Culture of discussion-polemical speech. The development of speech. Speech during the discussion. Memo "How to conduct a discussion." — Hypermarket of knowledge Culture of discussion speech

Russian language lesson

(double lesson-discussion)

Grade 11

Russian language teachers

and literature

GOU TsO №879

Mordan Natalya Yurievna

Lesson topic: Culture of speech: you can not forget to learn!

Lesson type: lesson-discussion

The purpose of the lesson : to identify during the discussion different points of view on the problem of preserving the culture of speech and determine ways to solve this problem

Lesson objectives : - to develop the ability to conduct a discussion, the ability to convincingly and reasonably defend one's point of view on the problem;

Prepare students for writing part C of the Unified State Examination on the problem of preserving the culture of speech;

Stimulate the speech activity of students;

Create conditions for the development of communication skills;

Develop creative abilities;

To cultivate a culture of behavior during a dispute, a respectful attitude towards the interlocutor;

Cultivate love for your native language.

preliminary

preparation : the class is divided into groups, each group chooses a leader and works in a certain direction:

1. "Defenders" - the group selects arguments "for" the culture of speech;

2. "Opponents" - the group selects arguments "against" the culture of speech;

3. "Sociologists" - a) conducts a sociological survey "Compliance with the norms of the literary Russian language" among graduates and teachers of the school;

B) conducts a sociological survey "Causes of clogging and coarsening of Russian speech";

4. "Theorists" - publish a linguistic newspaper about the problems of speech culture

5. "Actors" - they stage the story of M. Zoshchenko "Monkey tongue";

6. "Experts" - invited teachers at the end of the lesson express their opinion on the problem and evaluate the students' performances.

Class decoration: - exhibition of books on the culture of speech;

Linguistic newspaper;

TSO: - a multimedia projector to show the presentation of a group of sociologists;

Video deuce to show a fragment from the film "12 chairs"

During the classes

I. Organizing time

Greetings to all gathered in the discussion club: eleventh graders and teachers

II. Topic update

All year long we were preparing hard for the Unified State Examination: we repeated the Russian language course, practiced “trap” questions, wrote diagnostic papers ... Much is already achieved, but as soon as it comes to part C, difficulties arise: it is difficult to find a text problem, comment on it, and also it is more difficult to argue your point of view on the problem, especially if we are talking about the problem of the loss of the culture of speech.

The culture of speech is largely lost not only in everyday communication, but even in the language of literature. It is no coincidence that at the All-Russian Conference on the Problems of the Russian Language (2002) it was said: "If we lose the Russian language, we will lose the national heritage of our country." But there is another point of view: the Russian language wants variety, it is a hospitable host who welcomes all guests, even if they are ugly. So today we have gathered to discuss one question: “Do I need to speak and write correctly, or does everyone have the right to build their speech the way they want?”

III. Speech by "theorists"

The culture of speech is a special section of the science of language, the main result of which should be the ability to speak and write correctly; it organically includes all the elements that contribute to the accurate, clear and emotional transmission of thought.

The ability to speak and write beautifully has long been considered hallmark cultural, educated person. It is no coincidence that we judge people by their speech: owning a word means smart, has moral and business qualities, cannot correctly express a thought - narrow-minded.

The culture of speech of a single person reflects his general cultural level - education, good breeding, self-control, the ability to understand people of other cultures, susceptibility to works of art, modesty ...

The content of speech is very important. Empty chatter cannot be a role model. The dignity of any work and speech is the accuracy, clarity and simplicity of speech. Eloquence is incompatible with the poverty of the dictionary. The problem of the purity of speech warns us against unjustified enthusiasm for dialectisms, jargon, foreign words. And the obligatory conditions for good speech is the observance of all the norms and rules of the Russian language.

But in the last decade, an extremely low culture of speech has been revealed: people have been unable to clearly and intelligibly express their thoughts. An avalanche of errors poured in on us. As the great Russian educator Academician D.S. Likhachev said in one of his last interviews, “the general degradation of us as a nation has affected the language first of all.”

Our tongue is sick. And the causes of the disease are obvious: the poverty of the dictionary, especially among adolescents; loss of interest in classical literature and art in the age of computerization; the absence of prohibitions or at least criticism from many adults when using profanity, jargon and foreign words.

Is it worth treating the tongue? Or let everything stay as it is?

IV. Presentation of "sociologists"

The results of the survey "Causes of clogging and coarsening of Russian speech"

The results of the survey "Compliance with the norms of the literary Russian language"

V. Discussion

1. Norms

From the first grade we study Russian, which we already know from childhood. Maybe, indeed, we are fighting in vain: only say "ringing and t "," good e l. Why all this? The Czech writer Yaroslav Hasek once said: "Everyone speaks as best he can." Is it really necessary to observe all the norms of the literary Russian language? A word to the opponents of the norm.

"Opponents"

Linguists themselves say that many words have variants of pronunciation, stress, grammatical forms etc. These variants exist objectively in the language system. This means that the language itself wants diversity, it invites us to choose. Why should everyone speak and write the same way and reduce language diversity to dull correctness? Stop speaking in unison. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Let him choose from several options what he personally likes (we will still understand each other, because these options have been programmed by our native language). Only by abolishing the norm, we will get not a gray, devoid of individuality mass, but a union of bright personalities. We are for pluralism in speech practice, because it is boring when everyone speaks the same way, correctly. Let's remember Pushkin: "Like ruddy lips without a smile, without a grammatical error, I don't like Russian speech." What do you say to that?

So, the position of the opponents of the norm is clear: they are for diversity. Can we agree?

"Defenders"

References to pluralism and freedom of choice on the issue of linguistic norms are inappropriate. Speech uniformity is a condition of our mutual understanding. Designed according to the rules common to all, speech does not complicate communication, but facilitates it. Failure to comply with the norm distracts from the meaning, can cause a comic effect. This, by the way, is remarkably felt by our satirists: one has only to distort a word a little, pronounce it not in the way that is customary in society, and it immediately becomes funny.

A civilized person understands that he does not live on a desert island, but in society, he accepts social norms as his own in order to facilitate his contacts with people.

Linguists do not invent, but only reflect the norm, which, according to different reasons set by society. Linguists do not follow their own taste or personal opinion, but rely on objective data: written sources of various genres, statistical studies, records oral speech, taking into account public opinion. By the way, often the norm allows for not one, but two completely equal options. So the norm is democratic, it takes into account our desires.

So, a violation of the norm is possible, the norm is not a dogma, however, each deviation from it must be justified, due to a special author's task. There is no such task - stick to the general rules.

2. Vulgarisms

Standardized literary language does not allow us to use vulgar words. But now they sound more and more often, and not only sound, but also occur in the media and even in works fiction. What do you think, are swear words acceptable in our speech?

"Defenders"

"Opponents"

Nevertheless, vulgarisms should be attributed to the number of means alien to the literary language and the requirements of morality, since they humiliate the dignity and honor of a person, directly and unambiguously offend people.

3. The wealth of Russian speech

The Dictionary of the Modern Russian Literary Language (it consists of 17 volumes) contains more than 120 thousand words. In fact, there are many more of them, since not all words that are in the language are marked in dictionaries. Is it possible for every Russian person to use all these words? Is it necessary to have a variety of vocabulary? Maybe we can get by with 30 words, as the heroine of a famous movie did?

Watching an excerpt from the movie "12 Chairs" (Ellochka-cannibal talks with her husband)

"Opponents"

"Defenders"

So, the richness of speech testifies to the erudition of the speaker, his high intelligence. The more a person knows words, the more diverse his language, the more accurately the speaker expresses his thoughts. Such people arouse sympathy, it is pleasant to have a conversation with them, we dream of such friends.

4. Purity of speech

Dramatization of the story by M. Zoshchenko "Monkey tongue"

"Defenders"

"Opponents"

The Russian language is truly great! He accepts everything, responds to everything, moreover, he also absorbs foreign words and teaches them to produce new forms. The Russian language is still "powerful, truthful and free." We only spoil it ourselves, forgetting that it is alive, so there is no need to offend it with vulgarity, other people's rubbish, profanity, clerical delights, incompatible hash.

VI. Word of the experts

While group leaders draw up credit sheets, we will listen to the opinion of experts

Whose position was more convincing today?

And what point of view on the problem of culture of speech do you adhere to?

I ask group leaders to hand over test sheets

VII. The final word of the teacher

You will very soon become graduates of the school, enter adulthood, you are responsible for the present and future of the Russian language. Listen. Think. Decide. What will he be like? Treat your native word as a "priceless gift", as a treasure, let them always say about you: "This is a cultured person." What kind of cultured person is he? This is a person who owns a culture of feelings, a culture of communication, who knows how to speak and write correctly, beautifully and expressively.

Remarkably about the power of the Russian word, V. G. Rasputin said in the story “Ivan’s Daughter, Ivan’s Mother”: “It is contained in you in the necessary fullness, knowing the true price of everything in the world; when it cries, this word, with bitter tears taken away into the throng of Russian women, when it thunders with solemn brass on the days of victories and capital holidays; when it knows unerringly at what moments to speak passionately, and when gently. When you have this almighty native word in you next to your heart and soul, saturated with native blood, then you can’t make a mistake. It, this word, is stronger than an anthem and a flag, an oath and a vow. Since ancient times, it is in itself an unbreakable oath and oath. There is it - everything else is there, but not - and there will be nothing to consolidate the most sincere impulses.

When you read these lines, you understand how sensitively Valentin Grigorievich perceives the word, how the writer strives to change his attitude to the Russian word, to his native language.

I would like to end the conversation with words from a poem by T. Zumakulova:

Two rivers flow in the heart, without shallowing,
become one river...
Forgetting my native language, I will become numb.
Having lost Russian, I will become deaf.

To prevent this from happening, we need to talk about these problems. You will do this in writing.

VIII. Homework

You are presented with a text. Write an essay on it in the form of part C of the exam. Express your opinion on one of the problems posed by the author of the text; when arguing your point of view, you can use the lesson materials collected in a separate folder.

Usually at the end of the discussion it is customary to put an end to it. But I suggest you put a comma today. Try to guess where we should put a comma (students suggest where to put a comma: in the title of the lesson, which is written on the board: "Culture of speech: teach, you must not forget!")

Attachment 1

Sociological survey

"Compliance with the norms of the literary Russian language"

Place the stress on the words:wholesale, sentence, in shoes, prettier, calling
Put the words into shape genitive plural: sock, shoulder strap, orange, boots, dress
Write the numerals in the given case:Over 895 kilometers
Insert, where necessary, the missing letters, forming the forms of the gender of nouns:The buyer asked to let him try on the rights ... tuff ...
Choose synonyms:emergency, region, defect
Break up paronyms:dress - put on, company - campaign
Use phrases in a figurative sense:walnut finish, green street

Sociological survey

"Causes of clogging and coarsening of Russian speech"

What do you think, which of the proposed ones clogs and coarsens our speech the most? Arrange the numbers in order of the greatest harm to speech (in ascending order)

1. Dominance of jargon

2. Scarcity and monotony of vocabulary

3. In colloquial speech, foul language, swearing is welcome

4. Frequent violation of the norms of the language is observed for journalists, announcers, whose speech was previously considered exemplary

5. Excessive use of foreign words

6. "Office"

Appendix 2

(1) Ecology is the science of the interaction of living organisms and their communities with each other and with the environment in which they live.
(2) These relationships are studied by a wide variety of sciences: biology and chemistry, astronomy and cosmology, mathematics and philosophy.
(3) All of them contribute to ecology, which today has been divided into a number of independent disciplines: general ecology, agroecology, hydroecology, human ecology, etc.
(4) The ecology of culture, or spiritual ecology, is being actively formed today.
(5) Of course, there cannot be an impassable abyss between the ecology of nature and the ecology of culture, but there is also a big difference between them.
(6) Losses in nature are recoverable to a certain extent.
(7) Cultural and moral values are another matter.
(8) They are either restored with great difficulty, or disappear altogether, like, say, destroyed cultural monuments, burnt books, manuscripts ...
(9) Historian-archaeologist V.L. Yanin so figuratively revealed the content of the concept of "ecology of culture".
(10) If a tree is uprooted, a new one can be grown in its place.
(11) But if we destroy antiquity, cultural monuments, erase historical names from the map, thereby, according to the scientist, we destroy genetic code our historical memory.
(12) Therefore, our love for the spiritual heritage of our people must be effective. (13) Much depends on the attitude towards the language.
(14) It cannot be otherwise! (15) Indeed.
(16) If culture is a set of achievements of society in the field of science, education, art, then these achievements are fixed, as a rule, in the language, in the Word.
(17) Having arisen at a certain historical stage, the literary language in itself serves as evidence of the level spiritual development people, society.
(18) Love for language, like love for nature, component patriotism, love for the motherland.
(19) The ecology of language therefore also has a moral side.
(20) A careless attitude to the language, a departure from the national culture that is expressed in it, does not pass without leaving a trace for a person as a person.
(21) After all, language is both the basis of national memory and the key to understanding the spiritual world, one's own and others.
(22) B last years our writers and publicists tirelessly speak with anxiety about the signs of spiritual degradation, spiritual impoverishment, directly related to language losses.
(23) Just as every living thing on earth cannot put up with its death, so a living nation cannot put up with the degradation of its language. (According to L.I. Skvortsov)

In the struggle of ideas, sharpness of judgments is permissible,
but rudeness of expression is quite inadmissible.
G. V. Plekhanov

The most important way to get to know a person is to listen to what
as he says... The language of a person is his worldview
and his behavior, as he says, so therefore he thinks.

D.S. Likhachev

clarification of different points of view on the norms of the modern Russian literary language;
education in students of a culture of speech behavior during a dispute;
stimulation of speech activity.

Audience layout:

Exhibition of books on the culture of speech.
Linguistic bulletin "Is it necessary to speak correctly?".
Exhibition dedicated to the 100th anniversary of the birth of D.S. Likhachev.

Posters:

"What speakers lack in depth, they make up for in length." Montesquieu

“Beautiful expressions adorn beautiful speech and preserve it.” Hugo

“To speak well is simply to think well out loud.” Renan

“If the shamelessness of everyday life (swearing) passes into language, then the shamelessness of language creates an environment in which shamelessness is already a common thing.” D. S. Likhachev

Preliminary preparation: Preparation of a sketch based on the story of M. Zoshchenko “Monkey tongue”.

Conducting an express questionnaire (the students conduct and summarize the results of the questionnaire) : Will you correct the interlocutor if he makes a speech error? possible answers: yes, no, not always (underline as appropriate).

why would you do that? Argument your position.

Interview “At the school threshold” (interviewed by students):

should i say it right?
read the words newborn, providing, calling.
are there any errors in the sentence “The son came from school and asked what time it was”.

Creation of a video presentation “D.S. Likhachev".

Preparing questions:

discussion model. In the discussion, in addition to the teacher, schoolchildren speak, whose performances are conditionally divided into two options: 1) improvised, absolutely unprepared; 2) pre-prepared - in this case, monologues are preceded by words proponents of the norm or opponents of the norm.

Approximate course of the discussion

Teacher. The culture of speech of a single person reflects his general cultural level - education, good breeding, self-control, the ability to understand people of other cultures, susceptibility to works of art, modesty ... By the way a person builds speech, selects words, one can judge his moral and business qualities. The higher the general culture of the speaker, the more his speech will correspond to the norms of the literary language.

In the last decade, an extremely low culture of speech has been revealed: people have been unable to clearly and intelligibly express their thoughts. An avalanche of errors poured in on us - grammatical, stylistic, syntactic ... As the great Russian educator Academician D.S. Likhachev said in one of his last interviews, “the general degradation of us as a nation affected the language first of all.” The language of the street - abuse, swear words - is now not uncommon in literary works and in public speeches. Dmitry Sergeevich spoke about this with pain: “If the shamelessness of everyday life (scoldness) passes into the language, then the shamelessness of the language creates an environment in which shamelessness is already a common thing.”

Today, it is not by chance that we begin our conversation with the words of Academician D.S. Likhachev, Academician D.S. Likhachev, with his modesty, extremely sincere respect for people (and for the interlocutor, in particular), with his highest general culture, with his understanding and love for the true treasures of fine and musical art. Announcer of the Central Television I.L. Kirillov said this about the speech of D.S. Likhachev: “If I were asked to give an example of a sample of Russian speech, I would, without hesitation, name the speech of Dmitry Sergeevich Likhachev. It is, as I often say, flowing, free, born right there before your eyes.”

Story about D.S. Likhachev (accompanied by a video presentation). Application No. 1.

Teacher. Today we have gathered to discuss one question: “Is it necessary to speak correctly?” You say: “Does it really exist?! From the first grade, we got used to his positive decision (words in a frame in a school textbook, teachers' corrections, dictionaries, TV shows). Indeed, our society spends energy and money on educating a high speech culture among the population. Defenders of the norm, perhaps, will be able to briefly talk about this.

Defenders of the norm. Yes, the authorities are on our side. M. V. Lomonosov was also a staunch supporter of the normalization of the Russian language; his "Russian Grammar" and "Rhetoric" laid the foundations of normative grammar and style, which is largely relevant today. The norm was defended by A. Kh. Vostokov, F. I. Buslaev, Ya. K. Grot, A. A. Potebnya.

Teacher. Maybe, indeed, we are fighting in vain: only speak ringing and t, shav e le, etc. Why all this? The Czech writer Yaroslav Hasek once said: “Everyone speaks as he can.” Is it really necessary to speak correctly, that is, to observe the norms of the literary language? A word to the opponents of the norm!

Opponents of the norm. Let us first remind those present what a norm is, so that it is clear what we are protesting against. A norm is one of the many variants of a language unit that has historically been accepted by society as the only correct one. So, you can pronounce the word in different ways a chacha - beginning a las - started a s, but only the last pronunciation is accepted by society, legalized, recorded in all dictionaries, is normative. And if I say not “the discussion began a s ”, and a little differently, I will be accused of lack of culture, of inability to speak Russian, of dislike for my native language. But why? After all, linguists themselves say that many words have variants of pronunciation, stress, grammatical forms, etc. These options exist objectively, in the language system, I do not invent them. This means that the language itself wants diversity, it invites us to choose. Why should everyone choose the same way and reduce linguistic diversity to dull correctness? Stop speaking in unison. Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Let him choose from several options what he personally likes (we will still understand each other, because these options have been programmed by our native language). Only by abolishing the norm, we will get not a gray, devoid of individuality mass, but a union of bright personalities. We are for pluralism in speech practice, because it is boring when everyone speaks the same way, correctly. Let us recall Pushkin (his authority is also unconditional): “Like ruddy lips without a smile, without a grammatical error, I don’t like Russian speech.” What do you say to that?

Teacher. So, the position of the opponents of the norm is clear: they are for diversity. Can we agree?

The opinion of unprepared students.

Questionnaire results.

Demonstration of the skit “Monkey tongue”. Appendix 2

Defenders of the norm. References to pluralism and freedom of choice on the issue of linguistic norms are inappropriate. The scene we watched perfectly proved that speech uniformity is a condition for our mutual understanding. Designed according to the rules common to all, speech does not complicate communication, but facilitates it. Failure to comply with the norm distracts from the meaning, causes a comic effect. This, by the way, is remarkably felt by our satirists: one has only to distort a word a little, pronounce it not in the way that is customary in society, and it immediately becomes funny. Remember Khazanov's Kalinary College! Or from Zhvanetsky: “You need to be more careful, guys!” A civilized person understands that he does not live on a desert island, but in society, he accepts social norms as his own in order to facilitate his contacts with people.

Opponents of the norm. OK. Maybe you are right. Without uniformity of speech it is difficult. But why, as the only option, should be offered not at all the one to which everyone is accustomed, but some kind of artificial one, taken from God knows where?

Teacher. Clearly, it's time to say where the norm comes from? Word to her supporters.

Proponents of the norm. Linguists do not invent, but only reflect the norm, which, for various reasons, is established by society. Linguists do not follow their own taste or personal opinion, but rely on objective data: written sources of various genres, statistical information, recordings of oral speech, and public opinion.

Modern dictionaries reflected the former non-normative variants as the law of today, the norm reflected the generally accepted colloquial version. By the way, after all, the norm allows not one, but two completely equal options, and quite often, remember the famous TV about horn and creation about G! So the norm is democratic, it takes into account our desires!

Teacher. So, a violation of the norm is possible, the norm is not a dogma, however, each deviation from it must be justified, due to a special author's task. There is no such task - stick to the general rules.

Results of the interview "At the School Doorstep".

“Test your knowledge”(shown on screen).

Place the emphasis in the words: wholesale, sentence, in shoes, more beautiful, call.
Put the words in the genitive plural form: sock, shoulder strap, orange, felt boots, dress.
Write down the numerals in the given case: Over 895 kilometers.
Insert, where necessary, the missing letters, forming the forms of the gender of nouns: The buyer asked me to let him try on rights ... tuff ...
Pick up synonyms: emergency, region, defect.
Dilute paronyms: put on - put on, company - campaign.
Use phrases in a figurative sense: finish under a walnut, green street.

The results of the sociological survey Person "Letter".

Summing up the discussion.

A discussion should be understood as a discussion of a controversial issue, a study of a problem in which each side, opposing the opinion of the interlocutor, argues its position and claims to achieve the goal.

Experts distinguish several types of discussion. The type of discussion depends on the goal, which determines how to achieve it. If the goal of the interlocutor is the search for truth, then he leads apodictic(authentic, based on the formal law of thought and rules of inference) discussion. If the goal of the opponent is to convince, to persuade the interlocutor to his opinion, then he leads an eristic (based on the laws of dialectics) discussion. Its goal is to defeat the opponent in any way, then such a discussion is called sophistical(based on verbal tricks that mislead the interlocutor).

From the point of view of ethics, my sophistical discussion is unlikely to be recognized as acceptable, since manipulating the interlocutor's opinion in the overwhelming majority of cases is unworthy for a cultured, intelligent person.

The ethics of business communication poses the following main task for the participants in the discussion - to prevent the transition of the discussion into the phase of a dispute. Dispute can be defined as follows: this is the phase of the negative development of the discussion, characterized by the intransigence of the parties, the dominance of the sophistical type of discussion, the transition to the emotional level of discussion to the detriment of the logical. An analogy can be drawn with the emotional stage of conflict development, when the conflicting parties are already do not realize what the objective cause of the conflict was.

A similar picture is observed in the dispute. The parties involved begin to use ways to achieve a result that are inadequate to the problem around which the dispute flared up. As a rule, it does not lead to the search for truth or to the optimal solution of deprecated issues. In most cases, none of the parties involved in the dispute is not satisfied, because they do not feel like a winner.

The business nature of the discussion is facilitated by the use of principles that should be the basis for its conduct: promoting the emergence of alternatives, plurality of opinions, ways to solve the problem; constructive criticism; ensuring social and psychological security of the individual; adequacy of perception and statements. These principles form the norms of interaction between the parties, regulate the activities of the participants in the discussion.

♦Facilitating the emergence of alternatives, plurality of opinions, ways to solve the problem also interpreted as principle of decentralization in discussion.

This principle speaks of the need to analyze a situation or problem from the point of view of another person and the interests of the case, and not based only on personal goals. The decentric orientation develops in the context of alternatives, i.e., when considering several points of view on the problem from the participants in the discussion.

♦Constructive criticism is one of the most important principles in business ethics. Criticism is defined as a negative judgment, an indication of shortcomings in a person's work and behavior. Hence, criticism is perceived by people initially painfully and negatively, although there are ways to somewhat reduce the severity of this problem. Criticism should be constructive, should not infringe on the self-esteem of the criticized person. it general principle implemented through more specific rules that the criticizer must observe (for more details on the rules of constructive criticism, see 9.6).

Ensuring social and psychological security of the individual in the course of the discussion is often interpreted as the principle of equal security. It says: do not cause psychological damage to any of the participants in the discussion. If someone violates this principle, then there is a substitution of the goal of achieving the truth; the discussion moves from the process of confrontation of different logics of the development of thought to the process of confrontation of ambitions.

The principle of the adequacy of what is perceived to what is said, says: do not harm the thought of your interlocutor by intentional or unintentional distortion of what was said. One side should strive for simplicity and accuracy of statements, the other should develop the skills of effective perception through reflective listening. In this type of listening, the receiver of the message provides the speaker with some kind of feedback that does not include elements of evaluation or judgment. This feedback can be supplemented by non-reflective listening, which uses simple tools such as mindful silence and minimal neutral verbal response.

As mentioned earlier, the culture of behavior in the process of discussion assumes, as one of its main elements, the ability of the participants in the discussion to listen to their interlocutors. As a rule, the one who has the skills of effective listening is the one who holds the threads of the discussion in his hands. Moreover, a person who skillfully listens to the other side looks in her eyes as an interesting interlocutor, a personality. high culture and intellect.

The principle of the adequacy of perception and statements implies the practical application of reflective listening skills. Reflective listening is a form of reflecting the speaker's messages, involving active feedback that does not include elements of evaluation or judgment.

In reflective listening, the receiver of the message uses the following types of feedback from the speaker:

a verbal signal about the need for any statements;

own retelling of the main thoughts of the interlocutor;

generalization of individual parts of the message into a semantic whole;

a reaction that reflects the feelings of the interlocutor; it may include elements of the reactions already mentioned, but the special emphasis here falls on the sensation of the speaker's tone. In other words, we "mirror" the feelings of the interlocutor, his personal coloring of the subject of conversation.

We can say that the feedback in this case serves as a means of controlling the speaker from the side of the listener. In order to ensure understanding of each other during the discussion, one side must let the other side know exactly how the message is perceived. This provides an opportunity to correct it and make it accessible to understanding. This process is reflective listening.

The use of these types feedback assumes that the listener fulfills the following basic rules for the effective perception of verbal messages:

restrains his desire to express a hasty judgment;

does not refute the interlocutor without fully understanding the course of his reasoning;

gives the other side the opportunity to complete their own argumentation of statements;

is not distracted by unimportant moments to the detriment of the main thing,

does not focus on the shortcomings of the speaker's speech, the nuances of his appearance, does not miss the essence of the message due to this;

takes into account the motivation of the interlocutor, which encourages him to express his own thoughts, different from the views of the other party;

does not rest in confidence that the truth is on his side, thereby not adjusting in advance to disagree with the position of the other side in the discussion.

Failure to comply with these rules leads to a violation of mutual understanding due to inadequate perception of the interlocutor's statements.

Very often, a feeling of dissatisfaction with the results of the discussion arises in one of its participants due to the fact that he did not ask the right questions in time. As a result, the necessary information was not received in full, the position of the interlocutor was not fully clarified, and one's own attitude to the problems considered during the discussion was not formed.

Practice shows that he owns the course of the discussion, it is not really controlled by the one who turns the conversation into his own monologue, trying to suppress the interlocutor with an abundance of information and a “mass” of intellect. The one who clearly directs the discussion in the right direction, doses the information received and forms a meaningful result is the one who knows how to ask the right questions in time, and these questions may differ in their specific form. The choice of the type of questions corresponding to the situation that develops during the discussion, the choice of time for posing them, as well as the variation in the types of questions in the course of the discussion - these are the main tasks, the solution of which allows us to talk about successful tactics for raising questions.

The questions used during the conversation can be divided into the following types:

open, involving the receipt by the interlocutor of detailed, voluminous information on the essence of the question posed; such questions begin with traditional interrogative words like "how...?", "how...?" "why...?" etc.;

closed, requiring an answer from the interlocutor in the form of "yes" or "no". This type of question is justified if you want specific, unambiguous information;

mirror, containing a repetition with an interrogative intonation of a part of the statement just uttered by the interlocutor. This type of questions allows you to create new elements in the conversation, highlight the core areas of discussion, while not contradicting the interlocutor and not refuting his statements;

counter-questions, very similar in their essence to mirror ones; they allow you to clarify this or that situation that develops in the course of the conversation, to clarify the correct understanding of certain judgments of the interlocutor;

relay-race, allowing to dynamicize the dialogue, to develop the statements of the interlocutor, to help him in case of difficulties in mutual understanding of the parties to the conversation;

alternative ones, involving the choice of certain directions for the development of the dialogue from a set of alternatives proposed by one of the parties;

suggestive, based on a certain impact on the mental sphere of perception of a conversation partner; this species questions contains some manipulation by the interlocutor due to the influence on the emotional component thought process;

hypothetical, allowing to build a simple model of the development of the subject of the conversation using the assumption about the influence of any external conditions on the development of the problem under discussion;

bypass, forcing your interlocutor to give information that you consider not entirely correct to receive through direct questions.

Mastering the basic elements of the culture of discussion will allow you to achieve faster and more reliable success in the course of the conversation, while not violating the ethical standards of interaction with business partners.

>>Russian language: The development of speech. Speech during the discussion. Memo "How to conduct a discussion."

SPEECH DURING THE DISCUSSION
1. Have you ever thought about the difference between discussion, dispute, polemic? Which of these types of dispute is assumed in the process of comparison
conflicting judgments, finding a common solution, establishing the truth, and which one is a refutation of the opponent's point of view and the assertion of one's own position? If necessary, refer to the explanatory dictionary.
2. You have no doubt participated in any of the above
exercise of types of public dispute. What difficulties did you experience in
this? What are the features of speaking during discussions? Find answers
these questions in the next text.
We often have to defend our opinion, support the speech of another or, conversely, refute the positions put forward, etc. And how important it is to know what our speech should be like, what are the features of a speech of a debatable nature.
An oral presentation during a discussion is a discussion of a problematic nature, in which some problem is posed, some complex and important question. The author of such a reasoning seeks to solve this problem, to find an answer, which will become the main thesis of the reasoning. Since many problems do not imply unambiguous solutions, discussions on problematic topics are debatable.
The participants in the discussion should be able to distinguish between what is common for the disputants and what separates them. First you need to briefly indicate what everyone agrees with, then point by point and, if possible, precisely formulate those provisions that cause disagreement. It should be remembered that before criticizing the opponent, it is necessary to understand him correctly. The criterion for understanding is the correct presentation of someone else's opinion. It is important that speakers express their point of view, what they think on a particular issue, and not what they want to hear from them.
A discussion speech in most cases consists of an introductory part (an indication of what the speaker will talk about and why), the main part (outlining one's own views on the problem or issue under discussion, evidence) and conclusion.
4. Explain the punctuation in one of the texts (of your choice).
V. Repeat spellings.
1. Write down the words by opening the brackets. Explain spelling.
All (still), (in) Turkish, (literary) musical, (violet-summer) blue, (firstly, agrarian) industrial, (sometimes) somehow, (some) like, (south) western, ( bright) white, (full) full, come out (ka).
2. Make phrases with these words. Explain their spelling.
Thanks to, in spite of, in spite of, in view of, according to, in connection with, in spite of, during, in continuation.
3. Make up phrases with words from brackets. Write them down, tell them
what determines the spelling of the endings of the highlighted words.
During .. (river, time), in continuation .. (term, line).
4. Write, opening the brackets, inserting the missing letters. Explain
spelling of the highlighted words.
1. Now (bright) red, now (dark) colored leaves spread along the water. (A Formozov.) 2. Night. In the gorge ..e (dark) it is dark ... Somewhere far away, a night bird screamed. (V. Aitmatov.)
What is this dignity? .. The latter were the majority. After all, we all knew very well that Anna Ivanovna would never allow herself to read other people's notes. But the girl showed a painful pride, she could not suppress her pride.
4. Imagine that your class has decided to have a discussion on the topic “We
and our time” and you were elected its leader. Engage in discussion as
as many classmates as possible, develop a script together (it is like
as a rule, includes an introductory word from the head - the rationale for the choice is given
topic, an indication of its relevance; issues for discussion;
methods of activating listeners. It also defines the tasks
presenting to the participants in the discussion; the terms of the dispute are specified, separate provisions are formulated, which must be substantiated by collective efforts; indicates which technical and visual aids will be used during the discussion). Keep in mind that the main task of the leader is to involve all listeners in an active exchange of views.
5. When preparing for a discussion on the topic “Ukraine Today and Tomorrow”, use the questions given as far as possible.

1. What is the essence of today's transformations in our state? What do you think prevents them from doing so?
2. Can young people take part in this process?
Where and how exactly?
3. What should be the real contribution of each to the transformation of society?
4. How do you imagine the future of the country?
5. Do friends and relatives agree with your point of view?
6. Read the polemicist's memo. Do you stick to the rules
discussions? When preparing for a discussion on the topic “Ukraine Today and Tomorrow,” refer to the memo.

HOW TO LEAVE A DISCUSSION
1. Remember that everyone has the same right to express their opinion as you do.
2. Treat your opponent with respect. You can refute in the most decisive way, but without offending other people's beliefs with ridicule and rudeness.
3. Be able to correctly identify the subject of the dispute and clearly formulate it.
4. Do not enter into an argument if you do not know its subject well.
5. Don't lose sight of the main points that are being argued over.
6. Know how to clearly define your position in the dispute. Do not forget that the dispute becomes more fruitful if the participants in the controversy, the discussion have a common source
suggestions). In such a speech, illustrative material is often used to substantiate the main idea (thesis) of the statement. It can be the so-called local material (examples from the life of the team), as well as references to authorities, that is, to specialists in a particular field of knowledge. In addition, during such a speech, one should clearly understand the purpose for which the speaker will speak, what reaction of the audience he is trying to achieve.
Participants in the discussion must strictly observe the basic requirements of the culture of the dispute, be friendly. Even speaking out against someone's idea, thoughts must be built as support for the positive that is in the objections of the one who argues with you.

Read an excerpt from a speech by your peer. When discussing what debatable topic, such a statement is possible? Are the speaker's arguments convincing enough? Do you agree with him on everything? Try to express your point of view on the issue under discussion. Use examples from the life of your class, school, refer to the opinion of authorities in your speech.
The answer to the question "Is it good or bad to be a proud person?" depends, in my opinion, on what we mean by self-love. Usually, self-esteem is understood as a sense of self-esteem, combined with a jealous attitude towards the opinion of others about oneself. And here is something to think about. This is a difficult human quality. It can be both good and evil. If it captures a person as a whole, then it leads him away from people into pride and loneliness. In this case, they say: “Ego is getting stuck ...” If it leaves a person for good, he becomes spineless. A Russian proverb speaks of this sharply and rightly: "Spit in your eyes, God's dew will say."
I recall one incident that confirms the idea that self-esteem needs to be nurtured so that for each of us it becomes support in difficult times, and not punishment, our strength, not weakness.
Once at a lesson, a student, passing a note, did not notice how the teacher approached her and suggested:
- May I be a postman?
The girl withdrew her hand, hid the note behind her back, and got up from her desk. Her face flushed. And suddenly, without a word, she rushed to the door.
Classmates then assessed her act in different ways: some said that she was doing well, she had self-esteem; others objected: why did she run away?
In order for the report to be well perceived by the audience and to be successful, it is necessary to carefully consider its content and make it original in composition. The most common is the structure, consisting of three parts: introduction, main part, conclusion.
In the introduction, the topic of the report is highlighted, then the reasons for choosing this topic are indicated, its relevance and importance for a particular audience are substantiated, the purpose of the report is formulated, and sometimes the history of the issue is briefly stated. It is recommended to start the presentation with an interesting example, catchphrase, quotes that will attract the attention of listeners, make you think about the statements made.
The main part begins with a description of the problem, then its individual aspects are considered. When preparing this part, you should briefly write down the content of each thought, that is, formulate theses, select evidence for each thesis - facts, figures, quotations, etc. A consistent transition to the discussion of each individual provision makes the report clear, logical and allows you to move on to the final part.
In conclusion, the report should repeat the main idea, summarize the most important provisions. At the same time, it is useful to think over in advance not only the content, but also its speech design, to choose such words with which you could concisely and expressively complete your speech. After all, if the first words of the speaker win the attention of the audience, then the task of the latter is to enhance the effect of the speech.
(According to Yu. Ravensky.)

3. Read and compare the two beginnings of student reports on the topic "Relationships of the languages of the world." Which option do you think is better? Justify your opinion.
I. The topic of my report is "Interrelations between the languages of the world." I will tell you about the relationship between different languages of the world, what related groups- “families * they form. I will build my report according to this plan ...
II. Long ago, more than two thousand years ago, the city of Babylon stood on the banks of the Euphrates River. According to biblical tradition, the inhabitants of Babylon decided to build a pillar tower to the very
heaven. The work went well because everyone spoke the same language. But God was angry with the Babylonians for their daring intention to approach heaven - his dwelling ...

7. Use concepts correctly in a dispute. It is important that the participants in the dispute put the same content into the terms used.
8. Learn to listen to your opponent, try not to interrupt him. Seek to understand exactly what the other party is saying. Do not attribute side effects to your opponent
motives.
9. Do not necessarily try to contradict the enemy in everything. Sometimes it is useful to agree with some of his arguments. But, having agreed, try to show that these arguments are not directly related to the subject of the dispute and do not
prove the rightness of the opponent.
10. Do not get excited, but try to argue calmly. Keep in mind that of the two arguing, equal to each other in all other respects, the winner will be the one who has
more endurance and composure.
11. Make sure that there are no contradictions in your arguments and arguments.
12. Do not rush to admit defeat, even if
the arguments of the opponent will seem convincing at first glance.

Pashkovskaya N.A., Korsakov V.O. Russian language grade 10-11

Submitted by readers from the website

All Russian language online, abstracts from Russian language, calendar and thematic plan of the school program, learn Russian language free of charge

For the lesson lesson summary and supporting frame presentation to the lesson of accelerative methods and interactive technologies Practice tasks are right, self-referencing workshops, laboratory, casey equal to the complexity of tasks: outstanding, high, olympic homework Illustrations illustrations: video clips, audio clips, photographs, graphics, tables, comics, multimedia abstracts for addictive cribs humor, parables, jokes, orders, crossword puzzles, quotes Additional zvnіshnє nezalezhnoe studovannya (ZNT) assistants of the main and additional thematic saints, mottos of the statute of national identity vocabulary of terms otherwise Tіlki for readers

Culture of discussion

Experts distinguish several types of discussion. The type of discussion depends on the goal, which determines how to achieve it. If the goal of the interlocutor is the search for truth, then he leads an apodictic (reliable, based on the formal laws of thinking and rules of inference) discussion. If the goal of the opponent is to convince, to persuade the interlocutor to his opinion, then he leads an eristic (based on the laws of dialectics) discussion. If the goal is to defeat the opponent in any way, then such a discussion is called sophistical (based on verbal tricks that mislead the interlocutor).

From the point of view of ethics, a sophistical discussion can hardly be considered acceptable, since manipulating the interlocutor's opinion in the overwhelming majority of cases is unworthy for a cultured, intelligent person.

Facilitating the emergence of alternatives, plurality of opinions, ways to solve the problem is also interpreted as the principle of decentralized discussion.

This principle speaks of the need to analyze a situation or problem from the point of view of another person and the interests of the case, and not based only on personal goals. Decentric orientation develops in the context of alternatives, that is, when considering several points of view on the problem on the part of the participants in the discussion.

Constructive criticism is one of the most important principles in business ethics. Criticism is defined as a negative judgment, an indication of shortcomings in a person's work and behavior. Hence, criticism is perceived by people initially painfully and negatively, although there are ways to somewhat reduce the severity of this problem. Criticism should be constructive, should not infringe on the self-esteem of the criticized person. This general principle is realized through more particular rules, which must be observed by the critic.

Ensuring the social and psychological security of the individual in the process of discussion is often interpreted as the principle of equal security. It says: do not cause psychological harm to any of the participants in the discussion. If someone violates this principle, then there is a substitution of the goal of achieving the truth; the discussion moves from the process of confrontation of different logics of the development of thought to the process of confrontation of ambitions.

The principle of the adequacy of what is perceived to what is said says: do not harm the thought of your interlocutor by intentional or unintentional distortion of what was said. One side should strive for simplicity and accuracy of statements, the other should develop the skills of effective perception through reflective listening. In this type of listening, the receiver of the message provides the speaker with some kind of feedback that does not include elements of evaluation or judgment. This feedback can be supplemented by non-reflective listening, which uses simple tools such as mindful silence and minimal neutral verbal response.

In reflective listening, the receiver of the message uses the following types of feedback from the speaker:

a verbal signal about the need for any statements;

own retelling of the main thoughts of the interlocutor;

generalization of individual parts of the message into a semantic whole;

a reaction that reflects the feelings of the interlocutor.

The use of these types of feedback assumes that the listener follows the following basic rules for the effective perception of verbal messages:

Restrains his desire to make a hasty judgment;

· does not refute the interlocutor, without delving into the course of his reasoning;

allows the other party to complete their own argumentation statements;

· not distracted by unimportant moments to the detriment of the main thing;

does not focus on the shortcomings of the speaker's speech, the nuances of his appearance, does not miss the essence of the message due to this;

takes into account the motivation of the interlocutor, which encourages him to express his own thoughts, different from the views of the other side;

· does not rest in confidence that the truth is on his side, thereby not adjusting in advance to disagree with the position of the other side in the discussion.

Failure to comply with these rules leads to a violation of mutual understanding due to inadequate perception of the interlocutor's statements.

Practice shows that he owns the course of the discussion, it is not really controlled by the one who turns the conversation into his own monologue, trying to suppress the interlocutor with an abundance of information and a “mass” of intellect. The one who clearly directs the discussion in the right direction, doses the information received and forms a meaningful result is the one who knows how to ask the right questions in time, and these questions may differ in their specific form. The choice of the type of questions corresponding to the situation that develops during the discussion, the choice of the time for posing them, as well as the variation in the types of questions in the course of the discussion - these are the main tasks, the solution of which allows us to talk about successful tactics for raising questions.

The questions used during the conversation can be divided into the following types: culture business speech document

Closed, requiring an answer from the interlocutor in the form of "yes" or "no". This type of question is justified if you want specific, unambiguous information;

mirror, containing a repetition with an interrogative intonation of a part of the statement just uttered by the interlocutor. This type of questions allows you to create new elements in a conversation, highlight the core areas of discussion, while not contradicting the interlocutor and not refuting his statements;

· counter-questions, very similar in their essence to mirror ones; they allow you to clarify this or that situation that develops in the course of the conversation, to clarify the correct understanding of certain judgments of the interlocutor;

· *relay, allowing to dynamicize the dialogue, to develop the statements of the interlocutor, to help him in case of difficulties in mutual understanding of the parties to the conversation;

· *alternative, involving the choice of certain directions for the development of the dialogue from the set of alternatives proposed by one of the parties;

suggestive, based on a certain impact on the mental sphere of perception of the partner in the conversation; this type of questions contains some manipulation by the interlocutor due to the influence on the emotional component of the thought process;

· hypothetical, allowing to build a simple model of the development of the subject of the conversation using the assumption about the influence of any external conditions on the development of the problem under discussion;

roundabout, forcing your interlocutor to give information that you consider not entirely correct to receive through direct questions.

culture speech business communication

Culture of discussion-polemical speech. The development of speech. Speech during the discussion. Memo "How to conduct a discussion." — Hypermarket of knowledge Culture of discussion speech

Approximate course of the discussion

Culture of discussion

Melting and hardening chart

Types of hairdressing requirements for premises, working conditions and personal hygiene