What kind of peace do I mean? What kind of peace do we seek? Not a Pax Americana enforced on the world by American weapons of war. Not the peace of the grave or the security of the slave. I am talking about genuine peace, the kind of peace that makes life on earth worth living, the kind that enables men and nations to grow and to hope and to build a better life for their children--not merely peace for Americans but peace for all men and women--not merely peace in our time but peace for all time. わたしの言う平和とはどのようなことでしょう。わたしたちの求める平和とはどのようなものでしょう。それは、アメリカの軍事力によって世界に強制的にもたらされるパクス・アメリカーナではありません。それは、墓場の平安でも、奴隷の安全でもありません。わたしは、真の平和、すなわち、この地球上での生活を生きる価値のあるものにする平和、人と国が成長し、希望を持ち、子孫のためにより良い生活を作り上げることのできる平和、アメリカ人のためだけではなく、世界中の人々のための平和、今の時代だけではなく、あらゆる時代での平和について話したいと思います。
I speak of peace, therefore, as the necessary rational end of rational men. I realize that the pursuit of peace is not as dramatic as the pursuit of war--and frequently the words of the pursuer fall on deaf ears. But we have no more urgent task. したがって、わたしは、合理的な人々にとっての、必然的、合理的な目標である平和についてお話しします。平和の追求は戦争の追求ほど劇的なものではなく、平和の追求者の言葉はしばしば人々に無視されます。しかし、これほど緊急を要する仕事はほかにないのです。
Our problems are manmade--therefore, they can be solved by man. And man can be as big as he wants. No problem of human destiny is beyond human beings. Man's reason and spirit have often solved the seemingly unsolvable--and we believe they can do it again. われわれの問題は、人間が作り出したものです。ならば、人間の手で解決できるはずです。人は自分が望むだけ大きくなることができます。人間の運命の問題で、人間の力の及ばない場所にあるものなどありません。人間は、その理性と精神によって、解決不可能に思われた問題をも解決してきました。今、同じことをできるはずだとわれわれは信じます。
And if we cannot end now our differences, at least we can help make the world safe for diversity. For, in the final analysis, our most basic common link is that we all inhabit this small planet. We all breathe the same air. We all cherish our children's future. And we are all mortal. しかし、相違があっても世界が平穏であり続けるように力を注ぐことはできます。究極のところ、われわれを結びつけるもっとも根本的な絆は、小さな地球の上でともに生きている、という事実です。われわれはみな同じ空気を吸い、子どもたちの将来を同じように大切に思います。われわれはみな命に限りのある人間です。
アメリカの議会で、No Child Left Behindに代わる教育方針の法律が話し合われるようです。標準テストを基に補助金の額が変わるという方針がどうなるのか、注目ですね。それに合わせてのインタビューがPBS Newshourにありました。
Is ‘The Test’ failing American schools? January 22, 2015 at 6:05 PM EST GWEN IFILL: As Congress begins to tackle a new federal education law that would succeed No Child Left Behind, one of the major dividing lines is already clear. What is the proper role and use of testing? It’s a question that has long touched a raw nerve among parents and educators. A new book explores that controversy and testing’s possible future. Hari Sreenivasan has our conversation from our New York studios. HARI SREENIVASAN: On the one hand, parents know their children’s talents can’t be quantified by multiple choice tests. At the same time, they often want their children to do well on high-stakes exams. A new book explores those issues and a growing backlash against testing in many circles. It’s called “The Test: Why Our Schools are Obsessed with Standardized Testing, But You Don’t Have to Be.”
HARI SREENIVASAN: There’s also this philosophical question on, is testing a good indicator of future outcomes, right? So colleges are basing their entrance of certain applicants on two things, usually, a grade-point average and an SAT or ACT test score, maybe some other extracurricular activities. But they’re saying based on that, I kind of have an idea of whether you will do well here and then on in the working world. ANYA KAMENETZ: Right. Well, one of the most interesting kind of emerging factors in the realm of assessment is the idea that half or more of what we need for success is not determined by academic measures at all. It’s these noncognitive measures, right, grit, perseverance, right? And these things actually can be — they can be assessed through surveys, low-stakes surveys. And the types of surveys that these organizations are doing, in fact, are quite predictive of people’s success later on in life, even more so than GPA alone.
Don’t Teach to the Test Journalist Ron Berler explains how standardized testing is preventing students from learning. By Brooke Berger April 11, 2013 | 10:30 a.m. EDT What is the effect of excessive testing on elementary-school curriculums? From September until Christmas vacation, [Brookside] was like any school you would imagine. Then, once they got back from Christmas break, for the next nine weeks until testing began, it was a different animal. What they did was drop their curriculum, drop their texts, and instead study exclusively from a standardized-test prep book. Kids weren't getting a liberal arts education, but prepping to a very narrowly drawn standardized test in primarily language arts and math. Because they were interested in passing the test more than anything else, for that 22 percent of the school year, they taught primarily to the broad middle section of kids that were going to pass. Plus, the school went and reached out to those kids who they thought were on the cusp of possibly passing. So who gets left out? The kids at the bottom and the kids at the top.
もちろんこれらは忘れてはならないとても重要な話ですが、今回の件でYutaが個人的に興味深く感じたのは、e-learningが発達することで定期テストが不要になるとピアソンやETSも考えているというI talked to chief research scientist at Pearson and ETS who said you know, we believe that this invisible integrated assessment is really the future because stopping and testing is this clunky kind of a way of going about it.ところです。現在のテストをstopping and testingと表現しているところが面白いですね。
The Past, Present And Future Of High-Stakes Testing JANUARY 22, 2015 3:39 AM ET INSKEEP: So now, Anya, you're talking about something that will remind people of what Google does with your search data or Facebook might do with information that it gathers on you. It's just quietly gathering information about you and acting accordingly, and you never even know the information is being gathered about you. KAMENETZ: Well, exactly. So on an individual basis every single day, more and more students in schools are using software to learn. And while the software is, you know, giving them the math problems or the English problems to answer, it's getting incredibly fine-grained information about the students' performances, how they think, how they approach difficult problems. Do they try really hard? Do they give up easily? And many people who, you know, run testing companies and software companies believe that that kind of information could replace the activity of stopping and testing. INSKEEP: Wait, even the people who are making money creating the tests think there might be a better way to measure school performance than their own tests? KAMENETZ: Oh, absolutely. I mean, I talked to chief research scientist at Pearson and ETS who said you know, we believe that this invisible integrated assessment is really the future because stopping and testing is this clunky kind of a way of going about it. Businesses in the 1970s used to have to shut down at the end of the year and do inventory for three weeks. And that's kind of how we do it in schools today. We spend eight days taking tests. And so how could schools possibly use data in that same sort of agile, just-in-time way?
最近、iPhoneに標準装備されていたヘルスケアのアプリを見てビックリしたのですが、歩数や上った階数などがデータとしてすでに集計されているのですね。（今頃の話ですみません。。。）同じように教育ソフトウェアで学習するのが普通になると、日頃の集計データで成績は測定できるようになるので、現在のTOEICのようなstopping and testingは不要になるというのです。このヘルスケアアプリを考えると、遠い将来の話ではないと感じてしまいました。
Little House on the Prairie is celebrating its 40th anniversary as the one-time staple of prime-time television that ran from 1974 to 1983.
The television adventures of the 19th-century Ingalls family, based on Laura Ingalls Wilder's beloved book series, is being celebrated with a remastered edition of its first two seasons. The Blu-Ray/DVD package features a tribute to the show's star and director Michael Landon.
Landon starred as young stud 'Little Joe' Cartwright in 427 episodes of Bonanza before ruling the Little House roost as gentle patriarch Charles Ingalls. He died in 1991.
この作品は、オックスフォードやロングマンの学習辞典でも載っています。
Little House on the Prairie the title of a novel published in 1935 by the US writer Laura Ingalls Wilder (1867–1957), one of the series based on her childhood experiences travelling in the Mid-West. A popular television series (1974–84) was based on the novels.
Little House on the Prairie a book for children by the US writer Laura Ingalls Wilder, which describes her life as a child in the Midwest in the 19th century, when her family were among the first white people to live there. It is also the name of a popular US television programme of the 1970s, which was based on Wilder's books.
The autobiography predates Wilder's "Little House" series with seven novels that depict real moments of Wilder's life, but are mostly "dramatized and made up" with the help of her daughter and editor, Rose Wilder Lane.
Wilder and her daughter simply fabricated characters and events for the drama.
Actress Melissa Sue Anderson, left, who plays Mary for the television series " Little House on the Prairie" is escorted by actor Michael Landon, who plays her father, are shown during the taping of Mary's wedding scene in Los Angeles in 1978. One such false scene included her father, Charles Ingalls, confronting irate railroad workers with a gun.
But that's nowhere close to the factual liberties the 1974 NBC series starring Michael Landon took with Wilder's literature. Pa was depicted as a clean shaven pioneer with an adopted son.
In truth, "Pa had the ugliest beard," Koupal said.
The TV series also married Mary with another blind man in the town of Walnut Grove which never happened.
Pioneer Girl offers Wilder's story from her own word.
"She transports herself back to the prairie of her youth ... to that place that most people don't live in," Koupal added.
The small South Dakota town of her childhood, De Smet, remains with its loft stores even if it no longer is how Wilder remembered.
In describing the history of "Pioneer Girl" in her introductory essay, Hill also addresses the complex and much-speculated-about relationship between Wilder and her daughter Rose as writers. William Holtz, author of a biography of Rose, is among those who argue that Rose did so much work on the "Little House" books she can be considered their ghostwriter. Rose was the more experienced writer and editor when her mother began writing her autobiography. Hill writes:
"Lane has been 'rewriting' or editing manuscripts for other writers, including Wilder, for about fifteen years when she took on 'Pioneer Girl.' Furthermore, based on Wilder's notes to Lane in the original 'Pioneer Girl' manuscript, it is clear that Wilder expected her daughter to review and edit it for publication."
However, Hill doesn't reach the same conclusion Holtz did.
Hill describes mother and daughter's editorial back-and-forth in as much detail as the historical record allows. She notes how Rose did a rewrite of a portion of "Pioneer Girl" with a juvenile audience in mind, a text that might be seen as a precursor of the first of Wilder's famed novels, "Little House in the Big Woods." But Wilder took her daughter's unauthorized rewrite, along with suggestions from an editor who wanted more details about the pioneering experience, and wrote the larger "Big Woods" book.
その前にFeinstein: ‘Torture doesn’t work’ is takeaway of CIA reportというNewshourをチェックしておきます。以前のブログ「英辞郎にも載っていないけど、要チェックの語」取り上げたようにtakeawayが使われていますね。
（ケンブリッジ） takeaway [C or U] something that you get or learn from an experience, activity, etc.: the takeaway from sth What's the key takeaway from this survey?
英語学習的にはMr. President, I want to thank the leader for his words and his support. They are extraordinarily welcomed and appreciated.と報告を始めていることを押さえておきたいです。
Intelligence Chairwoman Dianne Feinstein gave an hourlong speech on the Senate floor Tuesday after her committee's release of a report detailing the CIA's interrogation of suspected terrorists after the 9/11 attacks. Her full remarks are below.
"Mr. President, I want to thank the leader for his words and his support. They are extraordinarily welcomed and appreciated.
"Today a 500-page executive summary of the Senate Intelligence Committee's five and a half year review of the CIA's detention and interrogation program—which was conducted between 2002 and 2009—is being released publicly.
"The executive summary, which is going out today, is backed up by a 6,700 page classified and unredacted report (with 38,000 footnotes), which can be released if necessary at a later time. "The report released today examines the CIA's secret overseas detention of at least 119 individuals and the use of coercive interrogation techniques—in some cases amounting to torture.
Foreword On April 3, 2014, the Senate Select Committee on Intelligence voted to send the Findings and Conclusions and the Executive Summary of its final Study on the CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program to the President for declassification and subsequent public release. This action marked the culmination of a monumental effort that officially began with the Committee's decision to initiate the Study in March 2009, but which had its roots in an investigation into the CIA's destruction of videotapes of CIA detainee interrogations that began in December 2007. The full Committee Study, which totals more than 6,700 pages, remains classified but is now an official Senatereport. The full report has been provided to the White House, the CIA, the Department of Justice, the Department of Defense, the Department of State, and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in the hopes that it will prevent future coercive interrogation practices and inform the management of other covert action programs. As the Chairman of the Committee since 2009,1 write to offer some additional views, context, and history. I began my service on the Senate Intelligence Committee in January 2001. I remember testimony that summer from George Tenet, the Director of Central Intelligence, that warned of a possible major terrorist event against the United States, but without specifics on the time, location, or method of attack. On September 11, 2001, the world learned the answers to those questions that had consumed the CIA and other parts of the U.S. Intelligence Community.
こういう前書きでは、関係者への感謝で閉めるのが通例です。授賞式で確認した動詞recognizeがI want to recognize the members of the staff who have endured years of long hoursのように使われています。
Finally, I want to recognize the members of the staff who have endured years of long hours poring through the difficult details of one of the lowest points in our nation's history. They have produced the most significant and comprehensive oversight report in the Committee's history, and perhaps in that of the U.S. Senate, and their contributions should be recognized and praised. （中略） Other Committee staff members have also assisted in the review and provided valuable contributions at the direction of our Committee Members. They include, among others, Jennifer Barrett, Nick Basciano, Michael Buchwald, Jim Catella, Eric Chapman, John Dickas, Lorenzo Goco, Andrew Grotto, Tressa Guenov, Clete Johnson, Michael Noblet, Michael Pevzner, Tonmiy Ross, Caroline Tess, and JamesWolfe. The Committee's Staff Director throughout the review, David Grannis, has played a central role in assisting me and guiding the Committee through this entire process. Without the expertise, patience, and work ethic of our able staff, our Members would not have been able to complete this most important work.
Dianne Feinstein Chairman Senate Select Committee on Intelligence
最後の部分の感謝の表現も自分から使えるようにしたいです。
Without the expertise, patience, and work ethic of our able staff, our Members would not have been able to complete this most important work.
work ethicを「労働倫理」と訳してしまうと場違いな感じがしますので、「仕事への取り組み姿勢」のように理解すればいいのではないでしょうか。ケンブリッジビジネスによるとwork ethicだけでも「仕事熱心な態度」を指すようですね。
（ケンブリッジビジネス） work ethic the way that someone feels about the importance of work, usually the belief that it is important to work hard: The aim of the program is to instil a work ethic and a sense of teamwork in young people. Managers often say that older workers are friendlier to customers and have a better work ethic than their younger counterparts. The unemployed are often criticized for having a poor work ethic.
２０個の結論があげられていましたが、とりあえず最初のものをみてみます。ニューズアワーの見出しでは‘Torture doesn’t work’ とありましたが、報告書ではThe CIA's use of its enhanced interrogation techniques was not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining cooperation from detainees.と表現しています。ここらあたりの語り口の違いを実際の素材にたくさん触れて感じていくようにしたいです。
The Committee makes the following findings and conclusions: #1: The CIA's use of its enhanced interrogation techniques was not an effective means of acquiring intelligence or gaining cooperation from detainees. The Committee finds, based on a review of CIA interrogation records, that the use of the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques was not an effective means of obtaining accurate information or gaining detainee cooperation. For example, according to CIA records, seven of the 39 CIA detainees known to have been subjected to the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques produced no intelligence while in CIA custody.* CIAdetaineeswhoweresubjectedtotheCIA'senhancedinterrogationtechniques were usually subjected to the techniques immediately after being rendered to CIA custody. Other detainees provided significant accurate intelligence prior to, or without having been subjected to these techniques. While being subjected to the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques and afterwards, multiple CIA detainees fabricated information, resulting in faulty intelligence. Detainees provided fabricated information on critical intelligence issues, including the terrorist threats which the CIA identified as its highest priorities. At numerous times thi'oughoutthe CIA's Detention and Interrogation Program, CIA personnel assessed that the most effective method for acquiring intelligence from detainees, including from detainees the CIA considered to be the most "high-value," was to confront the detainees with information already acquired by the Intelligence Community. CIA officers regularly called into question whether the CIA's enhanced interrogation techniques were effective, assessing that the use of the techniques failed to elicit detainee cooperation or produce accurate intelligence.
With midterm Election Day approaching, you would expect to hear forceful criticisms of the president’s leadership. But you might not expect those criticisms to be made by a member of his own party, and an eminent former member of his own administration to boot.
Yet that is the case with Leon E. Panetta, the Democratic former secretary of defense and C.I.A. chief. In his memoir, “Worthy Fights,” and in a media blitz in support of it, he takes President Obama to task for not leaving troops in Iraq after 2011 and for dithering instead of acting in Syria.
And the president’s leadership? Mr. Panetta writes that he too often “relies on the logic of a law professor rather than the passion of a leader.”
Newshourの動画では、表立った批判はしていません。最初にPresident Obama has been a strong leader.と語り、オバマの功績を語りつつも、But this president has the ability to establish a strong legacy for the country.からは、これからオバマに期待することを語っています。このような話の運び方を学んでいきたいですね。
JUDY WOODRUFF: So we are four weeks away from the midterm election, and, right now, Republicans from Mitt Romney to Senate Republicans running in tight contests around the country are saying that — they’re citing you as proof that President Obama is weak. Do they have a point?
LEON PANETTA: Look, President Obama has been a strong leader. He made a very tough decision with regards to the bin Laden raid, and it was a risky decision, but he made the right decision. He’s made the right decision in terms of helping the economy. He’s made the right decision in terms of health care. He’s been a president who really is trying to provide the right leadership for the country. That doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t talk or disagree about certain elements of the leadership. That’s part of what goes on. But this president has the ability to establish a strong legacy for the country. We can do immigration reform. We can do a budget deal. We can improve health care delivery. We can get — be energy-independent. Democrats, this president can present a strong agenda to the country. That’s what we’re — that’s what they ought to all run on, the ability to govern this country. And I think Republicans have a hard time, frankly, coming at that issue of governing this country because they, in the House in particular, are largely responsible for undermining government and its efforts to try to help people. That should be the principal issue in this next campaign.
