Владимир Аракин - Практический курс английского языка 3 курс [calibre 2.43.0]

she turned to her father, she felt almost flashes of hatred for her mother. Her mother's dark muzzle and curiously insidious ways, her

mother's utter surety and confidence, her strange satisfaction, even triumph, her mother's way of laughing at things and her mother's

silent overriding of vexatious propositions, most of all her mother's triumphant power maddened the girl.

She became sudden and incalculable ... the whole house continued to be disturbed. She had a pathetic, baffled appeal. She was

hostile to her parents, even whilst she lived entirely with them, within their spell.

(From "The Rainbow" by D. H. Lawrence)

2. Answer the following questions:

1. What do we learn about Anna's relationship to the girls at school in Nottingham? 2. In what kind of environment did the girl

grow up? How did it contribute to her personal development? 3. Was Anna a disciplined and hard-working pupil at school? How can

you account for her lack of interest in learning? 4. What do you think is an essential conflict in the girl's character? What made her

mistrust the outside world? 5. Was the girl entirely or partially right when despising her schoolmistresses, "who carped and were loud

over trifles"? 6. Why did she turn to a royal ideal to satisfy her ego? 7. How did Anna's attitude to her parents change at the age of

seventeen? What do you think are the reasons for it? 8. What were the most remarkable traits of Anna's character that made her unlike

the girls of her age? 9. How can you apply the information you obtained from the story to the problems which you are facing or will

have to face as a future parent (a teacher) ?

3. Find in the text the arguments to illustrate the following:

Anna Brangwen was not what we call a "problem" child, but a child who was just having problems like most young people of her

age. Try and preserve the wording of the original. Add your arguments as well.

4. Summarize the text in four paragraphs specifying the role of the family background and school experience in the moulding of a person's

character.

5. Use the Topical Vocabulary in answering the following questions:

1. What kind of person will never arrest anyone's attention? (take a risk, spend more than he can afford, take anything to heart,

lose his temper, do a silly thing, disobey instructions, w^ver in the face of danger, fail his friend)

2. What kind of people are often lonely? (are usually surrounded by friends, are easily forgotten, are quick to see the point, think

only of themselves, feel uneasy in company, keep their thoughts to themselves, easily lose their patience, enjoy other people's con-

fidence)

3. What kind of people are called good mixers, poor mixers, colourful, discreet, just, business-like, level-headed, sympathetic, re-

vengeful, squeamish, persistent, haughty, humble, placid, broad- minded, vulgar, vain, ambitious?

4. What do you call a person who can't keep a secret? (can appreciate a piece of art, feels deeply, pokes his nose into other peo-

ple's affairs, intrudes his views on others, is always sure of himself, is mostly in high spirits, gets annoyed easily, keeps on forgetting

things, is unlike others, says what he thinks, has no moral principles)

5. What traits of character would you appreciate in a wife (a husband), a mother (a father), a son (a daughter), a bosom friend?

What traits would you detest most?

6. What traits of character are required to make a good teacher, a good doctor, a good lawyer, a good journalist? What traits might

prevent one from becoming a good specialist in those fields?

6. Give a character sketch of a person you know and like (dislike). Use the Topical Vocabulary. Remember: The sketch should be informative

and convincing enough. A mere outward description of a person is not a character sketch. You should present a sort of critical analysis and pass

your own well-grounded judgement of a personality.

Outline for a Character Sketch (Personal Identification)

1. Appearance: age, height, weight, build of figure, face, hair, eyes, complexion, clothes.

2. Background: family, education, profession or occupation.

3. Likes and dislikes: with regard to people, tastes, hobbies and interests.

4. Character, temperament, disposition.

5. Conclusion.

7. You are asked to tell a group of students about your favourite fictitious (literary, film) character. Describe the character in about fifty words.

Use the Topical Vocabulary and the Outline for a Character Sketch of Ex. 6.

8. Work in pairs. Discuss real people or fictitious characters you find interesting. Bring out clearly their most prominent individual traits. One

of the students is supposed to describe a person he/she likes, the other a person he/she dislikes. Try and interrupt each other with questions to get

sufficient information about the characters you speak about. Use the Topical Vocabulary and the Outline for a Character Sketch of Ex. 6.

M o d e l :

A: I want to tell you about Peter who is by far the most affable man from all I know. I can speak about him unreservedly. He is

honest and generous, he is a man of high morals. Moreover, he is everyone's favourite ....

B: I am not as enthusiastic about people as you are. I do not take people for what they look and sound. I try to size them up

according to their deeds. That's why I pass my judgement only on second thought. Very often some little things make us change our

opinion of a person for the worse ....

9. Speak about the most striking traits of people's characters. Consider the following:

1. Your favourite traits of character in a person.

2. The traits of character you detest.

3. Your own chief characteristics.

10. Read the following interview. The expressions in bold type show the way English people describe themselves and other matters. Note them

down. Be ready to act out the Interview in class.

TV interviewer: In this week's edition of "Up with People" we went into the streets and asked a number of people a question they

just didn't expect. We asked them to be self-critical ... to ask themselves exactly what they thought they lacked or — the other side of

the coin— what virtues they had. Here is what we heard.

Jane Smith: Wel ... I ... I don't know really ... it's not the sort of question you ask yourself directly. I know I'm good at my job ... at

least my boss calls me hard-working, conscientious, efficient. I am a secretary by the way. As for when I look at myself in a mirror as it

were ... you know ... you sometimes do in the privacy of your own bedroom ... or at your reflection in the ... in the shop window as you

walk up the street... Well... then I see someone a bit different.Yes ... I'm different inmy private life. And that's probably, my main

fault I should say... I'm not exactly — Oh, how shall I say? — I suppose I'm not coherent in my behaviour ... My office is always in order

... but my flat! Well... you'd have to see it to believe it.

Charles Dimmock: Well ... I'm retired, you know. Used to be a secondary school teacher. And ... I think I've kept myself... yes, I've

kept myself respectable — that's the word I'd use — respectable and dignified the whole of my life. I've tried to help those who

depended on me. Perhaps you might consider me a bit of a fanatic about organization and discipline — self-discipline comes first —

and all that sort of thing. But basically I'm a good chap ... not two polemic ... fond of my wife and family ... That's me.

Arthur Fuller: Well... when I was young I was very shy. At times I ... I was very unhappy ... especially when I was sent to boarding-

school at seven. I didn't make close friends till ... till quite late in life ... till I was about... what... fifteen. Then I became quite good at

being myself. I had no one to rely on ... and no one to ask for advice. That made me independent ... and I've always solved my

problems myself...

11. Answer the following questions:

1. Does the self-criticism of each of the participants of the interview reveal anything about personality and attitudes? 2. Would

these people be different when described by their relations or friends? 3. What differences do you notice between the people

answering the questions of the interviewer?

12. When you describe people you either criticize or praise them. When you criticize you normally try to find faults rather than positive traits

of character but it certainly does not exclude the expression of praise. Here are some comments that people make when they are invited to analyse

and judge:

I think I'd much prefer to ... ; nothing like as good (bad) as ... ; that's what I thought... ; and that's another thing; there's much va-

riety in ... ; to be similar in ... ; there's a tremendous number of differences in ... : to have little (much) in common.

Use the cliches in the conversations of your own when you are welcome with your criticism of people.

13. Work in pairs. Read the extracts and expand on the idea that: "Every man is a bundle of possibilities." You are to sum up the characters

described. You may be of a similar or a different opinion of the human types presented below. Consider the strong and the weak traits of

characters. Your judgement should be followed by some appropriate comment:

1. Where she found the time, and still managed to "practically run that big house" and be the president of her class ... , a skilled

rider, an excellent musician (piano, clarinet), an annual winner at the country fair (pastry, preserves, needlework, flower arrangement)

— how a girl not yet seventeen could have such a wagon- load, and do so without "brag", with, rather, merely a radiant jaun- tiness,

was an enigma the community pondered, and solved by saying, "She's got character. Gets it from her old man." Certainly her

strongest trait, the talent that gave support to all the others, was derived from her father: a fine-boned sense of organization. Each

moment was assigned; she knew precisely at any hour, what she would be doing, how long it would require.

2. You are a man of extreme passion, a hungry man not quite sure where his appetite lies, a deeply frustrated man striving to

project his individuality against a backdrop of rigid conformity. You exist in a half-world suspended between two superstructures, one

self-expression and the other self-destruction. You are strong, but there is a flaw in your strength, and unless you learn to control it the

flaw will prove stronger than your strength and defeat you. The flaw? Explosive emotional reaction out of all proportion to the

occasion. Why? Why this unreasonable anger at the sight of others who are happy or content, this growing contempt for people and

the desire to hurt them? All right, you think they're fools, you despise them because their morals, their happiness is the source of your

frustration and resentment. But these are dreadful enemies you carry within yourself — in time destructive as bullets. Merci fully, a