Recently changed pages
HomePage
Last Edited By:bangeurope
( 708 - days ago )
Youth Speech 2010
Last Edited By:bangeurope
( 708 - days ago )
Structure
Last Edited By:Guest
( 751 - days ago )
Final Final Draft
Last Edited By:Guest
( 752 - days ago )
Final Draft
Last Edited By:Guest
( 772 - days ago )
Second Draft
Last Edited By:bangeurope
( 783 - days ago )
First Draft
Last Edited By:Guest
( 799 - days ago )
Ideas and Comments
Last Edited By:Guest
( 826 - days ago )
More »
Recently Attached FilesMore » |
Newly added pages
Youth Speech 2010
Author: bangeurope ( 708 days ago )
Final Final Draft
Author: bangeurope ( 771 days ago )
Final Draft
Author: bangeurope ( 783 days ago )
Second Draft
Author: bangeurope ( 808 days ago )
Structure
Author: bangeurope ( 821 days ago )
Recent comments
More »
|
Uploading ....
![View](javascript:WikiCommon.previewImage("/_attach/1.0/zero.jpg");){kind=link}
well I think this is quite difficult and we would have to cut other parts of the speech because you have to count every word in each language and also the speaker might have problems.
Dear Natasha,
if we want I could ask if a power point would be possible (the last years it wasn't but this year also other NGOs are trying). But I think if we reorganize them and add new once which are fitting to the context it sounds good - and they also will be read out by another speaker.
We have tried to clear up the language as much as possible while retaining the message- some points don’t really add anything. Including the pat about nuclear deterrence- either we add a section on it- but not just one sentence. There is already an NGO presentation specifically on deterrence so maybe a good idea if we stick to human security type stuff?
We have also tried to strengthen the language in some places. Its is not a long speech so everything needs to be punchy and hard hitting.
great you made it :) and thank you very much also for your quotes :) what is missing is your age, could you tell me please how old are you, so we can add this information to your quote.
Peace,
Nina
Thank you for what you've done! it's really good!
How long can we work on this draft?
I was on holiday last week so it looks like I missed out on a big section of discussion and the meeting in Geneva! I think some good changes have been made but there are a few moments still when the flow isn't quite smooth enough, but I need to think a bit before I suggest changes!
Good work anyway :) x
I´m already thinking about alternative formulations and I think it is good idea to work on it together next week, cause it is always easier and faster to work it out directly and not via internet.
It is probably a question of interpretation, but I think there are a lot of comments with rational arguments.
Maybe I should point out what I mean exactly by rational arguments, because I do not mean necessarily concrete steps or a more technical speech. I would like to focus more on ethical and political aspects and therefore I really like the “rational arguments” we have in the speech, like “no human being has the right to kill another one”, “It is the responsibility of a government to protect its citizens and to provide adequate and worthwhile living conditions.”, that in todays political situation nuclear weapons have lost their purpose, the responsibility rich countries have for the poorer ones and also the question about “true security”.
But I think these rational arguments get lost in between the emotional arguments.
This was why I made the proposal to separate stronger between emotional and rational arguments and move the emotional arguments more to the end.
I agree with you that we have to keep the political will to abolish alive, and that our speech should be motivating. The only question is how to achieve this. Because motivating does not necessarily mean being emotional. The problem is we are not writing a speech to motivate ourselves but to motivate political decision makers, it would be good if they would respond to emotional argumentation, but I do not think so, at least not only emotional argumentation.
I definitely do not want to leave out the emotional, touching part, it is always an important part of the speech. But we should show that we are informed and also able to argument rational (like Emily said in the comments “informed but innocent”).
thank you for your comments.
with some I agree but with some not :)
First of all it would be nice if you give alternative formulations. Maybe we can work on it together next week.
In general there are two things why I am for a very emotinal speech. First: it was the comments done when we collected the comments, and there were voices raised about making things more concret but also against it.
Second: you are right. last speeches were sometimes quite technical and also the other speeches were. this year it is different. states themselve having experts, work is in process, the atmosphere is different, everybody is more optimistic, a political will is growing.
But this seems to "fall down" again. And I think what we must do is keeping it alive. other NGOs will give technical presentations again. but also more alternative and we decided that we will present technical issues in expert papers and using the NGO presentations for what they should be: motivating encouraging alternative, an appeal to humanity.
In the last speeches we always had a very good balance between rational and emotional arguments. This year the focus is in my opinion (and maybe I am alone with this opinion, please let me know) to much on the emotions. Of cause this does not mean I think the emotional arguments are not important, they are.
But maybe it would be better to move the emotional parts more to the end. This would give them the appropriate weight, without loosing sight of the rational arguments.
Regarding to the quotes I think it might confuse the audience, to place the quotes between the paragraphs. Therefore it is a good idea and maybe even necessary for understanding to have one speaker reading only the quotes, but maybe this would interrupt the fluency of the speech. But you are right we have to wait till we have all the quotes, maybe they will fit well into the fluency of the speech.
Great work!
Yes, maybe an introduction would be good, maybe befor starting with the first quote the "quote-speaker" could give a short explanation. I don't want to interupt the speech to much by it.
We have 10 minutes. But everybody would be happy if it is shorter :) and also I am not keen on giving a 10 minutes youth speech. Important things can be short. If you have nothing to say you can talk for ages.
You're right, when we have the quotes we will be able to link them with the text.
How are you planning to have these? Will they be read (along with the names and places) by the two speakers from our group?
If so, we should have a sentence to explain what they are.
How many minutes do we have? I think it will also be good to add a quick sentence about how we have been asking them for years now to act and they still haven't. I will think about where to put it!
I thank you so much for your comments and corrections. It shows me how much I still have to improve my English! ;)
you are right the flow is still missing... but as always it comes through the time and we also have to see where we put the quotes. this is a key to make it fluent or split into paragraphs...
Nina
Sorry for all the changes. Most is just (very small) language changes or adding some pretty words.
I think we could do with making it flow a bit more, but this will come with time.
Good work, let's get thinking :)