Joy English · المستوى C2 · المقالات الحجاجيةjoy-english.com

مقال جدلي عن الكفاءة والحياة العامة

الاسم:التاريخ:

ابنِ حجة متوازنة ومتحفظة في مقال جدلي: سلّم بما هو معقول، وقيّد، واختم بحكم متزن.

Efficiency and the quiet erosion of public life

It is a commonplace of contemporary life that time saved is time gained. Yet the relentless pursuit of efficiency, so often presented as an unqualified good, may be quietly eroding the unplanned encounters on which a healthy public life depends.

The case for efficiency is, admittedly, not easily dismissed. Automated ticket machines, self-service checkouts and online appointment systems spare us queues and paperwork, and the hours they release can be spent on pursuits we value more highly. Nor should we romanticise inefficiency: a slow bureaucracy has seldom enriched anyone's existence, least of all those with the least time to spare.

Nevertheless, what is gained in speed is frequently lost in incidental contact. The conversation with a pharmacist, the passing remark of a neighbour in a queue, the shared grumble about a delayed train: none of these appears on any balance sheet, yet together they weave the loose fabric of trust that binds strangers. Remove the occasions for such exchanges and one is left with a society that functions smoothly but knows itself less well.

It would be mistaken, however, to conclude that technology is the culprit. The fault lies less in the machines than in the assumption that every transaction is merely a means to an end, to be completed at the lowest possible cost in minutes. Where institutions deliberately preserve a human option, as some libraries and post offices have done, people appear to value the choice even when they seldom exercise it. That reluctance to see the option disappear suggests that we sense, if only dimly, what is at stake.

On balance, then, efficiency deserves to be treated as a servant rather than a master. Planners and employers would do well to ask not only how quickly a process can be completed but also what, if anything, will be lost along the way. A public life stripped of friction may prove, paradoxically, a good deal poorer for it.

الموقف والتحفظ والأسلوب

اختر الخيار الأفضل في مقال جدلي رسمي.

Which sentence hedges most appropriately?
- a) Efficiency destroys public life.
- b) Efficiency may well be eroding public life to some extent.
- c) Efficiency is definitely the only reason public life is declining.
___ its undeniable convenience, the system carries costs that are easily overlooked.
- a) Notwithstanding
- b) Albeit
- c) Whereas
- d) Lest
Which linker signals that the writer is about to qualify their own argument?
- a) Likewise,
- b) That said,
- c) Consequently,
- d) Incidentally,
Which is the most suitable way to open a final paragraph?
- a) All in all, I reckon
- b) On balance, then,
- c) So yeah,
- d) To cut a long story short,
Which sentence is the most appropriately impersonal and cautious?
- a) You can say the benefits are overrated.
- b) I think the benefits are overrated, to be honest.
- c) It could be argued that the benefits are overstated.
Efficiency, ___ valuable it may be, should not be pursued at any cost.
- a) however
- b) although
- c) despite
- d) whatever
Which sentence rejects an opposing view without overstating?
- a) That is rubbish.
- b) Only a fool would believe that.
- c) Such a view is hard to sustain.

أكمل لغة المقال

اكتب كلمة واحدة، أو الصيغة الواردة بين القوسين، لإكمال كل جملة.

The case for efficiency is, ___, not easily dismissed. (a concession adverb)
None of these appears on any balance sheet, ___ together they weave the loose fabric of trust.
Planners would do well ___ ask what will be lost along the way.
The fault lies less in the machines ___ in the assumption behind them.
It would be mistaken, ___, to conclude that technology is the culprit. (a contrast word)
Remove those occasions and one is left ___ a society that functions smoothly.
A public life stripped ___ friction may prove a good deal poorer.

مهمة كتابة

يرى بعض الناس أنه ينبغي إعادة تصميم المدن بالكامل حول الراحة والسرعة. اكتب مقالًا جدليًا عن مدى موافقتك. سلّم بنقطة واحدة على الأقل للرأي المخالف، واستخدم التحفظ، واختم بحكم متزن.

280–340 كلمة

راجع كتابتك

بدأت بفكرة تستحق التساؤل، لا ببيان عن الموضوع.
سلّمت بنقطة معقولة قبل أن أقيّدها.
استخدمت التحفظ (may وappears to وit could be argued) بدل الادعاءات المطلقة.
لكل فقرة فكرة رئيسية واحدة وترتبط منطقيًا بالتي تليها.
أسلوبي رسمي وغير شخصي دون اختصارات.
تقدّم خاتمتي حكمًا متزنًا ولا تكتفي بتكرار المقدمة.

مفتاح الإجابات

الموقف والتحفظ والأسلوب

b) Efficiency may well be eroding public life to some extent.May well وto some extent يُبقيان الادعاء متناسبًا. أما الأخرى فمطلقة وتبالغ في الأمر.
a) NotwithstandingNotwithstanding تعني in spite of ويليها عبارة اسمية. أما Albeit فتحتاج إلى صفة أو عبارة، وwhereas تحتاج إلى جملة، وlest تقدّم نتيجة مخشيّة.
b) That said,That said تقدّم تقييدًا. أما Likewise فتضيف نقطة مماثلة، وconsequently تعطي نتيجة، وincidentally ملاحظة جانبية.
b) On balance, then,On balance, then, طريقة رسمية لوزن الحجة. أما الأخرى فغير رسمية أو ثرثارة.
c) It could be argued that the benefits are overstated.It could be argued that غير شخصية وحذرة. أما الأخرى فشخصية أو عامية.
a) howeverHowever + صفة + فاعل + may be تعني "مهما كانت قيّمة". أما Although وdespite فلا تأتيان بهذا التركيب، ولا يمكن لـ whatever أن تسبق صفة هنا.
c) Such a view is hard to sustain.Hard to sustain حازمة ولكن متزنة. أما الأخرى فمهينة أو ازدرائية.

أكمل لغة المقال

admittedly / undeniably / undoubtedly / certainly / grantedAdmittedly (وما شابهها من الظروف) تسلّم بنقطة قبل أن يقيّدها الكاتب.
yet / but / and yet / though / althoughYet (أو but أو though) تشير إلى التباين بين جزأي الجملة.
toبعد Would do well يأتي المصدر المسبوق بـ to.
thanLess ... than هو تركيب المقارنة لتحويل التركيز.
however / nevertheless / nonetheless / thoughظرف تباين مثل however يقدّم التقييد.
withTo be left with تعني البقاء مع شيء بعد فقدان الباقي.
ofStrip something of something هو النمط الثابت.

إجابة نموذجية

Few would deny that a city in which every journey is swift and every service immediate has its attractions. Yet a city designed solely for convenience may turn out to be one that nobody much wants to linger in.

The argument in favour of speed is a serious one. Congestion costs time and health, and those who depend on public transport are the first to suffer when it fails. Wide, fast routes and well-timed connections can therefore be defended as a form of fairness as much as of comfort, and it would be perverse to romanticise the delays that the poorest commuters endure.

Even so, convenience is a narrow measure of what a city is for. Streets built to move people as quickly as possible tend to treat them as freight, to be delivered rather than to be met. The pavement café, the market stall and the bench beside a fountain all slow the pedestrian down, and it is precisely this slowness that gives a neighbourhood its character. Where such features have been removed in the name of flow, residents often report that the place has become easier to cross but harder to belong to.

There is, moreover, a practical objection. A city that is optimised for one purpose is seldom robust. Roads widened for peak traffic invite more vehicles; the extra capacity is absorbed within a few years, and the congestion returns, now accompanied by noise and pollution. Planners who pursue speed alone may thus end up with neither speed nor pleasure.

The sensible course lies between the extremes. Rapid, reliable transport for those who need it should coexist with streets that reward the unhurried, and decisions about each should be tested against a broader question: not merely how quickly can people move, but what kind of life does the movement serve? A city that can answer that question has little to fear from the stopwatch.