The position, in its own terms
Read out the position you disagree with. Your partner says whether it sounds like something somebody would actually claim, or like a version built to be knocked down.
If it sounds like the second, rewrite it now. An argument against a position nobody holds is worth nothing.
Six ways of holding an opinion without overclaiming. Match each to what it does.
Where the extra minutes come from
The same opinion at ninety seconds and at four minutes
Ninety seconds: I think the parking scheme is a bad idea. It cost too much and it does not solve anything. The people who made the decision do not live here.
Four minutes adds: precisely which part of the scheme is objected to, and which parts are fine; who exactly made the decision, described rather than named; the strongest version of the argument for it, stated in its own terms; one number; a concession about what the scheme does get right; the thing nobody in the debate has mentioned; and what would change the speaker’s mind.
Four questions about the list of additions.
1. Several additions are descriptions of people and things rather than new arguments. Which grammar do they need?
2. One addition states the opposing argument in its own terms. Why?
3. One addition names what the scheme gets right. What does that buy?
4. The last addition says what would change the speaker’s mind. What does it show?
Six ways to make a minute
Where the extra time comes from
| Add | Question | Grammar it wants |
|---|---|---|
| Precision about the target | Which part exactly do you object to? | Defining relative clause |
| Who, described not named | Who made this, and what is relevant about them? | the people who… · a committee whose… |
| The opposing case | How would somebody who holds it put it? | Their framing, reported |
| A concession | What does it get right? | To be fair to it, … |
| A number | How big, how many, how long? | Noun phrase with a numeral modifier |
| What would change your mind | What evidence would move you? | First conditional |
Six moves. Put them into the order they would fall across four minutes.
Build the four minutes
Task card · Planning · Individual · 6 minutes
Four minutes of argument from a page of notes. Phrases only.
A page with six headings and three or four words under each.
- The position, in its own terms. One sentence, and it must be one somebody would say.
- The precise target: which part, described with a defining clause.
- Who made it, described by something relevant rather than named.
- One number, and one thing it gets right.
- The thing nobody has mentioned.
- What would change your mind.
One to five words per gap. Relative clauses doing the precision work.
The part I object to is not the charge itself. It is the exemption to residents a permit before 2019, means that the people most are the ones arrived most recently. To be fair to the scheme, the part the school run has worked.
Four minutes, twice
Task card · Speaking · Round one · 4 minutes each
Your partner holds the position you are arguing against, or is going to pretend to. Notes on the table; six headings only.
Four minutes, in the six moves.
- State their position first, in their terms. They will tell you if you got it wrong.
- Say precisely which part you object to, with a defining clause.
- Describe who made it rather than naming them.
- Concede one thing, give one number, and name the thing nobody has mentioned.
- Close on what would change your mind. If you run out at three minutes, add precision, not assertion.
Listener’s job. Three columns:
1. Every relative clause, marked defining or non-defining from the intonation alone.
2. Every place you could not tell which thing was meant.
3. Whether the version of your position they gave was one you would sign.
Column three is answered once, at the start, and it decides whether the rest of the four minutes was worth anything.
Between the rounds — three minutes, silent. Look at column two. Every entry is a place a clause did not do its job.
And if column three was a no, rewrite the opposing position now. Everything else is wasted until that sentence is one they would sign.
Task card · Speaking · Round two · New partner · 4 minutes
Same issue, new partner, same clock, notes face down.
Four minutes with the target precise and the opposing position accurate.
- No notes.
- Open with their position and ask, in one word, whether it is fair. Fix it if not.
- Your new listener keeps the same three columns.
- Compare the two pages. Column two should be shorter.
What could not be identified
Five sentences from round one. Fix each.
1. The people, who made this decision, do not live here.
2. The exemption, that applies to older residents, is the problem.
3. It cost four million, what nobody mentions.
4. The committee who its members do not park here designed it.
5. The residents they were consulted had six weeks.
Which thing, exactly
Two questions about your own two rounds.
1. You ran out at three minutes. What is the fix?
2. Your partner would not sign your version of their position. What does that mean for the rest?
Before next lesson. Keep both listeners’ pages. For every entry in column two, write out the sentence properly punctuated and decide what it now claims.
Next lesson is built out of exactly those, and out of the commas that made a claim you did not intend.