×
[PR]上記の広告は3ヶ月以上新規記事投稿のないブログに表示されています。新しい記事を書く事で広告が消えます。
次回のToastmastes例会のスピーチ原稿。
あとでlang-8にも投稿してみよう。
自分がDivisionの論評コンテストに出た時の感想。
敗退した身で偉そうなことはいえないが、みんな声調（vocal variety）とボディランゲージは立派だけど、それがスピーカーのためになったかどうかは疑問だった、という内容。
もちろん自分も自分の論評でどうインパクトを与えるかしか考えていなかった。
反省。
I'd like to talk about my impression for the Division evaluation contests, which I took part in as a contestant.
First of all, I was really surprised by the high level performance of contestants.
The contestants and test speaker used various techniques for speech in our communication manual.
The test speaker in Division D used vocal variety technique in her speech.
For example, she made a speech about a poety contest, spoke some poetry loudly.
On the other hand, she acted as if she were a contestant of the poetry contestant.
And, all contestants made full use of body language.
All contestants moved from one side of podium to another side, speaking loudly.
Someone suddenly squated down in his evaluation speech.
They must be using these dynamic body languages in their regular meeting.
However, the winner in the Division contest didn't use the most various vocal and didn't use the most dynamic body movement.
I believe that it was the analytic ability that the winner was superior to the other contestants in.
Of course, his vocal variety and body speaking were excellent.
Additionally, He evaluated the test speech in various and unique terms.
For example, he pointed out that speaker should have had some INTERVAL in her speech.
「そのポルトガル人のコンテスタントにこういったんです
...
もうええやないか！通訳なんかいらんわ！」
I agree his idea that the interval could have added a great impact on her speech.
Yes, loud and various sounds and dynamic body languages are not important!
They enhance impacts on audience.
However, the important point for test speaker must be specific improvement for herself.
Evaluation should be for speaker, not for audience.
I have never taken a role as IE.
I would be a evaluator who MUST be a great helpful for speakers.
Thank you.
PR
Comment
Trackback
Comment form
