Официальный сайт МГИМО МИД России · web viewmake sure that you think...

Unit 1 British Core Values

LEAD-IN

Schoolchildren should be taught "traditional British values" as part of an attempt to challenge extremism and promote a more cohesive society, the UK higher education minister claimed.

Under the proposals, all 11 to 16-year-olds will learn about free speech and democracy in the UK, as well as about the contribution of different communities to building a modern, successful country.

Do you think core values should be taught at schools?Should governments promote "traditional values" in their societies?

READING 1: WORKING WITH TWO TEXTS

Read the following texts on the British core values. Discuss the question in groups: In what way are the British ‘core values’ different from the core values of other nations, or are they?

Text 1What's British about core values?

Martin Kettle The Guardian May 15, 2006

Now, if there is one thing that most people will accept (happily in some cases, unhappily in others) about a country like ours in the 21st century, it is that the old nation state no longer comfortably embodies the people who inhabit it - call that the Tebbit test or the melting pot according to choice. But it's a fact that we all know we live in interconnected and weakened nations. So I'm very sceptical that a dose of shared national values are really the answer to any of these issues. I fear they might merely be a source of fresh divisions and disagreements.

I'd be more in favour of kids being taught Core British Values if I knew what CBV actually were. But in every discussion I've ever been involved in on this subject (and I've been in a few) it's not long before someone (sometimes me) makes the blindingly obvious point that fairness or ingenuity or respect or love of the countryside - or whatever virtue some other speaker has identified as essentially British - isn't in fact uniquely British at all. If I were French, I would have no trouble claiming that all these qualities were French Values too. Or if I were American. Or Chinese. And so on around the world. It is just daft to pretend that we British, however polite or pastoral we may imagine ourselves to be, are uniquely defined by them.

I'm not going to pretend that there isn't something worthy of the name that I would want to call Britishness. I think it's a fascinating challenge to define what, if

Продайвода Е.Д. Graduation Course 1

anything, really differentiates one group of human beings from another. But this is an incredibly slippery and elusive subject and too much of the debate is owned by scoundrels.

Yes, some aspects of what I would define as truly distinctive Britishness are rather admirable, like our pride in our particular independence, or an inherent scepticism towards theory and authority and a rumbustiously creative and adaptive use of language. But there are other British values, like drunken aggression and a seemingly unquenchable appetite for smut, that do less for me. And in any case, as I've said, a lot of what we tend to pass off as British is actually common to all humankind, while quite a lot of the rest is more accurately labelled, I suspect, as English.

So my view is that we should abandon the rather quaint and daft (and perhaps rather British) idea of trying to define the Britishness of core values, and should concentrate instead on the Core Values themselves, without trying to plant the Union Jack on any of them. I'm all for kids being taught about good citizenship and the principles of democracy, about respect for others, about non-violence, the rule of law, the ethical life, respect for the environment, individual freedom and the ties of community - and about how we can reconcile them.

Reading Notes

Norman Beresford Tebbit, Baron Tebbit, CH, PC (born 29 March 1931) is a British Conservative politician and former MP. He proposed the "Cricket test", also known as the "Tebbit Test", where he suggested that people from ethnic minorities in Britain should not be considered truly British until they supported the England cricket team, as opposed to the country of their or their ancestors' birth.

The melting pot - is a metaphor for a heterogeneous society becoming more homogeneous, with different elements "melting together". It is particularly used to describe the assimilation of immigrants to the United States.

The first use of the concept of immigrants "melting" into the receiving culture is found in the writings of J. Hector St. John de Crevecoeur. In his Letters from an American Farmer (1782) Crevecoeur writes, that the American is one who "leaving behind him all his ancient prejudices and manners, receives new ones from the new mode of life he has embraced, the government he obeys, and the new rank he holds. Here individuals of all nations are melted into a new race of men, whose labour and posterity will one day cause great changes in the world."

Text 2Ten core values of the British identity

Telegraph.co.uk27 Jul 2005

It cannot be said too often that terrorist atrocities are solely the responsibility of those who perpetrate them. To blame the invasion of Iraq, or the occupation of the West Bank, or poverty, or racism, or Western decadence, is both intellectually and morally wrong. What is reasonable, however, is to ask why modern Britain is breeding so many anti-British fanatics.


Part of the answer has to do with how Britain sees itself. The ancestors of the Leeds bombers, who arrived here in the mid-20th century from countries which had prospered under colonial rule, were infected by the self-belief of the British Empire. They were content, as it were, to buy into a nation whose subjects were so obviously proud of it.

Many countries try to codify their values in law. Some oblige their citizens to speak the national language; others make it a criminal offence to show disrespect to the flag. But statutory patriotism is an intrinsically un-British notion. We prefer simply to set out, in general terms, the non-negotiable components of our identity - the qualities of the citizenship that so many people crave for.

I. The rule of law. Our society is based on the idea that we all abide by the same rules, whatever our wealth or status. No one is above the law - not even the government.

II. The sovereignty of the Crown in Parliament. The Lords, the Commons and the monarch constitute the supreme authority in the land. There is no appeal to any higher jurisdiction, spiritual or temporal.

III. The pluralist state. Equality before the law implies that no one should be treated differently on the basis of belonging to a particular group. Conversely, all parties, sects, faiths and ideologies must tolerate the existence of their rivals.

IV. Personal freedom. There should be a presumption, always and everywhere, against state coercion. We should tolerate eccentricity in others, almost to the point of lunacy, provided no one else is harmed.

V. Private property. Freedom must include the freedom to buy and sell without fear of confiscation, to transfer ownership, to sign contracts and have them enforced. Britain was quicker than most countries to recognise this and became, in consequence, one of the happiest and most prosperous nations on Earth.

VI. Institutions. British freedom and British character are immanent in British institutions. These are not, mostly, statutory bodies, but spring from the way free individuals regulate each other's conduct, and provide for their needs, without recourse to coercion.

VII. The family. Civic society depends on values being passed from generation to generation. Stable families are the essential ingredient of a stable society.

VIII. History. British children inherit a political culture, a set of specific legal rights and obligations, and a stupendous series of national achievements. They should be taught about these things.

IX. The English-speaking world. The atrocities of September 11, 2001, were not simply an attack on a foreign nation; they were an attack on the anglosphere - on all of us who believe in freedom, justice and the rule of law.

X. The British character. Shaped by and in turn shaping our national institutions is our character as a people: stubborn, stoical, indignant at injustice. "The Saxon," wrote Kipling, "never means anything seriously till he talks about justice and right."

Not for the first time, we have been slow - perhaps too slow - to wake up to the threat we face. Now is the time to "talk about justice and right", and to act on our words.


Answer these questions on the texts:

Text 1 How important are the shared national values according to the author? What qualities does the author define as distinctively British?

Text 2 How do you understand the words of the author: “… statutory patriotism is an

intrinsically un-British notion”?

Find words in the texts which mean the same as the following. (They are in text order.) Use an English-English dictionary to help you . Make up sentences of your own using the words from the text.

Text 1resourcefulnessevasivea roguetypical ofadjust

Text 2crueltyto commitforefatheressentiallyto observeto put up withinherent infeeling anger at sth


DISCUSSION POINT

The Russian Government has put the concept of a national vision for Russia back on the political agenda, arguing the need to fill the current "ideological vacuum" in the country. It is widely recognized that reforms had left Russia without a unifying theme. To fill this void, a new national idea should be constructed, one based on "patriotism in the most positive sense of the concept."

What ideas can form the basis of the unifying theme in your country?Do traditional values help maintain order?Are family values equally important?

PAIR WORK

In pairs make a list of personal values. Get ready to speak about two to five values that have shaped your life. Also think about specific ways they have benefited you in your life.Consider which one or two new values you would like to implement in your life. Now think about the specific ways you can do it.

READING 2:

WOULD-BE BRITONS 'TO RECITE GOD SAVE THE QUEEN' FOR CITIZENSHIP TEST

Foreign nationals wishing to become British citizens will be required to know the first verse of God Save the Queen and key historic facts under a rewritten test, it has been claimed. Immigrants applying for a British passport will have to take

The new test will focus on the UK's culture and past rather than practical information, according to the Sunday Times.

Under plans drawn up by home secretary, immigrants will be told in an accompanying handbook that Britain is historically a Christian country with a 'long and illustrious history'.

Key battles, inventions, discoveries and culture will form the base of the 45-minute test, which will also require applicants to memorise profiles of William Shakespeare and Sir Winston Churchill among others.

The new test would replace the Life in the United Kingdom test introduced by the then Labour government in 2005, which included questions on welfare payments, borrowing money, dealing with the local council and the Human Rights Act.

A Home Office spokesperson commented: 'Putting our culture and history at the heart of the citizenship test will help ensure those permanently settling can understand British life, allowing them to properly integrate into our society.'

For getting a citizenship is the knowledge of the country’s history and culture more important than understanding social security schemes and being

aware of one’s rights?

See how you can deal with some of the questions from the Life in the UK Practice Test:

1. What type of constitution does the UK have? A. A legal constitution B. A written constitution C. An amended D. An unwritten constitution

2. When are general elections held?A. At least every yearB. At least every four yearsC. At least every five yearsD. At least every six years

3. How is it decided which party forms the Government?A. The members of the House of Lords vote for their preferred partyB. The party that wins the majority of the constituencies forms the GovernmentC. The party with the most candidates forms the GovernmentD. The party with the most votes forms the Government

4. What are functions of the House of Lords? Select two options from below:

A. Suggest amendment to lawsB. Propose new lawsC. Elect the Prime MinisterD. Elect the Speaker of the House of Commons

5. How often does the Cabinet normally meet?A. Bi-weeklyB. DailyC. MonthlyD. Weekly

6. What politicians are members of the Shadow Cabinet?

A. Civil servants working in the GovernmentB. Peers from the House of LordsC. Senior members of the main opposition partyD. The remaining MPs in Government who are not in the Cabinet

7. Which minister can sit in the House of Lords or in the House of Commons?

A. Chancellor of the ExchequerB. Foreign SecretaryC. Lord Chancellor

D. Home Secretary

8. What is the name of the system that governs how MPs are elected into the House of Commons?

A. Electoral College systemB. First past the post systemC. Proportional representation system

9. Members of the House of Lords can stand for election to the House of Commons. Is this statement true or false?

A. TrueB. False

10.What are the functions of the Speaker of the House of Commons? Select two options from below

A. To keep order during political debateB. To make sure rules are followed in the House of CommonsC. To Promote Members from the House of Commons to the House of LordsD. To give royal assent to new laws.

11.What is the name of the official record of proceedings in Parliament?A. HansardB. Parliament NewsC. The RecorderD. Westminster hour

12.What are the roles of the Whips in Parliament? Select two correct roles from below

A. Responsible for discipline in their partyB. Ensure attendance of MPs at voting time in the House of CommonsC. Ensure the House od Commons is always safe and secureD. Keep order in the House of Commons during political debates

13.When did all 18-year-olds get the vote? A. 1918 B. 1928 C. 1939D. 1969

14.How many member states are there in the Commonwealth?A. 25B. 39C. 53D. 75

15.When did the UK join the European Union?A. 1965B. 1973C. 1989D. The UK is not a member of the EU

16.What is a quango?A. A local police officerB. A non-departamental public bodyC. Another name for the Lord ChancellorD. The name of the British citizenship ceremony

17.What is the name of the patron saint of Scotland?A. St AndrewB. St DavidC. St GeorgeD. St Patrick

18.What's the minimum time you must have been married before you can divorce?

A. Six months B. One year C. Two yearsD. Three years

19.What is an important ceremonial role that the King or Queen performs?A. Chairing proceedings of the House of LordsB. Meeting weekly with Prime MinisterC. Opening of a new parliamentary sessionD. Voting in the House of Commons in case of a tie

20.Who is the monarch not allowed to marry? A. Anyone who is not of royal blood B. Anyone who is not a Protestant C. Anyone who is under the age of 25 D. Anyone who was born outside the UK

READING 3: ANALYSING TEXT STRUCTRE

Read the text and analyse its structure answering the questions that follow:

WHY MONARCHY? Paul JamesJanuary 30, 2005

We live in the 21st century, the age of democracy and equality of opportunity. We elect our leaders and hold them accountable to our representatives and to the law. Despite all this, a significant proportion of the World's democracies have as their head of state an

unelected, hereditary monarch, chosen by nothing more representative or accountable than chance of birth, and normally removable by nothing other than death. The status of these individuals defies the principle of equality and meritocracy. Why do we continue to accept it? What does monarchy give us that makes this apparent anachronism worth preserving?

Part of the answer probably lies in the principle “if it ain't broke, don't fix it.” In Europe, monarchies have survived in countries which have remained relatively stable over long periods, evolving gradually into modern democracies, evolving the monarchy along with them. In their cases, there has been no sudden or radical shift in political philosophy, leaving the monarchy floundering as a symbol of the old and discredited regime. Monarchies have fallen as a result of revolution, invasion, or catastrophic defeat in war, but never (in Europe) through a lawfully taken decision of a legislature or constitutional process where no wider major conflicts were involved.

Whatever faults the British monarchy may have, they don’t appear to be enough to warrant its removal, or enough to outweigh the benefits. There are various constitutional and political arguments which may underline the benefits of its existence. Not all the arguments which apply to the British monarchy will apply to others (or even to other realms of Her Britannic Majesty), but I will concentrate here on the British arguments.

The constitutional argument puts the monarch at the centre of the state. Although she exercises very little power at her own discretion, the Queen is the central cog in the machinery of state, the common link between executive, legislature, judiciary, civil service, military, church and other institutions, and keeps them all working. The Crown embodies the central authority under which these other bodies operate; it gives the final stamp of approval, the Royal Assent, to legislation. In a country without a written constitution, the Crown is the source of all state authority (although it is still subject to the law of the land – its authority is not absolute). The authority, and those who exercise it, could be codified in writing, and the particular functions of the Head of State granted to a President, but we would lose the flexibility of a constitution which can evolve to meet changing circumstances without the difficulties of a formal, and sometimes difficult, amendment process.

The existence of a hereditary monarch keeps the politicians in their place. However eminent a Prime Minister may become, he is always subject to a higher personal authority. Ambition, politicking and intrigue can never take someone to the highest office in the land, and he can never aggrandise himself by claiming to be the head and ultimate representative of the nation. A British Prime Minister can be verbally mauled in the legislature, and summarily dismissed by it, with a level of disrespect which few nations would be happy to show to their Head of State, but might like to inflict on their lesser politicians. Although, in practice, it is always the politicians who give the orders and run the country, if they go far beyond their authority, others can, in theory, defy them by claiming allegiance to the higher authority of the Crown, which is duty-bound to uphold the democratic order without personal interest or favour. This argument has never been put to the test in the UK, and has had mixed success elsewhere.

Proponents of a republic might argue that their head of state has at least been chosen by the people, and so has a right to command their respect, but the flip-side of that is that every elected president was opposed by a sizable section of the population, which may feel little loyalty or respect for the man they didn't want to represent it. While it is true that nobody ever voted for Elizabeth II, it is equally the case that not one person has ever rejected her at the ballot box either. While we have a vague idea where she stands on some issues, we don't really know her views in the way in which we would with a politician or ex-politician, and it is difficult to feel resentment towards a person who has never imposed, or attempted to impose, an unpopular policy on anyone. Personal loyalty is easier to achieve, and personal loyalty perhaps has more resonance than loyalty to an inanimate flag or amorphous state.

That loyalty is also easier to feel towards people with whom one has been familiar all one's life. With only the gradual changes of births and deaths, the Royal Family has always been with us, without the constant changes which come with elections every few years. By the same token, members of the Royal Family know from an early age that their lives will be ones of public duty, and are brought up in that ethos, in a way which a private citizen is usually not. As a result, they rarely go wrong in their public role, even though they may be no more successful than the rest of us in achieving ideal private lives.

“Monarchy” means rule by one person, but modern monarchies can offer more than the services of one person, or one person plus a spouse, because they are supported by a royal family. The Queen alone is responsible for the constitutional functions of the monarch, but she can delegate other duties (such as investitures) when necessary to other members of the family, all as well-known and familiar as herself. Part of what gives constitutional monarchy an enhanced social role is its ability to espouse many worthy causes, and take the time to attend events and functions without having to take time out of the essential job of running the country to do so; and that role is greatly enhanced further by the fact that there are a number of princes and princesses to carry it out. By contrast, an individual non-executive President in a parliamentary republic is more limited in number of roles he can play and causes he can espouse.

As well as the familiarity with the members of today’s monarchy, the Crown also gives a sense of continuity with the past, in a way which a very modern institution doesn’t, and in a more personalized way than a non-hereditary, older institution can. It is instinctively conservative, and can preserve and represent traditions which date back centuries; its current representatives are the descendants of its former ones, and its family continuity over centuries enhances the sense of identity with a nation’s own history and culture.

The nation wouldn’t fall apart without the monarchy. Its culture isn’t entirely dependent on royalty, and ways can be found to preserve traditions and handle the constitutional issues which its absence would create (in fact, some would argue that such issues would be better dealt with through a written constitution, with clearly defined powers for the institutions of state). Because of its enduring nature, its importance can be romantically overemphasized. It’s not an institution which could be created today embodying all the features which give it its distinctive character,

because its history is part of what makes it distinctive. But given that it exists and that it enhances the character of the nation, it would be a shame to lose it.

Do the following assignments on the text:

Single out introduction, body and conclusion. Is there a thesis statement? Where do you usually find it? Does every paragraph have a topic sentence? See, if all of them are relevant. Is every topic sentence developed into a paragraph by giving examples, facts

or figures and by stating reasons or giving an explanation? Does the author stick to the rule: One paragraph – one thought or idea?

WRITING PRACTICE: PARAGRAPH Now, develop any of the topic sentences given below into a coherent paragraph 1 :

The Monarchy sustains class injustice Monarchy is a costly extravagance The behaviour of the Royals if often indecent

READING 4: READING FOR INFORMATION

Read the text and do the listening assignment that follows. Get ready to discuss which voting system is used in Russia, the UK and the US. Argue which system in your opinion is the most democratic and be ready to defend your stance in course of class discussion

BRITAIN SAYS NOMay 7, 2011 The Economist

BRITAIN is to continue electing its Parliament with the first-past-the-post voting system. A change to the alternative vote (AV) was offered in a national referendum, only the second in British history, on May 5th, but was rejected by a landslide. The counting is yet to finish but the No campaign is on course to secure over two-thirds of the votes cast. Cambridge and some London boroughs were among the very few electoral districts which voted in favour of AV. Turnout is estimated to be 41%, higher than many expected.

The political implications of the result are different for each of the main three parties. It is a crushing setback for the Liberal Democrats, and their leader Nick Clegg. Electoral reform is their animating cause; the current system gives them fewer seats in Parliament than their share of the popular vote would seem to deserve. Today’s result has killed off not only AV, but perhaps the prospect of any electoral reform for a generation. Some in the party may now also begin to openly question what the Lib Dems are getting out of the coalition with the Conservatives,

1 See ANNEX 1 for the guidelines on paragraph writing

though their reluctance to provoke a general election while they are so low in the polls would seem to make an outright rupture unlikely.

For the Tories, and David Cameron in particular, the result is a triumph. The party feared that it would never again be able to govern alone if the reform passed (though the electoral implications of AV for the Tories were never that clear) and many resented their leader for offering the referendum to the Lib Dems in the first place. Only when he joined the No campaign tenaciously in February did it begin to pull away from the Yes camp. Mr Cameron has managed to avoid a serious schism with his party, and perhaps even a crisis concerning his own leadership, by defeating AV. He is also the only one of the three main party leaders to end up on the victorious side. The only problem is that he may have won too well, as Bagehot notes.

For Labour generally, the result means little. The party has long been divided on electoral reform, and even its pro-AV camp were not so enthusiastic as to be crestfallen tonight. For Ed Miliband, their leader, the implications are slightly more serious. He featured prominently in the Yes campaign, perhaps more prominently than was wise. On its own, the result is not enough to taint him as an electoral under-achiever but, in combination with Labour’s humiliation in the elections in Scotland (where he also campaigned visibly) and its modestly successful showing in the English council elections, it might.

LISTENING:

Go to http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wyGX19-4PIListen to the conversation and say what the difference between the "first past the post", "alternative voting" and "proportional representation" systems is.

PROFICIENCY FILE:

MULTIPLE CHOICE LEXICAL CLOZE 2

…On British MonarchyI must say, I can’t understand the (1) .......... of the British nation toward the royal family. For years - shall I be candid here for a moment? - I thought they were insupportably boring and only marginally attractive, but everybody in England adored them. Then when, by a small (2) ……...., they finally started doing arresting and erratic things and started making the News of the World on merit— when, in a (3) ……....., they finally became interesting—the whole nation was suddenly saying, "Shocking. Let's get rid of them." Only that week, I had watched with open mouth a television program in which four (4) …….... of British intellectual life sat around discussing whether the nation should (5) ............ with Prince Charles and leapfrog to little Prince William. If you are going to have a system of hereditary

2 See ANNEX 2 for the instructions on how to deal with the exercises in the Proficiency format

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-wyGX19-4PI

privilege, then surely you have to take what (6) .......... comes your way no matter how ponderous the poor fellow may be.

1. A. feeling В. attitudes С. contacts D. attachment

2. A. miracle В. way С. chance D. surprise

3. A. time В. minute С. wonder D. word

4. A. characters В. figures С. pillars D. cornerstones

5. A. side В. dispense С. do away D. cope

6. A. gives В. goes С. Is D. comes

OPEN CLOZENotes from a Small Island (excerpt)

...Daniel's, the most interesting department store in Britain, always puts me (1) …....... mind of what Britain might have been like (2) …….... communism.It has long seemed to me unfortunate—and I'm taking the global view here—that such an important experiment (3) .......... social organization was left to the Russians when the British clearly would have managed it so much better. All those things that are necessary (4) …….... the successful implementation of a rigorous socialist system are, after all, second nature (5) …….... the British. (6) …….... a start, they like going without. They are great (7) …….... pulling together, particularly (8) ..... the face of adversity, (9) .......... a perceived common good. They will queue patiently for indefinite periods and accept (10) .......... rare fortitude the imposition of rationing, bland diets, and sudden inconvenient shortages of staple goods. They are comfortable (11) .......... faceless bureaucracies and, as Mrs. Thatcher proved, tolerant (12) …….... dictatorships. They will wait uncomplainingly for years for an operation or the delivery of a household appliance. They have a natural gift for making excellent, muttered jokes (13) …….... authority without ever actually challenging it, and they derive universal satisfaction from the sight of the rich and powerful brought low. Most of those (14) …….... the age of twenty-five already dress like East Germans. The conditions, (15) …….... a word, are right.

Please understand I'm not saying that Britain would have been a happier, better place (16) …….... communism, merely that the British would have done it properly. They would have taken it (17) .......... stride, (18) …….... good heart, and without excessive cheating. (19) …….... point of fact, (20) ..... about 1970 it wouldn't have made the slightest discernible difference to most people's lives.

WORD FORMATION

From The Times June 15, 2007Brown Will Put Reform Of The Lords On Back Burner

Peter Riddell The reform of the House of Lords has been put off, again. Gordon Brown has decided that this is a “manifesto issue”, not a matter for early legislation in

this Parliament.There has been a pause since the Commons voted three months ago for a wholly elected second chamber, and the Lords for a wholly appointed one. The problem is less this stalemate than the many (1) .......... questions. A meeting last month of the Cabinet committee on constitutional affairs (known as CA and chaired by Jack Straw, the Leader of the Commons) decided that a lot more work needs to be done. This was also the (2) .......... view of the cross-party group on Lords reform.At heart is the familiar dilemma over the balance between composition and powers: the more elected members there are, the more assertive the reformed House is likely to be. How can the supremacy of the Commons be (3) ..........? How will differences between the House be reconciled without gridlock? Also, what system will be used to elect members? If it is a regional list system asking voters to choose between groups drawn up by the parties, won’t party managers have effectively the same powers of patronage as under appointment? How will life peers be phased out?Mr Straw has been asked to prepare options for both an 80 and 100 per cent elected House. The main (4) .......... preference is still for the former (with the balance coming largely from nonparty peers), (5) .......... since the majority for a (6) .......... elected chamber was inflated by “wrecking” votes by supporters of an appointed House.A statement is (7) .......... before the end of July, promising further consultations and yet another White Paper. Specific proposals will then be set out in the next Labour manifesto. Including a detailed plan in the manifesto would be in order to (8) ..........any resistance in the Lords after the next election.Mr Brown has, for some time, been inclined to take this approach. This is partly because he does not want his government to be bogged down in a time-consuming battle in the Lords. But he is also keen for the future of the Lords to be considered as part of the (9) .......... debate on reviving constitutional reform.In the interim, the Government is keeping a close eye on a Private Member’s Bill put forward by Lord Steel of Aikwood, the former Liberal leader, which is due to have its second reading on July 20. It would prevent the remaining 92 hereditary peers from being (10) .......... through by-elections, put the appointments commission on a statutory basis and make it responsible for selecting new peers.Ministers support some of these aims, but fear the Bill risks preempting the question of election: along the lines that since anomalies have been removed, why do any more? But there is still momentum for change: elections could start around the time of the London Olympics.

resolve

dominate

shrine

ministerspecialwhole

like

come

wide

place

*Explain the meaning of the underlined words, translate them into Russian

GAPPED SENTENCES

1. Checks and balances guard against undue concentrations of power and make certain that all the interests are properly taken into ..........Plato gave an .......... of how aristocratic government declines.

These are the funds in the process of being transferred from one customer's .......... to another.2. The party's failure hit her pretty hard and while she was .......... to comfort her husband, it was he that ended up comforting her.The views of people like Ashley were .......... very clearly by their own class experiences.This ballot is about the right of our members to have their pay .......... by free collective bargaining and not by government diktat.3. When we draw a picture of a planet's orbit we show the Sun, of course, and a single line around it in the .......... of an ellipse.A few seconds later she disappeared: as the cloud changed .......... and then vanishedWith the team still taking new .........., Arsenal reached the Cup final for the first time in 19274. True, there is a hard .......... of youngsters who are totally beyond the control of their parents or the social servicesAt the .......... of this debate is the threat of reductions in public funding at a time when cutting the government's colossal budget deficit is a national priority.Yes, quality training will be needed which addresses the .......... values and the health and safety perceptions that are the key to our success.5. The slowly evolving British family leaves a much more easily discernible impact on women's employment in Britain than the possible .......... influence of women's earning opportunities on family formation.Often the paintings appear to be signed on the .......... and occasionally a date is inscribed there also.The Gulf war can be viewed as an attempt to .......... the irreversible.6. If the Government were serious about this matter, would they not .......... some of the obstacles that now stand in the way of successful prosecutions of the Theft Act?It is essential that engineers are in a position to demonstrate that they have carried out their professional responsibilities and have acted to .......... or reduce risks to acceptable levels.Perhaps it may even spur them to have a rethink and .......... the threat of closure from many wonderful facilities up and down the country.

KEY WORD TRANSFORMATIONS

1. The present government has never promised to lower taxation.timeAt _____________________________ promised to lower taxation.

2. William tried to remain impartial in the quarrel between his cousins.sidesWilliam tried ____________________________ in the quarrel between his cousins.

3. I really enjoy reading, but sometimes I feel like doing something more active.timesMuch ____________________________ I prefer to do something more active.

4. The president only made his formal announcement after the publication of the leaked information.

stillNot until the leaked information _______________________________ his formal announcement.

5. Without your support, I would never have been able to find a new job.stillIf it hadn’t ___________________________ doing my old job.

6. The villagers said they opposed the plans for the new shopping center.disapprovalThe villagers ____________________________ the plans for the new shopping centre.

7. The prime Minister resigned because of his sudden illness.resultedThe Prime Minister __________________________ his sudden illness.

8. The news of the merger came as a complete surprise to the workers.abackThe workers ___________________________ the news of the merger.

READING FOR SUMMARY 3

Skim the text paying special attention to the text structure. Single out the thesis, the topic sentences, if any, and the conclusion. Read the text again making notes of the main ideas and arguments of the author.

WHY THE MONARCHY MUST STAYNewsweekMarch10, 1996Harold Brooks Baker

Churchill often described parliamentary democracy and constitutional monarchy as being imperfect--but the best that man had yet devised.

It is human nature to require a leader at the helm. In our century we have looked to our heads of state for this role. Apart from carrying out ceremonial duties, a head of state should foster the notion of political accountability, while remaining above politics. That, of course, can't be true in places where the head of state is an ex-politician--or in America, where the head of state is the political leader. The British system of constitutional monarchy, like the more than half-dozen monarchies still in existence in Europe, aptly shows why a monarch is a more successful figurehead than a president.

"In Great Britain things that are conventional become habitual, and things that are habitual become constitutional," wrote American historian George Brinton Cooper 40 years ago. In Britain the monarch remains very much at the heart of its Constitution. As constitutional monarch, Queen Elizabeth II holds powers that may surprise many. She can choose a prime minister, dissolve Parliament and declare war. In reality, she waives these powers and is bound by tradition to accept the advice of Parliament. This system prevents politicians from too easily usurping

3 See ANNEX 3 for guidelines on summary writing

power and, it may be argued, has prevented a dictator from dominating Great Britain since Oliver Cromwell's short rule in the 17th century.

It is one of the great strengths of monarchy that it has never taken sides in any political debate, that it shows itself, as an institution, to be evenhanded. This apolitical stance has made it possible for the political culture of Great Britain to assimilate, with relative ease, theories that would appear on the face of things to be radically at odds with a system of monarchical government-- for example, socialism. Monarchy in this century has worked with socialist governments as effectively as with those whose politics one might choose to think were more sympathetic to the institution.

If one were to jettison the monarchy, government, Parliament, the nation and the commonwealth would be turned upside down. Every nut and bolt of every one of Britain's major institutions would have to be altered to make way for change. Bear in mind that every organ from the post office to the armed services acts with authority from the monarch. The troops that are sent to Bosnia and the letters that arrive in one's letter box are all effectively Her Majesty's. This is a system that has shown itself to work--and it's generally agreed that if something works, it should be retained. Any replacement would be ruinously costly, both in financial terms and also in terms of the loss of a unifying national symbol and a vital historical link. Only a monarchy can provide such continuity, remaining constant in a country's ever-changing national vision.

British monarchy has served both the empire and the commonwealth with great distinction. It is easy to forget in Great Britain that Queen Elizabeth is head of state not only of one small island nation, but also of the 53 nations of the commonwealth, with a combined population of 1.5 billion. In short, she is head of state to more than one quarter of the earth's inhabitants. As such, she flies the world nurturing a sense of unity between nations. From this follows trade, and a vital economic boost to the nation's industry and commerce. At home, monarchy is at the center of a multimillion-dollar tourist industry. (And Elizabeth II donates more than $90 million a year to the treasury.) Monarchy adds dignity and historical relevance to all state occasions, and there can be no doubt that it is still more impressive to be met by a monarch than by a president.

And yet monarchy is threatened because the idea of republicanism seems more democratic and less overtly hierarchical. After the "annus horribilis", "Camillagate", "Squidgygate" and other royal antics, support for the monarchy in Great Britain dropped to 38 percent. Yet these poll results stem largely from a confusion in the public mind between the words "monarchy" and "royal family." In a monarchy there is only one person of importance: the reigning monarch. The public actions and statements of other members of the royal family -- however laudable or distressing they may be--have no effect on the monarch's power or status. Nor should any individual's character or conduct be confused with those of an institution of much longer standing. Monarchy's legitimacy flows from its history and traditions and from the fact that it cannot be overwhelmed by any short-lived cult of personality. It commands too much respect.

Despite recent bursts of anti-monarchical feeling, however, it is still hard to discover a strong movement toward a republic in this country. There is still no

focus for this opposition, nor has any popular political party taken up the call for the monarch's removal. Even The Independent, one of Britain's most respected broadsheet newspapers, in its call for a wider debate on this issue still advocated the retention of Queen Elizabeth as head of state until her death. Taken together, what does all this show? That people like things the way they are.

Now summarise the article Why Monarchy? By Paul James following the suggested summary-writing technique.

VOCABULARY FOCUS: LAW AND ORDER

Read the text paying special attention to the terms used. Translate the italicised word combinations using vocabulary notes.

Laws embody the basic moral values of society. They impose limits on the conduct of individuals in order to promote the greater good and to make communities safer places to live. It is against the law to steal, to injure another person, to drive recklessly or to pollute the environment, to name just a few of the countless ways the law is designed to protect us. We are said to be ruled by law, not by those who enforce the law or wield government power. No one is above the law. Everyone, no matter how wealthy or how powerful they are, must obey the law or face the consequences.

Criminal law, one of two broad categories of law, deals with acts of intentional harm to individuals. A crime is a deliberate or reckless act that causes harm to another person or another person's property, and it is also a crime to neglect a duty to protect others from harm. National Criminal Codes list hundreds of criminal offences - from vandalism to murder - and stipulate the range of punishment that can be imposed. Since crimes are an offence against society, normally the state investigates and prosecutes criminal allegations on the victim's behalf. The police gather evidence and, in court, public prosecutors present the case against the person accused of the crime. For someone to be convicted of a crime, it must be proven that a crime was committed and, for most offences, that the person meant to commit the crime.

Civil law deals with disputes between private parties, or negligent acts that cause harm to others. For example, if individuals or companies disagree over the terms of an agreement, or who owns land or buildings, or whether a person was wrongfully dismissed from their employment, they may file a suit asking the courts to decide who is right. Depending on the circumstances, a person may be held responsible for any damages or injury that occurs as a result of their negligence. The party who brings the legal action is known as the plaintiff, claimant or applicant, while the party being sued is the defendant or respondent. The state plays no role in civil cases, unless the government launches a lawsuit or is the party being sued. Parties retain a lawyer - or may choose to represent themselves - to gather evidence and present the case in court.

Differing standards of proof: More evidence is needed to find the accused at fault in criminal cases than to find the defendant at fault in civil ones. To convict someone of a crime, the prosecution must show there is proof beyond a reasonable doubt that the person committed the crime and, in most cases, that they intended to commit it. Judges and juries cannot convict someone they believe probably committed the crime or likely is guilty - they must be almost certain. This gives the accused the benefit of any reasonable doubt and makes it less likely an innocent person will be wrongfully convicted and imprisoned. Civil cases, in contrast, must be proven on a balance of probabilities - if it is more likely than not that the defendant caused harm or loss, a court can uphold a civil claim.

Given below are the newspaper clips which contain typical collocations about courts and trials. Read them and translate them into Russian using Active vocabulary list below:

Vocabulary Notes:1. to be convicted of a crime - осудить, признать виновным (в чём-л.)2. to file a suit – подать иск3. to hоld sb. responsible – признать виновным4. plaintiff, claimant or applicant - истец5. defendant or respondent - ответчик6. evidence - улика; свидетельское показание

Jack Tweed has today denied two counts of rape. Co-defendant Anthony Davis who is on bail, appeared in court where he also pleaded not guilty on two counts of rape. Judge Radford remanded Tweed in custody and set a trial date of April 12.

Kerman describes how she was tracked down, indicted on drug-smuggling and money-laundering charges and sentenced to federal prison for 15 months after pleading guilty to laundering.

The Sneed court found as a matter of law that the plaintiff's allegations failed to show “aggravating circumstances”.

A Quebec man who was acquitted of killing a police officer has been granted parole after serving one-third of a 20-month sentence.

Attorney submitted a motion to the court to issue a subpoena to obtain Nord’s testimony at his corruption trial

The affidavit of the lead investigator in the Oland homicide investigation has been made public, but the release of search warrants related to the case has been delayed for another couple of weeks.

Russian Parliament has restored the Criminal Code's defamation article, the press office of the State Duma

announced Monday. Under the old

law, libel was classified as an administrative offence.

7. to find the accused at fault in – признать виновным8. to issue a subpoena

to subpoena smb. as a witness — вызывать кого-л. повесткой в качестве свидетеляto subpoena smb. to testify — вызывать кого-л. повесткой для дачи свидетельских показанийto be summoned before a judge — быть вызванным в суд

9. to obtain testimonyto give / bear testimony — давать показания to call smb. in testimony — вызвать кого-л. в качестве свидетеля

10.a trial - судебное разбирательство; судебный процесс, судto be on one's trial — быть под судом to face / to stand / to undergo / to go on trial, to come (to appear) before the bar (before the court / in court) — представать перед судом to bring to / to put on trial — привлекать к суду

11.to acquit (of a crime) – оправдать12.to grant (to release on) parole – досрочно условно освободить13.to sentence smb. to – приговорить к

to serve a sentence – отбыть срокto pass / to impose / to pronounce a sentence upon smb. — выносить приговор кому-л.

14.a plaintiff / a claimant – истец15.aggravating circumstances – отягчающие обстоятельства

mitigating ~ – смягчающие вину обстоятельства16.affidavit – письменное показание под присягой (syn. testimony)17.homicide – убийство18.warrant - ордер

to release a search ~ - выдать ордер на обыск19.to indict / to bring (file, lay, level, raise) an accusation (a charge)

(against) / to accuse (smb) of (blame for, charge with) (smth) - обвинять кого-л в чём-л

20.to plead guilty (not guilty) - признать себя виновным (заявлять о своей невиновности)

21.on counts of / on a charge of – по обвинению в 22.a defendant / an accused / a respondent - ответчик; обвиняемый,

подсудимый23.on bail – под залог

to set smb. free / to release / to remand smb. on bail — отпустить кого-л. под залог

24.to take into custody — арестовать, взять под стражу to remand (in custody) – возвращать под стражу

25.to grant pardon – помиловатьto grant a reprieve – дать отсрочку исполнения приговора

26.defamation (libel, slander, calumny) - клевета

What do you call a person who:

o is formally declared not to have committed the crime o has been accused of breaking the law and is being tried in court o brings a case against another in a court of law o is found guilty of a criminal offence and serving a sentence of imprisonment o a person who helps another commit a crime o a person giving sworn testimony to a court of law

What do you call the following crimes:

o a minor, non-indictable offense o a crime regarded in many judicial systems as more serious than a

misdemeanouro the criminal act of deliberately setting fire to propertyo the offense of wilfully telling an untruth in a court after having taken an oatho illegal entry of a building with intent to commit a crime, especially thefto a legal term for any killing of a human being by another human being

Translate the following sentences into English using the collocations from the active vocabulary list of the unit:

Женщина по имени Кристал Мангум арестована по обвинению в поджоге и покушении на убийство своего гражданского мужа.

Бывший начальник таможенного управления признан виновным в получении взятки и осужден к шести годам лишения свободы.

Подозреваемый был немедленно взят под стражу и скоро предстанет перед судом.

Бывший, осужденный за воспрепятствование осуществлению правосудия, сегодня условно-досрочно освобожден.

Президент опроверг заявления о политическом характере дела и сказал, что X. должен признать себя виновным, если хочет быть помилованным.

Польский режиссер Роман Полански сегодня освобожден под залог из тюрьмы швейцарского города Винтертур.

Сотрудник британского МИД Джордж Блейк был признан виновным по всем пунктам обвинения и приговорен к 42 годам лишения свободы.

Cуд принял во внимание отсутствие отягчающих вину обстоятельств, а к смягчающим вину обстоятельствам суд относит: полное признание вины и раскаяние в содеянном.

Несколько высокопоставленных российских чиновников были вызваны повесткой в суд в качестве свидетеля по второму делу ЮКОСа.

What do you call

o a system that allows a prisoner to be released before they have served their full sentence

o a state of being detained or held under guard, especially by the police o a writ ordering a person to attend a courto a crime committed consciously and intentionally o a forgiveness of a crime and the penalty associated with ito a security, usually a sum of money, exchanged for the release of an

arrested person as a guarantee of that person's appearance for trial o a court document authorizing the police to detain someone o a written statement with details of the crimes someone is charged witho a communication of a statement that makes a claim, expressly stated or

implied to be factual, that may give an individual a negative imageo is the damaging of someone's good reputation by saying something bad

and untrue about them

Match the verbs in column A with the words in column B and translate the collocations into Russian:

Ato sue to acquit to commit to issueto grant to file to pleadto indictto stand to giveto remand

Ba pardonsmb. on bailtrial guilty to felonysmb. for murderon all countstestimonyperjuryfor damagesfor bankruptcya subpoena

Fill in the gaps with the words from your active vocabulary list. Translate the text into Russian

Van der Sloot Waits in Prison for Murder TrialAs an angry crowd shouted insults, Joran van der Sloot was lead away to

prison to wait his trial after being officially …………… with first-degree murder of a 21-year-old Peruvian woman. The key to the charges against the …………… is that he acted with "ferocity and great cruelty" which under Peruvian law are considered …………… circumstances, allowing the judge to impose the maximum …………… of 35 years if he is ……………

Breivik sentenced to prison for Norway mass killingOn 24 August 2012, Oslo District Court found Breivik _______ of murdering

77 people. He was _______ to preventive _______ with a term of 21 years with the possibility of extension for as long as he is deemed a danger to society.

A man believed to be a sympathizer of Breivik has been _______ in the Czech Republic for building up a stash of weapons at his home. The 29-year-old man was _______ on Aug. 10 in Ostrava. In a home _______ police found computer equipment, ammunition and explosives. The_______, who was not identified, has been _______ five times in the past on explosives-related_______.

FOLOW-UP: In the press find a report of a recent case/conflict and present it in class (it should take not more than 2 minutes). When drafting your presentation try to make use of as many active vocabulary items as possible.

DEBATE CLUB 4: GIVING ARGUMENTS

PROPOSITION: We should limit the right to bear arms

Given below are the arguments for the proposition:

1. The only function of a gun is to kill2. The legal ownership of guns by ordinary citizens inevitably leads to many

accidental deaths3. Gun ownership increases the risk of suicide

Extend these arguments and give others to support the proposition

Here is the example of how you can extend an argument:

4 See ANNEX 4 for the debate format

The only function of a gun is to kill. The more instruments of death and injury can be removed from our society, the

safer it will be. In the U.S.A. for example death by gunshot has become the leading cause of death among some social groups (in particular for African-American males aged from 12 to 19 years old). Quite simply, guns are lethal and the fewer people have them the better.

Here is the counter argument:Prohibition is not the answer, especially not in countries such as the USA where

gun ownership is such an entrenched aspect of society. Banning guns would not make them disappear or make them any less dangerous. It is a legitimate right of citizens to own weapons with which they can protect themselves, their family, and their property. Besides, in many cases guns serve as a deterrent against criminals and can be viewed as crime prevention instruments.Now think of counter arguments to the points in support of the proposition.

READING 5 (optional): READ THE TEXT AND DO THE ASSIGNMENTS THAT FOLLOW

NEW GUIDE TO ‘IRRITATING’ ENGLAND9 May 2008 BBC.co.uk

England is a nation of "overweight, alcopop-swilling, sex- and celebrity-obsessed TV addicts", according to a new tourist guide book.

The latest edition of the Rough Guide says no other country is as "insular, self-important and irritating". But in turn none is more "fascinating, beautiful and culturally diverse", with such "an unparalleled range of historic buildings, monuments and landscapes". Oxford is "superb", Bath "unmissable" and Newcastle "vibrant", it adds.

Backhanded compliments abound in the book, which was produced by four British travel writers. "It's a nation that prides itself on patriotism - yet has a Scottish prime minister, Italian football coach and a Greek royal consort," it says.

England "isn't just one place, but a perpetual collision of culture, class and race". On the one hand, "a genuine haven for refugees" with immigrants from more than 100 ethnic backgrounds, but on the other, "a deeply conservative place".

In some ways the country is losing its diversity, the guide claims, "where the hearts of many towns - and increasingly their outskirts - consist of identikit retail zones". "Yet it's also a country where individuality and creativity flourish, fuelling* a thriving pop culture and producing one of the most dynamic fashion, music and arts scenes to be found anywhere."

Certain towns and cities are recommended to visitors, such as Bath which has "graceful, honey-toned terrace, beautifully preserved Roman baths and a vivacious cultural scene". The Lake District, South Downs and Royal Tunbridge Wells also all find favour. But many other places are criticised. Plymouth has "a bland and modern face", Derby is "unexciting" and Essex is "an unappetising commuter strip just outside London."

'Footie not soccer' The nation's favourite pastime also takes something of a kicking. "Football,

footie, call it what you will (no English fan ever says 'soccer')", the Premier League is overpriced and with players "more famous than pop stars". The guide suggests heading to an "unfashionable provincial" club for the "real experience". "Macclesfield Town against Rochdale on a wet Tuesday night in February - that's a proper football match," it enthuses.

When it comes to England's people the guide gives with one hand - kindly describing them as "animal-loving, tea-drinking, charity donors" whose "warmth is in the humour". But it takes away with the other hand, saying: "The English have become obedient consumers rather than active citizens, with brand loyalty the nearest thing to religious/spiritual belief."

All in all, the Rough Guide concludes: "The only certainty for visitors is that however long you spend in England and however much you see, it still won't be enough to understand the place." A spokesman for the company said he believed would-be visitors would recognise that the comments were "tongue-in-cheek". "Our sense of humour is one of the many reasons, along with heritage and culture that people come here," he said.

Do the following statements agree with the information given in the text?Say if the statement is TRUE , FALSE or the information on this is NOT GIVEN:

1. Many people living in Essex work in London.2. The English are rather unsociable.3. England is not a “melting pot”4. Tickets to provincial football clubs’ games are not very expensive.5. The English are very religious people.6. The guide book abounds in critical comments.

Look at the following list of adjectives used in the text (1-10). Match each adjective with its synonym (a-n)

1. tongue-in-cheek 2. unparalleled 3. back-handed 4. identikit 5. unappetizing 6. obedient7. loyal 8. vivacious9. insular10.unmissable

a. devotedb. livelyc. submissived. obesee. ambiguousf. vividg. a must-seeh. featurelessi. unattractivej. identicalk. self-containedl. extraordinarym. humorous

Now decide which of the above-mentioned words are missing from the following sentences:

1. HTC Desire, the world’s fastest smartphone, allows users to click between e-mails, Facebook pages and the internet with …………… speed.

2. She had to be well brought-up, quiet, calm, religious and …………… to make a good bride for the sheikh.

3. The old image of the ……………, xenophobic Brit has altered dramatically with this new Euro-conscious generation.

4. Unlike many starlets, she wears high street and seeks out niche labels to stand apart from the …………… red-carpet blondes.

5. Barclays has come under fire for slashing savings rates for …………… customers even though there has been no change in the Bank of England rate.

6. The diet industry promotes totally …………… food, but you should go to your fridge and throw out everything that doesn’t inspire you.

7. The offer to become the new chief executive of Marks & Spencer was an …………… opportunity for Marc Bolland.

IDIOM SPOT (optional)

To be learned most efficiently the idioms can be grouped in different ways:

as pairs of words by topic by form by key word

In the article New Guide to 'Irritating' England and in the exercises that followed the adjectives tongue-in-cheek and back-handed were used. There are many more so-called body idioms in the English language.

Match verbs (1-10) with collocations (a-k) and then find the corresponding definition (i-xi)

1. to see2. to have 3. to put (2)4. to get 5. to fall6. to win

7. to come8. to stick9. to take10.to turn (2)

a. one's foot downb. on deaf earsc. under smb’s skind. the upper hande. heart in sthf. one’s neck out

g. a blind eyeh. to a headi. one's best foot forwardj. eye to eyek. neck and neckl. one’s back on smb

1) about something or someone that is annoying;2) to agree totally;3) to find encouragement in something;4) to be ignored;5) have the advantage, be in a stronger position in a contest or a conflict;6) adopt a firm policy when faced with opposition or disobedience;7) to pretend not to notice;8) reject or abandon (a person or thing that one was previously involved

with)9) to act or appear at one's best; to try to make a good impression;10) to win by a narrow margin;11) to reach a point where action has to be taken;12) to risk incurring criticism or anger by acting or speaking boldly

Translate the following sentences into English using one of the above-mentioned idioms:

1. До последнего времени США предпочитали не замечать тот факт, что авторитарные режимы в арабских странах не стремятся внедрять у себя ценности западной демократии.

2. Премьер-министр Таиланда заявил, что правительственным войскам удалось подавить выступления оппозиции.

3. Напряженность в отношениях между компанией Google и властями Китая достигла критической отметки, когда руководство "поисковика" приняло решение о полном отказе от цензуры.

4. Представители коалиции игнорировали предложенные оппозицией поправки к новой редакции Бюджетного кодекса.

5. Европа и США занимают сходные позиции в вопросе реформирования финансового сектора.

6. Меркель заняла твёрдую позицию против фонда спасения, в который Германия должна внести как минимум 120 млрд. евро.

7. Португалия обещает сделать все возможное, чтобы не выходить из зоны евро, хотя и переживает беспрецедентный финансовый кризис.

8. На прошедших в Чехии в пятницу парламентских выборах Социал-демократическая партия победила с минимальным преимуществом.

9. Для чиновников карьера является главным приоритетом, а их главным принципом является девиз: "не лезь на рожон".

FOLLOW-UP: Search through newspaper and magazine articles to find examples of other body idioms. Suggest how they can be translated into Russian.

CULTURAL AWARENESS:


BRITISH ECCENTRICITIES QUIZ By J. B. Morris

All the situations below describe ways in which England is different from the rest of Europe.

A. English taps in bathrooms and kitchens are different from the ones used in Europe. In England they have two taps — a hot and cold tap on each side of the basin, instead of one tap with which you can mix the temperature of the water. Why?

1. It is law: taps must be different because hot and cold water comes from different reservoirs. Hot water, because it is for washing only, is not treated with chemicals. You can only drink from the cold tap.

2. Hot water is heated in a tank in the roof of the house. Cold water comes straight from a pipe under the street. The pressure of the water is different and so it's difficult to use a mixer tap.

3. English people are used to very cold water (try swimming when you next visit the UK!). They don't need mixer taps!

B. In most countries, cars drive on the right side of the road. In England (and a few former colonies) they drive on the left-hand side of the road. Why?

1. Because of Napoleon. Most countries drove on the left in the past because when passing someone it is easier to shake hands or draw a sword against an enemy. England was the only place Napoleon didn't invade, everywhere else he forced people to drive on the right.

2. The government wants to protect the British car industry from foreign competitors. Driving on the left, makes foreign cars expensive - they have to change the position of the steering wheel. British cars are therefore cheaper.

3. It is safer to drive on the left. Statistics prove that the brain can work better when the driver is changing gear with the left hand and looking to the right at the other traffic.

C. The English police do not carry guns. They are the only police force in the world not to be armed. Why?

1. In the old English constitution there is a law that says the police can carry swords, but not guns. The constitution has never been updated.

2. All British policemen and women are trained in judo, karate and other martial arts. They don't need guns as their arms and legs are deadly weapons and they wear bulletproof vests.

3. The police don't need guns. Criminals don't have many guns, and it is difficult to buy guns, even illegally, in Britain. If the police started using guns, then criminals would also arm themselves and more people would die.


D. The BBC (British Broadcasting Corporation), channels of British TV do not show any adverts — only programmes. Why?

1. Everybody who owns a television set in the UK has to pay 110 pounds a year for a license. The money from this license is given to the BBC and so they don't need to raise money from adverts.

2. Each programme is made by different companies like McDonalds or Pepsi. These companies are allowed to put their products in the programmes for people to see (a newsreader drinks Pepsi on the screen, an actor eats a hamburger). The companies then give the programmes to the BBC for free.

3. The BBC is so successful. It sells its programmes to other countries and makes a big profit. It doesn't need to make money from adverts.

E. The United Kingdom (England, Wales, Scotland, Northern Ireland) has two currencies. What are they, and why have two different forms of money!?

1. You can use dollars in England — they are like a second currency in Britain.2. Scotland has its own currency: Scottish pounds. You can use them anywhere

in the UK.3. The Euro is the second currency, it is accepted everywhere in the European

Union.F. Travelling by train between cities you can choose between two or three completely different prices (they can be one-hundred pounds in difference). Why?

1. England has many different train routes; some of them go through mountains and are more beautiful. These routes cost more.

2. There are first-class trains (faster with restaurants, shops, bars and more comfortable), and second-class trains with no facilities. They vary in price a lot.

3. English trains have been privatised. Different companies compete with different trains on the same routes. You can choose which train company to travel with.

G. The French eat frogs and snails, but in England they eat toads. Why?1. Toads have more vitamins than frogs, and they love a rainy climate. There

are many toad farms in England.2. 'Toad' just means sausage. 'Toad in the hole' is an English dish of sausages

baked in dough.3. French cooking is the best in the world. English cooking is rather boring.

Recently the English started eating toads to show off to the French.H. On the fifth of November in many places in England there are fireworks and demonstrations with flaming torches and bonfires. People burn effigies of politicians and some other unpopular people. Why?

1. To celebrate the day of independence from America.2. This is Fire Day, a prehistoric ritual. It is the only day on which English

people are allowed to burn fires on the streets and have fireworks.3. To celebrate the saving of Parliament and the king from a plan to blow them

up by rebels hundreds of years ago. Now it is just the excuse for a big party.


FOLLOW-UP: Prepare a 3-minute statement on other British “eccentricities” or rather strange British traditions

WORD FORMATION TECHNIQUES: CONVERSION (VERBING) optional

Conversions from adjectives to nouns and vice versa are quite common in English. But much more remarked upon is verbing, the creation of a verb by converting a noun or other word. It is a very potent source of neologisms. Verbification has furnished English with countless new expressions, e.g. "host", as in "host a party", and "chair", as in "chair the meeting".

Verbification is sometimes used to create joking words. Sometimes these jocular constructions gain favor and become used in serious discourse, due to a subtle shade of meaning which is present in the neologism but absent from similar standard verbs. In other cases, simple conversion is involved, as with formations like beer, as in beer me ("give me a beer") and eye, as in eye it ("look at it"). A lot of new verbs are created as our language evolves, especially when we're grappling with words for new inventions and ideas.

NB! But not all of them are acceptable - acceptability of terms can only be validated by entries in contemporary dictionaries.

English is an analytic language, unlike Russian which is a synthetic one. That is why it is sometimes difficult to translate converted words into Russian.

Look at the examples of converted words below and suggest their Russian translations:

1. It's also a country where individuality and creativity flourish, fuelling a thriving pop culture and producing one of the most dynamic fashion, music and arts scenes to be found anywhere.

2. But last month talks in Geneva to hammer out the final details surprisingly stalled

3. Judge Lewis said he would try to rule this afternoon4. You'd have domestic production falling, whole cities blacked out, whole

industries threatened.5. Up the difficulty by combining moves.6. The "misery index," a then popular measure that added the unemployment

rate to the inflation rate, had skyrocketed during Carter's tenure.7. The Sunshine State has recently elbowed its way onto the national scene by

moving its primary date up to January 29.8. Though voters voiced discontent with both parties, Republicans took the

bigger drubbing in the polls--for now--as the architects of a needless impasse


9. Even within Brussels, thousands of job vacancies go unfilled every month because nine in ten jobseekers cannot read and write in French and Dutch, prompting employers to bin their applications.

10. Republicans claim that hundreds of voters were tricked into casting absentee ballots that cost the Republicans control of the senate as well.

11. While the FBI was fashioned to fight conventional crime--drug gangs, computer fraud, car theft now it's asked to fight secret terror cells with international reach.

12. The seven-time Grand Slam champion wowed the crowd at Roland Garros by wearing a lacy, black dress during her first-round match.

See if you can use the method of conversion when translating the following Russian sentences:

1. Я увидел ее у входа в театр, но пока я протискивался сквозь толпу, она исчезла из вида.

2. Новый тип вакцины впервые был предложен южноафриканскими врачами еще в 1990г.

3. Мы всю ночь провели на вечеринке, отмечая окончание учебного года.4. Принятие подобного закона не оправдано, так как он дает особые

права лишь избранным, при этом ущемляя в правах большинство.5. Они относились к этому ребенку, как к своему родному, отдавая ему

всю свою теплоту и заботу.6. Главная цель выставки – продемонстрировать последние достижения

в области автомобильного дизайна.7. В 2008 году Пекин стал местом проведения летней олимпиады.8. В докладе особое внимание обращается на необходимость создания

системы поддержки малого бизнеса.

READING 6: WORKING WITH TWO TEXTS

Read the two texts and underline the points which answer the following question:Is English the world’s lingua franca, or are its days as the world’s second language ending?

Text 1: ENGLISH AS SHE WAS SPOKEDec 16th 2010The Economist print edition

The English is the most successful language in the history of the world. It is spoken on every continent, is learnt as a second language by schoolchildren and is the vehicle of science, global business and popular culture. Many think it will spread without end. But scholars make a surprising prediction: the days of English as the world’s lingua-franca may be numbered.


English is expanding as a lingua-franca but not as a mother tongue. More than 1 billion people speak English worldwide but only about 330m of them as a first language, and this population is not spreading. The future of English is in the hands of countries outside the core Anglophone group. Will they always learn English?

In future two new factors—modern nationalism and technology—will check the spread of English. No confident modern nation would today make a foreign language official. Several of Britain’s ex-colonies once did so but only because English was a neutral language among competing native tongues. English has been rejected in other ex-colonies, such as Sri Lanka and Tanzania, where Anglophone elites gave way to Sinhala- and Swahili-speaking nationalists. In 1990 the Netherlands considered but rejected on nationalist grounds making English the sole language of university education.

English will fade as a lingua-franca but not because some other language will take its place. No pretender is pan-regional enough, and only Africa’s linguistic situation may be sufficiently fluid to have its future choices influenced by outsiders. Rather, English will have no successor because none will be needed. Technology will fill the need.

This argument relies on huge advances in computer translation and speech recognition. So far such software is a disappointment even after 50 years of intense research, and an explosion in the power of computers. But half a century, though aeons in computer time, is an instant in the sweep of language history. Scholars are surely right about the nationalist limits to the spread of English as a mother-tongue. If they are right about the technology too, future generations will come to see English as something like calligraphy or Latin: prestigious and traditional, but increasingly dispensable.

Text 2: ENGLISH IS STILL ON THE MARCHFeb 22nd 2001 The Economist print edition

IS ENGLISH becoming the European Union’s tongue? A survey of the linguistic skills of 16,000 of the Union’s citizens suggests that it is well on the way. Perhaps more surprisingly, it also suggests that more and more (non-British) Europeans accept the idea that all Europeans should learn English.

Over 40% of them claimed to “know” English as a foreign language. Add that to the almost 16% of the EU’s people who are native English-speakers, and already over half the EU claims to be able to converse in English.

The onward march of the English language is often assumed to raise hackles across Europe, particularly in France, but also in Germany and elsewhere. However, the survey suggests that the opposition may be exaggerated. Some 69% of respondents agreed with the proposition that “everyone should speak English”—including 66% of the French, which is only a shade less than the number in Britain.

Given that everyone else is learning English, it is perhaps unsurprising that the British are the worst at learning other European languages. Some 66% of them,


judging by the survey, speak no foreign language at all, compared to the EU’s average of 47%. Luxembourgers are the best linguists: only 2.2% of them are monoglottal. The Dutch are pretty brilliant; over 80% of them speak English.

The rise of English may bolster some European federalists who have long battled against the idea that European political integration, as well as labour mobility within the single market, will be constrained by the lack of a common European language. But they should not be too confident. Even now, nearly half of all EU citizens still speak no language other than their own. And even bilingual countries can find themselves politically divided by language. For an example look no further than Belgium, whose capital, Brussels, serves as the EU’s headquarters. Belgian politics is bitterly divided between French and Dutch speakers—even though all schoolchildren, and certainly all politicians, are meant to speak both languages.

READING 7: READ AND DISCUSS

CLUBBING TOGETHERGuardian co.ukMarch 14, 2005

No disrespect intended to the institution or its 53 member countries, but today's Commonwealth 1 Day celebrations are not likely to generate much interest or enthusiasm. The Queen's message for this year is that education is the most important instrument for overcoming conflict, natural disasters, inequality, poverty and Aids - all scourges for some of the 1.8 billion people who make up the post-colonial club she heads. The argument is fine but it cannot disguise the fact that the Commonwealth is in sad decline. It has long been overshadowed by Britain's relationships with the US and Europe, though it remains a useful network for deploying "soft power". Its finest hour was fighting apartheid. It has also helped protect democracy in Pakistan, Fiji and Nigeria, but failed with Zimbabwe, when Robert Mugabe walked out in 2003.

Its main advantage is that, unlike other global bodies such as the UN and the G8, the US is not a member. But the organisation that spans continents and regions has suffered from regional approaches to international problems - even though it is quite right that Africa should be singled out for urgent attention. The relative prosperity of India and other Asian countries underscores the old joke about its members having little in common and not much wealth. Prince Charles, who may one day follow his mother to head the Commonwealth, has called it "muddled and confused." Still, though, it commands human and (dwindling) financial resources and expertise, in election-monitoring, poverty eradication and promoting racial harmony, buttressing Nehru's hope that the Commonwealth could help bring "a touch of healing" to global problems. It also speaks English, the language of globalisation.

The Commonwealth has transcended its imperial past but failed to find a role. Perhaps a useful thought for today is that the time has finally come for new management, with the old white "ABC" powers of Australia, Britain and Canada


stepping aside to let India, Nigeria and South Africa steer the organisation towards a more relevant future.

1. The Commonwealth of Nations, normally referred to as the Commonwealth and formerly known as the British Commonwealth, is an intergovernmental organisation of fifty-four independent member states. All but two of these countries (Mozambique and Rwanda) were formerly part of the British Empire, out of which it developed.

The member states cooperate within a framework of common values and goals as outlined in the Singapore Declaration. These include the promotion of democracy, human rights, good governance, the rule of law, individual liberty, egalitarianism, free trade, multilateralism, and world peace. The Commonwealth is not a political union, but an intergovernmental organisation through which countries with diverse social, political, and economic backgrounds are regarded as equal in status.

Give the background of the Commonwealth and speak on its prospects.

FOLLOW-UP: SPEAKING

Prepare a 3-minute statement on one of the following topics 5 :

Should Great Britain become a republic or continue as a constitutional monarchy?

What are the ways in which Britain is different from the rest of Europe? How effective is the current British voting system? Will English remain the world’s lingua franca? How much freedom should the media have? Does the Commonwealth serve its purpose?

POWERPOINT PRESENTATIONS6

Presentations do not have a problem with lack of information. The biggest issue is the way you present it. Remember, in a PowerPoint Presentation whatever information appears on your slides is only part of what you will be saying to your audience. It is meant to capture your listeners’ attention and to emphasize the key points.

Do not try to provide too much information. Do not just read your slides – tell your audience more, or help them interpret what they are seeing (graph or picture). FOLLOW-UP:

Now draft and give a 10-12 minute PowerPoint presentation on one of the topics discussed or devise a topic of your own. You may also want to speak on:

5 See ANNEX 5 for tips on speaking assignment6 See ANNEX 6 for guidelines on drafting a PowerPoint presentation


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Singapore_Declaration

BRITISH CHARACTER – A STIFF UPPER LIPGREAT BRITAIN: THE LAND OF TRADITIONSTHE COMMONWEALTH TODAYENGLISH AS A LINGUA FRANCA BRITISH HUMOUR - DO YOU GET ITA NATION OF ANIMAL LOVERSFOOTBALL: ENGLAND’S GLORY?

ADDITIONAL TEXTS

THE LEGACY OF EMPIREDecember 3, 2009 From The Economist print edition

The many ways in which Britain is living in the shadow of its empireIn London conference centre, spooks and diplomats unpick Britain's

involvement in the Iraq war. In Parliament, politicians argue about the right approach to home-grown Islamists. In the City, financiers worry about their exposure to a foreign-debt crisis. In the Caribbean, the queen glad-hands the Commonwealth's presidents and prime ministers. What these disparate events have in common is that they are all, to some degree, part of the legacy of empire.

When Britons remember their dead empire, they tend to concentrate, with pride or shame, on its impact on the former colonies. The consequences for their own country are mostly thought of as so much pompous bric-a-brac and nostalgic trivia: honours with imperial names, archaic ceremonies, statues of forgotten heroes, a smattering of exotic vocabulary, curry and distressingly proficient rival cricket teams. This way of thinking about empire is mistaken. In important ways Britain is still-even, perhaps, increasingly-trapped by its imperial past.

The historian Linda Colley sees such imperial longing behind Britain's devotion to the "special relationship". "Playing Boy Wonder to America's Batman", as she puts it, is British politicians' only chance of maintaining a global role—as if the American Revolution could somehow be cancelled and the two nations confront the world as one. On the other hand, a yen for independent greatness may lie behind the fear of emasculation by America that afflicts some Britons as well.

The sun never really setsIf empire is the backdrop of Britain's foreign entanglements, it is also

implicated in the country's exposure to another great debacle, the financial crash. The City and the empire grew up symbiotically. Imperial trade and investment made London a world financial centre; the City became vital to the British economy, while at the same time, preoccupied as it was with foreign deals, largely separate from the rest of it. The empire thus bequeathed commercial habits, and an overmighty financial sector, which British taxpayers now have cause to regret. (Some historians trace Britain's trouble with real engineering, as well as the financial type, to the empire too, arguing that protected trade inside it coddled British industry and left it uncompetitive.)


The most obvious domestic legacy, of course, is in immigration. Because of worries about terrorism, much public policy and anxiety is currently focused on some Pakistani Britons. But empire helped to determine the attitudes and chances that awaited post-war immigrants to Britain as well as their origins.

Though notionally welcomed by a 1948 act, colonial caused alarm when they actually turned up, and from 1962 their entry rights were drastically curtailed. Instead of fraternity and fairness there was racism-sometimes overt, more often and insidiously the supercilious tolerance that the empire cultivated. Many immigrants were marooned at the bottom end of the labour market, some in doomed industries such as textiles, cut off from their families and latterly relegated in government priorities, as they saw it, to a place below new European migrants.

Much of this is the routine lot of immigrants everywhere, but with a cutting post-imperial edge. In some cases the grievances have reverberated through the generations.

The fallout of empire may include the fraying of the union (because the lost colonial opportunities bound Scotland in). Beneath all this is the peculiar British combination of bragging and bewilderment, an air of expectations great but unmet and of unrealised specialness. It is hard to think of another country so keen to magnify its accomplishments (everything must be "the best in the world"), yet also to wallow in its failings; so deluded and yet so morbidly disappointed. Every recent prime minister has struggled to overcome this sense of thwartedness and decline, and to come up with a notion of Britishness to replace the defunct imperial version. Mr Blair tried "Cool Britannia". It flopped. The gloom may be almost as acute now as it was in the late 1950s or 1970s.

It is arrogant to suppose that where other powers-Germany say, or France-were traumatised by their losses, Britain could have lost an empire on which the sun never set, give or take a few tax havens, without side effects. It didn't: looked at in a certain light, much of its recent history-military, political and economic—can be seen as a kind of post-imperial malaise. The empire is the Indian elephant in the living room, the tiger under the dinner table. Britain is still living in its own shadow.

ROYAL WEDDING: THE FUTURE OF THE BRITISH MONARCHYABC News InternationalZoe Magee April 18, 2011

When Catherine Middleton married Prince William April 29, billions of people from around the world were watching. Among them were the skeptics who've seen this so-called fairy tale play out before to a less than happily-ever-after ending.

When you have a royal wedding in the 21st century on the heels of a whole generation of royal marital failures, inevitably there's a degree of cynicism. You can take a bet in English bookmakers at the moment as to how long the marriage will last.


The marriages of three of Queen Elizabeth's four children and that of her sister all ended in divorce. The scandalous headlines and tales of adultery that accompanied many of these splits tarnished the royal family's image.

Having inherited such a legacy of divorce, Prince William and Middleton might lose an opportunity to modernize the monarchy and risk irrevocably damaging the royal family's popularity if their marriage fails. And, for them, living in the public eye so much, when every flicker of an eyelid is recorded by the cameras and television … and now by mobile phones, the pressures are even greater.

All the speculation and media attention surrounding the couple have also provoked a broader discussion on the relevance of the monarchy in 21st-century Britain.

The monarchy needs to think about its relevance for today," Tristram Hunt, a member of parliament, said. Hunt argues that the monarchy needs to modernize, and that Middleton and Prince William should play a pivotal role in the process. He called for Prince William to publicly support a change to the royal family's succession law. The Act of Settlement dictates that the first-born son will inherit the throne even if he has an older sister. The law also states that anyone in line to the throne cannot marry a Catholic without revoking the right to succession. Hunt wants Prince William to change all this.

The Future of British MonarchyHis biggest complaint about the monarchy is that they do not do enough to

share their space and their inheritance within Britain. But such changes and even unlimited access to the royal family's cultural riches would do little to placate those that wish to abolish the monarchy all together. They view it as an obsolete, arcane institution that should not be paid for by the British taxpayer and are using the interest in this wedding as a platform from which to promote their message.

The head of state in Britain is someone who's there simply because of who their parents and grandparents and great-grandparents were which is quite embarrassing in the 21st century. But proponents of the monarchy say that this is precisely what makes the monarchy so special; it is above politics. And the nice thing about the queen is that she represents history. She's been there herself for almost 60 years. She's seen 10 prime ministers come and go. She's known every US president since Harry Truman.

But the critics view the cost of the monarchy as an unreasonable burden on the taxpayer, saying the money spent on maintaining the "lavish" lifestyle of the royals would be better spent on public services. They claim that the queen mother set the pattern, which is still followed. She had 83 personal servants. She had three full-time chauffeurs. It's an absolutely bizarre amount of opulence. And it's all paid for by every British taxpayer.

The official cost of the monarchy, released annually by Buckingham Palace, is about $60 million a year, and supporters of the monarchy say that this is cheap at the price. There are about 60 million people in Britain and it costs a dollar a head per person per year to sustain this extraordinary institution, which has served the country very well for a thousand years.


But this figure does not include the cost of protecting the royal family nor the ceremonial duties the military fulfills on royal occasions. Those that are against the monarchy say its true cost is much higher and there are other hidden costs that are not disclosed.

Despite recent polls that show the British public would prefer a leapfrog in the line of succession and for Prince William to be the next king, the consensus is that Charles will become king. This means William will most likely face an equally long wait to become King and will have to carve out his own role as heir to the throne.

The young couple has already started on the royal duty rotation, launching ships, opening sports grounds and meeting and greeting the masses. As the new face of the British monarchy, they carry with them its best hope of survival.

They have yet to disappoint, so far. There's a great deal of warmth for Prince William in this country, partly because of his traumatic childhood, partly because of his late mother and partly because of the way he's ... behaved and carried himself. Those that know him say Prince William is equipped for the role claiming he is an outstanding person, a model prince and will be an outstanding king.

INTRODUCTION TO THE BRITISH CHARACTERE. M. DelafieldSeptember 23, 2008

It has been well said—by myself, as it chances— that every Englishman is an average Englishman: it's a national characteristic.

What is more, no true Englishman would wish it to be otherwise. He prefers his neighbour to be an average Englishman—he prefers to be one himself. He likes what he knows. The humour of Pont's drawings will appeal to him enormously but that appeal will mostly lie in the fact that he recognises every situation portrayed as a thoroughly familiar one. His friends, his relations, and himself have all experienced those " tendencies " so trenchantly depicted by the artist, and have reacted to them in precisely the same way. He can therefore enjoy himself without having to think.

For if there is one peculiarity in the British character that is more marked than another, it is this aversion from thought.

At this stage I must digress, briefly, to say that if I have a fault to find with this book, it is that it was not called The English, rather than The British Character. My own remarks will be entirely confined to the former, and will include neither the Scottish, the Irish, the Welsh, nor the far-flung denizens of the British Empire. Quite a number of these are as ready as possible, for instance, to think—wrongly, no doubt, on the part of the Irish, whimsically—which is worse—on the part of the Scots, and unintelligibly on the part of the Welsh.

But to return to the English.To think is no part of their character. Instead of thoughts, the English have

traditions.The tradition of the Home, for instance.Even the French—a volatile and irreverent race, with no marked bias in


favour of Albion— have preferred not to translate this word, but to recognise it as unalterably English in origin and spirit by referring to it as "le home."

Yet how do the English treat "le home"— that is, theoretically and traditionally, the backbone of their country?

Their first care is to remove their children from it by sending them to boarding-school almost as soon as they can walk, and keeping them there until they are old enough to be sent still farther away.

Their next is to avoid the proximity of their relations. Unlike the Latin races, the English seldom keep a widowed mother-in-law, an unmarried sister and a couple of canaries on the top floor, an asthmatic uncle and his housekeeper on the third, and a centenarian cousin in a little room behind the kitchen.

They speak, write, and sing of Home Sweet Home, and by this means have built up the tradition that it is a thoroughly English institution. Once tradition is firmly established, the thing is done.

The danger of having to think is practically eliminated.Another tradition that is rooted not only in our own soil, but in the minds of

the rest of the world, is the devotion of the English to animals. Certainly, they will speak affectionately to and of their dogs and horses, which is more than they will do concerning their friends and family —but between the dogs and horses and the rest of the brute creation a sharp line has been drawn. The fox, the deer, the badger, the otter, the pheasant, and many others would have but little to say in praise of the animal-loving English, were they consulted. Even the domestic cat is, for the most part, only viewed as an inferior kind of dog, its sole virtue being that it will—like its owners—kill other, smaller animals.

But by dint of never thinking about it, the English firmly believe themselves to be the only nation on earth that is really kind to its animals.

Indeed, the power of self-delusion possessed by our singular race is almost phenomenal, the more so because it cannot be called the product of imagination, for the English neither possess, nor wish to possess, any imagination at all. They only possess, to a very high degree, the quality of faith as defined by the schoolboy: Believing what you know to be untrue.

Enough has now perhaps been said to show that the English, whatever else they may be, are agreeably inconsistent. It will be part of our English inconsistency, to enjoy Pont's delightful presentations of our national life, to point out to one another how very true it all is, and to continue, unmoved, in our ways.

CLASS PSYCHOLOGYSandra Jovchelovitch 1 Oct 2007

The psychology underlying the British class system is what makes it unique


I have been living in Britain for 16 years and during this period have acquired that kind of outsider/insider perspective that anthropologists describe as a mix of estrangement and familiarity. You become part of the place and yet not quite. I have learnt how to enjoy gardening and the best winter puddings in the world, but if there is something I still find intriguing and peculiar about Britain it is the class issue.

The force of class here is very striking. Certainly stronger than in any other comparable industrialised Western society. Social and cultural psychologists around Europe refer to it jokingly as the "British hang-up".

Indeed what makes class in Britain so unique is not so much the reality of the class system, but the psychology that lies beneath it. Class is central to the collective psyche of this country. Here there is awareness of class, talk about class, jokes about class, and embarrassed glances about class.

Accents, manners, intonation, food, impression and expression management are all subtle and pervasive markers that establish from the very beginning who you are and where you belong. Class here is an attitude, something you believe in or you do not, something you argue passionately about, something you feel in your gut and you understand as well as the language you speak.

Quite apart from different positions people occupy in the class system and the different experiences they have in relation to it there is widespread and immediately recognisable shared knowledge about class. Opinions may vary but everyone knows the terms of the debate and what class is about: it has a place at the very core of the collective consciousness of this country.

Such an ingrained way of thinking and behaving around a notion is part of what social psychologists and historians call mentalities. Mentalities are powerful and sticky ideas that run in history, get handed down through generations, are cemented in all kinds of social institutions and ultimately in the behaviour and psychological make-up of individuals. Mentalities are made of beliefs and deep-rooted in behaviour; they are difficult to change and tend to survive long after social structures are gone.

As part of the British mentality, class is resistant to change and difficult to transform because it is deeply entrenched in the way Brits speak – and language is the single most important symbolic system shaping any human community - and in the disciplining of bodies, one of the most powerful psychological mechanisms for socialising the young and reproducing social orders. Every time someone speaks and moves it starts all over again.

Ironically whereas the mentality about class in Britain is unique, its reality is not. The UK situation is not altogether dissimilar from other comparable European countries.

Across the board class still matters, as the strong correlation between educational achievement and family background demonstrates. But there has been tremendous social mobility in the post-war years, which might be slowing down considerably, but not completely.


It would be plainly wrong, and indeed politically undesirable, to state that material distinctions are gone, but the old differences between the upper, middle and working classes have been displaced by more complex scenarios, where diversity of lifestyles and use of income, multiculturalism and new global cultural references complicate distinctions and unsettle the ways in which identities are defined and group affiliations take shape.

The hard consequences of class are real enough for the many people who are at the sharp end of the class system. But these should not overshadow the reality and potential of the many new routes for socialisation and identity that are opening and challenging the social frameworks of class in contemporary Britain.

Today people cross borders and seek identity in ways that were unimagined and indeed almost impossible just a few decades ago. There are new sociabilities in the scene, new ways of organising communities and of establishing social solidarities. This should wake us up to what is new ahead. Britain's old psychology of class needs to catch up.

THE QUEEN MAKES US FEEL BRITISHBy Jim Mcbeth

IT is the bulldog spirit of Queen, country and Marmite smeared on our stiff upper lips that makes us feel so ... British.

Apparently, the actress Joan Collins - a national treasure - also swells us with pride. At least that’s according to a survey on what makes us feel British, carried out .

Just how many Scots were polled, however, they were unable to say, so the results may not be wholly representative of opinion north of the Border, where Land of Hope and Glory, Buckingham Palace and that undoubtedly iconic figure - wait for it - Baroness Thatcher may not loom quite so large in the popularity stakes.

The survey says we Britons adore fish and chips, roast beef, Marks & Spencer, the Beatles, the Rolling Stones, John Cleese and the Tower of London.

And we love being hopeless at speaking other people’s languages. Drinking tea is a source of great national pride, particularly when

accompanied by a full "English" breakfast of sausage, bacon and eggs. And there is nothing that stirs our blood more than idolising such cultural

icons as the singers Sir Cliff Richard and Robbie Williams, and the actors David Jason, Hugh Grant and the late Peter Sellers.

In the findings of the survey, which were published yesterday, the Queen loomed large, along with Buckingham Palace and most of her family. She was joined by a love of stiff upper lips, Marmite, Carry On films, Constable (the painter), the Beatles and the Prince of Wales.

Nearly half of the 1,000 Britons polled said that British Airways sparked a sense of great Britishness, while 45 per cent said the same of the Tower of London.

However, a third of Britons have their greatest sense of Britishness when considering the weather, Winston Churchill, Tony Blair, EastEnders, Michael Caine and the classic Dad’s Army comedy series.


Just over 22 per cent of those surveyed cited the Last Night of the Proms as the ultimate in Britishness.

A further 27 per cent felt at their most flag-wavingly, heart-warmingly British when they saw Tower Bridge and red telephone boxes, or witnessed the Changing of the Guard at Buckingham Palace.

And the same percentage grew misty-eyed when they listened to Land of Hope and Glory or watched a Carry On film.

According to the survey, we Brits also burst with pride at the thought of the artist LS Lowry and episodes of Coronation Street. When it comes to culinary pleasure, we do love our roast beef and Yorkshire pudding and marmalade, although not necessarily on the same plate.

BEST OF BRITISHNESSNovember 1 2005

How should the values and culture of these islands be defined? Britons have long prided themselves on pragmatism and common sense. The

British way of life, an accretion of centuries of experience in these islands, has largely been based on what works: the social structures, economic relationships and the framework of justice. There was never a need for a formal constitution; the law, evolving in response to changing circumstances, was based on shared values, general tolerance and a common understanding of rights and duties.

But in the past 30 years, this complacency has been shaken. A multicultural Britain can no longer rely for its cohesion on common background. Devolution, regional nationalism, ethnic division and religious extremism have so widened the divisions that the old certainties no longer prevail. What now passes for common sense? What is the glue holding this disparate society together? What is Britishness?

Five years ago the question was academic. Now it is as acute as it is sensitive. Immigration has enhanced and enlivened the country, but has brought to Britain people with beliefs, values and backgrounds far removed, and sometimes at odds, with the prevailing culture. A misunderstood multiculturalism has led to social and cultural fragmentation at the expense of a common core. And the shock of the 7/7 bombings has raised the question: what does it mean to be British?

A government handbook to help those wanting to become citizens to answer the questions in a proposed test of British comprehension provides a few clues. Most of the questions deal with the mundane: how to call the emergency services; the rights of trade unions; which courts use juries; and what licence is needed for a television. Such basic knowledge is vital to those wanting to work and settle in this country. More importantly, however, citizens should also understand the values and symbols that underline Britain’s political culture. The monarchy, Parliament, the Church of England, the rule of law and freedom of speech may seem alien to a Kurdish refugee. But if he is to enjoy his rights and accept his responsibilities as a citizen, these are important institutions and concepts.

Many native-born Britons will not be able to answer some of the questions suggested for inclusion. They should bone up, and schools should take issues of


citizenship more seriously. But that does not invalidate a test for foreign-born immigrants. The aim is not only to equip a newcomer with essential understanding of a new society; it should also be to celebrate this momentous decision. Already welcome steps have been taken to enhance the granting of a British passport: the new citizenship ceremony, despite the cynics’ derision, is a dignified and honourable innovation.

British citizenship is too little valued by those who hold it. Britain is one of the most vibrant, tolerant and individual societies in the world. Its freedoms are hard-earned and deserve to be celebrated. Its language — a prerequisite to anyone wanting to live here — is pre-eminent globally. To many, the new handbook on facts that putative citizens should master may seem more like a Highway Code than a distillation of Britishness. It is not the facts themselves that matter, however, but the ideas they exemplify. The debate on Britishness is overdue; and it is for immigrants and all citizens alike.

LORDS REFORM BILL TO BE TABLED

Press AssociationWed, Jun 27, 2012

A Lords reform Bill that is set to strain the coalition Government to its limits will be tabled on Wednesday amid threats of a Tory rebellion and a Labour attempt to derail the timetable for pushing it through.

Labour wants more days allotted to debating the legislation, which would introduce an 80% elected Upper House and slim membership down from 800 to 450, and confirmed it will join with Conservative rebels to vote down a motion setting out its passage through parliament.

Ministers aim to make the Bill law by the spring but a defeat on the timetable would pave the way for as much as four or five weeks of debate in the autumn, which would swallow up time needed by for other business.

Conservative opponents of reform - of whom there are thought to be as many as 100 in the Commons - would also seek to use the opportunity to "talk out" the legislation.

Labour leader Ed Miliband announced his party will back the reforms in the Commons but is expected to table an amendment demanding that any change is subject to a national referendum - something which the Government has firmly ruled out.

The Bill, approved by Cabinet with "strong support" from ministers on Tuesday, is being driven by Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg and forms the remaining centrepiece of Liberal Democrat constitutional reform plans, following defeat in last year's referendum on voting reform.

It would finally complete the removal of hereditary peers from the Second Chamber and introduce the first elected members in tranches of 120 at each of the next three general elections, with the process of change completed by 2025. Elected members would serve for a single 15-year term.


In a concession to critics, ministers have scrapped plans for a salary of about £60,000 for members of the new Upper House. Members will instead receive £300 for each day they attend - a maximum of about £45,000 a year - and this sum will be taxed, unlike the attendance allowances currently paid to peers.

Ministers insist that the reforms will maintain the primacy of the House of Commons within Parliament, but critics warn that this will be under threat once the Upper House has the added clout of democratic legitimacy.

After publication, the Bill will have its second reading in the Commons, followed by the crucial vote on the timetable motion before Parliament rises for its summer break on July 17.

ANNEX 1

HOW TO WRITE A PARAGRAPH


In many languages, the fundamental unit of composition is the paragraph. A paragraph consists of several sentences that are grouped together. This group of sentences discusses one main subject. In academic English, paragraphs have three principal parts: the topic sentence, body sentences, and the concluding sentence.

The Topic SentenceA topic sentence usually comes at the beginning of a paragraph; that is, it is usually the first sentence in a formal academic paragraph. Not only is a topic sentence the first sentence of a paragraph, but, more importantly, it is the most general sentence in a paragraph which does not give any details but introduces an overall idea to be discussed later in the paragraph.

ANNEX 2

HOW TO DEAL WITH THE PROFICIENCY FILE

Multiple choice lexical cloze

Each text contains six gaps and is followed by six four-option multiple choice questions which test your knowledge of Idioms, collocations, fixed phrases, complementation, phrasal verbs, semantic precision

Read the text carefully before looking at the options. When choosing the answer remember that you are often being tested not just on choosing a word which is grammatically correct, but also one which best fits the sense or tone of the text.

Open Cloze

In this type of exercises you will have to complete a text which has several numbered spaces. The missing words have a mainly grammatical focus, although there might be a few vocabulary items. Each space must be filled with one word only. First of all read through the whole article carefully and go back and decide which type of word is missing from each space, e.g. a verb, a noun or a preposition, etc. It is very important to read through the whole text carefully before you decide to write anything down. Some answers may be dependent on a sentence which comes later in the text. The areas which are often tested are:

Fixed phrasesRelative pronounsPrepositional phrasesPhrasal verbsPrepositions

CollocationsPronounsArticlesComparison


Remember that the missing words are more likely to have a grammatical focus rather than a lexical one.

Word formation

In this type of exercises the students will need to read a text and complete the ten numbered spaces with a form of the word at the end of the line.

Read through the text carefully and decide which form of the given word you need to use.

Make sure that you think about all the changes a word may require: suffix, prefix, internal, more than one, singular, plural or negative, change of word class.

Gapped Sentences

This type of exercises mainly tests collocations. There are six questions and each question contains three sentences. In each of the three sentences, one word has been taken out. Only one word will fit all three sentences. The gapped word is always in the same form.

Do not attempt an answer until you have read all three sentences very carefully.

Make sure that your answer will fit in all three sentences. Check that it fits both grammatically and with the sense of the sentences.

Key word transformations

For each question, you have a ‘lead-in’ sentence followed by a key word. There is then a response sentence with a gap. Using the key word, you have to complete the response sentence in 3–8 words so that it means the same as the ‘lead-in’ sentence.

Don't alter the word given. Don't write more than eight words, including the given word. Contracted words count as the number of words they would be if they were

not contracted. For example, isn’t, didn’t, I’m, I’ll are counted as two words (replacing is not, did not, I am, I will). Where the contraction replaces one word (e.g. can’t for cannot), it is counted as one word.

Make sure you haven't left out any information from the prompt sentence.


ANNEX 3

HOW TO WRITE A SUMMARY

What is a Summary?

A summary is an overview of a text. The main idea is given, but details, examples and formalities are left out. The main aim of summarising is to reduce or condense a text to its most important ideas.

How to Summarise?

Read the text and make notes of the key ideas and the main points, leaving out examples, evidence etc.

In the introduction it is important to characterise the article as a whole bringing out the main idea of the text (remember that the main idea of the text is usually either worded in the sub-title or in the last sentence of the introductory paragraph).

Your summary should begin with the reference to the author of the article, its title and the source

Pay special attention to paragraphing (ideally, there is one central idea in every paragraph presented in a topical sentence).

Rewrite your notes in your own words; restate the main ideas and the arguments of the author while remaining neutral and impartial in tone.

The summary should be approximately one-third of the original text.

Now read the summary written by an American student and analyse it. Did the student manage to cover all the important points while complying with major structural requirements?

In his article “Why the Monarchy must stay” published in the Newsweek magazine on March 11, 1996 Harold Brooks-Baker writes that Great Britain’s monarchy should be preserved not only because of its symbolic and historical significance. The author makes the case for monarchy both by giving convincing arguments in its support and by refuting the counter arguments of the republicans.

The monarchy should be preserved first and foremost due to its role as a functioning part of British political and cultural life. The main political benefit of having a monarch as the head of state is that, unlike a president, a monarch is not a politician. The monarch is above the changeable and sometimes murky world of politics.

In England’s constitutional monarchy, Queen Elizabeth II serves as an impartial observer of the political process, and even a check on politicians’ power. Although the British monarch does not make real political decisions,


deferring instead to Parliament, the power to declare war, choose a Prime Minister, and dissolve Parliament legally rest with the monarch. This ensures that no elected politician could take these powers for himself. The monarchy guides Great Britain on its traditional path, keeping the political system from undergoing radical changes.

The decision to do away with the monarchy would greatly interfere with nearly every aspect of British life, from the Royal mail, to currency, to Britain’s relationship with the 53 countries of the British Commonwealth. The monarch is a unifying force that fosters goodwill, trade, and cooperation between these nations. Of course, the end of the monarchy would also mean the end of centuries of British tradition, not to mention the significant loss of revenue from the tourist trade.

Statistics that show public dissatisfaction with the monarchy are mostly fuelled by embarrassment or disapproval of the actions of members of the royal family. But the monarchy still commands respect due to its historical significance and because it is a lasting institution, greater than the individual who holds the title.

ANNEX 4

TIPS FOR THE SPEAKING ASSIGNMENT

1. Show what you knowThe listeners will evaluate you on what they hear. So make the most of the opportunity to show your English at its best.

2. Start with an overview statement which repeats the topic given, for example:

Today I'm going to talk about the topic of work and pay: why are some people paid more than others?

3. Then say something to acknowledge the importance of the topic:This is a significant issue at the moment in many ways.

This is a really important topic today because...

People have been discussing this issue a lot recently.....

This question is relevant to my own life, because...

This issue is significant in this country at the moment because....


4. After this introduction, try to preview your topic in some way which gives your presentation structure:

I'm going to look at this issue from two angles. Firstly, I will talk about jobs where people are in my opinion overpaid. Then, I will talk about jobs where people are often underpaid. Finally, I will try to explain the differences in pay and give an example from my own country.

5. When you speak, try to give frequent examples to illustrate your ideas. Make use of your own experience and background knowledge.

Only the other day I read in the news that the pay of top Russian footballers has risen 300% in the last twenty years, whereas the pay of some public sector workers, for example nurses, has fallen in real terms. So why is this?

6. Make eye contact with other people in the room and use your hands and facial expressions to convey your message.

7. If you dry up towards the end of your speech, either recap what you have said

'Let me now summarise what I have said about this topic...'

or - better - refer to a personal experience that will allow you to keep talking until the end.

ANNEX 5

DEBATE FORMAT

The main purpose of debate club is to develop critical thinking skills and tolerance for differing viewpoints. To facilitate these goals, debaters work together in teams, affirmative and negative, and must research both sides of each issue. Each team is given the opportunity to offer arguments and direct questions to the opposing team. Judges then offer constructive feedback, commenting on logical flaws, insufficient evidence, or arguments that debaters may have overlooked.

Suggested Debate Format: Team 1 (Affirmative), Team 2 (Negative)

1. Opening Statements of Two Teams: (1 minute each)Like an introduction to a formal paper, introduce yourself/team and the topic

you will be debating. Tell what you are going to argue during the debate (like a thesis statement) and tell why your position should win.


2. Team 1: Constructive Statement 1 (2 minutes) In this speech, the affirmative team is expected to offer its argument in favour of the proposition.

3. Team 2: Cross-Examination The negative debater is expected to ask questions rather than make speeches. The affirmative debater is expected to answer these questions; he or she should not make speeches or ask questions in return. Team members should not assist their teammates by answering questions on their behalf.

4. Team 2: Constructive Statement 1 (2 minutes) The negative team is expected to offer its argument against the affirmative position.

5. Team 1: Cross-Examination Now the Affirmative debater asks questions and the Negative debater is expected to answer them.

The number of constructive statements (i.e. arguments) each team is supposed to present is subject to preliminary agreement between the teams.

6. Team 1: Rebuttal The affirmative speaker summarizes team’s refutations of the negative arguments.

7. Team 2: Rebuttal The negative speaker summarizes team’s refutations of the affirmative arguments.

8. Team 1: Closing Argument The affirmative speaker summarizes the key points the team presented concluding with a persuasive argument that will win the debate for the team!

9. Team 2: Closing Argument

ANNEX 6

POWERPOINT PRESENTATION

Structure of Your Presentation:

State your name, the number of the group you are in and the name of your presentation on the first slide.

State your presentation objectives or make a brief outline on the second slide.

The total number of slides in the body of your presentation should be no more than the number of minutes you were asked to speak (~10-12 min)


The final slides should carry the conclusion (the bulleted list of conclusions) and invite the audience to ask you questions.

Limit the information on the slide to a single point or idea. Follow the rule of 5s and 6s. No more than five lines on a slide and each

line should be no more than six words. Use short phrases rather than complete sentences. Make certain all phrases

are parallel in grammatical structure.

Format of Your Presentation:

Keep the font size large but not too large. Generally, a font size of 24 will suffice in most presentations.

Use colors with care. Select 2 or 3 tasteful but contrasting colors. Make your backgrounds simple. If you are using any kind of backgrounds,

make certain they do not overwhelm the information on the screen. Use pictures effectively. Don't overwhelm your slides with pictures.

However, your slides (or at least a good amount of them) should have pictures to hold your audience's attention.

To display information - use a chart whenever possible. For data presentation, use

o bar charts to compare data;o line graphs to show trends;o box charts to illustrate makeup or organizations or processes;o pie charts to emphasize the relationship of parts to the whole; ando photographs to illustrate realism.

Use ALL CAPS for the Title only. Use initial caps or lower-case letters for body text

Do not use underlines – it is very distracting and difficult to read. Use slide builds (where each bulleted point is added to the slide) and

animation but be consistent about the way you do it. Pick an approach, generally Wipe Right, and stay with it.

Proofread your presentation carefully.


Официальный сайт МГИМО МИД России · web viewmake sure that you think...

Documents