An Interesting Discussion You Had With Friends

Part 3 追问

这些是考官在该题卡之后提出的讨论题，已编写范文的题目附有参考答案。

1. 1. How important are good listening skills?

   2026年5–8月
   查看这道题的6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5三档对比

   6.5 分

   The plain causal statement about trust lacks the closing antithesis about poor and good listeners that 7.5 adds.这句关于信任的朴素因果陈述,缺少7.5分加上的、关于差劲和优秀倾听者之间的结尾式对比。

   I think listening matters even more than speaking, and that dinner proved it to me. Hà said the least of the four of us, listening for a whole hour before he spoke, but when he did, he reframed the whole argument, because he had really heard what each of us was afraid of. Listening helps you find out what a conversation is really about, which is often not what it seems. It also builds trust, since people know when they are truly being heard. In my job, a client says 'make it pop', and a good listener works out that this really means 'my mother cannot read it'.

   查看中文翻译

   我觉得倾听甚至比说话更重要,而那顿晚饭让我确信了这一点。我们四个人里,Hà说话最少,整整一个小时都在听,一言不发,但当他开口时,他却重新定义了整个争论的框架,因为他真正听懂了我们每个人心里在害怕什么。倾听能帮你发现一场对话真正在讲什么,而这往往不是它表面看起来的样子。它也能建立信任,因为人们能感觉到自己是不是真的被听见了。在我的工作中,客户会说“让它更抓眼球一点”,而一个善于倾听的人则能听出,这句话真正的意思其实是“我妈妈看不清这个字”。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“It also builds trust, since people know when they are truly being heard.” — A plain causal statement. Compare 7.5's version, which adds a closing antithesis about poor and good listeners after making a similar point.一个朴素的因果陈述。对比一下7.5分的版本,在表达类似观点之后,又加上了一句关于差劲和优秀倾听者的结尾式对比。
   • LR“he reframed the whole argument” — A precise verb ("reframed"), matching the higher bands, but the sentence around it is less punctuated than 7.5's dash-separated version of the same idea.一个精确的动词(“reframed”),与高分段相同,但周围的句子标点使用得不如7.5分中用破折号分隔的版本那么丰富。
   • GRA“Hà said the least of the four of us, listening for a whole hour before he spoke, but when he did, he reframed the whole argument, because he had really heard what each of us was afraid of.” — One long sentence chaining several ideas with commas, less punctuated than 7.5's dash-separated version.一个用逗号把几个想法串联起来的长句,标点使用得不如7.5分中用破折号分隔的版本那么丰富。

   7.0 分

   The passive "trust gets built" plus "genuinely" adds a slightly more natural register than 6.5's plainer active version of the same claim.被动语态的 “trust gets built” 加上 “genuinely”,比6.5分中同样论断的更朴素的主动语态版本,增添了略微更自然的语域。

   More important than speaking, honestly, and that dinner proved it. Hà said the least of the four of us — he listened for a full hour before he spoke — and when he finally did, he said the thing that reframed the whole argument, because he'd actually heard what each of us was afraid of. Listening is how you find out what a conversation is really about, which is rarely what it seems on the surface. It's also how trust gets built, since people can tell when they're genuinely being heard. In my job it's basically the whole skill — a client says 'make it pop', and the listener works out that really means 'my mother can't read it'.

   查看中文翻译

   说实话,倾听比说话更重要,而那顿晚饭证明了这一点。我们四个人里,Hà说话最少——他整整一个小时都在听,一言不发——但当他终于开口时,他说出的话重新定义了整个争论的框架,因为他确实听懂了我们每个人心里在害怕什么。倾听是你发现一场对话真正在讲什么的方式,而这往往不是它表面看起来的样子。它也是信任得以建立的方式,因为人们能分辨出自己是不是真的被听见了。在我的工作中,这基本上就是全部的技能所在——客户会说“让它更抓眼球一点”,而倾听者则能听出,这句话真正的意思其实是“我妈妈看不清这个字”。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“It's also how trust gets built, since people can tell when they're genuinely being heard.” — The passive "gets built" plus "genuinely" adds a slightly more natural register than 6.5's plainer active version.被动语态的 “gets built” 加上 “genuinely”,比6.5分更朴素的主动语态版本,增添了略微更自然的语域。
   • LR“he said the thing that reframed the whole argument” — A precise verb shared with 7.5, more developed than 6.5's plainer phrasing of the same moment.一个与7.5分共用的精确动词,比6.5分对同一时刻更朴素的措辞更为成熟。
   • GRA“Hà said the least of the four of us — he listened for a full hour before he spoke — and when he finally did, he said the thing that reframed the whole argument” — A dash-parenthesis embedded mid-sentence, more ambitious than 6.5's simple comma chain.一个嵌入句中的破折号插入语,比6.5分简单的逗号链条更有野心。

   7.5 分

   The closing semicolon-joined antithesis about poor and good listeners goes beyond the single observation that ends the lower-band answers.结尾用分号连接的关于差劲和优秀倾听者的对比,超越了低分段回答结尾那种单一的观察。

   More important than speaking, and that dinner proved it. Hà said the least of the four of us — he listened for an hour before he spoke — and when he did, he said the thing that reframed the whole argument, because he'd actually heard what each of us was afraid of. Listening is how you find out what a conversation is really about, which is rarely what it's about on the surface. It's how trust is built, since people can tell when they're being heard. In my job it's the whole skill: a client says 'make it pop' and the listener finds out that means 'my mother can't read it'. Poor listeners argue with what they expected to hear; good ones answer what was actually said, and it's rarer than it sounds.

   查看中文翻译

   比说话更重要,而那顿晚饭证明了这一点。我们四个人里,Hà说话最少——他整整一个小时都在听,一言不发——但当他开口时,他说出的话重新定义了整个争论的框架,因为他确实听懂了我们每个人心里在害怕什么。倾听是你发现一场对话真正在讲什么的方式,而这往往不是它表面上看起来的样子。这就是信任被建立起来的方式,因为人们能分辨出自己是不是被听见了。在我的工作中,这就是全部的技能所在:客户会说“让它更抓眼球一点”,而倾听者则能听出,这句话的意思其实是“我妈妈看不清这个字”。差劲的倾听者会去反驳自己以为会听到的话;优秀的倾听者则会回应对方实际说出来的话,而这比听起来要稀有得多。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“and it's rarer than it sounds” — An evaluative closing touch that reframes the whole answer, going beyond the single observation that ends the 7.0 and 6.5 answers.一个评价性的结尾笔触,重新定义了整个回答,超越了7.0分和6.5分回答结尾那种单一的观察。
   • LR“argue with what they expected to hear” — A vivid, contrast-based phrase, more figurative than the plainer explanations at the lower bands.一个生动、基于对比的短语,比低分段更朴素的解释更具比喻性。
   • GRA“Poor listeners argue with what they expected to hear; good ones answer what was actually said” — A semicolon-joined antithetical sentence, more controlled than the single-clause sentences at 6.5 and 7.0.一个用分号连接的对比句,比6.5分和7.0分中单一分句的句子更有控制力。

2. 2. How easy is it for people to improve their communication skills?

   2026年5–8月
   查看这道题的6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5三档对比

   6.5 分

   The plain separate closing sentence about Đức lacks the generalising reflection 7.5 folds into the same sentence.这个关于Đức的朴素独立结尾句,缺少7.5分融合进同一句子里的那种概括性反思。

   I think it is easier than people expect, but slower than they would like. At that dinner, Đức kept interrupting everyone, until Linh finally pointed it out, and since then he has practised a three-second pause before speaking. It really has made him a different person to talk to. Communication is really just a set of habits, like listening fully, asking before assuming, and saying less, and each one can be practised. What is hard is that most people do not know what they do wrong, because nobody tells them. Anyone can improve, but very few people actually try, because it means hearing something uncomfortable first.

   查看中文翻译

   我觉得这比人们预期的要容易,但比他们希望的要慢。在那顿晚饭上,Đức一直打断每个人的话,直到Linh最终指了出来,从那以后他就一直在练习说话前先停顿三秒。这确实让他变成了一个跟以前不一样的、更好交谈的人。沟通其实说到底就是一系列的习惯,比如充分地倾听、先问清楚再做假设、少说话,而每一项都是可以练习的。难的地方在于,大多数人不知道自己做错了什么,因为没有人告诉他们。任何人都可以进步,但真正去尝试的人却很少,因为这意味着首先要听到一些让人不舒服的话。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“It really has made him a different person to talk to.” — A plain, separate closing sentence. Compare 7.5's tighter dash version, which folds a generalising comment ("one habit, noticed and worked on, changed a lot") into the same sentence.一个朴素、独立的结尾句。对比7.5分中更紧凑的破折号版本,把一句概括性的评论(“one habit, noticed and worked on, changed a lot”)融合进了同一个句子里。
   • LR“a set of habits, like listening fully, asking before assuming, and saying less” — A three-item list, less developed than 7.5's four-item list, which adds "matching tone."一份三项列举,不如7.5分四项列举那么成熟,后者又加上了 “matching tone”。
   • GRA“At that dinner, Đức kept interrupting everyone, until Linh finally pointed it out, and since then he has practised a three-second pause before speaking.” — A single long coordinated sentence, less punctuated than 7.5's dash-separated version.一个单一的长并列句,标点使用得不如7.5分中用破折号分隔的版本那么丰富。

   7.0 分

   The inserted "honestly" mid-sentence gives natural spoken emphasis, more fluent than 6.5's plainer separate sentence making the same point.句中插入的 “honestly” 提供了一种自然的口语化强调,比6.5分中表达同样观点的、更朴素的独立句更流畅。

   Easier than people think, honestly, and slower than they'd like. Đức interrupted everyone that evening — Linh finally pointed it out — and he's since practised a three-second pause before speaking that has made him, honestly, a different person to talk to. Communication really is a set of habits: listening fully, asking before assuming, matching tone, saying less. Each one can be practised, and feedback from an honest friend speeds it up a lot. What's hard is that most people don't know what they do wrong, since nobody tells them. Recording yourself or simply asking 'how did that come across?' both work — anyone can improve, but very few people actually decide to.

   查看中文翻译

   说实话,这比人们想象的要容易,但比他们希望的要慢。那天晚上Đức一直打断每个人的话——Linh最终把这一点指了出来——从那以后他就一直在练习说话前先停顿三秒,说实话,这确实让他变成了一个更好交谈的人。沟通真的就是一系列的习惯:充分地倾听、先问清楚再做假设、配合对方的语气、少说话。每一项都是可以练习的,而来自一个诚实朋友的反馈能大大加快这个过程。难的地方在于,大多数人不知道自己做错了什么,因为没有人告诉他们。给自己录音,或者干脆问一句“这话听起来是什么效果?”,这两种方法都管用——任何人都可以进步,但真正决定去做的人却很少。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“he's since practised a three-second pause before speaking that has made him, honestly, a different person to talk to” — The inserted "honestly" gives natural spoken emphasis mid-sentence, more fluent than 6.5's plainer separate sentence.插入句中的 “honestly” 提供了一种自然的口语化强调,比6.5分更朴素的独立句更流畅。
   • LR“matching tone” — A more specific communication skill added to the list of habits than 6.5's shorter three-item list.一项更具体的沟通技巧被加进了习惯列举里,比6.5分更短的三项列举更丰富。
   • GRA“Recording yourself or simply asking 'how did that come across?' both work — anyone can improve, but very few people actually decide to.” — A dash-linked closing pair, less layered than 7.5's three-item list plus separate two-sentence closing.一对用破折号连接的结尾句,不如7.5分中三项列举加上独立的两句式结尾那样有层次。

   7.5 分

   Splitting the final idea into two short sentences gives the ending more rhetorical punch than the single flowing sentence at the lower bands.把最后的想法拆成两个短句,比低分段的单一流畅句给结尾带来了更强的修辞冲击力。

   Easier than people think and slower than they'd like. Đức interrupted everyone that evening — Linh finally pointed it out — and he has since practised a three-second pause before speaking that has made him, honestly, a different person to talk to; one habit, noticed and worked on, changed a lot. Communication is a set of habits: listening fully, asking before assuming, matching tone, saying less. Each can be practised, and feedback from an honest friend speeds it up enormously. What's genuinely hard is that most people don't know what they do wrong, because nobody ever tells them. Recording yourself, taking a course, or simply asking 'how did that come across?' all work. Anyone can improve. Very few people decide to, because it means hearing something uncomfortable first.

   查看中文翻译

   这比人们想象的要容易,也比他们希望的要慢。那天晚上Đức一直打断每个人的话——Linh最终把这一点指了出来——从那以后他就一直在练习说话前先停顿三秒,说实话,这确实让他变成了一个更好交谈的人;一个习惯,一旦被注意到并加以努力,就带来了很大的改变。沟通就是一系列的习惯:充分地倾听、先问清楚再做假设、配合对方的语气、少说话。每一项都是可以练习的,而来自一个诚实朋友的反馈能极大地加快这个过程。真正难的地方在于,大多数人不知道自己做错了什么,因为从来没有人告诉他们。给自己录音、上一门课,或者干脆问一句“这话听起来是什么效果?”,这些方法都管用。任何人都可以进步。但真正决定去做的人却很少,因为这意味着首先要听到一些让人不舒服的话。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“Anyone can improve. Very few people decide to, because it means hearing something uncomfortable first.” — Splitting the final idea into two short sentences gives the ending more rhetorical punch than the single flowing sentence at 7.0.把最后的想法拆成两个短句,比7.0分的单一流畅句给结尾带来了更强的修辞冲击力。
   • LR“Recording yourself, taking a course, or simply asking 'how did that come across?'” — A three-item list, richer than 7.0's two-item version of the same idea.一份三项列举,比7.0分中同样想法的两项版本更丰富。
   • GRA“he has since practised a three-second pause before speaking that has made him, honestly, a different person to talk to; one habit, noticed and worked on, changed a lot” — A semicolon adding a generalising reflection onto the sentence, more layered than 7.0's version without it.一个分号为句子加上了一句概括性的反思,比7.0分没有这句话的版本更有层次。

3. 3. Why are some people much better at persuading others to change their behaviour?

   2026年5–8月
   查看这道题的6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5三档对比

   6.5 分

   The abstract, generic "which approach will work" lacks the concrete metaphor 7.5 uses for the same idea.抽象、笼统的“which approach will work”,缺少7.5分对同一想法所使用的那个具象化的隐喻。

   I think it is because persuasive people start with the other person, not with their own argument. Linh got me to learn a new AI tool by asking what I was afraid of, and then answering that fear. Đức lectured me on the same subject for an hour, and it just bounced off, even though his facts were better. Persuasive people listen first, so they know which approach will work. People trust them, because they have been honest before. They also make the change feel small and possible, not big and shameful. They use stories, which people remember, instead of statistics, which people often ignore.

   查看中文翻译

   我觉得这是因为擅长说服人的人,起点是对方,而不是自己的论点。Linh让我去学一个新的AI工具的办法,是先问我在害怕什么,然后再针对那份恐惧作出回应。Đức则就同一个话题对我说教了整整一个小时,可这一切都被我完全弹开了,尽管他给出的事实更准确。擅长说服的人会先倾听,所以他们知道哪种方式行得通。人们信任他们,是因为他们以前一直很诚实。他们还会让这个改变显得渺小、可以做到,而不是巨大、让人羞愧。他们用故事——人们会记住的东西——而不是数据——人们常常会忽略的东西。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“Persuasive people listen first, so they know which approach will work.” — A plain causal claim. Compare 7.5's more evocative metaphor, "they know which door is open."一个朴素的因果论断。对比7.5分更有画面感的隐喻,“they know which door is open.”
   • LR“which approach will work” — Generic, abstract phrasing. Contrast 7.5's concrete metaphor "which door is open."笼统、抽象的措辞。对比7.5分具象化的隐喻“which door is open.”
   • GRA“Linh got me to learn a new AI tool by asking what I was afraid of, and then answering that fear.” — A single coordinated sentence, less compact than 7.5's semicolon-joined version with the added contrast about Đức.一个单一的并列句,不如7.5分中用分号连接、并加上了关于Đức的额外对比的版本那么紧凑。

   7.0 分

   The intensifier "genuinely" adds natural emphasis, more fluent than 6.5's plainer "even though his facts were better."强调词“genuinely”增添了自然的强调,比6.5分更朴素的“even though his facts were better”更流畅。

   Because they start from the other person rather than the argument, honestly. Linh got me to learn the AI tool by asking what I was afraid of and then simply answering that; Đức lectured me on the same subject for an hour, and it bounced straight off, even though his facts were genuinely better. Persuasive people listen first, so they know which door is actually open. They're trusted, because they've been honest before and don't seem desperate for you to agree. They make the change feel small and possible rather than large and shaming, and they lean on stories, which people remember, over statistics, which people tend to dismiss.

   查看中文翻译

   说实话,这是因为他们的起点是对方,而不是论点本身。Linh让我去学那个AI工具的办法,是先问我在害怕什么,然后干脆直接针对那份恐惧作出回应;Đức则就同一个话题对我说教了整整一个小时,可这一切都被我直接弹开了,尽管他给出的事实确实更准确。擅长说服的人会先倾听,所以他们知道哪扇门实际上是开着的。人们信任他们,是因为他们以前一直很诚实,而且看起来并不急切地渴望你的认同。他们让这个改变显得渺小、可以做到,而不是巨大、令人羞愧,而且他们依靠的是故事——人们会记住的东西——而不是数据——人们往往会忽视的东西。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“even though his facts were genuinely better” — The intensifier "genuinely" adds natural emphasis, more fluent than 6.5's plainer "even though his facts were better."强调词“genuinely”增添了自然的强调,比6.5分更朴素的“even though his facts were better”更流畅。
   • LR“which door is actually open” — A metaphor with "actually" added, similar to 7.5's version but slightly less economical.一个加上了“actually”的隐喻,和7.5分的版本类似,但略微不那么简洁。
   • GRA“They make the change feel small and possible rather than large and shaming, and they lean on stories, which people remember, over statistics, which people tend to dismiss.” — A long coordinated sentence combining two parallel contrasts, less separated than 7.5's version, which splits this into distinct sentences.一个把两个平行对比结合在一起的长并列句,不如7.5分的版本那样分开,后者把它拆成了独立的句子。

   7.5 分

   The short, aphoristic closing sentence reframes the whole answer as a moral claim, beyond the more descriptive endings of the lower bands.简短、格言式的结尾句,把整个回答重新定义成了一句道德论断,超越了低分段更具描述性的结尾。

   Because they start from the other person rather than from the argument. Linh got me to learn the AI tool by asking what I was afraid of and then answering that; Đức lectured me on the same subject for an hour and it bounced off, though his facts were better. Persuasive people listen first, so they know which door is open. They're trusted, because they've been honest before and because they don't seem to need you to agree. They make the change small and possible rather than large and shaming. They use stories, which people remember, over statistics, which people dismiss. And they let the other person feel the decision is their own. It's less a talent than a habit of respect.

   查看中文翻译

   因为他们的起点是对方,而不是论点本身。Linh让我去学那个AI工具的办法,是先问我在害怕什么,然后再针对那份恐惧作出回应;Đức则就同一个话题对我说教了整整一个小时,可这一切都被我弹开了,尽管他给出的事实更准确。擅长说服的人会先倾听,所以他们知道哪扇门是开着的。人们信任他们,是因为他们以前一直很诚实,也因为他们看起来并不需要你去认同他们。他们让这个改变显得渺小、可以做到,而不是巨大、令人羞愧。他们用故事——人们会记住的东西——而不是数据——人们常常会忽视的东西。而且他们会让对方觉得,这个决定是自己做出来的。与其说这是一种天赋,不如说是一种尊重他人的习惯。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“It's less a talent than a habit of respect.” — A short, aphoristic closing sentence that reframes the whole answer as a moral claim, beyond the more descriptive endings of 6.5 and 7.0.一个简短、格言式的结尾句,把整个回答重新定义成了一句道德论断,超越了6.5分和7.0分更具描述性的结尾。
   • LR“which door is open” — A compact metaphor, more figurative than 6.5's literal "which approach will work."一个紧凑的隐喻,比6.5分字面意义的“which approach will work”更具比喻性。
   • GRA“They're trusted, because they've been honest before and because they don't seem to need you to agree.” — A sentence with two parallel because-clauses, more balanced than 7.0's single because-clause version.一个带有两个平行because从句的句子,比7.0分单一because从句的版本更平衡。

4. 4. What kinds of jobs require excellent communication skills?

   2026年5–8月
   查看这道题的6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5三档对比

   6.5 分

   The vague evaluation "a high level of communication" lacks the specific, vivid comparison 7.5 uses for the same idea.含糊的评价“a high level of communication”,缺少7.5分对同一想法所使用的那种具体、生动的比较。

   I think it is more than the obvious jobs like teachers, lawyers, and salespeople. The nurse on our hospital project can explain a diagnosis in one sentence that a frightened seventy-year-old can understand, and that is a high level of communication. My friend Hà spends his days explaining computer bugs to bank managers who do not know what a database is. Doctors, managers, diplomats, and customer service workers all need this skill too. My own job is mostly explaining why something is designed the way it is. Even engineers need to explain their work clearly, or it does not get used.

   查看中文翻译

   我觉得需要出色沟通能力的职业,远不止教师、律师、销售人员这些显而易见的例子。我们医院项目里的护士,能用一句话把诊断结果解释清楚,让一个惊慌失措的七十岁老人也能听懂,这就是一种很高水平的沟通能力。我朋友Hà每天的工作,就是向那些连数据库是什么都不知道的银行经理解释电脑漏洞。医生、经理、外交官,还有客服人员,也都需要这项技能。我自己的工作,大部分就是在解释为什么某个东西要被设计成那个样子。就连工程师也需要把自己的工作讲清楚,不然它就用不起来。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“Even engineers need to explain their work clearly, or it does not get used.” — A plain closing claim. Compare 7.5's more dramatic phrasing, "engineers and scientists live or die by whether they can make their work understood."一个朴素的结尾论断。对比7.5分更戏剧化的措辞,“engineers and scientists live or die by whether they can make their work understood.”
   • LR“a high level of communication” — A vague, generic evaluation. Contrast 7.5's "communication of a higher order than most speeches," a more specific and vivid comparison.一个含糊、笼统的评价。对比7.5分的“communication of a higher order than most speeches”,是一个更具体、更生动的比较。
   • GRA“Doctors, managers, diplomats, and customer service workers all need this skill too.” — A simple four-item list with a repeated tag ("all need this skill too"), less compact than 7.5's dash-free five-item list.一份简单的四项列举,带有一个重复的标签(“all need this skill too”),不如7.5分不用破折号的五项列举那样紧凑。

   7.0 分

   The dash-extended list ending in the tag "really" is more fluent than 6.5's flatter four-item list.用破折号延伸、并以语气词“really”收尾的列举,比6.5分更平淡的四项列举更流畅。

   More than the obvious list of teachers, lawyers and salespeople, honestly. The nurse on our hospital project explains a diagnosis in one sentence that a frightened seventy-year-old can actually hold onto, and that's communication of a higher order than most speeches. Hà spends his days explaining bugs to bank managers who don't know what a database is. Doctors, managers, diplomats, journalists, customer service — anyone who leads a team, really. My own job is mostly explaining why something is designed the way it is. Even engineers and scientists live or die by whether they can make their work understood.

   查看中文翻译

   说实话,远不止教师、律师、销售人员这份显而易见的名单。我们医院项目里的护士,能用一句话把诊断结果解释清楚,让一个惊慌失措的七十岁老人真正能记住、理解,而这就是一种比大多数演讲都更高层次的沟通。Hà每天的工作,就是向那些连数据库是什么都不知道的银行经理解释各种漏洞。医生、经理、外交官、记者、客服人员——说真的,任何带团队的人都需要这项技能。我自己的工作,大部分就是在解释为什么某个东西要被设计成那个样子。就连工程师和科学家的生死存亡,也取决于他们能否让别人理解自己的工作。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“Doctors, managers, diplomats, journalists, customer service — anyone who leads a team, really.” — A dash-extended list ending in a generalising tag ("really"), more fluent than 6.5's flatter four-item list.用破折号延伸、以概括性语气词(“really”)收尾的列举,比6.5分更平淡的四项列举更流畅。
   • LR“communication of a higher order than most speeches” — A precise, elevated comparison, matching 7.5 but without the final extending clause about shrinking jobs.一个精确、有格调的比较,与7.5分相同,但没有那个关于职业萎缩的结尾延伸分句。
   • GRA“a frightened seventy-year-old can actually hold onto” — The added intensifier "actually" and idiom "hold onto" give this clause more texture than 6.5's plainer "can understand."增加的强调词“actually”和习语“hold onto”,让这个分句比6.5分更朴素的“can understand”更有质感。

   7.5 分

   The added closing sentence about shrinking jobs extends the argument into the future, beyond the single present-tense observation at the lower bands.新加上的关于职业萎缩的结尾句,把论证延伸到了未来,超越了低分段单一的现在时观察。

   More than the obvious list of teachers, lawyers and salespeople. The nurse on our hospital project explains a diagnosis in one sentence that a frightened seventy-year-old can hold, and that's communication of a higher order than most speeches. Hà spends his days explaining bugs to bank managers who don't know what a database is. Doctors, managers, diplomats, journalists, customer service, anyone who leads a team. My own job is mostly explaining why something is designed the way it is. Even engineers and scientists live or die by whether they can make their work understood. The jobs that don't require it are shrinking, since machines now handle the work that needs no explanation at all.

   查看中文翻译

   远不止教师、律师、销售人员这份显而易见的名单。我们医院项目里的护士,能用一句话把诊断结果解释清楚,让一个惊慌失措的七十岁老人也能记住,而这就是一种比大多数演讲都更高层次的沟通。Hà每天的工作,就是向那些连数据库是什么都不知道的银行经理解释各种漏洞。医生、经理、外交官、记者、客服人员,任何带团队的人都需要这项技能。我自己的工作,大部分就是在解释为什么某个东西要被设计成那个样子。就连工程师和科学家的生死存亡,也取决于他们能否让别人理解自己的工作。而不需要这项技能的职业正在萎缩,因为如今机器已经接管了那些根本不需要任何解释的工作。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“The jobs that don't require it are shrinking, since machines now handle the work that needs no explanation at all.” — An added closing sentence extending the argument into the future, going beyond the single present-tense observation that ends 6.5 and 7.0.一个新加上的结尾句,把论证延伸到了未来,超越了6.5分和7.0分结尾那种单一的现在时观察。
   • LR“The jobs that don't require it are shrinking” — Figurative economic framing of skill demand, beyond 7.0's simple list of professions.对技能需求的经济学式比喻性框定,超越了7.0分单纯的职业列举。
   • GRA“Even engineers and scientists live or die by whether they can make their work understood.” — A stark, idiomatic conditional-style clause ("live or die by"), more dramatic than 6.5's plain "need to explain their work clearly."一个鲜明、习语化的条件式分句(“live or die by”),比6.5分朴素的“need to explain their work clearly”更具戏剧性。

5. 5. What kinds of things do children usually have strong opinions about?

   2026年5–8月
   查看这道题的6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5三档对比

   6.5 分

   The flat repetition of "strong" throughout lacks the vivid, varied vocabulary the higher bands use for the same idea.全篇平淡地重复使用“strong”,缺少高分段为同一想法所使用的那种生动、多样的词汇。

   I think children have strong opinions about fairness first, and then about anything that touches their own life. My nephew has a very strong opinion about the correct order of his bedtime routine, and he will not change his mind. My niece, who is eleven, has strong views on which animals should be pets, and thinks school starts too early. Small children care a lot about rules and fairness, because they are learning the rules and want them followed. They also have opinions about food, clothes, and who is their friend today. As children grow older, their opinions expand to teachers, music, and what is cool.

   查看中文翻译

   我觉得孩子首先会对公平这件事有强烈的看法,然后是对任何触及他们自身生活的事情。我侄子对他晚间流程该按什么顺序进行有非常坚定的看法,而且绝不会改变主意。我侄女,今年十一岁,对哪些动物该当宠物有强烈的观点,而且认为学校开始上课的时间太早了。小孩子非常在意规则和公平,因为他们正在学习这些规则,并希望它们得到遵守。他们对吃什么、穿什么,以及今天谁是自己的朋友,也都有自己的看法。随着孩子长大,他们的观点会扩展到老师、音乐,以及什么才算“酷”。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“and he will not change his mind” — A plain, direct statement. Compare 7.5's more vivid "and will not be moved," a slightly more forceful, idiomatic verb choice.一个朴素、直接的陈述。对比7.5分更生动的“and will not be moved”,是一个略微更有力、更地道的动词选择。
   • LR“very strong opinion” — Repeats "strong" rather flatly. Contrast 7.5's "furious position," a more vivid, precise noun-adjective pairing.相当平淡地重复了“strong”。对比7.5分的“furious position”,是一个更生动、更精确的名词形容词搭配。
   • GRA“As children grow older, their opinions expand to teachers, music, and what is cool.” — A plain sentence with a short list, less developed than 7.5's version, which extends the list further and adds a closing clause about certainty.一个带有简短列举的朴素句子,不如7.5分的版本那么成熟,后者把列举进一步延伸,还加上了一个关于确信感的结尾分句。

   7.0 分

   The vivid noun "position" plus the intensifier "simply" are more developed than 6.5's plainer "very strong opinion... will not change his mind."生动的名词“position”加上强调词“simply”,比6.5分更朴素的“very strong opinion... will not change his mind”更成熟。

   Fairness, first, honestly, and then anything that touches their own life. My nephew has a furious position on the correct order of the bedtime routine and simply will not be moved; my niece at eleven has strong views on which animals deserve to be pets and why school starts too early. Small children care intensely about rules, turns and what's fair, because they're learning the rules and want them kept. They have opinions about food, clothes, bedtime, siblings, and who is and isn't their friend today. As they grow, the opinions expand to teachers, music, what's cool, and eventually the injustices of the world, held with a certainty adults have usually lost.

   查看中文翻译

   说实话,首先是公平,然后才是任何触及他们自身生活的事情。我侄子对晚间流程该按什么顺序进行,抱有一种近乎愤怒的坚决立场,根本不可能被说动;我侄女今年十一岁,对哪些动物值得当宠物,以及为什么学校开始得太早,都有强烈的看法。小孩子非常在意规则、轮流,以及什么才算公平,因为他们正在学习这些规则,并希望它们得到遵守。他们对吃什么、穿什么、几点睡觉、兄弟姐妹,以及今天谁是不是自己的朋友,都有自己的看法。随着他们长大,这些观点会扩展到老师、音乐、什么算“酷”,最终延伸到这个世界的种种不公——而他们抱持这些观点的那种确信感,是成年人通常已经失去的。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“My nephew has a furious position on the correct order of the bedtime routine and simply will not be moved” — The vivid noun "position" and added intensifier "simply" are more developed than 6.5's plainer "very strong opinion... will not change his mind."生动的名词“position”以及增加的强调词“simply”,比6.5分更朴素的“very strong opinion... will not change his mind”更成熟。
   • LR“held with a certainty adults have usually lost” — A precise, reflective closing phrase, slightly less confident than 7.5's "adults have long since lost."一个精确、反思性的结尾短语,比7.5分的“adults have long since lost”略微不那么自信。
   • GRA“the opinions expand to teachers, music, what's cool, and eventually the injustices of the world, held with a certainty adults have usually lost” — A long sentence building a five-item list toward a reflective closing clause, more ambitious than 6.5's short, plain sentence.一个长句,构建了一份五项列举,通向一个反思性的结尾分句,比6.5分简短、朴素的句子更有野心。

   7.5 分

   The two short closing sentences reframe the whole answer as a claim about value, going beyond the single descriptive sentence at the lower bands.两个简短的结尾句,把整个回答重新定义成了一句关于价值的论断,超越了低分段单一的描述性句子。

   Fairness, first, and then anything that touches their own life. My nephew has a furious position on the correct order of the bedtime routine and will not be moved; my niece at eleven has strong views on which animals deserve to be pets and why school starts too early. Small children care intensely about rules, turns and what's fair, because they're learning the rules and want them kept. They have opinions about food, clothes, bedtime, siblings, and who is and isn't their friend today. As they grow, the opinions expand to teachers, music, what's cool, and, by early adolescence, the injustices of the world, held with a certainty adults have long since lost. Children rarely have mild opinions. That's what makes them worth listening to.

   查看中文翻译

   首先是公平,然后才是任何触及他们自身生活的事情。我侄子对晚间流程该按什么顺序进行,抱有一种近乎愤怒的坚决立场,根本无法被说动;我侄女今年十一岁,对哪些动物值得当宠物,以及为什么学校开始得太早,都有强烈的看法。小孩子非常在意规则、轮流,以及什么才算公平,因为他们正在学习这些规则,并希望它们得到遵守。他们对吃什么、穿什么、几点睡觉、兄弟姐妹,以及今天谁是不是自己的朋友,都有自己的看法。随着他们长大,这些观点会扩展到老师、音乐、什么算“酷”,到了青春期早期,还会延伸到这个世界的种种不公——而他们抱持这些观点的那种确信感,是成年人早就已经失去的。孩子很少有那种不温不火的观点。这正是他们值得被认真倾听的原因。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“Children rarely have mild opinions. That's what makes them worth listening to.” — Two short punchy closing sentences that reframe the whole answer as a claim about value, going beyond the single descriptive sentence that ends 6.5 and 7.0.两个简短、有力的结尾句,把整个回答重新定义成了一句关于价值的论断,超越了6.5分和7.0分结尾那种单一的描述性句子。
   • LR“furious position” — A vivid, precise noun-adjective pairing, more developed than 6.5's flat repetition of "strong."一个生动、精确的名词形容词搭配,比6.5分平淡地重复“strong”更成熟。
   • GRA“the opinions expand to teachers, music, what's cool, and, by early adolescence, the injustices of the world, held with a certainty adults have long since lost” — A five-item list with an embedded time phrase ("by early adolescence"), more layered than 7.0's version without that insertion.一份带有嵌入式时间短语(“by early adolescence”)的五项列举,比7.0分中没有这个插入语的版本更有层次。

6. 6. Do you think parents should always take their children's opinions into account?

   2026年5–8月
   查看这道题的6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5三档对比

   6.5 分

   The separate hedge-ended sentence "Both were right, I think" is plainer than 7.5's tighter integration of the same claim.独立成句、以限制语收尾的“Both were right, I think”,比7.5分把同样的论断更紧密地融合起来的做法更朴素。

   I think parents should always listen, but not always do what the child wants, and my sister shows this well. On the same day, I watched her ask her eleven-year-old's opinion about which flat to rent, seriously, and then decide about bedtime without asking at all. Both were right, I think. Listening to a child's opinion shows them they matter, and it can reveal something the parent missed. But children do not have enough information or a long view of life, so a parent who always obeys the child is not really respecting them. I think the rule should be: always ask, always explain, and then decide.

   查看中文翻译

   我觉得父母应该始终倾听,但不必总是照孩子说的去做,而我姐姐很好地展示了这一点。同一天里,我看到她认真地征求她十一岁孩子对该租哪套公寓的意见,然后又完全没问过孩子,就自己决定了睡觉时间。我觉得这两种做法都是对的。倾听孩子的意见,能让他们感觉到自己是被重视的,而且有时候还能揭示出父母忽略了的东西。但孩子既没有足够的信息,也缺乏对人生的长远眼光,所以一个总是听命于孩子的父母,其实并不是真正的尊重孩子。我觉得原则应该是:永远去问,永远去解释,然后再做决定。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“Both were right, I think.” — A short, hedge-ended sentence set apart. Compare 7.5's tighter integration, "both were right," folded directly into the flow of the previous sentence without a separate hedge.一个简短、以限制语收尾、独立分开的句子。对比7.5分更紧密的融合方式,“both were right”直接被折叠进了前一句的语流里,没有独立的限制语。
   • LR“always listen, but not always do what the child wants” — Plain, literal phrasing. Contrast 7.5's more elegant abstraction, "Into account, always; into effect, not always."朴素、字面化的措辞。对比7.5分更优雅的抽象表达,“Into account, always; into effect, not always.”
   • GRA“But children do not have enough information or a long view of life, so a parent who always obeys the child is not really respecting them.” — A single "so" clause, less layered than 7.5's version which adds the sharper contrast "they're abandoning the job."一个单一的“so”分句,不如7.5分的版本那样有层次,后者加上了更犀利的对比“they're abandoning the job.”

   7.0 分

   The semicolon-and-dash opening built on ellipsis is more fluent and compact than 6.5's fuller, plainer opening sentence.这个建立在省略基础上、用分号和破折号构成的开头,比6.5分更完整、更朴素的开头句更流畅、更紧凑。

   Into account, always, honestly; into effect, not always — and my sister manages that difference well. On the same day, I watched her ask her eleven-year-old's opinion on which flat to rent, seriously, and then overrule her on bedtime without much discussion at all — both were right, in their own way. Listening to a child's view teaches them that they matter and often reveals something the parent missed. But children lack information and long views, and a parent who obeys every opinion isn't really respecting the child, they're abandoning the job. The weight should grow with age and the stakes involved.

   查看中文翻译

   说实话,永远要纳入考虑;但不总是要付诸实践——而我姐姐把这两者之间的分寸拿捏得很好。同一天里,我看到她认真地征求她十一岁孩子对该租哪套公寓的意见,然后又几乎不怎么商量,就在睡觉时间这件事上否决了孩子的意见——两种做法,以各自的方式来说,都是对的。倾听孩子的意见,能让他们明白自己是重要的,而且往往还能揭示出父母忽略了的东西。但孩子既缺乏信息,也缺乏长远的眼光,所以一个总是听命于每一个意见的父母,并不是真正在尊重孩子,他们其实是在放弃自己作为父母的责任。这种分量应该随着年龄和牵涉的利害关系而增加。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“Into account, always, honestly; into effect, not always — and my sister manages that difference well.” — A semicolon-and-dash opening built on ellipsis, more fluent and compact than 6.5's fuller, plainer opening sentence.一个建立在省略基础上、用分号和破折号构成的开头,比6.5分更完整、更朴素的开头句更流畅、更紧凑。
   • LR“isn't really respecting the child, they're abandoning the job” — A sharp contrast, matching 7.5 closely but keeping "really," a slightly softer intensifier.一个鲜明的对比,与7.5分非常接近,但保留了“really”,是一个略微更柔和的强调词。
   • GRA“The weight should grow with age and the stakes involved.” — A short, general closing sentence, less developed than 7.5's version, which adds two concrete contrasting examples after the colon.一个简短、笼统的结尾句,不如7.5分的版本那样成熟,后者在冒号后加上了两个具体的对比例子。

   7.5 分

   The two concrete, contrasting closing examples go beyond the general principle that ends the lower bands.两个具体、对比鲜明的结尾例子,超越了低分段结尾那种笼统的原则。

   Into account, always; into effect, not always, and my sister manages the difference well. On the same day I watched her ask her eleven-year-old's opinion on which flat to rent, seriously, and then overrule her on bedtime without discussion — both were right. Listening to a child's view teaches them that they matter and often reveals something the parent missed. But children lack information and long views, and a parent who obeys every opinion isn't respecting the child, they're abandoning the job. The weight should grow with age and with the stakes: a teenager's opinion on their own future deserves a great deal; a four-year-old's opinion on sugar deserves affection and a no.

   查看中文翻译

   永远要纳入考虑;但不总是要付诸实践,而我姐姐把这两者之间的分寸拿捏得很好。同一天里,我看到她认真地征求她十一岁孩子对该租哪套公寓的意见,然后又不加商量,就在睡觉时间这件事上否决了孩子的意见——两种做法都是对的。倾听孩子的意见,能让他们明白自己是重要的,而且往往还能揭示出父母忽略了的东西。但孩子既缺乏信息,也缺乏长远的眼光,所以一个总是听命于每一个意见的父母,并不是在尊重孩子,他们其实是在放弃自己的责任。这种分量应该随着年龄以及所涉及的利害关系而增加:一个青少年对自己未来的意见理应得到充分的重视;而一个四岁孩子关于糖果的意见,理应得到的是疼爱,以及一句“不行”。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“a teenager's opinion on their own future deserves a great deal; a four-year-old's opinion on sugar deserves affection and a no” — Two concrete, contrasting examples closing the answer, going beyond the general principle that ends 6.5 and 7.0.两个具体、对比鲜明的例子为回答收尾,超越了6.5分和7.0分结尾那种笼统的原则。
   • LR“they're abandoning the job” — A blunt, idiomatic closing phrase, sharper than 6.5's softer, more explanatory version.一个直白、习语化的结尾短语,比6.5分更柔和、更解释性的版本更犀利。
   • GRA“The weight should grow with age and with the stakes: a teenager's opinion on their own future deserves a great deal; a four-year-old's opinion on sugar deserves affection and a no.” — A colon-introduced sentence with two semicolon-joined contrasting examples, the most structurally ambitious sentence of the three bands.一个冒号引出、带有两个用分号连接的对比例子的句子,是三个分段里结构上最有野心的一句。

7. 7. How optimistic should we be that people will realise the importance of changing their behaviour for the good of the planet?

   2026年5–8月
   查看这道题的6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5三档对比

   6.5 分

   The plain because-clause ending lacks the colon-introduced two-part structure 7.5 uses for the same closing idea.以朴素的because从句收尾,缺少7.5分对同一结尾想法所使用的冒号引出的两部分结构。

   I would say cautiously optimistic, and I can see the gap clearly. The beach cleanups in Da Nang now bring hundreds of volunteers every month, which would have been impossible ten years ago, but the plastic still arrives with every storm. So awareness has grown much faster than behaviour. I think people do realise the problem, because surveys everywhere show they care. What is missing is the link between caring and acting, because taking action is inconvenient and the results are hard to see. I am hopeful because young people treat this issue as obvious, not something to argue about.

   查看中文翻译

   我会说,谨慎乐观,而且我能清楚地看到这中间的差距。Da Nang现在的海滩清洁活动,每个月都能吸引到几百名志愿者,这在十年前是不可能的,但每次风暴过后,塑料垃圾依然会被冲上岸。所以说,意识的增长远远快过行为的改变。我觉得人们确实意识到了这个问题,因为到处的调查都显示他们是在乎的。缺失的是“在乎”和“行动”之间的那个环节,因为采取行动是不方便的,而且结果也很难看得见。我抱有希望,是因为年轻人把这个问题当作理所当然的常识,而不是一件需要争论的事情。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“So awareness has grown much faster than behaviour.” — A plain causal summary. Compare 7.5's tighter dash-integrated version of the same claim within a longer sentence.一个朴素的因果总结。对比7.5分中,同样的论断被更紧密地融入一个更长句子里的、用破折号衔接的版本。
   • LR“cautiously optimistic” — A plain compound adjective. Contrast 7.5's structural opening, "Cautiously, and with a clear view of the gap," which drops the adjective for a sharper adverb-led sentence.一个朴素的复合形容词。对比7.5分结构性的开头“Cautiously, and with a clear view of the gap”,它去掉了这个形容词,改用一个更犀利的、以副词开头的句子。
   • GRA“I am hopeful because young people treat this issue as obvious, not something to argue about.” — A single because-clause, less layered than 7.5's colon-introduced two-part list closing with the antithesis "pessimistic path... hopeful one."一个单一的because从句,不如7.5分中冒号引出的两部分列举那样有层次,后者以“pessimistic path... hopeful one”这样的对比句收尾。

   7.0 分

   The semicolon-joined pair with a natural hedge is more fluent than 6.5's separate two-sentence version of the same claim.用分号连接、带有自然限制语的一对句子,比6.5分中同样论断被拆成两个独立句子的版本更流畅。

   Cautiously, I'd say, with a clear view of the gap. The beach cleanups in Da Nang now draw hundreds of volunteers every month, which would have been unthinkable a decade ago, and the plastic still arrives with every storm — awareness has clearly grown faster than behaviour. People do realise, honestly; polls everywhere show they care. What's missing is the link between caring and acting, because the actions are inconvenient and the results are largely invisible. My optimism rests on two things: young people, who treat the issue as obvious rather than debatable, and the fact that behaviour changes fast once systems change.

   查看中文翻译

   我会说,谨慎乐观,而且我能清楚地看到这中间的差距。Da Nang现在的海滩清洁活动,每个月都能吸引到几百名志愿者,这在十年前是难以想象的,但每次风暴过后,塑料垃圾依然会被冲上岸——意识的增长显然远远快过行为的改变。说实话,人们确实意识到了这个问题;到处的民调都显示他们是在乎的。缺失的是“在乎”和“行动”之间的那个环节,因为采取行动是不方便的,而且结果在很大程度上是看不见的。我的乐观建立在两件事上:一是年轻人,他们把这个问题当作理所当然的常识,而不是一件可以争论的事情;二是一个事实,那就是一旦系统发生改变,行为的改变就会很快跟上。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“People do realise, honestly; polls everywhere show they care.” — A semicolon-joined pair with a natural hedge, more fluent than 6.5's separate two-sentence version.一对用分号连接、带有自然限制语的句子,比6.5分中独立的两句版本更流畅。
   • LR“unthinkable a decade ago” — A precise, vivid phrase, matching 7.5, though 7.0's answer lacks the closing antithesis that extends the idea further.一个精确、生动的短语,与7.5分相同,不过7.0分的回答缺少那个把这个想法进一步延伸的结尾对比句。
   • GRA“My optimism rests on two things: young people, who treat the issue as obvious rather than debatable, and the fact that behaviour changes fast once systems change.” — A colon-introduced two-part list, more developed than 6.5's simpler single-clause explanation.一份冒号引出的两部分列举,比6.5分中更简单的单分句解释更成熟。

   7.5 分

   The two short, balanced closing sentences form a final antithesis, going beyond the single explanatory sentence at 7.0.两个简短、平衡的结尾句,构成了一个最终的对比,超越了7.0分单一的解释性句子。

   Cautiously, and with a clear view of the gap. The beach cleanups in Da Nang now draw hundreds of volunteers every month, which would have been unthinkable a decade ago, and the plastic still arrives with every storm — awareness has grown far faster than behaviour. People do realise; polls everywhere show they care. What's missing is the link between caring and acting, because the actions are inconvenient and the results invisible. My optimism rests on two things: young people, who treat the issue as obvious rather than debatable, and the fact that behaviour changes fast when systems change — when the clean choice becomes the easy one. Waiting for individuals to change on their own is the pessimistic path. Changing what's easy is the hopeful one.

   查看中文翻译

   谨慎乐观,而且我能清楚地看到这中间的差距。Da Nang现在的海滩清洁活动,每个月都能吸引到几百名志愿者,这在十年前是难以想象的,但每次风暴过后,塑料垃圾依然会被冲上岸——意识的增长远远快过行为的改变。人们确实意识到了这个问题;到处的民调都显示他们是在乎的。缺失的是“在乎”和“行动”之间的那个环节,因为采取行动是不方便的,而且结果是看不见的。我的乐观建立在两件事上:一是年轻人,他们把这个问题当作理所当然的常识,而不是一件可以争论的事情;二是一个事实,那就是一旦系统发生改变——一旦干净的选择变成了轻松的选择——行为的改变就会很快跟上。指望个人自发地去改变,那是悲观的路径。改变什么是“轻松的”,才是充满希望的那条路。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“Waiting for individuals to change on their own is the pessimistic path. Changing what's easy is the hopeful one.” — Two short, balanced closing sentences forming a final antithesis, going beyond the single explanatory sentence that ends 7.0.两个简短、平衡的结尾句,构成了一个最终的对比,超越了7.0分结尾那种单一的解释性句子。
   • LR“when the clean choice becomes the easy one” — A precise, almost aphoristic phrase extending the idea of systemic change beyond 7.0's plainer "once systems change."一个精确、近乎格言式的短语,把系统性变革这个想法延伸到超越了7.0分更朴素的“once systems change”。
   • GRA“My optimism rests on two things: young people, who treat the issue as obvious rather than debatable, and the fact that behaviour changes fast when systems change — when the clean choice becomes the easy one.” — A colon-introduced list extended further by a dash-appended restatement, more layered than the equivalent sentence at 7.0.一份冒号引出的列举,又被一个破折号附加的复述进一步延伸了,比7.0分中相应的句子更有层次。

8. 8. At what age do young children start to develop their own opinions?

   2026年5–8月
   查看这道题的6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5三档对比

   6.5 分

   The vague deferral in the final sentence lacks the specific age-by-age breakdown 7.5 uses to answer the question directly.结尾句中那种含糊的推托,缺少7.5分用来直接回答问题的、按年龄逐一细分的具体做法。

   I think preferences come first, and real opinions come later. A regular at my friend Vy's café brings her two-year-old, who will only sit on the red chair and screams if it is taken, which is a preference with no real reason behind it. Real opinions, with a reason attached, usually start around age four, when children begin explaining why the neighbour's dog is bad. By seven or eight, children start judging adults' behaviour, sometimes harshly. Truly independent opinions, ones that disagree with the family and are still defended, belong to early adolescence. So it really depends on what you mean by an opinion.

   查看中文翻译

   我觉得偏好会先出现,而真正的观点则来得更晚。我朋友Vy的咖啡馆有一位常客,她带着她两岁的孩子,那孩子只肯坐红色的椅子,一旦被别人坐走就会尖叫,这是一种背后没有真正理由的偏好。带有理由支撑的真正观点,通常在四岁左右开始出现,那时孩子开始能解释为什么邻居家的狗不好。到了七八岁,孩子开始评判成年人的行为,有时还评判得相当苛刻。真正独立的观点——那种和家庭意见不一致、还能坚持为自己辩护的观点——则属于青春期早期。所以这其实取决于你所说的“观点”到底是什么意思。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“So it really depends on what you mean by an opinion.” — A plain, general closing statement. Compare 7.5's fuller three-part breakdown, which answers the question with actual ages rather than a vague deferral.一个朴素、笼统的结尾陈述。对比7.5分更完整的三部分细分,它用实际的年龄来回答问题,而不是含糊地推托。
   • LR“a preference with no real reason behind it” — Plain phrasing. Contrast 7.5's more vivid "a preference held with total conviction and absolutely no argument behind it."朴素的措辞。对比7.5分更生动的“a preference held with total conviction and absolutely no argument behind it”。
   • GRA“Real opinions, with a reason attached, usually start around age four, when children begin explaining why the neighbour's dog is bad.” — A single sentence with one embedded example, less developed than 7.5's version, which adds a second example.一个只嵌入了一个例子的单句,不如7.5分的版本那样成熟,后者又加上了第二个例子。

   7.0 分

   The dash-framed definition embedded in a long sentence is more developed than 6.5's plainer, shorter version of the same claim.嵌入在一个长句里、用破折号框起来的定义,比6.5分中更朴素、更简短的同类论断更成熟。

   Preferences come first, honestly, then positions. A regular at Vy's café brings her two-year-old, who will only sit on the red chair and screams if it's taken — a preference held with total force and no argument behind it. Real positions, with a 'because' attached, tend to show up around four, when children start explaining why the neighbour's dog is bad or why rice beats noodles. By seven or eight they judge grown-ups' behaviour, sometimes harshly. Genuinely independent views — ones that contradict what the household believes and are defended anyway — belong to early adolescence, when my sister's students suddenly have theories about everything.

   查看中文翻译

   说实话,先出现的是偏好,然后才是立场。Vy咖啡馆有一位常客,带着她两岁的孩子,那孩子只肯坐红色的椅子,一旦被别人坐走就会尖叫——这是一种带着十足坚决态度、但背后没有任何理由支撑的偏好。带有“因为”这个理由的真正立场,通常在四岁左右开始出现,那时孩子开始能解释为什么邻居家的狗不好,或者为什么米饭比面条好吃。到了七八岁,他们开始评判大人的行为,有时还评判得相当苛刻。真正独立的观点——那种和家庭的信念相悖、却依然被坚持捍卫的观点——则属于青春期早期,那时我姐姐的学生们会突然对什么事情都有一套自己的理论。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“Genuinely independent views — ones that contradict what the household believes and are defended anyway — belong to early adolescence, when my sister's students suddenly have theories about everything.” — A dash-framed definition embedded in a long sentence, more developed than 6.5's plainer, shorter version of the same claim.一个嵌入在长句里、用破折号框起来的定义,比6.5分更朴素、更简短的同类论断更成熟。
   • LR“a preference held with total force and no argument behind it” — A more vivid, precise phrase than 6.5's plain "a preference with no real reason behind it."一个比6.5分朴素的“a preference with no real reason behind it”更生动、更精确的短语。
   • GRA“Real positions, with a 'because' attached, tend to show up around four, when children start explaining why the neighbour's dog is bad or why rice beats noodles.” — A sentence with two embedded examples joined by "or," more developed than 6.5's single-example version.一个带有两个用“or”连接的嵌入式例子的句子,比6.5分单一例子的版本更成熟。

   7.5 分

   The colon-introduced three-part chronological breakdown actually answers the question with specific ages, going beyond both lower bands.冒号引出的三部分时间线细分,真正用具体的年龄回答了问题,超越了两个较低分段的做法。

   Preferences arrive first, then positions. A regular at Vy's café brings her two-year-old, who will only sit on the red chair and screams the moment it's taken — a preference held with total conviction and absolutely no argument behind it. Real positions, the kind with a 'because' attached, tend to appear around four, when children start explaining why the neighbour's dog is bad or why rice beats noodles. By seven or eight they're judging grown-ups' behaviour, sometimes harshly. Genuinely independent views — the kind that contradict what the household believes and get defended anyway — belong to early adolescence, when my sister's students suddenly seem to have theories about everything. So it depends what counts: liking arrives in infancy, reasoning in preschool, and disagreement waits at the door of the teenage years.

   查看中文翻译

   先到来的是偏好,然后才是立场。Vy咖啡馆有一位常客,带着她两岁的孩子,那孩子只肯坐红色的椅子,一旦被别人坐走就会立刻尖叫——这是一种带着十足信念、但背后完全没有任何理由支撑的偏好。真正的立场,也就是带着一个“因为”的那种,通常在四岁左右开始出现,那时孩子开始能解释为什么邻居家的狗不好,或者为什么米饭比面条好吃。到了七八岁,他们开始评判大人的行为,有时还评判得相当苛刻。真正独立的观点——那种和家庭的信念相悖、却依然被坚持捍卫的观点——则属于青春期早期,那时我姐姐的学生们似乎会突然对什么事情都有一套自己的理论。所以这取决于你怎么定义:“喜欢”在婴儿期就出现了,“推理”在学前阶段出现,而“异议”则要等到青少年时期的大门才姗姗来迟。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“So it depends what counts: liking arrives in infancy, reasoning in preschool, and disagreement waits at the door of the teenage years.” — A colon-introduced three-part chronological breakdown that actually answers the question with specific ages, going well beyond 6.5's vague deferral and even 7.0's version, which lacks this closing summary.一份冒号引出的三部分时间线细分,真正用具体的年龄回答了问题,远远超越了6.5分含糊的推托,甚至也超越了7.0分的版本,后者缺少这个结尾式的总结。
   • LR“a preference held with total conviction and absolutely no argument behind it” — An intensified version of 7.0's phrase, adding "absolutely" for extra emphasis.7.0分短语的强化版本,加上了“absolutely”以作进一步强调。
   • GRA“Genuinely independent views — the kind that contradict what the household believes and get defended anyway — belong to early adolescence, when my sister's students suddenly seem to have theories about everything.” — A dash-framed definition matching 7.0's structure but with the added hedge "seem to," giving it a slightly more reflective tone.一个用破折号框起来的定义,结构与7.0分相同,但加上了限制语“seem to”,让它带有略微更反思性的语气。

9. 9. How successful are government campaigns in persuading people to change their behaviour, such as adopting a healthy lifestyle or protecting the environment?

   2026年5–8月
   查看这道题的6.5 / 7.0 / 7.5三档对比

   6.5 分

   The single-reason closing sentence lacks the second reason and sharper final antithesis 7.5 adds.这个单一理由的结尾句,缺少7.5分加上的第二个理由,以及更犀利的最终对比。

   I think campaigns work well when they change the rules, but not when they only change the posters. Vietnam's motorbike helmet law changed the country's roads in about a month, because it came with fines. But the anti-plastic-bag posters that have been in markets for years have changed nothing, because the bags are still free and everywhere. Campaigns that only give information assume people do not know something, but usually they already do. What actually works is making the good behaviour easy, cheap, or required, and the bad behaviour inconvenient or costly. Campaigns can still help a little, because they explain the reason for a rule.

   查看中文翻译

   我觉得宣传活动在改变规则的时候效果很好,但如果只是改变海报,那就没什么用。越南的摩托车头盔法,大约一个月内就改变了整个国家的道路状况,因为它配套了罚款措施。但那些在市场里贴了好几年的反塑料袋海报,却什么都没改变,因为塑料袋依然是免费的,而且到处都是。那些只提供信息的宣传活动,是假设人们不知道某件事,但通常他们其实早就知道了。真正起作用的,是让好的行为变得容易、便宜,或者成为强制要求,而让坏的行为变得不方便或者付出代价。宣传活动还是能起到一点帮助的,因为它们能解释一条规则背后的理由。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“Campaigns can still help a little, because they explain the reason for a rule.” — A plain, single-reason closing statement. Compare 7.5's fuller version, which adds a second reason and the sharper final antithesis about being "the weakest tool... the one it reaches for first."一个朴素的、单一理由的结尾陈述。对比7.5分更完整的版本,它加上了第二个理由,以及那句更犀利的最终对比,说宣传活动是“the weakest tool... the one it reaches for first”。
   • LR“give information assume people do not know something” — Wordy, imprecise phrasing. Contrast 7.5's tighter "only inform assume people don't know."冗长、不够精确的措辞。对比7.5分更紧凑的“only inform assume people don't know”。
   • GRA“Vietnam's motorbike helmet law changed the country's roads in about a month, because it came with fines.” — A simple because-clause, less layered than 7.5's semicolon-joined contrast sentence pairing the helmet law with the plastic-bag posters.一个简单的because从句,不如7.5分中用分号连接、把头盔法和反塑料袋海报配对起来的对比句那样有层次。

   7.0 分

   The dash-extended sentence with two supporting points is more developed than 6.5's single-reason version.用破折号延伸、带有两个支撑要点的句子,比6.5分单一理由的版本更成熟。

   Successful when they change the rules, honestly, and weak when they only change the posters. Vietnam's motorbike helmet law transformed the country's roads in about a month, because it came with fines; the anti-plastic-bag posters that have hung in markets for years have changed almost nothing, since the bags are still free and everywhere. Campaigns that only inform tend to assume people don't know, and mostly they already do. What works is making the desired behaviour easy, cheap or required, and the undesired one inconvenient or costly. Campaigns do help at the margins — they explain the reason for a rule, and can shift what's socially normal over years, as with smoking.

   查看中文翻译

   说实话,当宣传活动改变规则时,它们是成功的;而当它们只改变海报时,则是无力的。越南的摩托车头盔法,大约一个月内就改变了整个国家的道路状况,因为它配套了罚款措施;而那些在市场里挂了好几年的反塑料袋海报,却几乎什么都没改变,因为塑料袋依然是免费的,而且到处都是。那些只提供信息的宣传活动,往往是假设人们不知道某件事,但大多数情况下他们其实早就知道了。真正起作用的,是让人们想要的行为变得容易、便宜,或者成为强制要求,而让不想要的行为变得不方便或者付出代价。宣传活动确实能在边缘地带起到一点帮助——它们能解释一条规则背后的理由,还能在多年之后逐渐改变什么才算是社会常态,就像吸烟这件事一样。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“Campaigns do help at the margins — they explain the reason for a rule, and can shift what's socially normal over years, as with smoking.” — A dash-extended sentence with two supporting points, more developed than 6.5's single-reason version.一个用破折号延伸、带有两个支撑要点的句子,比6.5分单一理由的版本更成熟。
   • LR“transformed the country's roads” — A more dramatic verb than 6.5's plainer "changed."一个比6.5分更朴素的“changed”更具戏剧性的动词。
   • GRA“Vietnam's motorbike helmet law transformed the country's roads in about a month, because it came with fines; the anti-plastic-bag posters that have hung in markets for years have changed almost nothing, since the bags are still free and everywhere.” — A semicolon-joined contrast sentence, more controlled than 6.5's two separate sentences.一个用分号连接的对比句,比6.5分两个独立的句子更有控制力。

   7.5 分

   The sharp, ironic closing antithesis goes beyond 7.0's more neutral concluding sentence about campaigns helping at the margins.结尾那句犀利、带有反讽意味的对比,超越了7.0分更中性的结尾句,后者只是说宣传活动能在边缘地带起到帮助。

   Successful when they change the rules and weak when they only change the posters. Vietnam's motorbike helmet law transformed the country's roads in about a month, because it came with fines; the anti-plastic-bag posters that have hung in markets for years have changed nothing, because the bags are still free and everywhere. Campaigns that only inform assume people don't know, and mostly they do. What works is making the desired behaviour easy, cheap or required, and the undesired one inconvenient or costly. Campaigns help at the margins: they explain the reason for a rule, which builds acceptance, and they can shift what's socially normal over years, as with smoking. On their own, though, they're the weakest tool a government has, and the one it reaches for first.

   查看中文翻译

   当宣传活动改变规则时,它们是成功的;而当它们只改变海报时,则是无力的。越南的摩托车头盔法,大约一个月内就改变了整个国家的道路状况,因为它配套了罚款措施;而那些在市场里挂了好几年的反塑料袋海报,却什么都没改变,因为塑料袋依然是免费的,而且到处都是。那些只提供信息的宣传活动,是假设人们不知道,但大多数情况下他们其实是知道的。真正起作用的,是让人们想要的行为变得容易、便宜,或者成为强制要求,而让不想要的行为变得不方便或者付出代价。宣传活动能在边缘地带起到帮助:它们解释一条规则背后的理由,从而建立起人们的认同感,还能在多年之后逐渐改变什么才算是社会常态,就像吸烟这件事一样。不过,单靠宣传活动本身,它其实是一个政府手上最薄弱的工具——却也是它最先伸手去用的那一个。

   为什么是这个分数

   • FC“On their own, though, they're the weakest tool a government has, and the one it reaches for first.” — A sharp, ironic closing antithesis, going beyond 7.0's more neutral concluding sentence about campaigns helping "at the margins."一句犀利、带有反讽意味的结尾对比,超越了7.0分那句更中性的结尾句,后者只是说宣传活动能“at the margins”起到帮助。
   • LR“they're the weakest tool a government has” — A vivid, evaluative metaphor, more developed than 7.0's plainer description of campaigns helping "at the margins."一个生动、评价性的隐喻,比7.0分更朴素地描述宣传活动“at the margins”起到帮助的说法更成熟。
   • GRA“Campaigns help at the margins: they explain the reason for a rule, which builds acceptance, and they can shift what's socially normal over years, as with smoking.” — A colon-introduced sentence adding a third clause ("which builds acceptance") beyond 7.0's two-part version.一个冒号引出的句子,在7.0分两部分的版本之外,又加上了第三个分句(“which builds acceptance”)。