学习方式和过程是这样的：首先学生用母语建立相互信任的人际关系。学生坐成一个圆圈，教师在圈外。学生可以是零起点的外语学生。如果一个学生想对小组或某个学生说几句话，他就用母语说，顾问就把他的话翻译成外语，然后让学生重复这句外语。接着，别的学生就用母语回答，顾问再翻译，学生重复。这样，会话就会继续下去。如有可能，可以把会话录下来，引导学生归纳出一些有关新语言的信息。如果学生愿意，顾问可以给更多的指导，解释一些语言规则。在开始阶段，“病人”中会出现迷惑不解、混淆的情况，但是在顾问的帮助下，会慢慢好起来，开始用外语说一个词、一个短语，不用翻译。这是“病人”由完全依赖顾问到独立学习的第一个标志。随着“病人”对外语的逐渐熟悉，直接用外语交际就会发生，顾问的指导就会减少。数月之后，“病人”就会用外语进行流利的交际。从完全依赖顾问到完全独立，其间分以下五个阶段：1．完全依赖顾问；2．会说一些外语词和短语；3．逐渐独立，但还有一些错误需要顾问纠正；4．只需要顾问解释一些成语、具有特殊意义的固定表达法和语法；5．独立、自由地交际。顾问虽出场，但保持沉默。社团语言学习法的理论基础是人本主义心理学和以学生为中心的教育学。外语教学法流派：认知法（Cognitive Approach） 认知法又称认知－符号法（Cognitive-Code Approach），产生于60年代的美国，代表人物是卡鲁尔、布鲁纳。认知法反对听说法的“结构模式”论和过分依赖机械性的重复操练，主张在外语教学中发挥学生的智力，注重对语言规则的理解和创造性的运用，它的教学目标是全面地掌握语言，不完全侧重听说。它批评听说法的缺点，为语法－翻译法和直接法正名，因而被称为“改进了的现代语法－翻译法”（Hester,1970）或“改进了的现代直接法”（Diller，1971）。认知法的教学原则如下：1．把培养语言能力放在教学目标的首位。所谓语言能力就是内化了的语言知识体系。它主张通过有意识、有组织的练习获得正确使用语言的能力。2．以学生为中心，重视培养学生正确的学习动机、良好学习习惯和学习毅力，重视开发学生的智力，激发学生的学习兴趣，充分调动学生的学习积极性和主动性。3．提倡演绎法的教学原则，强调学生理解和掌握规则，启发学生发现语言规则。讲解约占教学活动的1/5。反对机械模仿，提倡有意义的练习。4．主张听说读写齐头并进，全面发展。在教学中，语音与文字结合，口笔语相互促进。各种感觉器官同时综合运用，以求收到最佳效果。语音教学应适可而止，因为成年人学习纯正地道的语音不容易。重视阅读和词汇量的扩大。5．适当地使用学生的本族语。通过两种语言的对比确定难点和重点，用学生的本族语解释一些比较抽象的语言现象，以便于理解。在初级阶段，学生的本族语使用得多一些，允许必要的适当的翻译。6．学生出现错误不可避免，教师要正确对待，分析出现的各种错误，影响交际的错误要加以纠正，但其他一般性错误不宜进行过多的纠正，更不要指责学生。过多的纠正或指责容易使学生感到无所适从产生怕出错的心理，甚至失去学习的信心。认知法认为，成千人学习外语与幼儿学习母语相比，有不同的特点：1．缺乏幼儿学习母语的语言环境，是在人为的语言环境（教室）中学习的；2．学生是在掌握了母语的基础上学习外语的；3．学习是自觉的、有意识、有组织的。根据这些特点，把外语教学过程分为三个阶段：语言的理解（comprehension）、语言能力（competence）、语言运用（performance）。外语教学法流派介绍：暗示法（Suggestopedia） 暗示法（Suggestopedia）是由保加利亚精神病疗法心理学家罗札诺夫（G.Lozanov）于60年代中期创立的。暗示法主张创造高度的动机，建立激发人的潜力，把各种无意识暗示因素组织起来，以便有效地完成学习伍务。暗示法由此而得名。另外，暗示法采用加速的方法进行外语教学，所以，它又称为暗示速成教学法（Suggestive-Ace1eratively Learning and Teachinhg，简称SALT）。暗示法的主要教学原则如下：1．语言材料的大量输入 暗示教学的教学大纲所规定的语言材料量比常规的外语教学法所规定的量要多好几倍。据试验，120个学时可学2000个词。2．有意识和无意识相统一 外语学习过程是大脑思维活动和情感同时作用的过程。脑子的左半球主管语言和逻辑思维，右半球主管非语言和形象思维。如果在学习外语时，采取措施，使两个半球同时发挥作用，就比用一个左半球好。有意识活动和无意识活动联系越紧密，效果就越好。暗示法的创新之处就在于，它集中无意中得到的信号去达到一个有意义的目的。3．创造心情舒畅的气氛 外语学习环境幽雅。舒适的软椅排成半圆形，光线柔和，有音乐伴奏。语言材料的输入采用戏剧、诗歌等方式，并伴随着丰富的表情和手势。在这种和谐的环境里，学生的紧张心理消除了，心情舒畅，充满乐趣，善于想象。这种环境可以激发学生的超级记忆能力，加速记忆效能，提高学习效果。4．借助母语翻译和对比 在学习过程中借助母语翻译，并对比两种语言的异同，开发学生的智力。5．建立高度的自信心 鼓励大胆说外语，尽量少纠错，避免造成紧张气氛。6．创造自然的情境 暗示法在学习过程中创造了十几个自然的情境，让学生把所学的语言材料应用到交际情境中去。外语教学法主要流派及其特点一、翻译法(Translation Method) 翻译法也叫语法翻译法(Grammar-Translation Method)、阅读法(Reading Method)、古典法(Classical Method)。翻译法最早是在欧洲用来教授古典语言希腊语和拉丁语的外语教学方法，到18世纪末和19世纪中期开始被用来教授现代语言。翻译法的教学目的是培养学生阅读外国文学作品的能力和模仿范文进行写作的能力。其突出的特点是：教师用母语授课，授课重点是讲解与分析句子成分和语音、词汇变化与语法规则。 翻译法历史悠久，其优点是： 1. 学生语法概念清晰； 2. 阅读能力较强，尤其是遇到长而难的句子时通过分析句子结构便能理解意思； 3. 有助于培养翻译能力和写作能力。 翻译法的缺点是： 1. 忽视口语教学，学生的语音语调差，不利于培养学生用外语进行交际的能力； 2. 教学方式单一，学生容易失去兴趣。

二、直接法(Direct Method) 直接法也叫自然法(Natural Method)、心理法(Psychological Method)、口语法(Oral Method)、改良法(Reformed Method)。针对翻译法不能培养学生听说能力的缺点，直接法于19世纪末在欧洲产生。它包含三个方面的意思：直接学习、直接理解和直接应用。其主要特点是：不允许使用母语，用动作和图画等直观手段解释词义和句子。 直接法流行甚广，其优点是： 1. 采用各种直观教具，广泛运用接近实际生活的教学方式，有助于培养用外语思维的能力； 2. 强调直接学习和直接应用，注重语言实践练习，学生学习积极性高，学习兴趣浓厚； 3. 重视口语和语音教学，能有效地培养学生的语言运用能力。 其缺点是： 1. 排斥母语，使学生对一些抽象和复杂的概念难以理解； 2. 没有明晰的语法解释，导致学生说出的话语法错误较多。

三、听说法(Audiolingualism, Audiolingual Method) 听说法于20世纪40至60年代盛行于美国。二战爆发后，美国需要派大量的士兵出国作战，士兵们需要掌握所去国家的语言，政府临时抽调外语教学法和语言学专家以及有经验的外语教师，成立了外语训练中心，研究外语速成教学方法，以六至八个月为一期，培训士兵，其训练方法就是听和说，听说法就这样产生了。它吸收了直接法的许多优点，又受结构主义语言学和行为主义心理学的影响。认为外语学习是习惯的形成，采取模仿、机械练习和记忆的方法强化学生的反应；课堂上学生做大量的句型操练，不考虑意思和语境。 其优点是： 1. 培养学生敢于大胆主动地使用所学语言进行交谈，口语能力较强； 2. 句型操练对初学者帮助很大，语言规范； 其缺点是： 1. 大量的模仿和机械操练不利于发展学生的创造性思维； 2. 脱离语言内容和语境的句型操练不利于学生对语言的灵活运用。 3. 放松读写训练，不利于学生全面发展实践能力。

四、情境法(Situational Method) 情境法也叫视听法。针对听说法脱离语境，孤立地练习句型，影响培养学生有效使用语言能力的问题，20世纪50年代在法国产生了情境法。它吸取了直接法和听说法的许多优点。充分利用幻灯机、录音机、投影机、电影和录象等视听教具，让学生边看边听边说，身临其境地学习外语，把看到的情景和听到的声音自然地联系起来，强调通过情景操练句型，在教学中只允许使用目的语。 其优点是： 1. 情境的创设能够加速外语与事物的联系，有助于理解所学语言； 2. 重视整体结构的对话教学，使课堂变得生动活泼学生学的语言自然，表达准确。 其缺点是： 1. 完全排除母语，不利于对语言材料的彻底理解； 2. 过分强调整体结构感知，使学生对语言项目缺乏清楚的认识。

五、认知法(Cognitive Approach) 六十年代，随着科技的飞速发展，国际间的交往和竞争都需要高级外语人材，听说法已不能满足这种新的发展形式，认知法便在美国诞生了。认知法把语言学习看作是智力活动。认知法提出：任何语言里的句子都是无穷无尽的，人不可能学到每一个句子，但在学习的过程中，却能听懂和应用从未学过或见过的句子，这就是智力或语法在起作用。在教学中强调发挥智力的作用，让学生理解所学的材料，掌握语言的运用规律，强调有意义的操练活动。 其优点是： 1. 有利于培养学生的创造性思维； 2. 在理解语言知识的基础上进行操练，有利于激发学生的学习兴趣，提高语言使用的准确性和得体性。 其缺点是： 1. 对语音语调要求不严格； 2. 没有强调培养学生的交际能力。

六、交际法(Communicative Approach) 交际法也叫功能法(Functional Approach)或意念法(Notional Approach)。交际法是70年代根据语言学家海姆斯(Hymes)和韩礼德(Halliday)的理论形成的，是全世界影响较大的外语教学法流派。交际学派认为：语言教学的目的是培养学生使用目的语进行交际的能力，语言教学的内容不仅要包括语言结构，还要包括表达各种意念和功能的常用语句。交际法重视培养学生的语言能力，采用真实、地道的语言材料，主张句型加情景来学习语言，鼓励学生多多接触和使用外语。 其优点是： 1. 重视学生的实际需要； 2. 重视交际能力的培养，有利于学生在一定的社会环境中恰当地使用目的语进行交际。 其缺点是： 1. 如何确定和统计功能、意念项目，有待进一步探讨； 2. 以功能意念为线索组织教学大纲，很难保证语法项目编排的体系性。

七、任务型教学法(Task-based Language Teaching Approach) 任务型教学(Task-based Language Teaching)是指教师通过引导语言学习者在课堂上完成任务来进行的教学。这是20世纪80年代兴起的一种强调“在做中学”(learning by doing)的语言教学方法，是交际教学法的发展，在世界语言教育界引起了人们的广泛注意。近年来，这种“用语言做事”(doing things with the language)的教学理论逐渐引入我国的基础英语课堂教学，是我国外语课程教学改革的一个走向。该理论认为：掌握语言大多是在活动中使用语言的结果，而不是单纯训练语言技能和学习语言知识的结果。在教学活动中，教师应当围绕特定的交际和语言项目，设计出具体的、可操作的任务，学生通过表达、沟通、交涉、解释、询问等各种语言活动形式来完成任务，以达到学习和掌握语言的目的。任务型教学法是吸收了以往多种教学法的优点而形成的，它和其它的教学法并不排斥。 其优点是： 1. 完成多种多样的任务活动，有助于激发学生的学习兴趣。 2. 在完成任务的过程中，将语言知识和语言技能结合起来，有助于培养学生综合的语言运用能力。 3. 促进学生积极参与语言交流活动，启发想像力和创造性思维，有利于发挥学生的主体性作用。 4. 在任务型教学中有大量的小组或双人活动，每个人都有自己的任务要完成，可以更好地面向全体学生进行教学。 5. 活动内容涉及面广，信息量大，有助于拓宽学生的知识面。 6. 在活动中学习知识，培养人际交往、思考、决策和应变能力，有利于学生的全面发展。 7. 在任务型教学活动中，在教师的启发下，每个学生都有独立思考、积极参与的机会，易于保持学习的积极性，养成良好的学习习惯，帮助学生获得终身学习的能力。

求莫扎特《唐璜》歌词

Abstract: The debate on foreignization or domestication is still heated in Chinese translation circles. Analysis reveals that the terms used by Chinese scholars and Venuti look the same, but actually have different origins and meanings and are used in different contexts for different purposes. They are simply not discussing the same thing.。

Key words: foreignization, domestication, comparison, terminology。

he debate over whether translation should be source- or target-oriented has recurred from Cicero to the 21st century and has again been a focus of discussions in China in the last decade. This paper attempts to make a comparison between 'foreignizing /domesticating' and yihua/guihua, the two most popular pairs of words for describing the translator's divided loyalties in English and Chinese.。

1. Different sources for foreignizing/domesticating and yihua/ guihua 。

Currently, most Chinese scholars use foreignization /domestication as their English renditions for yihua/guihua. Does the Chinese debate originate with Venuti (1995)?。

A historical review shows that Lu Xun used the term of guihua (assimilation or domestication) in talking about translation as early as 1935. And the word yihua is already included in Dictionary of Modern Chinese published in 1978 and reprinted in 1991. This means that the two terms are not recent loan words from the West. Then what's the English for yihua/guihua when they are used in Chinese translation discussions?。

Our search in the three volumes of An Index to the Articles on Foreign Language Studies (1949-1989), (1990-1994), (1995-1999) demonstrates that the first Chinese translation research paper with the word yihua in the title was Guo Jianzhong (1998)'s "Cultural Factors in Translation: Guihua and Yihua", published in the 2nd issue of Foreign Languages, 3 years after the publication of Venuti (1995)'s The Translator's Invisibility in which he coined the words of foreignizing and domesticating. But Guo's English translations for yihua and guihua are "alienation" and "adaptation", although Guo quoted the concept of 'resistant translation' from Venuti (1991)'s paper "Translation as a Social Action" presented at a conference at the State University of New York, Binghamton.。

Search on the Net of Chinese Academic Journals with "yihua" as the key word shows that in 1994, Wang Bingqin (1994:45) used the terms yihua/guihua to comment on the translation of the Bible from Russian to Chinese, though these words did not appear in the title of his paper. Guihua/yihua was also one of the ten translational paradoxes in Sun Zili's (1996:45-6) paper. Sun did not quote any foreign author while Wang, a Russian professor, didn't list any cited work at all. 。

Since Chinese translation scholars were already talking about guihua/yihua before Venuti (1995) and they used different English terms, we can conclude that, though both assimilation / alienation and domestication / foreignization are employed as the English renderings for the Chinese guihua/yihua and people in recent discussions tend to replace the former with the latter, early Chinese discussions were not under the direct influence of Venuti. 。

The appearance of the guihua/yihua discussion in Chinese translation circles is the result of several factors. First, China's policy of opening to the outside world and people's changed attitudes towards other cultures aroused intense interest in learning from the West. In translation, this means a demand for the retention of more foreign elements, both linguistic or cultural. Second, 'the enthusiasm in culture' in Chinese academic circles in the 1980s and its introduction into foreign language studies in the early 1990s bring about more concern for cultural elements in translation. The discussion of zhiyi/yiyi (literal/free translation) changed into that of guihua/yihua because, for some people, the latter involve cultural factors. There is an increasing demand for respecting the foreign cultures in translation into Chinese. Third, for some people, scholarly creativity lies partly in the coinage or use of new terms. The heated philosophical debates on alienation (yihua) in the 1980s (Gu Zhengkun, 1998: 20) offer a fashionable term for translation scholars to borrow from. This is evidenced by the fact that in some discussions nothing is new except the terminology.。

Venuti said that domesticating strategies have been implemented at least since ancient Rome, when translation was a kind of conquest, and translators into Latin not only deleted culturally specific markers but also added allusions to Roman culture and replaced the names of Greek poets with those of their own, passing the translation off as a text originally written in Latin. A foreignizing strategy in translation was first formulated in the German culture in the early 19th century by Friedrich Schleiermacher. (in Baker, 1998: 240-244) It has recently been revived in the French cultural scene characterized by postmodern developments in philosophy, literary criticism, psychoanalysis, and social theory that have come to be known as 'poststructuralism' (Venuti, 1995: 20)。

In short, foreignization and domestication are Venuti's coinages based on his investigation of Western translation history and theories. The Chinese debates over yihua and guihua are the extension of the literal/free discussions in the 1920s-30s. Guihua is a traditional Chinese term, and yihua is borrowed from the Western philosophy. They are not loan words from Lawrence Venuti.。

2. Different referents for the two pairs of concepts。

Early discussions and a large percentage of present-day talks about yihua/guihua were not very different from those about literal/free translation. Lu Xun (1935), the first one to talk about guihua in translation, did not define the term, but gave the example of a Japanese translator whose translation was close to paraphrase. (in Luo Xinzhang, 1984:301) Liu Yingkai (1987/1994:269-282), the initiator of the Chinese guihua/yihua debate since the 1990s, said that guihua means changing the 'guest' source language into idiomatic 'host' language so that the translations look familiar and sound fluent, without any feeling of strangeness. It is the extreme form of free translation, including the over-use of Chinese idioms and archaic Chinese expressions, of paraphrasing source cultural images, replacement of the source language idioms with Chinese substitutes, and unjustified change of no metaphors into metaphors. To Sun Zili (1996: 45-6), guihua refers to "the change from idiomatic source language to idiomatic target language" while yihua means "adoption of new words and expressions from the foreign works." The definitions of Liu and Sun are not very different from how people understand literal/free translation. And Zhu Zhiyu (2001:4) claims explicitly that "literal translation generally belongs to foreignizing and free translation may be said to be domesticating." In recent discussions, some people say that guihua/yihua involve cultural treatment while, literal/free translation, linguistic factors alone. But it may be difficult to say that translating with the latter methods does not involve cultural problems.。

For Venuti (1995:20), the domesticating method is "an ethnocentric reduction of the foreign text to target language cultural values, bringing the author back home." It is closely related to fluent translation, which is written in current, widely used and standard English. It is immediately recognizable and intelligible, "familiarized" and domesticated. In short, standard target language rather than a variation is used.。

Foreignizing translation practices entail the choice of a foreign text and the invention of translation discourses. A foreignizing translator can use "a discursive strategy that deviates from the prevailing hierarchy of dominant discourses (e.g. dense archaism), but also by choosing to translate a text that challenges the contemporary canon of foreign literature in the target language". (p148; p310) Venuti cites Pound, Newman and himself as examples of foreignizing translators. Archaism seems to be a major feature of this strategy. (p195). 。

Venuti's concepts of domestication and fluent translation are similar to the Chinese concept of guihua, but foreignization and strangeness obviously differ widely from yihua. 。

First, yihua refers to faithfulness through retention of the linguistic and cultural features of the source texts, while for Venuti, unfaithfulness to the source text is also a kind of foreignization. For example, he claimed that his own foreignizing English version of De Angelis's poem has not only challenged the dominant aesthetic in the Anglo-American culture, but has also deviated from the Italian text in decisive ways. Certain features of the syntax in his translation make it stranger than the Italian source text. (pp. 291-2)。

Second, yihua involves respect for the source cultures in translation, while Venuti does not advocate indiscriminate valorization of every foreign culture or a metaphysical concept of foreignness as an essential value. To him, the foreign text is privileged in a foreignizing translation only insofar as it enables a disruption of target language cultural codes, so that its value is always strategic, depending on the cultural formation into which it is translated (p.42) "Hence, close translation is foreignizing only because its approximation of the foreign text entails deviating from dominant domestic values"(p.146). This seems to contradict the common Chinese assumption that foreignization is always a means of respecting the cultural others.。

Third, guihua / yihua refer to specific translation methods only, whereas domestication / foreignization involve the careful selection of texts to be translated as well. Foreignizing translators choose texts that "challenge the contemporary canon of foreign literature in the target language," and "the choice of a foreign text for translation can be just as foreignizing in its impact on the target language culture as the invention of a discursive strategy (p.186)". 。

Lastly, yihua means close adherence to the linguistic and cultural features of the source texts alone. Foreignization also involves use of non-standard target language, as is further explained by Venuti in his email1 to a Chinese postgraduate student named Ma Jia (Eddie) on December 2, 2002. 。

In this letter, Venuti said that foreignization can take a number of different forms. Close adherence to the foreign text is one, and retaining cultural markers is another. The most decisive way, however, may well be producing a variation on the current standard dialect of the receiving language. Variations here mean regional and social dialects, archaism, jargons and technical terminologies, stylistic innovations and neologisms, literary figures like metaphors. It can also be achieved through the choice of a foreign text for translation translated fluently or in the current standard dialect. 。

In other words, for Venuti, foreignization means selecting a foreign text that is marginal in the target culture, but translating it in a fluent way (similar to guihua); or choosing a foreign text that is canonical in the target culture, but translating it with marginal discourse. Marginal discourse here includes adherence to source language form and retention of source cultural elements (similar to yihua) as well as the use of non-standard target language. The opposite is true of domestication.。

The above comparison reveals that domestication/foreignization focuses on whether the translation deviates from and challenges the target culture values, while guihua and yihua concentrate on retention /deletion of the source language/culture features. The former includes the selection of texts to be translated while the latter refers to the translational activity per se. The two pairs of terms overlap, but are not the same.。

3. Different contexts in and purposes for using the two pairs of terms。

Venuti talks about literary translation into English alone. He opposes the domesticating translation in the Anglo-American cultures. One reason is that this strategy results in transparent, fluent translations, which in turn lead to the invisibility of translators. Transparency effaces the work of translation and contributes to the cultural marginality and economic exploitation that English-language translators have long suffered. Venuti (1995:17) said that the motive of The Translator's Invisibility is "to make the translator more visible so as to resist and change the conditions under which translation is theorized and practiced today, especially in English-speaking countries." This is also the theme of another book by Venuti (1998), The Scandals of Translation.。

Another of his reasons has much to do with his respect for cultural others and the struggle for cultural equality. For Venuti (1995:306), translating involves looking for similarities between languages and cultures, only because it means constantly confronting dissimilarities. It can never and should never aim to remove these dissimilarities entirely. A translated text should be the site where a different culture emerges, where the reader gets a glimpse of the cultural other. The prevalence of fluent domestication has supported the developments of British and American cultures that are "aggressively monolingual, unreceptive to the foreign, accustomed to fluent translations that invisibly inscribe foreign texts with English-language values and provide readers with the narcissistic experience of recognizing their own culture in a cultural other" (p15). 。

Venuti believes that a foreignizing translation is highly desirable, insofar as it seeks to resist the dominant target-language cultural values and signify the linguistic and cultural difference of the foreign text. It is a strategic cultural intervention pitched against the hegemonic English-language nations and the unequal cultural exchanges in which they engage their global others. Foreignizing translation in English can be a form of resistance against ethnocentrism and racism, cultural narcissism and imperialism, in the interests of democratic geopolitical relations. (p.20) Venuti advocates and practices a resistant translation strategy, a term synonymous to foreignization, because it locates the alien in a cultural other, pursues cultural diversity, foregrounds the linguistic and cultural differences of the source language text and transforms the hierarchy of cultural values in the target language. (p309) 。

The two reasons are interrelated, because "to recognize the translator's invisibility is at once to critique the current situation and to hope for a future more hospitable to the differences that the translator must negotiate." (p313)。

In the last decade, the majority of Chinese debaters argued in favor of yihua. However, they are otherwise motivated by their American counterparts. For them, "the significance of yihua lies in three aspects: accelerating cultural communication and increasing the target reader's knowledge of the foreign culture, meeting the aesthetic expectations of the target readers for translated literature, and benefiting the development of the Chinese language (Sun Zili, 2003:49-50)". These reasons are not very different from the arguments for literal translation. 。

Unlike Venuti, who obviously has the political agendas of challenging the hegemony of the Anglo-American culture and improving the status of translators, Chinese scholars argue for yihua just to show their enthusiasm for learning from other cultures, especially the West.。

In China many people advocate that a strategy of "foreignization first and domestication second" should be adopted in English-Chinese translation (Sun Zhili, 2003:48), while in Chinese-English translation, "domestication should be used as much as possible" (Xu Jianping et al, 2002:36). 。

In recent years, most Chinese scholars use "domesticating" and "foreignizing" for their English translations of guihua / yihua, and some quote from Venuti (1995) in their discussions. What must not be forgotten is that domestication as much as possible in translation into English and the foreignization-first strategy in English-Chinese translation might be exactly what Venuti is against. One should never just take Venuti's terms and forget the contexts in which they are used and the purposes they serve.。

Context plays a significant role in the justification and determination of translation strategies. For example, archaism is seen as guihua or domesticating in Chinese discussions but foreignizing in Venuti's. For Venuti, archaism results in historical remoteness but this is not necessarily the case in Chinese translation. Since the classical dialect is actually pure Chinese, while modern Chinese is heavily influenced by European languages, the use of archaism in Chinese translation means return to traditional Chinese values, which is surely domesticating.。

"People [in China] tend to understand the new Western translation terms from their own perspective and translate them into traditional Chinese terminology. In consequence, the introduced foreign theories become deformed, are domesticated by traditional Chinese theories and cannot possibly enlarge the views of the Chinese scholars. ...."(Lin Kenan, 2001:14) Equating guihua/yihua with domestication/foreignization is a case in point.。

An increasing number of Chinese scholars opt for "domesticating" / "foreignizing" for their English translations of guihua/yihua and quote Venuti to justify their argument for foreignization in English-Chinese translation. But one must not forget that the Chinese discussions of guihua/yihua are similar to the old literal/free debates; guihua/yihua and domesticating/foreignizing have different origins and meanings and are used in different contexts for different purposes. One must never confuse a traditional discussion of translation methods with political translational theory.。

Bibliography

Baker, Mona. Routledge Encyclopedia of Translation Studies. London and New York: Routledge, 1998.。

Guo, Jianzhong. A cultural approach to translation. Foreign Languages1998(2).。

Gu, Zhengkun. Translation of loan words and academic problems in China. Chinese Translators Journal1998(6).。

Lin, Kenan. Terminology should be translated correctly. Chinese Translators Journal2001(1).。

Liu, Yingkai. Domestication: a wrong track in translation. Modern Foreign Languages1987(2). in Yang, Zijian (eds.). New Essays on Translation 1988-1922.Wuhan：Hubei Education Press 1994.。

Luo, Xinzhang (eds.). Essays on Translation. Beijing, The Commercial Press 1984.。

Sun, Zili. A dialectical view of translation. Journal of PLA University of Foreign Studies1996(5).。

Sun, Zili. More words on the strategy of literary translation. Chinese Translators Journal2003(1).。

Venuti, Lawrence. The Translator's Invisibility. London and New York: Routledge, 1995.。

Venuti, Lawrence. The Scandals of Translation. London and New York: Routlege, 1998. 。

Xu, Jianping & Zhang, Rongxi. Foreignization and Domestication in intercultural translation. Chinese Translators Journal 2002(5).。

Zhu, Zhiyu. Chinese traditional translation theory: resemblance in sprit and transformation of souls. Chinese Translators Journal2001(2).。

《威克菲尔德牧师传》英文读后感，50-70个单词，急需，小弟在这多谢了！！！

(The set of the final scene of "Don Juan TRIUMPHANT" A huge hall with an arch. 。

Behind the arch, which has curtains, is a bed. 。

A fine table, laid for two. PASSARINO, DON JUAN'S servant, 。

is directing the STAFF as they make the room ready. 。

They are a crowd of sixteenth century ruffians and hoydens, 。

proud of their master's reputation as a libertine)。

CHORUS

Here the sire may serve the dam,。

here the master takes his meat!。

Here the sacrificial lamb。

utters one despairing bleat!。

CARLOTTA AND CHORUS。

Poor young maiden! For the thrill。

on your tongue of stolen sweets。

you will have to pay the bill -。

tangled in the winding sheets!。

Serve the meal and serve the maid!。

Serve the master so that, when。

tables, plans and maids are laid,。

Don Juan triumphs once again!。

(SIGNOR PIANGI, as Don Juan, emerges from behind the arch. 。

MEG, a gypsy dancer pirouettes coquettishly for him.。

He throws her a purse. She catches it and leaves)。

DON JUAN

Passarino, faithful friend,。

once again recite the plan.。

PASSARINO

Your young guest believes I'm you -。

I, the master, you, the man.。

DON JUAN

When you met you wore my cloak,。

with my scarf you hid your face.。

She believes she dines with me,。

in her master's borrowed place!。

Furtively, we'll scoff and quaff,。

stealing what, in truth, is mine.。

When it's late and modesty。

starts to mellow, with the wine . . .。

PASSARINO

You come home! I use your voice -。

slam the door like crack of doom!。

DON JUAN

I shall say: "come - hide with me!。

Where, oh, where? Of course - my room!"。

PASSARINO

Poor thing hasn't got a chance!。

DON JUAN

Here's my hat, my cloak and sword.。

Conquest is assured,。

if I do not forget myself and laugh . . .。

(DON JUAN puts on PASSARINO's cloak 。

and goes into the curtained alcove where the bed awaits. 。

Although we do not yet know it, the Punjab Lasso has done its work, 。

and SIGNOR PIANGI is no more. 。

When next we see DON JUAN, it will be the PHANTOM.。

Meanwhile, we hear AMINTA (CHRISTINE) singing happily in the distance)。

AMINTA (CHRISTINE - offstage, entering)。

". . . no thoughts。

within her head,。

but thoughts of joy!。

No dreams

within her heart。

but dreams of love!"。

PASSARINO (onstage)。

Master?

DON JUAN (PHANTOM - behind the curtain)。

Passarino - go away!。

For the trap is set and waits for its prey . . .。

(PASSARINO leaves. CHRISTINE (AMINTA) enters. 。

She takes off her cloak and sits down. Looks about her. No one. 。

She starts on an apple. 。

The PHANTOM, disguised as DON JUAN pretending to be PASSARINO, 。

emerges.

He now wears PASSARINO's robe, the cowl of which hides his face. 。

His first words startle her)。

DON JUAN (PHANTOM)。

You have come here。

in pursuit of

your deepest urge,。

in pursuit of

that wish,

which till now

has been silent,。

silent . . .

I have brought you,。

that our passions。

may fuse and merge -。

in your mind

you've already

succumbed to me。

dropped all defences。

completely succumbed to me -。

now you are here with me:。

no second thoughts,。

you've decided,。

decided . . .

Past the point

of no return -

no backward glances:。

the games we've played。

till now are at。

an end . . .

Past all thought。

of "if" or "when" -。

no use resisting:。

abandon thought,。

and let the dream。

descend . . .

What raging fire。

shall flood the soul?。

What rich desire。

unlocks its door?。

What sweet seduction。

lies before

us . . .?

Past the point

of no return,

the final threshold -。

what warm,

unspoken secrets。

will we learn?

Beyond the point。

of no return . . .。

AMINTA (CHRISTINE)。

You have brought me。

to that moment

where words run dry,。

to that moment

where speech

disappears

into silence,

silence . . .

I have come here,。

hardly knowing

the reason why . . .。

In my mind,

I've already

imagined our

bodies entwining。

defenceless and silent -。

and now I am

here with you:

no second thoughts,。

I've decided,

decided . . .

Past the point

of no return -

no going back now:。

our passion-play。

has now, at last,。

begun . . .

Past all thought。

of right or wrong -。

one final question:。

how long should we。

two wait, before。

we're one . . .?。

When will the blood。

begin to race

the sleeping bud。

burst into bloom?。

When will the flames,。

at last, consume。

us . . .?

BOTH

Past the point

of no return

the final threshold -。

the bridge

is crossed, so stand。

and watch it burn . . .。

We've passed the point。

of no return . . .。

(By now the audience and the POLICE have realised 。

that SIGNOR PIANGI is dead behind the curtain, 。

and it is the PHANTOM who sings in his place. 。

CHRISTINE knows it too. As final confirmation, the PHANTOM sings)。

PHANTOM

Say you'll share with。

me one

love, one lifetime . . .。

Lead me, save me。

from my solitude . . .。

(He takes from his finger a ring and holds it out to her. 。

Slowly she takes it and puts it on her finger.)。

Say you want me。

with you,

here beside you . . .。

Anywhere you go。

let me go too -。

Christine

that's all I ask of . . .。

(We never reach the word 'you', 。

for CHRISTINE quite calmly reveals the PHANTOM'S face to the audience. 。

As the FORCES OF LAW close in on the horrifying skull, 。

the PHANTOM sweeps his cloak around her and vanishes.。

MEG pulls the curtain upstage, revealing PIANGI'S body garotted, 。

propped against the bed, his head gruesomely tilted to one side. 。

She screams.)

TRANSFORMATION TO:。

REVERSE VIEW OF THE STAGE。

(POLICE, STAGEHANDS, etc. rush onto the stage in confusion. 。

Also: ANDRE, FIRMIN, RAOUL, GIRY, CARLOTTA and MEG)。

CARLOTTA

What is it? What has happened? Ubaldo!。

ANDRE

Oh, my God . . . my God . . .。

FIRMIN

We're ruined, Andre - ruined!。

GIRY (to RAOUL)。

Monsieur le Vicomte! Come with me!。

CARLOTTA (rushing over to PIANGI's body)。

Oh, my darling, my darling . . . who has done。

this ...?

(Hysterical, attacking ANDRE)。

You! Why did you let this happen?。

(She breaks down, as PIANGI's body is carried off on a stretcher)。

GIRY

Monsieur le Vicomte, I know where they are.。

RAOUL

But can I trust you?。

GIRY

You must. But remember: your hand at the level of。

your eyes!

RAOUL

But why . . .?

GIRY

Why? The Punjab lasso, monsieur. First Buquet. Now Piangi.。

MEG (holding up her hand)。

Like this, monsieur. I'll come with you.。

GIRY

No, Meg! No, you stay here!。

(To RAOUL)

Come with me, monsieur. Hurry, or we shall be too。

late . . .

求黑人 马丁·路德·金 的经典讲演词

Dr. Primrose, his wife Deborah and their six children live an idyllic life in a country parish. The vicar is well-off due to investing an inheritance he received from a deceased relative, and the vicar donates the 34 pounds that his job pays annually to local orphans and war veterans. On the evening of his son George's wedding to wealthy Arabella Wilmot, the vicar loses all his money through the bankruptcy of his merchant investor who left town with his money.。

The wedding is called off by Arabella's father, who is known for his prudence with money. George, who was educated at Oxford and is old enough to be considered an adult, is sent away to town. The rest of the family move to a new and more humble parish on the land of Squire Thornhill, who is known to be a womanizer. On the way, they hear about the dubious reputation of their new landlord. Also, references are made to the squire's uncle Sir William Thornhill, who is known throughout the country for his worthiness and generosity.。

A poor and eccentric friend, Mr. Burchell, whom they meet at an inn, rescues Sophia from drowning. She is instantly attracted to him, but her ambitious mother does not encourage her feelings.。

Then follows a period of happy family life, only interrupted by regular visits of the dashing Squire Thornhill and Mr. Burchell. Olivia is captivated by Thornhill's hollow charm, but he also encourages the social ambitions of Mrs Primrose and her daughters to a ludicrous degree.。

Finally, Olivia is reported to have fled. First Burchell is suspected, but after a long pursuit Dr. Primrose finds his daughter, who was in reality deceived by Squire Thornhill. He planned to marry her in a mock ceremony and leave her then shortly after, as he had done with several women before.。

When Olivia and her father return home, they find their house in flames. Although the family has lost almost all their belongings, the evil Squire Thornhill insists on the payment of the rent. As the vicar cannot pay, he is brought to gaol.。

What follows now is a chain of dreadful occurrences. The vicar's daughter Olivia is reported dead, Sophia abducted and George is also brought to gaol in chains and covered with blood, as he had challenged Thornhill to a duel, when he had heard about his wickedness.。

But then Mr. Burchell arrives and solves all problems. He rescues Sophia, Olivia is not dead and it emerges that Burchell is in reality the worthy Sir William Thornhill, who travels through the country in disguise. In the end there is a double wedding: George marries Arabella, as he originally intended, and Sir William Thornhill marries Sophia. Squire Thornhill's servant turns out to have tricked him, and thus the sham marriage of the Squire and Olivia is real. Finally even the wealth of the vicar is restored, as the bankrupt merchant is reported to be found.。

原文地址：http://www.qianchusai.com/emerges-50.html