-
(单词翻译:双击或拖选)
BBC Learning EnglishWeekenderThe abolition1 of the slave trade
William: Hello and welcome to Weekender – I’mWilliam Kremer. Let’s start by goingback to 1807. At that time, Britain was an extremelypowerful country with a large empire. Britain made itsmoney through trading with other countries – throughselling them materials and products. One area that made agreat deal of money was the slave trade.
Slaves are people who are owned by other people - they haveno freedom. During the years of the slave trade, theBritish bought slaves, often from African leaders, thentransported them by ship to America and other places tosell. Slaves either died on the journey or faced a life ofhard work, bad treatment and disease.
This awful practice had existed for hundreds of yearsbefore 1807 – andslavery didn’t stop in 1807. Indeed, there are stillslaves today. But in that year, the British government madeit illegal. It stopped the slave trade, or, we wouldnormally say, it ‘abolished’ the slave trade. ‘Toabolish’ means to stop something by law and there’s anoun form too – ‘abolition’.
But as we’ll find out, the British had a mixture ofreasons for abolishing the slave trade. Let's hear now fromthe historian and politician William Hague. In this clip,he mentions the power Britain had after Trafalgar.
Trafalgar was an important sea battle that the BritishRoyal Navy won against France in 1805.
But what does William Hague say was ‘part of the abolitionof the slave trade’?
W. Hague: The Royal Navy, after Trafalgar,had the power to enforce the abolition of the slave tradeand to stop other countries doing it. And so part of theabolition of the slave trade was won by self-interest.
William: Listen again. What was part of theabolition of the slave trade?
W. Hague: The Royal Navy, after Trafalgar,had the power to enforce the abolition of the slave tradeand to stop other countries doing it. And so part of theabolition of the slave trade was won by self-interest.
William: William Hague says that after the Battle ofTrafalgar, Britain had enough power to stop other countriestrading slaves. So one reason the British agreed to abolishthe trade was that they knew they could stop othercountries making money through the slave trade too.
W. Hague: And so part of the abolition of the slavetrade was won by self-interest during.
William: ‘Interest’ is one of those words withseveral very different meanings. ‘Self- interest’, anoun, doesn’t mean interest in or curiosity aboutyourself. If you do something ‘out of self-interest’ youdo it because it will help you and not anyone else. Forexample, someone might ask: ‘Did he become a doctorbecause he wanted to help people?’ and you might reply, ‘No. He just wanted the salary - he did it out of self-interest.’
William Hague is saying that although abolishing the slavetrade was a good thing, it partly occurred because of theBritish parliament’s self-interest.
STINGWilliam: But was there more to the abolition thanself-interest? Here’s William Hague again:
W.Hague: It still required, in the end, the Britishparliament to have its fit of philanthropy.
It still required them to take an altruistic2 action, to gobeyond self-interest and to say ‘We are abolishing thisfor good and for ourselves’.
William: He said that to abolish the slave trade theBritish parliament had to ‘go beyond self-interest’ whichmeans they had to think about more than their own needs anddesires. He uses an interesting adjective to describe anaction which ‘goes beyond self-interest’. Listen again:
W.Hague: It still required, in the end, the Britishparliament to have its fit of philanthropy.
It still required them to take an altruistic action, to gobeyond self-interest and to say ‘We are abolishing thisfor good and for ourselves’.
William: An ‘altruistic’ action is an action whichbrings no benefit to you – you just do it to help otherpeople. For example, someone might ask, ‘Did he become adoctor to help people?’ And you might say, ‘Yes, he did.
He doesn’t care about the salary. He’s a very altruisticperson.’ There’s a noun form too – altruism3.
W.Hague: It still required, in the end, the Britishparliament to have its fit of philanthropy.
William: ‘Philanthropy’ is a concern for otherpeople’s health and happiness. We often use this word todescribe things that rich people or organisations do tohelp the poor. For example, Bill Gates is a successfulbusinessman who devotes a lot of time and money to charitywork, so you could say ‘Bill Gates is famous for hisphilanthropy’.
William Hague used the expression ‘a fit of philanthropy’
. This implies that the abolition of the slave trade wassudden and unusual. British politics at that time was ofcourse very self-interested, and acts of altruism wererare!
If you have some spare time this weekend, why not find outa bit more about the slave trade and the abolition byfollowing the links on the Weekender webpage? It’s goodpractice for your English and I promise you it’s veryinteresting!
William: Hello and welcome to Weekender – I’mWilliam Kremer. Let’s start by goingback to 1807. At that time, Britain was an extremelypowerful country with a large empire. Britain made itsmoney through trading with other countries – throughselling them materials and products. One area that made agreat deal of money was the slave trade.
Slaves are people who are owned by other people - they haveno freedom. During the years of the slave trade, theBritish bought slaves, often from African leaders, thentransported them by ship to America and other places tosell. Slaves either died on the journey or faced a life ofhard work, bad treatment and disease.
This awful practice had existed for hundreds of yearsbefore 1807 – andslavery didn’t stop in 1807. Indeed, there are stillslaves today. But in that year, the British government madeit illegal. It stopped the slave trade, or, we wouldnormally say, it ‘abolished’ the slave trade. ‘Toabolish’ means to stop something by law and there’s anoun form too – ‘abolition’.
But as we’ll find out, the British had a mixture ofreasons for abolishing the slave trade. Let's hear now fromthe historian and politician William Hague. In this clip,he mentions the power Britain had after Trafalgar.
Trafalgar was an important sea battle that the BritishRoyal Navy won against France in 1805.
But what does William Hague say was ‘part of the abolitionof the slave trade’?
W. Hague: The Royal Navy, after Trafalgar,had the power to enforce the abolition of the slave tradeand to stop other countries doing it. And so part of theabolition of the slave trade was won by self-interest.
William: Listen again. What was part of theabolition of the slave trade?
W. Hague: The Royal Navy, after Trafalgar,had the power to enforce the abolition of the slave tradeand to stop other countries doing it. And so part of theabolition of the slave trade was won by self-interest.
William: William Hague says that after the Battle ofTrafalgar, Britain had enough power to stop other countriestrading slaves. So one reason the British agreed to abolishthe trade was that they knew they could stop othercountries making money through the slave trade too.
W. Hague: And so part of the abolition of the slavetrade was won by self-interest during.
William: ‘Interest’ is one of those words withseveral very different meanings. ‘Self- interest’, anoun, doesn’t mean interest in or curiosity aboutyourself. If you do something ‘out of self-interest’ youdo it because it will help you and not anyone else. Forexample, someone might ask: ‘Did he become a doctorbecause he wanted to help people?’ and you might reply, ‘No. He just wanted the salary - he did it out of self-interest.’
William Hague is saying that although abolishing the slavetrade was a good thing, it partly occurred because of theBritish parliament’s self-interest.
STINGWilliam: But was there more to the abolition thanself-interest? Here’s William Hague again:
W.Hague: It still required, in the end, the Britishparliament to have its fit of philanthropy.
It still required them to take an altruistic2 action, to gobeyond self-interest and to say ‘We are abolishing thisfor good and for ourselves’.
William: He said that to abolish the slave trade theBritish parliament had to ‘go beyond self-interest’ whichmeans they had to think about more than their own needs anddesires. He uses an interesting adjective to describe anaction which ‘goes beyond self-interest’. Listen again:
W.Hague: It still required, in the end, the Britishparliament to have its fit of philanthropy.
It still required them to take an altruistic action, to gobeyond self-interest and to say ‘We are abolishing thisfor good and for ourselves’.
William: An ‘altruistic’ action is an action whichbrings no benefit to you – you just do it to help otherpeople. For example, someone might ask, ‘Did he become adoctor to help people?’ And you might say, ‘Yes, he did.
He doesn’t care about the salary. He’s a very altruisticperson.’ There’s a noun form too – altruism3.
W.Hague: It still required, in the end, the Britishparliament to have its fit of philanthropy.
William: ‘Philanthropy’ is a concern for otherpeople’s health and happiness. We often use this word todescribe things that rich people or organisations do tohelp the poor. For example, Bill Gates is a successfulbusinessman who devotes a lot of time and money to charitywork, so you could say ‘Bill Gates is famous for hisphilanthropy’.
William Hague used the expression ‘a fit of philanthropy’
. This implies that the abolition of the slave trade wassudden and unusual. British politics at that time was ofcourse very self-interested, and acts of altruism wererare!
If you have some spare time this weekend, why not find outa bit more about the slave trade and the abolition byfollowing the links on the Weekender webpage? It’s goodpractice for your English and I promise you it’s veryinteresting!
点击
收听单词发音
收听单词发音 |
1
abolition
|
|
| n.废除，取消 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
2
altruistic
|
|
| adj.无私的，为他人着想的 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
|
3
altruism
|
|
| n.利他主义，不自私 | |
参考例句： |
|
|
|
购买
在百度中搜索